Since when

[StillThePrettiest 4]

it gives some individuals incentive to post only for the sake of increasing their heart count, cluttering threads with inane and topic-off-dragging conversation.

THIS

can we do a trial where hearts disappear for a time? I could almost guarantee we'd see an immediate reduction in inanity

[rebeccajo 14]

it gives some individuals incentive to post only for the sake of increasing their heart count, cluttering threads with inane and topic-off-dragging conversation.

THIS

can we do a trial where hearts disappear for a time? I could almost guarantee we'd see an immediate reduction in inanity

It's been suggested dozens of times that posts from Off Topic not increase the heart tabulation.

There are probably other forums this might work in as well.

[Captain Ewok 1,930]

A very quick thing I just did to address this (in some part) is that the hearts now all hyperlink to:

http://www.visajourney.com/wiki/index.php/...ey_Member_Ranks

I get the Q on what they mean sometimes... now people will simply need to click on them to get the list.

[bakofoil 27]

The problem as I see it is related to the fact that individuals that are prolific posters (and that post count can be acquired in "rah, rah" threads opf no consequence) acquire stats under their member name that suggest longevity and that quite possibly could also falsely indicate to new members that they "just might know a little more than others". That is not always the case. I say that in order to keep the site a place for "INFORMation" when a discussion quite clearly involves a differing of opinion, then quality citations should be posted to demonstrate that the opinion being offered is substantiated. If one can't post a citation, then they should be told to ####### off and stop spewing #######. Shutting down the thread only serves one purpose.....the answer is never known, and the OP does not get the service s/he deserves.

I absolutely agree with you on all counts. As long as the thread stays open those unable to substantiate their opinion will become obvious.

[MrsCat 6]

Of course, the simplest way to handle a situation like the one that precipitated this thread, is to concede, if one is aware that one is only offering anecdotal information, when stacked up against someone who might have more factual offerings!

Agreed.

Additionally, if one is so concerned that the OP's question hasn't been fully answered or correctly answered, than simply PMing them the information that you feel is correct and that which supports your position is probably best. Continuing to retort simply obfuscates the issues. While generally entertaining, the back-and-forth is rarely helpful.

While a PM may be the antithesis of the purpose of this forum, I have seen plenty of parties here claim their sole goal is to help the OP. And if that's the case once a disagreement breaks out, then so be it. Everyone else will be at the loss. But at least the OPs question has been answered.

Though, I do think that a minority on here are around for their own ego, and would rather argue in public for the rest of the population to catch a glimpse of their greatness.

[MrsCat 6]

A very quick thing I just did to address this (in some part) is that the hearts now all hyperlink to:

http://www.visajourney.com/wiki/index.php/...ey_Member_Ranks

I get the Q on what they mean sometimes... now people will simply need to click on them to get the list.

Captain, I would recommend the wording "The number of "blue blocks" and "hearts" in a Member's profile simply correlates directly to their post count and Member Rank. It is not an indication of anything beyond this" be changed to something more explicit.

ie: It is not an indication of their immigration knowledge or expertise.

Just my opinion.

[rebeccajo 14]

Of course, the simplest way to handle a situation like the one that precipitated this thread, is to concede, if one is aware that one is only offering anecdotal information, when stacked up against someone who might have more factual offerings!

Agreed.

Additionally, if one is so concerned that the OP's question hasn't been fully answered or correctly answered, than simply PMing them the information that you feel is correct and that which supports your position is probably best. Continuing to retort simply obfuscates the issues. While generally entertaining, the back-and-forth is rarely helpful.

While a PM may be the antithesis of the purpose of this forum, I have seen plenty of parties here claim their sole goal is to help the OP. And if that's the case once a disagreement breaks out, then so be it. Everyone else will be at the loss. But at least the OPs question has been answered.

Though, I do think that a minority on here are around for their own ego, and would rather argue in public for the rest of the population to catch a glimpse of their greatness.

I think you mean well, but for me I will never PM a member with the 'right' answer. For me that is - as you say - the antithesis.

If people had been PM'ing me answers to my questions, I would never have had the pleasure of reading great dialogues where issues were hashed out, problems were solved.

PM'ing is just not a place I can go to. What the hell - I might be wrong with what I tell the person!

[Captain Ewok 1,930]

A very quick thing I just did to address this (in some part) is that the hearts now all hyperlink to:

http://www.visajourney.com/wiki/index.php/...ey_Member_Ranks

I get the Q on what they mean sometimes... now people will simply need to click on them to get the list.

Captain, I would recommend the wording "The number of "blue blocks" and "hearts" in a Member's profile simply correlates directly to their post count and Member Rank. It is not an indication of anything beyond this" be changed to something more explicit.

ie: It is not an indication of their immigration knowledge or expertise.

Just my opinion.

I have changed to "The number of "blue blocks" and "hearts" in a Member's profile simply correlates directly to their post count and Member Rank. It is not an indication of anything beyond this. This is no way indicates an expertise on any topic or issue with regards to the Forums. "

[pushbrk 13,965]

I say that in order to keep the site a place for "INFORMation" when a discussion quite clearly involves a differing of opinion, then quality citations should be posted to demonstrate that the opinion being offered is substantiated. If one can't post a citation, then they should be told to ####### off and stop spewing #######.

On the surface, that sounds like a good solution. However, there's a wealth of anecdotal knowledge that would go to waste under such a system, I dare say, much of it your own.

Well, would you rest your case on that "wealth" of knowledge? Does it have an intrinsic value, if it is merely a casual observation? And I will overlook your "dig" for the sake of permitting what I deem a valuable exercise to continue without interruption or closing yet another thread.

It's a compliment. I don't want to handicap anybody by requiring citations, you included.

So this will be an occasion where I am lucky to have some back story on this. Push, obviously this is a jab at a previous statement by Diad in another thread. I think we both know when and where. This is the exact type of personal prodding that I think needs to stop.

Certainly not anything conscious. Please take the statement at face value. There's a lot of anecdotal knowledge out there and I would hate to have it rendered useless here by requiring citations when there's disagreement. Some things just can't be cited. There's just too much subjective decision making throughout the process to provide a citation for every possibility there may be disagreement about, and "Diad" is one of the members with valuable knowledge. If she's only willing to help when she can provide a citation, I say let that be her choice, not one imposed by management.

[Otto 83]

Though, I do think that a minority on here are around for their own ego, and would rather argue in public for the rest of the population to catch a glimpse of their greatness.

Couldn't agree more.

[MrsCat 6]

Of course, the simplest way to handle a situation like the one that precipitated this thread, is to concede, if one is aware that one is only offering anecdotal information, when stacked up against someone who might have more factual offerings!

Agreed.

Additionally, if one is so concerned that the OP's question hasn't been fully answered or correctly answered, than simply PMing them the information that you feel is correct and that which supports your position is probably best. Continuing to retort simply obfuscates the issues. While generally entertaining, the back-and-forth is rarely helpful.

While a PM may be the antithesis of the purpose of this forum, I have seen plenty of parties here claim their sole goal is to help the OP. And if that's the case once a disagreement breaks out, then so be it. Everyone else will be at the loss. But at least the OPs question has been answered.

Though, I do think that a minority on here are around for their own ego, and would rather argue in public for the rest of the population to catch a glimpse of their greatness.

I think you mean well, but for me I will never PM a member with the 'right' answer. For me that is - as you say - the antithesis.

If people had been PM'ing me answers to my questions, I would never have had the pleasure of reading great dialogues where issues were hashed out, problems were solved.

PM'ing is just not a place I can go to. What the hell - I might be wrong with what I tell the person!

Honestly, that is the true mark if you're confident in your answer and whether you stand by it. If you can tell someone what you believe to be correct in private without need for validation of others, then all the better. Especially if you can provide links etc to support your position. If the best someone can come up with is conjecture and "what-ifs" its for the OP to weigh the information and make the final decision to or not to act upon it.

Though, I agree with you entirely, we shouldn't have to PM anyone. Information should stand on its own. If someone has something more valuable to add, then excellent. But sometimes there is a serious case of me-smarter-than-you.

I dunno. I see things your way too. Seems like there's no perfect way to resolve the conflicts around here when egos get involved.

[rebeccajo 14]

Of course, the simplest way to handle a situation like the one that precipitated this thread, is to concede, if one is aware that one is only offering anecdotal information, when stacked up against someone who might have more factual offerings!

Agreed.

Additionally, if one is so concerned that the OP's question hasn't been fully answered or correctly answered, than simply PMing them the information that you feel is correct and that which supports your position is probably best. Continuing to retort simply obfuscates the issues. While generally entertaining, the back-and-forth is rarely helpful.

While a PM may be the antithesis of the purpose of this forum, I have seen plenty of parties here claim their sole goal is to help the OP. And if that's the case once a disagreement breaks out, then so be it. Everyone else will be at the loss. But at least the OPs question has been answered.

Though, I do think that a minority on here are around for their own ego, and would rather argue in public for the rest of the population to catch a glimpse of their greatness.

I think you mean well, but for me I will never PM a member with the 'right' answer. For me that is - as you say - the antithesis.

If people had been PM'ing me answers to my questions, I would never have had the pleasure of reading great dialogues where issues were hashed out, problems were solved.

PM'ing is just not a place I can go to. What the hell - I might be wrong with what I tell the person!

Honestly, that is the true mark if you're confident in your answer and whether you stand by it. If you can tell someone what you believe to be correct in private without need for validation of others, then all the better. Especially if you can provide links etc to support your position. If the best someone can come up with is conjecture and "what-ifs" its for the OP to weigh the information and make the final decision to or not to act upon it.

Though, I agree with you entirely, we shouldn't have to PM anyone. Information should stand on its own. If someone has something more valuable to add, then excellent. But sometimes there is a serious case of me-smarter-than-you.

I dunno. I see things your way too. Seems like there's no perfect way to resolve the conflicts around here when egos get involved.

I understand.

I learned sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much early on (and still do) by reading the writings of others who had gone before me. I still read these people on other communities.

I just wouldn't want to miss any learning because the 'good stuff' is buried in PM's.

It's just what works for me. May not be the same for others.

Edited to add - I don't post my answers for 'validation'. I've always made a conscious effort (when posting advice) to only post on topics I am 'good' at. There are other areas I stay away from - mostly because it wasn't 'my' visa type or because it's something that has never fascinated me enough to learn about it.

Edited March 22, 2009 by rebeccajo

[LaL 418]

Honestly, that is the true mark if you're confident in your answer and whether you stand by it. If you can tell someone what you believe to be correct in private without need for validation of others, then all the better.

How many people feel confident in their answers enough to post a reply - only to have another person add a different experience to the conversation? Unless a poster actually comes right out and says "im not too confident in what I am about to say but..." then I would guess that someone answering a post feels they have something valuable to add. PMs just show the amount that someone will go to to try to get their point across - not that they are necessarily confident or I, daresay, even remotely correct.

PMs arent the way to go, however we have several who choose that as another tool and encourage others to do so.

[MrsCat 6]

Honestly, that is the true mark if you're confident in your answer and whether you stand by it. If you can tell someone what you believe to be correct in private without need for validation of others, then all the better.

How many people feel confident in their answers enough to post a reply - only to have another person add a different experience to the conversation? Unless a poster actually comes right out and says "im not too confident in what I am about to say but..." then I would guess that someone answering a post feels they have something valuable to add. PMs just show the amount that someone will go to to try to get their point across - not that they are necessarily confident or I, daresay, even remotely correct.

PMs arent the way to go, however we have several who choose that as another tool and encourage others to do so.

Guess its just my experience. I could care less about winning an argument. And I'd only PM someone an answer that I was confident about. Though, I guess we are talking about irrational needs to win arguments in which case, a PM is not necessarily prudent.

[LaL 418]

Honestly, that is the true mark if you're confident in your answer and whether you stand by it. If you can tell someone what you believe to be correct in private without need for validation of others, then all the better.

How many people feel confident in their answers enough to post a reply - only to have another person add a different experience to the conversation? Unless a poster actually comes right out and says "im not too confident in what I am about to say but..." then I would guess that someone answering a post feels they have something valuable to add. PMs just show the amount that someone will go to to try to get their point across - not that they are necessarily confident or I, daresay, even remotely correct.

PMs arent the way to go, however we have several who choose that as another tool and encourage others to do so.

Guess its just my experience. I could care less about winning an argument. And I'd only PM someone an answer that I was confident about. Though, I guess we are talking about irrational needs to win arguments in which case, a PM is not necessarily prudent.

Its not just about winning the argument though. I have posted many a reply that I was confident about in which someone came along and either corrected or added onto it. Its part of the process and why this site is so successful. It adds to my knowledge base, as well as the readers.