How to Shake Your NOA2 Loose from the CSC

[bakofoil 27]

To be fair, I don't think she was the only poster on this thread who could be viewed as antagonistic.

It would be a shame if the thread were closed down. I don't see why we can't have an honest debate about the relative merits of using TB's suggestions as long as people use them in the context he suggested in the first post. I think the thread has become inflamed in part by people being concerned about the RFE line being misused on a large scale because of others misunderstanding when it's acceptable to use it. We have to be cautious about the way we use the facilities available to us.

There are those who believe it is unacceptable to use it without an RFE. This is an equally valid point of view.

[rebeccajo 14]

To be fair, I don't think she was the only poster on this thread who could be viewed as antagonistic.

It would be a shame if the thread were closed down. I don't see why we can't have an honest debate about the relative merits of using TB's suggestions as long as people use them in the context he suggested in the first post. I think the thread has become inflamed in part by people being concerned about the RFE line being misused on a large scale because of others misunderstanding when it's acceptable to use it. We have to be cautious about the way we use the facilities available to us.

There are those who believe it is unacceptable to use it without an RFE. This is an equally valid point of view.

I don't believe TB really cares whether people use the information in an 'appropriate' manner. This thread would have died a natural death more than a week ago if he were not continually resurrecting it. He is more interested in not admitting that his 'method' is improper.

I've been there, done that when it comes to waiting and I know the exasperations. I don't believe we can expect people to come to a rational conclusion about the 'right time' to use this 'method'.

I still cannot get the image out of my mind of someone with an RFE not being able to get through. I don't think TBone cares about that.

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

Captain -

At what point do you stand up for the integrity of the information posted on this board?

Do not PM me. Have the courtesy to discuss this in public.

I just stated that I would call the USCIS hotline on Monday to get theri stance on the use of the #. I think that is a reasonable response to clarify their phone systems guidelines. I have checked their website and there are no prohibited uses that I can find when calling them. They can probably best answer this there. I also have several direct contacts I can query if needed at DHS/USCIS.

[BigCityDave 0]

rebeccajo,

I hope you know that you are respected here. I have always taken what you have to say with care and respect your points. You have helped me a lot in my journey as of now and I hope you know that your help is very much appreciated.

Just stay in school, kid!

Plan on it for a long long time....

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

I just googled this and there appears to be many ways to get to an IO posted online. It does not appear to be a secret as it is all over the internet. In any case I will call them and see what they say. It is probably good that we get the official word from them on this and not guess.

Edited March 8, 2008 by Captain Ewok
updated.

[rebeccajo 14]

Captain -

At what point do you stand up for the integrity of the information posted on this board?

Do not PM me. Have the courtesy to discuss this in public.

I just stated that I would call the USCIS hotline on Monday to get theri stance on the use of the #. I think that is a reasonable response to clarify their phone systems guidelines. I have checked their website and there are no prohibited uses that I can find when calling them. They can probably best answer this there. I also have several direct contacts I can query if needed at DHS/USCIS.

Thank you for keeping the discussion public.

My intent (when I posted about making a call myself) was to inquire of the operator exactly what information they are authorized to release. I intended to preface my queries in the name of research without disclosing VisaJourney as the talking point. I was also curious as to whether or not a live operator really could be accessed.

After a few days it became clear one can access an operator. So that purpose of my 'experiment' would have been moot. And as good as a communicator as I can be, I was unsure of my being able to ascertain real, factual information from one phone call. So I decided against placing the call.

If you can ascertain more fully for us what this line is really for, and what any abuses of it might cause, that would be good. I do believe you will have to go beyond the IO's on the line to come to a conclusion.

I should also say I have received information from former active members of this website telling me I am right on the mark in my admonitions. However, because their participation in this site is no longer valued, they are uncomfortable with adding their postings to the thread.

Edited March 8, 2008 by rebeccajo

[bakofoil 27]

I still cannot get the image out of my mind of someone with an RFE not being able to get through. I don't think TBone cares about that.

I do think he cares. He's simply found a way, which may or may not work, for those people who are waiting an unreasonably long time to get to speak to someone beyond the usual repetition of what is on the case update site.

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

Captain -

At what point do you stand up for the integrity of the information posted on this board?

Do not PM me. Have the courtesy to discuss this in public.

I just stated that I would call the USCIS hotline on Monday to get theri stance on the use of the #. I think that is a reasonable response to clarify their phone systems guidelines. I have checked their website and there are no prohibited uses that I can find when calling them. They can probably best answer this there. I also have several direct contacts I can query if needed at DHS/USCIS.

Thank you for keeping the discussion public.

My intent (when I posted about making a call myself) was to inquire of the operator exactly what information they are authorized to release. I intended to preface my queries in the name of research without disclosing VisaJourney as the talking point. I was also curious as to whether or not a live operator really could be accessed.

After a few days it became clear one can access an operator. So that purpose of my 'experiment' would have been moot. And as good as a communicator as I can be, I was unsure of my being able to ascertain real, factual information from one phone call. So I decided against placing the call.

If you can ascertain more fully for us what this line is really for, and what any abuses of it might cause, that would be good. I do believe you will have to go beyond the IO's on the line to come to a conclusion.

I should also say I have received information from former active members of this website telling me I am right on the mark in my admonitions. However, because their participation in this site is no longer valued, I do not have them with me to back me up.

I agree that we should certainly promote the most effective and legit way for people in general to unstick and fix their cases if there are truly problems (delays, etc).. I will relay what I find out when I talk to them. I have no reason to conceal anything when I call and I will probably just be matter of fact with my q's .

[rebeccajo 14]

Captain -

At what point do you stand up for the integrity of the information posted on this board?

Do not PM me. Have the courtesy to discuss this in public.

I just stated that I would call the USCIS hotline on Monday to get theri stance on the use of the #. I think that is a reasonable response to clarify their phone systems guidelines. I have checked their website and there are no prohibited uses that I can find when calling them. They can probably best answer this there. I also have several direct contacts I can query if needed at DHS/USCIS.

Thank you for keeping the discussion public.

My intent (when I posted about making a call myself) was to inquire of the operator exactly what information they are authorized to release. I intended to preface my queries in the name of research without disclosing VisaJourney as the talking point. I was also curious as to whether or not a live operator really could be accessed.

After a few days it became clear one can access an operator. So that purpose of my 'experiment' would have been moot. And as good as a communicator as I can be, I was unsure of my being able to ascertain real, factual information from one phone call. So I decided against placing the call.

If you can ascertain more fully for us what this line is really for, and what any abuses of it might cause, that would be good. I do believe you will have to go beyond the IO's on the line to come to a conclusion.

I should also say I have received information from former active members of this website telling me I am right on the mark in my admonitions. However, because their participation in this site is no longer valued, I do not have them with me to back me up.

I agree that we should certainly promote the most effective and legit way for people in general to unstick and fix their cases if there are truly problems (delays, etc).. I will relay what I find out when I talk to them. I have no reason to conceal anything when I call and I will probably just be matter of fact with my q's .

Captain -

You posted above about why cases are not necessarily processed 'in order'. This is probably the number one reason people think something is 'wrong' with their case. They see others around them being approved and their case not moving. It rightly causes much stress.

I think your first sentence to me is a conundrum....'effective and legit way for people to unstick and fix a case if there are truly problems (delays, etc.)'

A 'delay' is not necessarily a problem. All cases are delayed right now! A 'problem' is even mysterious - real problems are eventually revealed to the petitioner via an I797. A 'security check' is a problem but it's not something a petitioner can do anything about.

Where do we as petitioners draw the line on what is a reasonable delay or what is a problem? For many people, anything less than 'drive-thru' case approval is a problem. Are you getting the picture?

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

I should clarify. Delays beyond the USCIS processing guidelines. The USCIS calls those cases "past due" and instructs people to call them once that happens. There are many other reasons why there could be problems and often identifying the reason earlier than later can reduce further delays.

[rebeccajo 14]

I should clarify. Delays beyond the USCIS processing guidelines.

And you see people in the thread using the phone line to make the call well in advance of those published deadlines (which you and I both know are ####### deadlines anyway).

*sigh*

Part of the 'problem' with VJ is the focus on timeline driven data. So much so that readers have taken it upon themselves to create their own kind of data - witness the 'monthly filer' threads.

Ewok, not everybody finds your graphs and tables easy to read. I sure don't. I've mastered them enough to muddle through them (when I needed them). But it isn't always easy.

You could save yourself and a whole lot of us a whole lot of bother if the data collection methods around here were re-vamped. Now don't ask me how to do that - I'm not a 'pie chart' kind of gal. But you've got geeks around here that would probably be excellent at it.

The original purpose of this site was to add some transparency to a process that is pretty scary and frightening. Just as USCIS needs to take a look at its technology, I believe VJ needs to do the same.

We'd have a lot less of the nonsense you see in this thread, and possibly wouldn't even need the subforum the thread is written in, if improvements to our data were made.

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

I would love to improve the graphs. We have the data it is just how to display it. I guess I am a bit technical so the graphs tend to reflect that perspective. I agree that making easy to read and understand graphs is very important because no matter how much info they contain, if they can not be understood easily then they are useless .

That said I am going to take your suggestion and try to improve them right now .

[rebeccajo 14]

I would love to improve the graphs. We have the data it is just how to display it. I guess I am a but technical so the graphs tend to reflect that perspective. I agree that making easy to read and understand graphs is very important because no matter how much info they contain, if they can not be understood easily then they are useless .

That said I am going to take your suggestion and try to improve them right now .

While your at it, pretend when looking at them you graduated from high school AND college with the minimum number of math credits.

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

.

[mox 298]

.

You may want to have a look at Igor's timeline stats, generated using VJ data. Link is here.

Edited March 8, 2008 by mox