It was an interesting form of non-acceptance, because the letter said (and I quote) "Mr. Card asked me to make it clear, however, that not being accepted did not mean that your writing was judged 'not good.' His decision was based solely on whether OSC felt that the writer could gain from and contribute to the type of workshop he runs. There were, as always, talented writers who were not accepted this year."
It's a curious response - it both makes you feel good (the "gain from" means you might be talented but the workshop isn't right for you) and feel bummed (the "contribute to" part is interesting - how does one judge a person's ability to contribute from the first page of a story? I feel like I make a good contribution to a group critique).
I can definitely see the issue with the story I submitted. "Case of the Killer Dog" takes a little while to get going and it's not until the second page that it takes off. This might be something to think about in revisions. It will be interesting to see what the VP folks say.
In any case, it's a moot point because Viable Paradise was my first choice and I got in to VP! I have my travel and rental car all set, and will be arranging a room (and looking for roomies) today. Maybe next year I can re-apply to OSC Bootcamp. I have heard very good things about it from folks such as Brad Beaulieu.