RodgerDodger - thanks for the congrats, appreciate it.
For the recent comments above stemming from ppzz - I think everyone (ppzz included) should take a step back and realize that admissions truly is an art and not a science, and that it's all about selection and not simply evaluation. E.g. - Dee Leopold brags that her candidate pool as a whole boasts an average GMAT of over 700, yet their score range according to their recently published class profile handed out at Dillon House shows the range being 480-800. Clearly, there was something about Miss or Mister 480 that put them above the plethora of applicants with 700+ scores.
Those of us who have been in a hiring role at work understand this - we know of the subjectivity that goes into the process of picking 1 in 5 job applicants, and what draws our attention to a particular applicant.
AdCom members do the exact same thing - they'll review your entire app, but once your statistics are no longer of any concern (i.e. you're not applying with a 2.5 and a 500 GMAT), then they'll turn to the rest of your application,
and compare it to the rest of the apps they've read.Diversity - of age, race, ethnicity, experience, industry, sexual orientation, disability, etc. - is valued as part of the process because employers value it, and because schools of higher education view themselves as bastions of progress. Coming to recognize and accept this, and using it to your advantage in the process, instead of matching up similarities to other applicants as you see it and being upset at the result, would yield the most fruit.
I applied to Tuck EA, and frankly I'm not sure what's going to happen there because it was my first app, and frankly I've learned a lot in the process as to how to best present my story. We've all read good and bad books and know the difference when we see it - this is exactly what AdCom members are doing.
Best of luck to you all.