Reviews - Embassy etc

[VanessaTony 3,567]

Just today someone posted that they had reviewed a place for their AOS interview HOWEVER this persons name on VJ was something like "Tim" but he typed "Timothy" (not actual name.. just an example to maintain his privacy).

Is there a reason why when we review it doesn't automatically insert our profile name? is there a way that you can do this so we can actually see who posted what review? I know it automatically links to us when we click on the name of the reviewer but I wondered why it isn't just done this way... for instance if 10 people review in the one day but I wanted to see Tim's I would have to click on each reviewers name until I found that one that linked to Tim's profile. Or perhaps I didn't want to read his SPECIFIC review but I was looking through reviews in general and I can actually see the name of a poster I recognise.

Also, when this person posted they had reviewed, they were unable to actually post the review, they could only say where the reviews section is. Is there a way to enable direct link posting? Like when you click on the post number in a topic and you can post that link and it automatically jumps to that exact review? I know it's possible to see it in their timeline, but if I wanted someone else to view an old review for instance, it would save a lot of time if I could link the review I'm talking about rather than say "see Tim's review for POE" or something.

Thanks in advance. Sorry if this sounds confusing.

[VanessaTony 3,567]

Also, I just noticed that for the POE it lists my ENTRY date but for the ASC and Interview it puts the date that I entered the review... I think they should be across the board, the date the interview/appointment was, perhaps as well as when the review was entered just so if I entered it 2 years later obviously my memory wouldn't be too good.

I also think it would be good if in the timelines (mine for instance) if I could click on my review (or link) and be taken to the reviews pages to see it, as well as the rest of the reviews around that time (like when you click on a post link and it takes you to that place in the thread so you can see before or after it) rather than trying to search backwards to FIND my review and then those around the same time frame.

[VanessaTony 3,567]

**bumpity bump**

[ScottThuy 140]

I agree... couple it with the condition that I noted last week... no interview.. no review of consulate...

[VanessaTony 3,567]

I agree... couple it with the condition that I noted last week... no interview.. no review of consulate...

And you just reminded me.. is it possible to not have the things I haven't filled in (i.e things that don't apply to me) displayed? For instance in my timeline for K1, I didn't get RFE's yet they're in my list and just blank dates. Perhaps we could just have the stuff that actually applies to us so it doesn't look like I just forgot to enter a date?

Or perhaps for things where they may or may not occur we could have a "yes/no" section and when I click "no" it can say "none" in the list. Or just not list at all. That way we can be sure that people ARE completing all fields.

So in Scott's example if I click "No" to interview it won't ask me for a review and it will list "no interview".

AND (sorry ) in some cases (a lot recently) people are getting their GC without getting their EAD or AP approved. Could there be a section where you put "GC received, no need for EAD" or something like that. Rather than just "approved? no" where it looks like you were denied? The EAD and AP's just looks "unfinished" otherwise.

Thanks again in advance

Edited May 13, 2010 by Vanessa&Tony

[VanessaTony 3,567]

**bump again**

Any joy Captain?

[Captain Ewok 1,857]

All good suggestions. I would be happy to add direct linking. I will try to work on that in the next week or two and add it .

[VanessaTony 3,567]

Hey Captain. How are we going on my suggestions from Post 5 (and post 1 of course)?? I noticed my timeline is still cluttered with things that don't affect me or my case.

Thanks in advance

[Captain Ewok 1,857]

Yep; I will get to them soon. As you can tell, I was upgrading the forums yesterday. I am on two hours sleep in the last two days. Sleepy time for me; then back to work . I will hopefully get these items improved for you and others soon.

[VanessaTony 3,567]

**Any joy here**?

Also, I remember emailing you regarding the I-131 supplement to Part 7. As AOS applicants we do not include a supplement. Our "eligibility" is the fact we're applying for AOS (its in the I-131 instructions). Can you please remove this form from the AOS section as it's inclusion there implies it's needed when it's definitely not. it would be useful as an example form for a re-entry permit though.

[TBoneTX 43,058]

Is there a reason why when we review it doesn't automatically insert our profile name? is there a way that you can do this so we can actually see who posted what review?

Fair question; however, I can guess why. The reason follows:

this persons name on VJ was something like "Tim" but he typed "Timothy" (not actual name.. just an example to maintain his privacy).

The maintaining of privacy is the chief factor that bolsters candor. How wonderful to be able to rightfully & righteously barbecue a governmental outfit (a consulate, for example) in a review, without fear that a bored or evil bureaucrat would readily trace the writer's identity. Anonymity precludes governmental snoops from retaliating against people who must still deal with them. If this sounds slightly paranoid, bear in mind that I'm not the only one (or the first one) to suspect that the Government almost certainly reads this site.

In short, I believe that anonymity should trump most other factors in the Reviews sections, and I believe that candor of review is more important than for us to be able to identify an author of a review.

[VanessaTony 3,567]

Fair question; however, I can guess why. The reason follows:The maintaining of privacy is the chief factor that bolsters candor. How wonderful to be able to rightfully & righteously barbecue a governmental outfit (a consulate, for example) in a review, without fear that a bored or evil bureaucrat would readily trace the writer's identity. Anonymity precludes governmental snoops from retaliating against people who must still deal with them. If this sounds slightly paranoid, bear in mind that I'm not the only one (or the first one) to suspect that the Government almost certainly reads this site.

In short, I believe that anonymity should trump most other factors in the Reviews sections, and I believe that candor of review is more important than for us to be able to identify an author of a review.

I'm not sure you understood. I don't mean ACTUAL name, I mean profile name. Such as mine being Vanessa&Tony and my review marked that it was "Vanessa&Tony" that wrote the review. No matter what name you put the review IS linked to your profile as long as you are logged in of course.

I can't really remember "before" but i do notice now that all my reviews are listed in my timeline. Gotta love that of course.

[Captain Ewok 1,857]

I will see if I can do post #1 soon. I am arranging emergency travel for someone due to a family emergency so I am a bit tied up at the moment; I will get to this (I had forgotten so I am glad you pinged me; it is a good idea).

[TBoneTX 43,058]

I'm not sure you understood. I don't mean ACTUAL name, I mean profile name. Such as mine being Vanessa&Tony and my review marked that it was "Vanessa&Tony" that wrote the review. No matter what name you put the review IS linked to your profile as long as you are logged in of course.

Once I was blind, but now I can si!

[Captain Ewok 1,857]

You can now link directly to reviews. The link for all reviews is listed on the top of it .