After attending a good number of funding panels in the last months few reflections: panel members are serving the community and it is an extra work load. But it is rewarding. 1/10

Not all excellent science is funded. Good ideas and teams are not funded. The next transformative idea might not be supported. However, in general, the funded projects are indeed worth the funding. 2/10

For teams, it makes a difference those receiving core funding, or have access to long term funding. This allows them to write more exciting proposals. 3/10

Plant biologists (reviewers and panel members) strongly fight for the community. 4/10

Fungi and parasitologists also strongly support the community. 5/10

Overall, this also applies to immunologists as panel members, although reviewers could be more critical. 6/10

Virologists community is also quite supportive. 7/10

And bacteriologists... Reviewers could be very critical even of very good proposals. And there is a mix of panel members, although sometimes you do not feel the warmth for the discipline. 8/10

There is no template to write a funded proposal. However, the grant should transmit strongly need of running the project and a sense the work is frontline. Solid and enough preliminary data should be included. Solid track record is necesary (though no need for CNS papers). 9/10

Panels are mindful of career stage, and there is a strong will to support early careers. 10/10