Thread by @benkuhn

When I was deciding on colleges, the top tier all seemed kinda the same, so I picked the picked the cheapest one.

In retrospect I think one of the biggest differences between them was actually housing policy

The details vary a lot and have a surprisingly big effect...

Harvard sophomores get randomly assigned to an upperclass dorm but can "block" with a group of up to 8. Dorms are small enough that blockmates will prob be your roommates for the next 3y. So after ~4mo on campus you basically guess at (+ audition for!) your "college friend group"

For some reason, while applying, this did not strike me as an obviously terrible idea, or at least not "could substantially affect outcomes" level terrible. It was though. A single decision, w/ limited info + lots of politics, basically determines your college friend group.

The process was extremely fraught. I have a lot of angsty journal entries from around that time. (In fact it was the only time in my life I was actually angsty enough to write a journal!)

I ended up with a blocking group that I liked, but we mostly fell out of touch afterwards. There were other groups of people I liked a lot more, but I didn't get to invest in relationships with any of them as much as I'd have wanted.

(It's interesting to compare this to the freshman roommate process, in which some deans match all 1600 incoming students by hand based on a questionnaire. I'm still in touch with my freshman year roommate!)

A lot of other schools have less regimented housing rules, in which students can change their roommates between years, and often have interest-based housing groups. Comparing my experience to friends from those schools, it seems like they ended up with a lot more close friends.

And since friends/network are one of the most durable impacts of college, that makes housing policy a surprisingly big differentiator!

Funny to think how these fiddly seeming details end up having so much more impact than e.g. quality of classes.