I'd say that when you go from 0 to Platinum within a month of joining, almost entirely on the back of 'congrats' posts, then... yeah, you might have gone a teensy bit overboard. Maybe that's just me, though. Imagine if everyone on here did that...

Not saying that at all. I "personally" along with many others, see no point in offering congrats to people whose cases we have not followed.

Advice on the other hand, is the purpose of this site, free for everyone.

t this site is also about supporting and encouraging others...

and also consolemaster was warned by Captain Ewok and I think his congrats have tapered down since then...

Ooops! ON EDIT: To Captain Ewok!

As regards your explanation of moderating issues, I think much of these were covered in this discussion already - certainly I think anyone considering the nature of moderating roles and responsibilities would understand the inherent difficulties, but that is not to say that amongst the membership there are not a number of individuals who are capable of understanding the role and performing it within the boundaries of the site's needs, while balancing their own participation appropriately. It has happened before, and it happens elsewhere.

Your comment regarding the abuse of 'power' previously is an interesting one to me, because at no time when there were member-moderators here, was there anything but rather distantly anecdotal evidence to suggest it was happening. As one of that group, if such had been going on, I would have expected Steve to have not only resolved it but also then defined the boundaries of the role more tightly for the entire group in order to ensure it didn't recur.

That notwithstanding, and in awareness of the issues, I believe I'd proposed a way in which member-moderation could be achieved while ensuring the best possibility of success - that by your appointment of chosen individuals, you would be able to pick the people who were not only prepared to do it, but who fit the pattern of skills and competencies needed to fulfill the role. And that by appointment for a limited initial period, it would be possible to easily weed out any that were then not up to the task or who fell into any of the pitfalls you mention.

If you really need an example of how well member-moderators work, surely there is none better that Steve himself. He led this site and controlled it for all of the time it operated until he handed it over to you, and while there were some who may have had issues from time to time with his decisions, they were few and far between.

Moderating isn't a panacea for all our ills, but VJ is like any other community - there are all sorts of members with all sorts of interests and without some form of policing there are all sorts of problems. In your model, where policing is passive and based purely on TOS abuses, it's basically like saying that in the real world, policing is only necessary when a crime is committed - basically REactive, in that action only follows a violation where the problem may then be too late to resolve. The alternative is PROactive policing, that by actively participating in the discussion areas, moderators can actually head those problems off and help prevent the violations that would otherwise need action later. You, yourself can't do that, but member-moderators could.

It's also easy to suggest that senior posters could help do that anyway - and indeed they do to some extent. But it's a measure of how far the behavioural norms have slipped that for their pains there are often arguments or insults thrown in retaliation, and it's not difficult, surely, to see how dispiriting that can be after a while.

The notion of having to identify moderators and have their personal information is curious. I've never known that to be a requirement with any other internet discussion group and the explanation sounds rather curiously and legally contrived. Accountability in the real world for what is posted here, or liability for content infers a specific jurisdiction. If we are all if different locations around the world, upon which set of legal principles and liabilities are we being judged? I don't buy that, though while I have no interest in being a moderator here, I would also have no problem submitting those details if it were asked since I have no problem standing by any contribution I make.

Your social networking tools really should be considered purely in that light - mechanisms to assist the process of control and operation. You can't, for example, use a tool to bury a bad topic when the thread itself is valid but has been taken off topic by one or more participants and thus rendered it difficult for the OP to get further help. Nor if the thread has been hijacked, nor if dangerously bad or incorrect advice or information is given. Nor, in reality, where something legitimate descends into a bun fight between individuals or insults begin to get thrown. Those are situations where a member with some authority needs to step in and act before the situation gets out of hand. And those are just a quick example of why people are needed on the ground to do these things, not rely on buttons and options.

You are right in your last point - that the sense of community we had years ago will never come back simply because then there were dozens of members, now there are hundreds. That isn't the objective however. The objective is to rebuild the sense of community spirit, and stabilize the discussion areas so that they are friendly places not combative. So that every poster with a question can feel safe to ask it, and everyone with a contribution to help answer it can make that contribution. Where the site can focus on what it is good at, not have so much energy used up needlessly of things that divert attention.... like this thread itself has done!

i think Captain Ewok has done a great job of running this site...


It bugs me when people say that the fighting and arguing etc is something new..... because trust me, it is not.....


When I first joined back in 2004, there was a lot of fighting etc.... name calling etc.... this stuff is going to happen but we need to be grown-ups about it and deal with it.....

(I think I joined shorty before Steve left.....)

I don't think the issue was the congrats, Marilyn, but rather the size/color of his fonts...unless I'm mistaken too? I personally couldn't care less, but I can also see how it would be annoying.....could barely look at the screen when I came across one at 1 this morning.... M.

I just want to say that people seem to be forgetting that ultimately this IS Captain Ewok's site. We can bicker and argue til the cows come home, but at the end of the day he runs it and he can do whatever he wishes.

Yes, that was about the time indeed, and much of the issue you saw on the site when you arrived was the aggravation which surrounded one particular member and the disruption caused by him. Those who joined at this time must have thought themselves in a war zone, and indeed it was all of that which caused Steve to leave. By comparison to that phase in VJ's history, what we have now is a placid pool indeed!

Let me be very clear however, that I don't think anyone is saying Captain Ewok isn't doing a good job. What we're saying is that as the site gets bigger and bigger and the content more spread out, the form of moderating the he can do isn't enough and that the results of that are beginning to show. What we're trying to say is that it's better to have help to stop problems happening or get bigger rather than waiting to see if we go off the rails and then try and get us put back on.

Message received loud and clear.
-------------------------------------

Peer pressure was not enough in this case; "self moderating" didn't work, and clearly doesn't work, or there wouldn't be so many divided feelings (again).

We can not have site moderators to give someone a heads up when they are not in community standards. We actually don't even have community standards.

Those in the "we are grown ups" crowd (and I do feel this way myself) think we should be able to self-govern. That's all great IF there is a group ethos and we all agreed to it (joining = agreeing). But the group needs leadership. We have too many people who think they know what this site is supposed to be (self included) and in the absense of a strong agreement, we get the Wild West.

But if every request to do some background reading, or cool the posting jokes/congrats/etc becomes 'bashing' how on earth can we self-moderate AND be kittens and rainbows?
Supportive posts go only so far. I regret that I'm not as invested/interested in supporting some of the people I meet here. I have a limited amount of time, and I'd rather spend it making sure that someone doesn't totally muck up their case.
Well, that *has* been my preference. I'm feeling pretty underwhelmed about the whole thing anymore.

I apologize for the cheap shot with the first reply - that was not really appropriate given that your point was clear in everything other than what exactly it was I couldn't have both ways!

Actually I agree with you. There is this broad notion that because 'we' are each capable of self-moderating it means everyone is, and that if we don't admit there really isn't a broadly applicable 'community standard' then there must actually be one and we don't need to bother about it, or we don't need one in the first place. These things are not true however, and the result is as you rather interestingly paint it, the wild west.

My concern from the post you had replied to was that it ought not to be common currency amongst members to bandy epithets around - we have enough antagonisms working here in amongst the community of members already. That yes, there are problem posters, whether of the help-I-can't-be-bothered-to-read-anything-for-myself-first or 'congratualations-I-don't-really-care-but-this-helps-my-post-count-a-lot-and-I'll-say-thanks-for-the-opportunity-later-because-that'll-be-another-post-to-add-to-the-number' variety, but that is exactly what we need moderators to help deal with rather than leave the membership as a whole to have to battle, to the detriment of the membership as a whole.

It's my view that moderators are needed as much to take the heat for bringing some control as to actually do it, because the other way leads to senior members to try, and all that does is fan the flames.

revisit that link now....

especially this one:

I would rather see congrats posts then all the name calling etc that is going on in Off Topic right now

At least he/she got rid of the big font and colour... give the person that much credit....

I hear you. But we have no mod to close that thread!

Thing is with console, he was asked not to spam the site with congrats, yet he persists, throwing it in the Cap'n's face. Not cool.

I still see only a few on there...

who says he is spamming maybe he genuinely wants to congratulate people

And had it not been for that "trademark" or the bright yellow avatar, it most likely would have flown below the radar and nobody would even have noticed it much...

If senior members of this board, who have otherwise proven themselves to be level headed and trustworthy, cannot be 'allowed' to be moderators without undergoing some kind of 'check' on their person - then this place is like no other I've ever been to. How many internet boards do you know whose members have to be 'checked' before they can be mods? Unreal.

We have a thread now in OT that has gone on for WAY too long and could really stand to have been closed rapidly. But no - sadly, no one here is trustworthy enough to have that 'power'.

It IS Captain's board - in the sense that he can run it , have it moderated (or NOT moderated, as it goes) as he sees fit. I agree with that, and I adhere to the TOS. I think the idea of him choosing mods (were we to have them) is a very solid one.

But it IS our board, too. For that matter - would it even BE a board without our sustained contributions and effort? Or would it simply be a shell of a place with some FAQs, guides and example forms?

If Joe Q Newbie joins here and sees that not even senior members are 'granted' the ability to manage the hen house when the fox is away - what does that say about us as a whole? That we are cowboys, and basically, anything goes - until Ewok can get here to handle it. I'm not slagging him for that, as he is one person and entitled to life away from this board. But the fact remains that the board could (in that sense at the very least) stand to have some hands on, and immediate attention when the needs arise.

I would do that if I were asked - I'd be happy to help. But to have my life off this board inspected first? No thank you.

I guess from now on, I'll just live up to my member title (as only I can move threads as needed and have a laugh with my VJ friends. And HOPE that things don't go from bad to worse.

yup

what is wrong with him saying congratulations?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!

May I asked what changed overnight to make everyone so determined for this? I would guess that the answer is not much changed overnight however people may feel that the site is not what they want it to be and has changed over time. That being said I am hoping that you can understand that I am indeed trying to make efforts to reign in trolls and other people that are off topic.

I previously noted that if things are so bad then I was not seing it via reported threads. I asked that you demonstrate it or at least let me know by reporting them yet today other than one members threads I have seen no reports on the type of problems you are describing. I hope you can understand that it is hard for me to want to make drastic changes unless I can see there is a drastic problem.

I would like to change things and I would hope that instead of fighting me on this so hard that there is a way for some brain storming on things that can be done to help other than that. I can not believe that is the only possible way to do things. Like in life changes can happen a small step at a time and there are always many ways to make those changes happen.

**Btw.... no more congrats related posts in here. Sorry but we need to keep this of all threads on topic.

I just re-read the entire thread. May I ask, disregarding the "title" moderator (it is just a word and does not define much really), what features are you thinking that adding to a few members account might lead to added "smoothness and happiness" on the site? From this thread that was actually never raised and I am just curious.... (example: open/closing threads seems like 80% of what was implied would be nice to have on some members accounts since it was noted that I am not around every minute of the day to respond to reported threads).

I just want everyone to know that while I may appear to be digginf my feet in on certain issues it does not mean I am inflexible and honestly I really do want to make this site the best it can be.

Judging from suggestions in this thread, the ability to temporarily lock a thread might be useful. Probably wouldn't be needed often, but if there was a major OTT thread at least it could be "nipped in the bud", so to speak. The Captain could then look it over and reopen it if he disagrees.

But you would need someone who wasn't "trigger happy", otherwise there would be tons of locked threads and no real reason for them.

- Ability to rename threads. There are too many threads titled things like, "Need help plz". That's not helpful to others.

- Ability to lock threads with clear TOS violations. May I suggest that if you are worried about abuse that locking a thread require more than one "deputy" to confirm the lock?

I would actually rather give the Original Poster the capability to rename their thread as they should be the only person that can "edit" their content. I hope that makes sense. I think then they could be asked to change the title and then do so. I am totally ok with this.

Good in theory...however, what if you are asked, you say no and then that person asks someone else and it gets locked? If that route was followed you would have to have clear defining rules.

My suggestion is perhaps there should be some people who only have one "job". A couple of people lock threads, a couple of people do the "requesting to change thread titles to the members" and then the movers. That way no one does more than another, no one gets too big for their boots and everyone is pretty equal. And, more importantly, no one could be defined as a moderator at all, which I know we are trying to get away from.

Does that make sense to anyone but me? Or is that just far too complicated?

I do think asking someone to change titles may get ugly. Just my .02 - newbiews aren't fond of being told to look at guides, let alone change a title!

Very interesting concept (the giving differnet people different abilities). It does addess many of the concerns I had and would allow the work to get done and spread out. Comments anyone?

I am going to enable members to edit their titles now (I hope that helps some). Lets give that a chance and see ow it goes first on that topic.

I think spreading out the responsibilities is a fine idea.

I'm thinking along the same lines as devilette regarding having the OP change their own titles. I think improperly-titled threads often are created by either non-native English speakers or people with a general lack of understanding about the process. Maybe the "title police" could simply send PMs like, 'Please change the title of your thread to "______"'.

I know this is not directly related to Jenn's comments..but why not insert some language next to/near the "Topic Title box" when someone starts a new thread? (Example(s), hints, the words BE SPECIFIC, etc..w/out making it to labor intensive on Ewok.)

Can do the same for the "Topic Description Box" - I know it has to be brief/small because of space, but might help (if the fields are editable).


I think OP being able to edit their title is a good thing.

Yup, that's exactly what I was trying to get across!

Great idea. I will do that right now ! Added.

The most gratifying work, among the outlined "jobs", would be locking "out of control" threads. I have moved threads for months, necessary work indeed, yet I feel that I can contribute more on an analytical basis.

Perhaps rotating duties among the "mini-mods", every quarter? I know that concept would add more load to you Captain, but you would have an assurance that no individual would burn out or grow an inflated ego.

Good point .

Great thread. Not sure how I managed to miss it

We are in the chatroom for any interested parties.

I would like to thank about 15 people from this thread and in general who were able to come to the chat room and discuss this with me. I think we came up with some great ideas and terrific compromises that will accomplish everyone’s goals.

Regarding the concept of member moderation… We discussed this and it was agreed that one issue is that I can not be online 24 /7 to reply to crazy long gone threads and are flame wars. To this end we discussed how this type of situation is dealt with. The typical response is to lock it (which may take me some time until I get on to see it). The idea we all decided that would work is that just like the "movers" we would add a tool to a few very trusted members’ accounts that will allow them to lock threads, pending admin review. They would only lock threads that were out of control and clearly a detriment to the site and / or a violation of the TOS. They would then be required to email me documenting what thread they locked and why. I would review it and if it was a non issue I would re-open it or leave it closed if it was a real issue.

In our group conversation we all agree that members should never be given any tools that give private information to them such as IP addresses and other information. That would include people not having the ability to suspend people (that would only be able to be done by me). We looked back over the past year or so and only in a rare occasion would it be required that a member be banned immediately and that waiting a short while for me to do it would not a problem (namely for spammers). We also agreed that members should never be able to edit or change another person’s text. That can only lead to problems and privacy issues. I will be enabling members to change their own thread titles at any time in the very near future. Members with any extra tool will not receive 'reported threads' not any other confidential information.

I think a big theme we discussed is that we should make this just another "tool" that members have and not start parading around moderators. Ego's are the only thing that are typically satisfied by that name and that can lead to problems. If the best interest of the site is at heart there is no need for anything other than a few members to check in time to time when they are online and if there is something really bad going on to close the thread and email me to review it as soon as possible. This accomplishes the stop gap measure to react in the near term and retains the separation of members and the site.

The last point we all agreed on is that the locking of threads should be a last measure and used infrequently. Locking a thread should not be about an ego trip or anything else; it should truly be when a topic has become harmful to the community and not just one persons ego or opinion.

Oh, and I am open to adding other tools such as merging threads/splitting/etc as needed. The main theme we had is that no one had all the tools in their basket so we may have another small group of people to check for duplicate posts and merge them as they see them. This would help everyone and be a way to smooth out things. Again they would just be normal members with an extra tool to help organization.

I think that many people here wanted member moderators, but after the same people and I talked about it we agreed that the 'title: moderator' was less important than what really needed to be done to help smooth out the planks. It is just a name and if an alternate method can do the same thing equally well and avoid some of the pitfalls than why not try that instead.

I am very hopeful that this will help smooth things out when I can not be online to respond to reports or to see things in real time. I also think that it is a really good thing that this is an open door, open window policy so that everyone knows that some people are able to pitch in with these tools. I will select people that I trust to help and if they want to have the tool on their account I will enable it. I hope that no one feels left as this is not about egos or power trips, but simply about a way to improve the little things. To be clear as well, members with these tools will have to report when they make thread closures and if anyone abuses this they will lose the tool from their account.

Thank you all and I hope you can understand why I was hesitant to react quickly. I was not trying to be stubborn. I just did not want a knee jerk reaction and I think that this method is pretty well thought out although I welcome feedback!

I realize it's a bit of Monday morning quarterbacking as we say here and I'm sorry I couldn't join the chat at that time, but I do have a comment about the above.

I think that you are trying to piecemeal solve the individual complaints that come along, with pieces of solutions. What I still see missing is a definition of this 'community'.
Depending on my mood, I could see 50 threads a day that should be locked, or one. This is nothing to do with my ego, it's to do with how I am perceiving the role of VJ on that given day.

We don't really know what is acceptable behavior here (other than the blatently obvious) and we have very different ideas of it. Rob thinks he should be able to post about Jesus all day and no one should mock him. Andy doesn't like the term 'post whore' and finds it borderline anti-TOS. Lisa thinks there should be as little interference as possible because we're all adults. People make fun of a woman using babelfish to translate her serious question, and it becomes a VJ classic, and I was on the sticking-up-for-her side getting trashed along with her. Members *consistantly* join with false aliases to have fun with made-up posts. Those posts take answers away from people in genuine need. Polite requests are replied to with a STFU (look it up if need be).

One thing you've got to give to the Usenet groups--at least there is a standardized code of behavior, and most people follow it. Silly crap like the above gets pruned out and no one complains. The group is for information. We still make friends, but we keep the group on topic.

When you asked earlier today what exactly it was that people were asking for, I was astounded. I was simply going to go back through the thread and clip the things I had already posted here. You did come back and say you had re-read the entire thread, so I saved the post gathering for another time (never).

You either have one person running everything on this site, or you get members to get emotionally invested in the SITE and its information, not just the outcome of their 'class' or friends. Not a handful of people, a CULTURE of people. The only way people are going to bother with keeping info updated and threads in control is when they CARE about the outcome. You don't have that now, so what you have is one guy doing everything, and it is not enough.

I think that your suggested fixes here will calm everything down for awhile, but I don't think it's going to solve anyone's 'problem' with VJ. A handful of people is not enough to keep this machine running, and I see very few new recruits who want to contribute in what I think is the appropriate way.
And, I know that that is just my opinion. I get to make the decisions where I pay the bills.

My impression of this site is:

1.) A place to get immigration suggestions, support and anecdotal, yet skilled experience. This will fall short of legal advice though, be sure of that!

2.) A place with integrity, which has the members respecting each other. Yet disagreement is fully acceptable and appreciated, but with some level of respect. As we all know, this frequently does not happen, and tends to digress into name calling and bashing.

3.) A place where, "out of control threads" are shut down. As this is once again, an immigration forum. Over the top comments and threads are not needed, and do not promote the intent of the site.

I simply offer that additional admin help, limited to the final discretion of the good Captain, would be appropriate.

For those that feel the need to post any freaking thing they want, well, is it really benefiting those immigrating? No, it is not.

Agreed, I have posted a few off topic items, yet I always try to see both sides. If the site will benefit from restraint, why not promote it?

Self analysis is a useful tool; do you find yourself arguing more than helping the potential immigrant? With respect to the much argued post count, in my case, has been helping and supporting others. How about you?

What is your definition of he problem as you see it and what type of recruits are you looking for in your example above? Maybe we can brain storm. I know I can never make everyone happy but I can try!

Mo,

Perhaps you should suggest those contributors that can make a difference, in a PM to Captain Ewok?

It is all about integrity, commitment and the willingness to give up the time to the effort of improving this site.

I hope that I can do what it takes as everyones help to maintain the integrity of this site for everyone . I want people to take a sense of pride in the site and what it stands for. If anything today you have reminded me that it is important to promote that feeling out on the site more. I am very proud to be here on the site with so many people and I want to let you know my ears are open to what you think.

Let me know if I can do more and be honest. I will try.

I think the new plan 'not all power to one person' sounds like a good one. I'm sure M will have some great ideas to offer you...sorry I missed the chat as well. At least the issues are being looked at/worked on...it's a good step forward. M.

I am glad. I may indeed at some point soon actually have member moderators in the title but they would be far and few between. The member features above that do basically the same thing would be for a broader group of people. I am glad you think that it might be a feasible idea!

Wow, where on earth was I to miss this thread? I was surprised to see the new changes in K1 forum but I didn't have a hard time navigating through it. Being a newbie back in December, I was guilty of not reading the GUIDES. Now, I have learned a lot from being here for almost four months. I just want to thank everyone for their endless support and helpful advices and also, to congratulate whoever are responsible (aside from the Captain) for much organized K1 forum. Keep up the good work everyone!

I know I'm off topic but can't help but post, sorry.

Mae

Captain, I believe mo summed up what our bottom line should be with one word.

CARING.

Caring about the site having a useful purpose beyond members being able to come on for a snap answer or a quick glimpse of the Guides or FAQ. Caring about whether we are able to help each other by virtue of our experience and common goal.

*sigh*

One thing I have a great deal of trouble articulating to newer members is how the visajourney is just a small yet important part of the rest of their lives. In some cases, the blush of love, coupled with the romance of a long distance relationship with a partner from a different and fascinating culture impedes the thought processes of the couple.

Immigration becomes an enigma then - an enemy and a tyrant to be battled. If we can help people find the simpler path, then we can alleviate the stress - we can help take away the 'battle'.

When an immigrant comes to this nation, there are heaps of issues for them personally. In a marriage based petition, the goal was re-unification of the couple or family. But after that - what next? What about 'real life'? What about adjusting and assimilating? What about the normal adjustments of marriage? What about that immigrant's individual personal happiness? Their personal satisfaction with a career; making new friendships; adapting to different foods or weather - the list is endless.

And what about the responsibility of the USC to see to it that their foreign spouse has all the tools to make those transitions? I am so firmly convinced that many members here, in their rush to be with the loved one, forget that once that person is here, the immigration journey is not over. There are still more papers to process to insure the family STAYS together. I'm not exactly sure why, but I will never forget the admonishment by our Consular Officer during my husband's interview that I make sure I adjust my husband's status once we got married. Perhaps I can't forget that because just a few days later in Dublin, the CBP officer who admitted my husband to the US said the exact same thing.

I feel a responsibility to my husband to make sure all his papers are processed. So he can live a full and happy life here - with me. And for some weird and unknown reason, I feel that same responsibility to members here. Less heavily of course, but to me the members here are more than 'words on a screen'. They are real people who have either brought someone to this country, or they are the immigrant themselves who have packed up their lives and moved around the world.

If we can offer some help to those who want to take responsibility for their loved one, then I feel that's our purpose here. We have to care enough about each other to realize that 'moderation' of the site isn't policing or legislating. As adults, we realize that rules exist. We realize that courtesy and common sense aid in communication. And we realize that differing communication styles - when coupled with adult rules, courtesy and common sense - make for a well rounded environment.

The journey of a couple through life is winding and long. Immigration need not rule it or govern it. But it is a part of the story of each couple here. If we can somehow make that small portion of every couples story less painful, then we have served our purpose.

*nods* Excellent post Becca.

I post simply because if I can help make the process easier for just one person, then that's great. I can look back and see where I possibly made mistakes, where I worried needlessly, where things could have been done a little differently...and I see others doing similar things. I can now say to them "actually, if you try it this way, it'll be easier". If they take no notice then fair enough. If they do take notice, and it helps them, then it's a great feeling.

This process is hard enough as it is without others making it harder for you, just because THEY had to go the hard way themselves. I see that quite a bit on here.

I alos want to say that yesterday there was a noob thread asking about something BASIC from the giudes. I posted a link AND ONCE AGAIN got yelled at by a relatively new member saying people don't want a phone operator, they want a person. I posted to the answer, yet that is not acceptable???? WHY? I am so frustrated with this kind of behavior & how it's allowed to carry on - when older members who post correct links or 'read the guides' are yelled at.

The spoonfed noobs are 90% of the new members here - I'd like to address how to tell people to read the guides SO WE DON'T GET YELLED AT.

Although I understand why some people dislike OT, it is just that OFF TOPIC. I thought it was a place for people to relax and get away from the Immigration process. If people don't like OT then surely they could stay away...

I actually see some interesting topics in there and would hate for it to go away myself. Yes, there is a good share of post boosting going on, but that tends to stay within the game threads. I think that despite the disagreements there is a pretty good sense of community in there too. People don't seem to hold grudges IMO.

With regards to the Regional Forums, the UK one has really come along wonderfully lately. There is a real sense of community in there AND everyone is pretty nice (bar one thread which just naturally died a death thank goodness). Again, I think this is important. It lends support to people and can build friendships. Why is that silly?



D, does this happen with any other members that you know of? Not implying anything here, just wondering and thinking out loud cause this happens to you ALOT.



See my post before yours. Just because WE had a harder time...why do they have to? If we can help them then surely that is the whole point of VJ?

I sure am sorry I missed all this last night. The ONE night I decide to go out and this happens.

Sounds like you all came up w/ some good ideas. I'm willing to help if need be, as you all know.

Maybe when I've had food and caffeine, I can come back and add something more worthwhile but for now, it sounds all good to me!

OT is fine, whatever. There is no control in there though. That should be addressed I think.


OUCH. Yeah, you are most definitely implying something.

You know I'm not all rainbows but why on easrth does that mean I can't post a link to guides??????

Since WHEN is this kind of reply unwelcome?



Forget it, I'm leaving VJ for awhile. I can't deal with this absolute bullsh*t & name calling anymore.