Consider two competitive machine learning models, one of which was considered state-of-the art, and the other a competitive baseline. Suppose that by just permuting the examples of the training set, say by reversing the original order, by shuffling, or by mini-batching, you could report substantially better/worst performance for the system of your choice, by multiple percentage points. In this paper, we illustrate this scenario for a trending NLP task: Natural Language Inference (NLI). We show that for the two central NLI corpora today, the learning process of neural systems is far too sensitive to permutations of the data. In doing so we reopen the question of how to judge a good neural architecture for NLI, given the available dataset and perhaps, further, the soundness of the NLI task itself in its current state.