Can we have a place where we dispose of misinformation and posts?

[rebeccajo 14]

I have to agree. There is no one person probably here that can determine those things and presume to be correct all the time. Open shared discussion at least allows for a community effort to derive proper information. I could enable the rating tool for posts that allow people to rate posts however that also leads sometimes to people rating based on various opinions.

Another idea I had is below topics there is the similar topics area. I could code something that lists "similar FAQ's" or "similar Guides" to help people find information.

Of course there is no one person. You have three people now moderating behavior. If it takes three to somewhat corral the indians, it would obviously take that many or more to look for blatantly incorrect 'advice'.

I don't think there would be any harm in a group of administrators attempting to adhere to the original purpose of the site - anecdotal, accurate self-advice.

[Nagishkaw 510]

I have to agree. There is no one person probably here that can determine those things and presume to be correct all the time. Open shared discussion at least allows for a community effort to derive proper information. I could enable the rating tool for posts that allow people to rate posts however that also leads sometimes to people rating based on various opinions.

Another idea I had is below topics there is the similar topics area. I could code something that lists "similar FAQ's" or "similar Guides" to help people find information.

Of course there is no one person. You have three people now moderating behavior. If it takes three to somewhat corral the indians, keep PEOPLE in line,it would obviously take that many or more to look for blatantly incorrect 'advice'.

I don't think there would be any harm in a group of administrators attempting to adhere to the original purpose of the site - anecdotal, accurate self-advice.

[Krikit 1,164]

I have to agree. There is no one person probably here that can determine those things and presume to be correct all the time. Open shared discussion at least allows for a community effort to derive proper information. I could enable the rating tool for posts that allow people to rate posts however that also leads sometimes to people rating based on various opinions.

Another idea I had is below topics there is the similar topics area. I could code something that lists "similar FAQ's" or "similar Guides" to help people find information.

Of course there is no one person. You have three people now moderating behavior. If it takes three to somewhat corral the indians, keep PEOPLE in line,it would obviously take that many or more to look for blatantly incorrect 'advice'.

I don't think there would be any harm in a group of administrators attempting to adhere to the original purpose of the site - anecdotal, accurate self-advice.

Yeah, I cringed at that one too.

[rebeccajo 14]

Sorry. It wasn't meant to offend.

[bakofoil 27]

Maybe if there was a reminder on the VJ interface somewhere, perhaps an intermediate page when anyone signs in or uses the forum search. Just a statement to advise people to read all posts in a particular thread or to find a secondary source before making a decision. Also might be useful to remind people to take care when posting a reply. Some information can only be gained through anecdotal experience so we need to be careful how information is restricted or censored.

I have generally found that the most useful posts on VJ have given me the leads required to find other sources of information (not always a direct link or quote) and from there I have made a decision.

Edited February 23, 2008 by babblesgirl

[JVKn'CVO 11]

If we spent more time being encouraging and supportive to our knowledgeable crowd, if we shared information with a positive attitude, rather than correct others, then there would be no need for this.

Not talking about a specific topic or member, just a general trend/ feeling around the forum.

Saludos,

Caro

Edited February 24, 2008 by JVKn'CVO

[Fandango 1,439]

I have to agree with E, Jomo'sgirl, and Marilyn. There shouldn't be some 'deciding authority' as far as information. Adding to that thought: I think if there were, there's deffo be a bigger question as far as this site and U P L.

Captain,

A message board format, by its very nature, will have misinformation. Anyone who relies solely on information gathered here deserves what they get.

Maybe a disclaimer message at the top or bottom telling people to do their own sanity checks?

This is exactly what I was thinking when I read the first post.

[Fandango 1,439]

I just read the thread in question, and I want to point out that the poster in question wrote this at the end of her first post:

It is a gambling decision, it might work and it might not. Nobody will ever tell you that it is ok to do so, it's your own call.

We all have hated the wait and have suffered from it, it is how it goes when you do things legally.

Maybe you should seek the opinion and help of a lawyer, then you have someone to blame or congratulate.

So I think that covers it!

[mox 298]

I think message forums by their very nature are self-correcting, and there is no need for further moderation. Even in the example provided by Mermaid the correct answer eventually came through loud and clear, even at one point being affirmed by a moderator. Getting to the eventual truth is painful sometimes, but I can't remember the last thread I read where someone didn't eventually step in with the right answer. Most posters are going to understand that they can't just pick the first answer to their question as the gospel truth. And those that do are often beyond much help anyway.

Another thing a "graying out" or "moved to the dumpster" system would do is intimidate the hell out of new posters, and it would also lead people to believe that posts that are not grayed out are the VJ-approved truth. This community is built on experience, and sometimes members post wrong information. They are corrected, and while not all of them learn from the experience, some of them do. Being corrected (often crassly) in public tends to encourage members to think about what they post. Having your posts grayed out or binned, on the other hand, would be humiliating and have an adverse affect on the "pipeline" that turns newbie VJ'ers into experienced VJ'ers.

I could enable the rating tool for posts that allow people to rate posts however that also leads sometimes to people rating based on various opinions.

It also tends to turn into a rating system on the person who posted the information, rather than rating the content of the post itself. There are people on these boards that have a very "anti-following" even though the information they provide is very spot-on. A ratings system would give that crowd a lovely little tool of disruption.

Edited February 24, 2008 by mox

[diadromous mermaid 36]

I just read the thread in question, and I want to point out that the poster in question wrote this at the end of her first post:

It is a gambling decision, it might work and it might not. Nobody will ever tell you that it is ok to do so, it's your own call.

We all have hated the wait and have suffered from it, it is how it goes when you do things legally.

Maybe you should seek the opinion and help of a lawyer, then you have someone to blame or congratulate.

So I think that covers it!

LisaD,

I don't get it. Do you honestly mean that someone can post something which is clearly inaccurate and then cover him/herself with a disclaimer "it's your call" and or "seek help of___"?

If so, why do we even bother to write anything? If a member posts a question...we just all need a widget to click and it will pop up. "blah, blah, blah (all inaccurate) and then, but "it's your call" "maybe you could check with an attorney".

My point, and I am appreciating others' take on this, is to keep the board clean of clearly inaccurate information. I am not talking about grey areas, or areas subject to interpretation of the law. I am speaking of situations that involve simple factual information that is readily available on USCIS, and elsewhere. I am speaking of, as an example

Is a K-1 a multiple entry visa?

Yes! Us it as many times as you like within 6 months <The information striken contradicts published information, please proceed with caution>

No it is not, see this...<insert excerpt from reliable source as corroboration>

The problem and the reason I brought this whole discussion up is that in order to correct information that is being offered carelessly, it is important for those that know to post the right information. Often times with certain individuals this is not simply taken as given, and it involves some proof if you will, so that the person misguiding concedes. Sometimes, dependent upon an individual's willingness to concede, this can require a number of posts to get the "poiunt home", if you will. Then, there's the other hazard to doing this that can result. I, personally have been accused of attacking in the past. Not that it is true, mind you but the point is that in an effort to send a message loud and clear that the information is faulty, there is a tendency for certain individuals to take the discussion of on a tangent and turn it into a personal thing. The problem is, that in the course of doing so, the conversation can go off tangent. In the meantime, if a moderator wishes to "keep peace", the inclination is to close the thread. Sometimes, entire discussions are closed, due to the banter between members that disagree on the facts. So, in a situation like that...what happens? The matter is not settled. The misinformation is still swirling around, and the only thing to do is to start another thread to clear it up...which then could follow suit. Not exactly like I am doing now, but sort of

It was just an observation I had, and have had on a number of occasions, which I rhink is unfortunately working against the very foundation of the site like this.

But, eh, I'm easy and flexible....so it can stay as it is, if that's what everyone senses is best.

[diadromous mermaid 36]

I think if there were, there's deffo be a bigger question as far as this site and U P L.

Whythat and not the rest? It's not like there isn't information on here that could, if anyone were so inclined, to be perceived as guidance. What about the information in the guides and everyone's participation?

[rebeccajo 14]

I could enable the rating tool for posts that allow people to rate posts however that also leads sometimes to people rating based on various opinions.

It also tends to turn into a rating system on the person who posted the information, rather than rating the content of the post itself. There are people on these boards that have a very "anti-following" even though the information they provide is very spot-on. A ratings system would give that crowd a lovely little tool of disruption.

It doesn't have to be a 'rating' like A,B,C,D,F. Make it a black or white 'thank you' or 'good vibes' type of thing.

At the very least, I believe something like that would be most helpful. There are all sorts of DIY boards out there - not just for immigration. Most of them have some way of pin-pointing the worker bees who have earned their stripes. All we have is boxes and hearts. I think it's really confusing. People who read message boards are used to looking for 'rating tools'. If I'm new and I see loads of boxes and no other way to determine anything about that poster, what else am I to do?

I'm not concerned that the 'anti-following' of members would taint the 'rating'. Anyone who is truly helpful is going to get more pluses than minues.

[Fandango 1,439]

I just read the thread in question, and I want to point out that the poster in question wrote this at the end of her first post:

It is a gambling decision, it might work and it might not. Nobody will ever tell you that it is ok to do so, it's your own call.

We all have hated the wait and have suffered from it, it is how it goes when you do things legally.

Maybe you should seek the opinion and help of a lawyer, then you have someone to blame or congratulate.

So I think that covers it!

LisaD,

I don't get it. Do you honestly mean that someone can post something which is clearly inaccurate and then cover him/herself with a disclaimer "it's your call" and or "seek help of___"?

If so, why do we even bother to write anything? If a member posts a question...we just all need a widget to click and it will pop up. "blah, blah, blah (all inaccurate) and then, but "it's your call" "maybe you could check with an attorney".

My point, and I am appreciating others' take on this, is to keep the board clean of clearly inaccurate information. I am not talking about grey areas, or areas subject to interpretation of the law. I am speaking of situations that involve simple factual information that is readily available on USCIS, and elsewhere. I am speaking of, as an example

Is a K-1 a multiple entry visa?

Yes! Us it as many times as you like within 6 months <The information striken contradicts published information, please proceed with caution>

No it is not, see this...<insert excerpt from reliable source as corroboration>

The problem and the reason I brought this whole discussion up is that in order to correct information that is being offered carelessly, it is important for those that know to post the right information. Often times with certain individuals this is not simply taken as given, and it involves some proof if you will, so that the person misguiding concedes. Sometimes, dependent upon an individual's willingness to concede, this can require a number of posts to get the "poiunt home", if you will. Then, there's the other hazard to doing this that can result. I, personally have been accused of attacking in the past. Not that it is true, mind you but the point is that in an effort to send a message loud and clear that the information is faulty, there is a tendency for certain individuals to take the discussion of on a tangent and turn it into a personal thing. The problem is, that in the course of doing so, the conversation can go off tangent. In the meantime, if a moderator wishes to "keep peace", the inclination is to close the thread. Sometimes, entire discussions are closed, due to the banter between members that disagree on the facts. So, in a situation like that...what happens? The matter is not settled. The misinformation is still swirling around, and the only thing to do is to start another thread to clear it up...which then could follow suit. Not exactly like I am doing now, but sort of

It was just an observation I had, and have had on a number of occasions, which I rhink is unfortunately working against the very foundation of the site like this.

But, eh, I'm easy and flexible....so it can stay as it is, if that's what everyone senses is best.

I'm very much a 'buyer beware' type person...I've said this a million times in the past but we are not a help desk. We're a bunch of ppl who are or have been at varying stages of this process. The information here is anecdotal...I see suggestions all the time 'let's do this for the newbs' 'let's do that to make it easier for them' and the question is...WHY? Many ppl here went thru this process before VJ was so user friendly, and they made it thru just fine. 'So why this urge to spoon feed?' I ask myself. The underlying tone of this site should be 'this is how *I* did it, but if you're not going to be completely responsible and verify everything you read with an official source, then you either need an atty or you need to realize you may be relying on misinformation.'

I think if there were, there's deffo be a bigger question as far as this site and U P L.

Whythat and not the rest? It's not like there isn't information on here that could, if anyone were so inclined, to be perceived as guidance. What about the information in the guides and everyone's participation?

Well, imo it's already a shade of grey....moderating the flow of information goes deeper. 'I'm so and so and I approve of this message!' Plus, we have the whole issue of 'who is going to be held responsible to control the accuracy of the information'....this place shouldn't have a set heirarchy...of course some are known for certain things, but that's all very unofficial. If someone wants to stay here for 10 years and give out advice and constantly update his/her own knowledge of the process, well that is his/her choice...but that person is not VJ's 'staff writer' or any 'official' representative of the site. I do think there's a huge difference.

[diadromous mermaid 36]

Well, imo it's already a shade of grey....moderating the flow of information goes deeper. 'I'm so and so and I approve of this message!' Plus, we have the whole issue of 'who is going to be held responsible to control the accuracy of the information'....this place shouldn't have a set heirarchy...of course some are known for certain things, but that's all very unofficial. If someone wants to stay here for 10 years and give out advice and constantly update his/her own knowledge of the process, well that is his/her choice...but that person is not VJ's 'staff writer' or any 'official' representative of the site. I do think there's a huge difference.

Then nothing would change. If you LisaD correct a member who asks if a K-1 is for mutliple entries by saying, "no, the K-1 is a single entry visa" what is the difference? If it's UPL, then it's UPL whether you say it or someone else. The irony is that the information is in the guides, and yet noone on here, including moderation, hesitates to instruct members to consult them.