AOS before or after I-94 expires

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Yeah alright, you got me. Damn.

Well, seriously.

I came into this thread because I THOUGHT there were some people asking serious questions about a serious issue. I thought we were going to be able to remain civil about it. I can pretty safely say you can go back to my posts and find that even though we disagreed, I didn't get as rude with you as you got with me. I took some offense to that at the time. I think now you were (and still are) riled up over somebody else you disagree with.

[bakofoil 27]

what is so hard to understand about "out of status"?

I don't know LaL. I really don't know.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

JQ, you're taking this WAY too personally. The manner in which I post is to make my point, sometimes humorously, sometimes directly, but always with a single aim in mind. You're free to engage or disengage with me, it doesn't matter, but I'm no more or less civil with you than just about anybody else. (Except LaL. I have a super-sekrit internet crush on LaL.)

And then there are certain hot-button issues with me. One of them is the basis for this thread. Another is people abusing their privileges (although quite frankly I see this more of a problem of the board leadership than an individual problem, but still.). I'm told I need to get over these issues. But it has nothing to do with you, so again, don't take it personally.

I won't if you won't.

I've got a scary feeling though in my bones about that.

[bakofoil 27]

Ah, I think I'm starting to see what's going on here.

I seriously don't think you do. I was, as a matter of fact, making serious and independent points about the questions raised in this thread. If scaremongering and backtracking are amongst those issues I wish to contest then it is my right to do so and I will. Nothing can or should be taken personally unless the cap fits, so to speak.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

I seriously don't think you do. I was, as a matter of fact, making serious and independent points about the questions raised in this thread. If scaremongering and backtracking are amongst those issues I wish to contest then it is my right to do so and I will. Nothing can or should be taken personally unless the cap fits, so to speak.

*shrugs*

Just looked like a pile-on to me. And not one in my direction, I might add.

I'll ask that I be forgiven should my "forum radar" be off on this one.

[Nik+Heather 122]

*shrugs*

Just looked like a pile-on to me. And not one in my direction, I might add.

I'll ask that I be forgiven should my "forum radar" be off on this one.

Nope, yours isn't the only one beeping.

[bakofoil 27]

Johnny, with respect and for clarification, I was referring to a post in an associated thread to this one that was edited out almost completely by the author, an organizer, an hour after posting it. I make no apology for drawing attention to that because I feel it is an abuse of organizer/moderator privileges. It's really not rocket science if mox saw it too because he has been heavily harassed involved in both discussions. I am certain we are not the only ones who noticed it or feel that it is abusive and a point of principle. Every word we write is scrutinized to almost ridiculous detail at times, as evidenced in this thread. If we all had the benefit of editing posts beyond the usual timeframe we would rarely be caught out saying the wrong thing

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

And just to ride bakofoil's coattails: unless I completely misunderstand the conspiracy that JQ believes is taking place, I'm sort of amazed that those of us who are promoting the notion of advice grounded in fact rather than scaremongering should be accused of having some sort of nefarious agenda, while those who continue to propagate misinformation based in hearsay are perceived as just participating in normal discourse. You'd think we were part of some super secret club that picks and chooses specific targets of opportunity on Visa Journey for punching bags or something.

The real conspiracy is that misinformation is often accepted more often than it's refuted. And until the membership gets off their self-righteous collective arses and decides that they'd rather have a really good immigration site rather than a social club, it's just going to keep getting worse. So you can continue to be civil and engage in polite debate, or you can get mad as hell and try to take the site back from the armchair immigration experts. It's your choice, I've made mine.

Noted JQ that this line *did* start with my criticism of Sunspot and what I think I've shown as poor advice, and yes I also think that she's taken advantage of her privileges as an organizer, but if it's a pile-on then I think it's a justified pile-on. But it's not a pile-on imho.

I will wish you well on those attempts to "take back" your beloved website.

I read lots of immigration boards. Lots. And for a long time. A. Long. Time. It's a pretty loose rope around here. Things seem to be more traffic driven than anything else.

In the meanwhile, I'll suggest if you REALLY want accuracy and integrity of the information, you loose the stick and start speaking a bit more softly. You can't train novice members up by berating them. You can't break a horse by beating him, you know.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Johnny, with respect and for clarification, I was referring to a post in an associated thread to this one that was edited out almost completely by the author, an organizer, an hour after posting it. I make no apology for drawing attention to that because I feel it is an abuse of organizer/moderator privileges. It's really not rocket science if mox saw it too because he has been heavily harassed involved in both discussions. I am certain we are not the only ones who noticed it or feel that it is abusive and a point of principle. Every word we write is scrutinized to almost ridiculous detail at times, as evidenced in this thread. If we all had the benefit of editing posts beyond the usual timeframe we would rarely be caught out saying the wrong thing

I think if you have a complaint about that you should take it to your Admin.

[bakofoil 27]

I think if you have a complaint about that you should take it to your Admin.

I beg to differ Johnny and I make no apologies for anything I have written here. As an aside, have you ever tried to email 'our' admin? I learned a long time ago that emailing the admin of this site is a pretty futile exercise.

You can call me silly if you like, but offering advice on a message board that can have real impact on people's lives and actions is a responsibility I take fairly seriously. With that in mind, I am pretty cautious about what I write because after it's posted I can't take it back.

If you'd prefer my remarks about the admin abuses deleted from this thread I can't comply I'm afraid, but you can contact a mod or an organizer and I'm sure they'll happily remove/edit the offending post.

[Nik+Heather 122]

Done that, been there, stole the t-shirt. Both on the boards and behind the scenes. It doesn't work. I've come to the conclusion that nothing gets done here unless you make a scene. And I'll grant you that even then, very little changes, but at least it's out there and the people responsible (both membership and staff) are either a little more gun shy about what they write, or they keep doing what they're doing with the full knowledge that not everybody is buying it. I mean, I may be abrasive at times, but I'm not dishonest.

I dunno, Mox, this thread and the other weren't really so much for the newbs, but for the people giving out the advice. You make it mighty difficult to change ones mind to AGREE with you (aside from the lack of citation). I'm not so set that I wouldn't be willing to learn something new. Just take the I-9 and EAD stamp issue. It was a heated debate, but once it all got hashed out you see pretty much most of the "arm chair experts" joining in the same chorus.

Edited February 26, 2010 by Nik+Heather

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

I beg to differ Johnny and I make no apologies for anything I have written here. As an aside, have you ever tried to email 'our' admin? I learned a long time ago that emailing the admin of this site is a pretty futile exercise.

You can call me silly if you like, but offering advice on a message board that can have real impact on people's lives and actions is a responsibility I take fairly seriously. With that in mind, I am pretty cautious about what I write because after it's posted I can't take it back.

If you'd prefer my remarks about the admin abuses deleted from this thread I can't comply I'm afraid, but you can contact a mod or an organizer and I'm sure they'll happily remove/edit the offending post.

Eh, I have no problems with complaints about 'admin abuses'. Except I don't think your organizers are Admin. If they could edit your posts an hour after the fact, they might be.

I can assure you of a couple of other things, if you'll entertain my drivel for a bit. This immigration board isn't like any other I read. Not by a single stretch of the imagination. There's not a single moderator in site on the informational forums. Other communities have two or three mods in each forum just to keep the dust down.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

I dunno, Mox, this thread and the other weren't really so much for the newbs, but for the people giving out the advice. You make it mighty difficult to change ones mind to AGREE with you (aside from the lack of citation). I'm not so set that I wouldn't be willing to learn something new. Just take the I-9 and EAD stamp issue. It was a heated debate, but once it all got hashed out you see pretty much most of the "arm chair experts" joining in the same chorus.

"Good work" in a community like this comes from the collective. Not from one single person.

Sure there are cliques in online communities. There are 'discussion leaders' and there are 'noobs'

I've gone back and forth for ages on this place in particular because I felt some of the post leaders were too heavy handed. And because there seemed to be too much competition for the crowd.

You can't get people to come to the trough with poison water. It just won't work. And you won't train up your noobs to be able to lead others.

Sad.

[bakofoil 27]

See what I mean about scrutiny? You called me out for using 'admin'. Yep, I meant organizer. My bad!

But, yes, I have to agree with you. This board is pretty much a free for all and unfortunately often the first and only place people come seeking advice. We have lost a lot of good knowledgeable people over the years, probably to the other boards you are talking about. I am mostly bugged by the judgemental stuff, you know judgement on a personal level rather than criticisms made for the common good of the 'community'.

It is good though to hash out ideas and policy with people who are willing to look at things in detail. There are a lot of grey areas and it is useful to discuss these with people whether you reach an agreement or not. So I am happy to entertain your drivel, if that's what you want to call it.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

See what I mean about scrutiny? You called me out for using 'admin'. Yep, I meant organizer. My bad!

But, yes, I have to agree with you. This board is pretty much a free for all and unfortunately often the first and only place people come seeking advice. We have lost a lot of good knowledgeable people over the years, probably to the other boards you are talking about. I am mostly bugged by the judgemental stuff, you know judgement on a personal level rather than criticisms made for the common good of the 'community'.

It is good though to hash out ideas and policy with people who are willing to look at things in detail. There are a lot of grey areas and it is useful to discuss these with people whether you reach an agreement or not. So I am happy to entertain your drivel, if that's what you want to call it.

I'm used to doing the scrutiny. It's unfortunately important in these discussions. Hence it should 'neer be personal.