I'm knee deep is preproposals right now. A bunch of them. They are funny documents and if anything is becoming apparent by reading many side by side, it's that those who can write concisely and get right to the point are doing themselves a service. While this is often true in a grant proposal, it is magnified when you are selling your project in 4 pages.
I am in the middle of a proposal now that was written by an early career PI. I think the science is decent, but the message is getting slowly strangled by convoluted sentences that average one parenthetical statement each. It is not an easy read. In fact, I would bet that this proposal will score lower than it would if it were just written for the proper audience - a group of scientist outside the field, judging on a tight timeline.
So, blogpeeps, is the grant review a "proper" place for critiquing the writing of the proposal? Having written, read and received >100 grant reviews for my own writing and that of many others (as a panelist, one can see all other reviews) I have never seen this done. Maybe it is laziness, maybe reviewers can't be bothered to wipe n00b ass or perhaps it is just Not The Way It Is Done.
What say thee?