After 3 weeks... Is CSC slowing down again?

[Possiblymaybe 371]

Just our 2 cents.

Just my 2 cents.

Your goals are admirable and you are confident that your methods are legal and that no personal information can be extrapolated from the data you collected.

The failure in your goal of this data reaching as many people as possible was in your approach. You came into a public forum masked with the name "Tyler Durden", addressing you and your posse as "we" with creepy little catch phrases and a somewhat arrogant attitude. You created a public poll and sought out the needless opinions of as many people as possible. You rushed to get your data out as soon as someone objected to it. You produced a video declaring your message in a manner in which most people would not relate to.

You were essentially standing in the middle of a room, waving your arms in the air, wearing a mask, and shouting "Look at me! Look at me! I have the power to change your life". It was too much hype.

Had "Tyler Durden" come onto VJ as "John Smith", posted the data and said "Hey guys, look at what I found" you would have attained your goal of reaching as many people on here as possible. I assume the first thing someone would have done was look up their own number to verify the validity of the data. They may have then checked more against the USCIS website. Word would have quickly spread. People would have worked their magic and a few days later charts and graphs would have been plastered all over VJ encouraging discussion and debate of any possible observations and conclusions. These conclusions may have then been passed on to elected representatives. This outcome would have been more in line with your overall goals.

I personally am very interested in what you are doing and think the discussions could have been both meaningful and beneficial to many, including myself. As you are well aware, VJ members account for between 5-10% of the total I-129F population. I'm sure you could provide me with the exact number. I am doubtful that you could have found a higher concentration of people interested in what you have to offer on any other website. But you blew it. I think your arrogance prevented you from attaining your goals.

My suggestion to you is the next time you take on an "Anonymous" project, try to be a bit more anonymous. It could been everything you wanted.

[squirrelisan 23]

In my opinion, I don't see much that can be done to make the USCIS move faster dramatically. Having this kind of info is all well and good for everyone, so that you can plan your life instead of being on hold for a year. But even if somehow USCIS doubled their budget tomorrow, it would still takes months to get additional manpower to make a dent. How long does it take to train newbies? Do they even have room for these people?

Has anybody here work in PR, Marketing, Pyschology, Politics, or anything involving manipulating minds?

I think a story that would make it to a major news outlet somehow would be a big win. Like a story about some hardworking, poster-child immigrant (who happens to be photogenic) waits for a really long time for their visa, but tragedy occurs. They <insert tragedy here>!!!!! Omg so sad, the horror, the injustice...I'm disgusted to be an american today....etc

What do you think? Anybody got a better idea? Feel free to flame me for being a callous, opportunistic, insensitive person. I won't take offense. Just trying to help out in my own way.

Edited May 11, 2013 by squirrelisan

[NigeriaorBust 4,087]

You took my number and posted it all over as if it was yours. Even after I said I didn't want you do to so. You have no real concern for any person, you just want people to think you are some grand cyber savior when you are little more than a cyber bully that thinks of themselves as a cyber power. Shame on you for using the people on this board as your pawns and for distorting your agenda of power into something that you pose as something to benefit the common people. If you truely cared you would have cared about the one over the many but you are behaving the same way as the very entity you are trying to trash. You are a child in the cyber world and you need to grow up and stop thinking you are the super hero.

[TylerDurden 45]

Just my 2 cents.

Your goals are admirable and you are confident that your methods are legal and that no personal information can be extrapolated from the data you collected.

The failure in your goal of this data reaching as many people as possible was in your approach. You came into a public forum masked with the name "Tyler Durden", addressing you and your posse as "we" with creepy little catch phrases and a somewhat arrogant attitude. You created a public poll and sought out the needless opinions of as many people as possible. You rushed to get your data out as soon as someone objected to it. You produced a video declaring your message in a manner in which most people would not relate to.

You were essentially standing in the middle of a room, waving your arms in the air, wearing a mask, and shouting "Look at me! Look at me! I have the power to change your life". It was too much hype.

Had "Tyler Durden" come onto VJ as "John Smith", posted the data and said "Hey guys, look at what I found" you would have attained your goal of reaching as many people on here as possible. I assume the first thing someone would have done was look up their own number to verify the validity of the data. They may have then checked more against the USCIS website. Word would have quickly spread. People would have worked their magic and a few days later charts and graphs would have been plastered all over VJ encouraging discussion and debate of any possible observations and conclusions. These conclusions may have then been passed on to elected representatives. This outcome would have been more in line with your overall goals.

I personally am very interested in what you are doing and think the discussions could have been both meaningful and beneficial to many, including myself. As you are well aware, VJ members account for between 5-10% of the total I-129F population. I'm sure you could provide me with the exact number. I am doubtful that you could have found a higher concentration of people interested in what you have to offer on any other website. But you blew it. I think your arrogance prevented you from attaining your goals.

My suggestion to you is the next time you take on an "Anonymous" project, try to be a bit more anonymous. It could been everything you wanted.

We released the data not because someone didn’t agree with us, but because they said the notified USCIS.

If USCIS had checked and we had not released the data our actions would have appeared to be idle talk.

While we can see why some may not be comfortable with the Anonymous persona. The fact is it is intended at the opposite of personal the attention effort you interpret it as.

Our plan was/is as follows:

• Announce the fact we had collected data and were preparing to release it.
  • Achieved, however people immediately wanted the scope of data increased. As a result we collected the additional data.
• Determine if releasing the data is the morally and ethically correct thing seeking out the advice of those most affected.
  • Achieved, although the additional data elongated our release then an individual sought to report the action before we were ready based on the additional data.
• Release the data and message to USCIS.
  • Partially achieved. While the data is in the hands of members the use of the data is forbidden. An unanticipated scenario.
• Help any parties establish use of the data.
  • Partially achieved.
• Provide periodic updates, reports, charts and graphs.
  • Action on hold while

At phase 5 we would have reduced our activity on their board to only posting the updates, charts, and graphs.

We actually see this as partial success. If there is a failure it is in the fact that we did not anticipate that the leadership in VJ would censor public data collected for advocacy in favor of their cause.

The only objection you or anyone seems to have is that we are Anonymous. Sorry, but we don’t see a line of people other than us standing by to assist you in this manner. Some branches of Anonymous are good, others not as much. You don’t typically cut down the tree because of a bad branch.

Creepy, ok... Fine we are creepy… we really don’t mind being seen as creepy.

Arrogant attitude... It can seem that way and that’s fine... The truth is it’s the opposite of definition of arrogant. Arrogance is an exaggerated sense of self, one’s importance or abilities. We have no self, which is part of being Anonymous. We do not believe that we are important at all and have tried to drive the conversation away from identity and to the pressing matter at hand, the data. We do not believe we have abilities not possessed by others nor would we even slightly venture to say that. It is not possible to selfless and arrogant simultaneously. We however do understand why the perception of arrogance is there.

[TylerDurden 45]

You took my number and posted it all over as if it was yours. Even after I said I didn't want you do to so. You have no real concern for any person, you just want people to think you are some grand cyber savior when you are little more than a cyber bully that thinks of themselves as a cyber power. Shame on you for using the people on this board as your pawns and for distorting your agenda of power into something that you pose as something to benefit the common people. If you truely cared you would have cared about the one over the many but you are behaving the same way as the very entity you are trying to trash. You are a child in the cyber world and you need to grow up and stop thinking you are the super hero.

"one over the many"...

Interesting view.

Everyone should suffer because of one persons unfounded fears.

Let’s apply this logic to other things.

One starving person gets no food because he is afraid of the aid workers, so feed none.

One person is afraid of medicine, so close the hospitals.

One person gets their visa denied so deny them all.

Edited May 11, 2013 by TylerDurden

[NigeriaorBust 4,087]

No unfounded fears , the number was issued to me, the data is mine. As the owner i have the right to ask that it be respected. You have no clue about respect. because you never took off those superman jamies.

[TylerDurden 45]

No unfounded fears , the number was issued to me, the data is mine. As the owner i have the right to ask that it be respected. You have no clue about respect. because you never took off those superman jamies.

It’s not yours. If it belongs to anyone it is that of USCIS and they publicize it.

The SSN assigned to you is not yours, but it’s not publicized. The A# assigned to you is not yours, but they do not publicizes it either. You are not even privy to the A# in the beginning of the process.

The US currency in your wallet is not yours. It is against the law to deface or destroy it.

The receipt number is not yours, but they do publicize those.

Edited May 11, 2013 by TylerDurden

[TylerDurden 45]

On a side question. Has anyone here read all 844 pages of EAS13500?

[pachacuti 154]

No unfounded fears , the number was issued to me, the data is mine. As the owner i have the right to ask that it be respected. You have no clue about respect. because you never took off those superman jamies.

You continue to miss the point that USCIS has ALREADY made your receipt number publicly accessible. No further harm was caused you in this case. Why do you continue to ignore this fact?

[TylerDurden 45]

It does not matter. We are getting clear guidelines and talking with Capt. Ewok as we speak.

If he allows us to post the information elsewhere and member are allowed to refer to or use those results, then we will go our merry way and focus providing the information on other sites in a easy to digest manner for members to use.

Edited May 11, 2013 by TylerDurden

[pachacuti 154]

It does not matter. We are getting clear guidelines and talking with Capt. Ewok as we speak.

If he allows us to post the information elsewhere and member are allowed to refer to or use those results, then we will go our merry way and focus providing the information on other sites in a easy to digest manner for members to use.

I am also in communication with admin about the site I plan to develop this weekend.

[pachacuti 154]

It does not matter. We are getting clear guidelines and talking with Capt. Ewok as we speak.

If he allows us to post the information elsewhere and member are allowed to refer to or use those results, then we will go our merry way and focus providing the information on other sites in a easy to digest manner for members to use.

I am also in communication with admin about the site I plan to develop this weekend.

#######... Double post again....

[Possiblymaybe 371]

Please see my responses below in bold.

We released the data not because someone didn’t agree with us, but because they said the notified USCIS.

If USCIS had checked and we had not released the data our actions would have appeared to be idle talk.

While we can see why some may not be comfortable with the Anonymous persona. The fact is it is intended at the opposite of personal the attention effort you interpret it as.

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. As I stated previously, I think your failure lies in your approach. The persona was a major aspect of your approach.

Our plan was/is as follows:

• Announce the fact we had collected data and were preparing to release it.
  • Achieved, however people immediately wanted the scope of data increased. As a result we collected the additional data.

I don't see why this step of the plan was necessary. If you had released the data without the announcement, you could have still collected additional data when people wanted the scope increased.

• Determine if releasing the data is the morally and ethically correct thing seeking out the advice of those most affected.
  • Achieved, although the additional data elongated our release then an individual sought to report the action before we were ready based on the additional data.

Again, I didn't see this step as necessary. Data was collected from a public source by legal means without any personal identifiers.

• Release the data and message to USCIS.
  • Partially achieved. While the data is in the hands of members the use of the data is forbidden. An unanticipated scenario.

Had "John Smith" skipped the above 2 steps and just released the data it would be in the hands of many more people than it is now. Sending your message to USCIS was unnecessary. The message would have reached USCIS in a much more meaningful and powerful way via petitioners and congressional representatives once conclusions had been made based on the data.

• Help any parties establish use of the data.
  • Partially achieved.

​"John Smith" would have had the support of many intelligent people achieving this step together.

• Provide periodic updates, reports, charts and graphs.
  • Action on hold while

Although the periodic updates may have come from you, the reports, charts, and graphs would have been a natural progression created by the members here once they had access to the data.

At phase 5 we would have reduced our activity on their board to only posting the updates, charts, and graphs.

We actually see this as partial success. If there is a failure it is in the fact that we did not anticipate that the leadership in VJ would censor public data collected for advocacy in favor of their cause.

I can not speak for the leadership of VJ. However, I believe that there would have been no mention of censorship had you not created all of the hype. If you had not brought so much attention to yourself, I don't think there would have been any objections to the data itself. I have seen in other threads where people have included WAC #s and the status of those cases without anyone mentioning it.

The only objection you or anyone seems to have is that we are Anonymous. Sorry, but we don’t see a line of people other than us standing by to assist you in this manner. Some branches of Anonymous are good, others not as much. You don’t typically cut down the tree because of a bad branch.

I do not object to you being "Anonymous". I had no idea the Anonymous collective existed before you started posting here. As previously stated, I think your failure was due to your approach, and your persona was a major aspect of that approach.

Creepy, ok... Fine we are creepy… we really don’t mind being seen as creepy.

When appealing to an audience, you should be concerned about the way you are perceived. In this particular case, your persona was what created all of the hype that led to you not achieving your goals.

Arrogant attitude... It can seem that way and that’s fine... The truth is it’s the opposite of definition of arrogant. Arrogance is an exaggerated sense of self, one’s importance or abilities. We have no self, which is part of being Anonymous. We do not believe that we are important at all and have tried to drive the conversation away from identity and to the pressing matter at hand, the data. We do not believe we have abilities not possessed by others nor would we even slightly venture to say that. It is not possible to selfless and arrogant simultaneously. We however do understand why the perception of arrogance is there.

You are correct in that it is not possible to be selfless and arrogant simultaneously. However you are contradicting yourself. You have not driven the conversation away from identity. You have declared your identity as "Anonymous". "Anonymous" wanted credit by unnecessarily announcing they had collected the data. "Anonymous" wanted credit by unnecessarily releasing a video to USCIS. Anonymous seems to have an "exaggerated sense of self, one’s importance or abilities"

Just imagine for a moment that "John Smith" had started a thread, released this data, and never said another word. No one would have asked who he is was. Everyone's attention would have been on the data itself. Not the collector of the data. Not the distributor of the data. Not the message sender. Just the data.

[TylerDurden 45]

Step 1 and 2 was voted on beforehand. Before we began collecting data. it was done in the interest of fairness.

Other branches of Anonymous have been accused of being unethical because they did not do those steps.

We really don't care if people think we are arrogant, creepy, or what have you. Ethical, moral, operating for the good of the cause, that we care about.

Honestly, we wish people didn't know what Anonymous was, then they could go back to being those creepy, arrogant guys who did X, Y, or Z for whatever cause.

Many branches have broken away because of this exact issue, but inevitably those branches find themselves creating leaderships and dying.

[Possiblymaybe 371]

It does not matter. We are getting clear guidelines and talking with Capt. Ewok as we speak.

]

That's awesome! I didn't think you guys would pick up on the hint he gave you by opening that other thread. Regardless, of what you may think I believe, I do want this data out and about.

Best of luck to you!