Since when

[Holliday 4]

I'm glad that all of these issues are being addressed openly here. I spend a whole lot of time reading and not very much time posting (because I rarely have anything constructive to add), and I've noticed the trend of personality conflicts and bickering getting in the way of advice, and it has been bothering me. Sometimes I see constructive bickering, other times it's just a useless pissing match between people who probably don't know each other in real life, but have decided that they hate each other on the internet. As far as I'm concerned, that's completely ridiculous, and it's a big waste of time.

I see no reason why people can't disagree with each other in a RESPECTFUL manner. We're all adults here, right? To say something like "I disagree. Here's my reason why..." or to say "You're wrong. Here's the right answer..." will both get the same point across, but one is a productive way to answer, and one isn't. There are a lot of issues related to the immigration process that aren't clear cut. Two people with exactly the same circumstances can easily have two very different experiences, right? So the differing opinions are helpful to the person asking the question, because then they know the possibilities of what to expect. For example... Somebody asked about what would happen if they have assumed their husband's last name, but not made the change on their passport, and wanted to know what name would appear on their green card. Some people answered that the name used on the petition and other paperwork would be the name used on the green card. Other people answered that the name on the passport appears on the green card. Both sides were speaking of their own experiences, so neither answer is wrong, but instead a third answer is most helpful: In some cases they use the name from the petition and other paperwork, in others they use the name on the passport. If you want to be sure to have your married name on your green card, the best thing to do is change the passport. No need for bickering, right? In this case, the two opposite answers are necessary in order to come to the conclusion that will be most helpful to the person who asked the question. It's just one example, and in this case there was no pissing match about the differing opinions, but still... I hope the point I'm trying to make is coming across properly. Because yeah, I've also seen people asking for immigration advice and support about problems in their relationship, and thread evolved into an angry discussion riddled with insults about whether or not Obama is a good President... or something like that. Not helpful.

I think some people need to make better use of the "Ignore" feature. It's awesome. If someone is constantly pissing you off, it's a great tool. Nobody here pisses me off on a personal level, because well... I don't know anyone here. But I use "ignore" anyway. If I notice that I find a particular person's posts to be consistently irritating or useless, and I have to restrain myself from saying "you know what? You're a jackass!", I'll put them on ignore, just because me telling them that they're a jackass won't help anyone at all, so the best thing I can do is set their profile to "ignore". Then, while I'll see that they have posted something, I don't have to read the jackassery if I don't want to.

I especially think the "ignore" feature should be used by some of the people here who are really knowledgeable and helpful, but can't seem to get along with each other for whatever reason. I'd hate to see someone really useful either get suspended, or get so fed up with someone else that they don't want to visit this site anymore. And as I've read in this thread, things like that have already happened, and I think it's a real shame. I'm one of the scared new people here, and personally, I need your advice and knowledge. You all continually answer questions I have (although I haven't personally posted them, I'm still reading when other people ask), and your advice and experience are invaluable to me, and I really appreciate it. So please don't let personality conflicts get in the way.

[Captain Ewok 1,930]

I'm glad that all of these issues are being addressed openly here. I spend a whole lot of time reading and not very much time posting (because I rarely have anything constructive to add), and I've noticed the trend of personality conflicts and bickering getting in the way of advice, and it has been bothering me. Sometimes I see constructive bickering, other times it's just a useless pissing match between people who probably don't know each other in real life, but have decided that they hate each other on the internet. As far as I'm concerned, that's completely ridiculous, and it's a big waste of time.

I see no reason why people can't disagree with each other in a RESPECTFUL manner. We're all adults here, right? To say something like "I disagree. Here's my reason why..." or to say "You're wrong. Here's the right answer..." will both get the same point across, but one is a productive way to answer, and one isn't. There are a lot of issues related to the immigration process that aren't clear cut. Two people with exactly the same circumstances can easily have two very different experiences, right? So the differing opinions are helpful to the person asking the question, because then they know the possibilities of what to expect. For example... Somebody asked about what would happen if they have assumed their husband's last name, but not made the change on their passport, and wanted to know what name would appear on their green card. Some people answered that the name used on the petition and other paperwork would be the name used on the green card. Other people answered that the name on the passport appears on the green card. Both sides were speaking of their own experiences, so neither answer is wrong, but instead a third answer is most helpful: In some cases they use the name from the petition and other paperwork, in others they use the name on the passport. If you want to be sure to have your married name on your green card, the best thing to do is change the passport. No need for bickering, right? In this case, the two opposite answers are necessary in order to come to the conclusion that will be most helpful to the person who asked the question. It's just one example, and in this case there was no pissing match about the differing opinions, but still... I hope the point I'm trying to make is coming across properly. Because yeah, I've also seen people asking for immigration advice and support about problems in their relationship, and thread evolved into an angry discussion riddled with insults about whether or not Obama is a good President... or something like that. Not helpful.

I think some people need to make better use of the "Ignore" feature. It's awesome. If someone is constantly pissing you off, it's a great tool. Nobody here pisses me off on a personal level, because well... I don't know anyone here. But I use "ignore" anyway. If I notice that I find a particular person's posts to be consistently irritating or useless, and I have to restrain myself from saying "you know what? You're a jackass!", I'll put them on ignore, just because me telling them that they're a jackass won't help anyone at all, so the best thing I can do is set their profile to "ignore". Then, while I'll see that they have posted something, I don't have to read the jackassery if I don't want to.

I especially think the "ignore" feature should be used by some of the people here who are really knowledgeable and helpful, but can't seem to get along with each other for whatever reason. I'd hate to see someone really useful either get suspended, or get so fed up with someone else that they don't want to visit this site anymore. And as I've read in this thread, things like that have already happened, and I think it's a real shame. I'm one of the scared new people here, and personally, I need your advice and knowledge. You all continually answer questions I have (although I haven't personally posted them, I'm still reading when other people ask), and your advice and experience are invaluable to me, and I really appreciate it. So please don't let personality conflicts get in the way.

I think your point about the ignore feature is terrific. In some cases it can be an excellent way to screen out people you prefer not to interact with.

[NatPatBen 3]

A very quick thing I just did to address this (in some part) is that the hearts now all hyperlink to:

http://www.visajourney.com/wiki/index.php/...ey_Member_Ranks

I get the Q on what they mean sometimes... now people will simply need to click on them to get the list.

Great idea to add the link. I asked this question before, and I'm sure others have & will, so I'm sure some current & future VJers will appreciate this.

[Kez/JWolf 6]

The idea about taking things to PM is a good thing, I know it has worked for me on many occasions. The only problem is when one of the two people has the other blocked for PM.

If I come across a thread where incorrect info has been given, I normally just post the correct info and the quote and link to the source and leave it up to the readers to decided what information is correct and useful.

I do not see any point in the back and forth arguments it just causes stress for the people concerned, and fills up the thread with ####### that people dont need or want to have to trawl through to get at the information that we all come here for.

I find the fact that I constantly have to go and find the information and links to back up my answer is a good thing as when doing this I have found out about changes and new up-dates, so hopefully keeping my info fresh and up to date. For us senior members many years can pass from the time we did our journey and as we all know immigration and its laws are always changing, so it would be easy to be giving outdated info without knowing.

Its nice to see the explanation of the Hears and boxes, I know many people mistake them for sign of seniority and think that someone with lots of BIG hearts must be very knowledgeable about immigration when in reality they gained all their hearts from OT posting. I do think that the loss of the Boxes and hearts would be a good idea, I have been on other information forums where there is no rank system and it works well. Having a rank system means you will always get people who want another box or heart so the post a one word answer like "congrats" in every thread they see that has an approval or answers every poll back to god knows when to increase their post count. If we are going to keep the rank system them maybe excluding OT posts would be good.

Sadly there will always be personality mismatches on any public forum. Something as sensitive as immigration can cause a lot of frustration and stress. We have a vast array of people from all corners of the earth and some people are very good at the written word and can make their posts look and sound very professional and have added weight. while other may know the correct information and have the links to go along with it but they are not as good with words or English is not their first language. I find it strangely funny when the bickering happens between some people that the language used gets more and more Legal/Professional as things get worse and worse, it is almost like watching two junior lawyers trying to score points by using the most complicated and obscure language that the know, LOL

Additional MODS will help as there is often times when I find something that needs attention but all I can do is send a PM to the MODS advising them of a issue, but as we all have a real life it does mean that sometimes a few hours have passed before the issues can be dealt with.

Anyway there you have it, my very early Sunday morning musing on a difficult subject.

Jon

[missmissy 38]

The arguing on the forums "despite who is right or wrong" scares new members looking for help. They did not ask for their threads to turn into a battleground for senoir members but I see it happening which is a shame.

w.r.t. to the arguing between the two members central to this tangent... it is possible that both are wrong and both are right. At the most basic level they may simply not like each other... which is just part of life: not everyone likes each other. That said this is not a reason to leave ones civility behind at the expense of keeping the community a helpful and welcoming place for all members.

That is precisely why many people, old and new members alike, have stopped or never even begin posting on VJ. Some of this petty bickering is seemingly for 'argument's sake' or to score personal points in what is obviously a very personal disagreement. It is obvious to me there are sides, since the same 'sides' keep throwing pies at one another.

Frankly, it has become tiresome trawling through the threads for relevant information and I very rarely come back here for information. I am glad that my K1 visajourney experience on these boards, at least, was in some way positive as many of those filing with me were extremely supportive and shared some genuinely useful information. The site and some member's commitment to the quality of the site have definitely degenerated in the past year.

That is great feedback. Thank you. Do you think it would be helpful for more to stop in from time to time throughout the forums. While I am not a source of any immigration information I would not mind suggesting areas of the site for people to read (replying to the topic). I would also like to welcome new members and "Set the welcoming tone" that VJ should really be all about. Maybe this will help to encourage that atmosphere to be more prevalent if it is at all lacking.

Thoughts?

I think that is a marvelous idea! We are about ready to send our k1 in and I have to say - I have been on this site for 6 months now, reading, posting and trying to cope with the waiting and the stress of being apart. It would be fantastic to have someone answer a question with a link to that iformation in previous posts. This is a great community, I have passed many a lonely night and weekend here, reading, participating in goofy discussions and just passing the time sometimes. I respect both parties being discussed in this thread and hate that this has happened. It has diminished my respect for both of them and I am sure it has had the same effect on others.

[diadromous mermaid 36]

Maybe the solution, for the time being, is that rather than a mod getting involved and asking for people to "stop bickering or the thread will be closed" they should simply pop on and say something along the lines of "opposing opinions, parties please cite your sources".

1. If one does and the other doesn't, then the object of the thread has been accomplished. The question has been answered and some veracity to one party's "opinion" has been provided.
2. If both do, then the debate was useful and necessary to weed through and demonstrate that there is conflicting information "out there".
3. If neither does, both will know that they are simply conjecturing, (or as Pushbrk refers, offering anecdotal knowledge, that can hardly be regarded as fact, but just an observation), and the OP will know that neither has enough factual background on the matter to be taken as expert.

I am not advocating sources or citations for each and every post on this forum. Rather for when it is clear that an opposing opinion has developed and a discourse between two or more has ensued. Those that should then go back to an arsenal of knowledge or links to reputable sources know "instantly" when that becomes necessary. The mod directing the parties to do so, is only a warning that the discussion, so far, has been insufficiently "backed up" with factual sources.

The problem as I see it is related to the fact that individuals that are prolific posters (and that post count can be acquired in "rah, rah" threads opf no consequence) acquire stats under their member name that suggest longevity and that quite possibly could also falsely indicate to new members that they "just might know a little more than others". That is not always the case. I say that in order to keep the site a place for "INFORMation" when a discussion quite clearly involves a differing of opinion, then quality citations should be posted to demonstrate that the opinion being offered is substantiated. If one can't post a citation, then they should be told to ####### off and stop spewing #######. Shutting down the thread only serves one purpose.....the answer is never known, and the OP does not get the service s/he deserves.

I absolutely agree with you on all counts. As long as the thread stays open those unable to substantiate their opinion will become obvious.

[rebeccajo 14]

Regarding posting of sources:

There are many sources of information on the web. I know Push reads other forums; so do I.

I would appreciate having links to anecdotal evidence that is claimed. I am certainly not all-knowing. Plus I do enjoy finding new sources of information.

In that vein, I would ask that Admin of this site make certain that any filters or censors which are community specific be lifted.

Time has long passed for that feud to be over as well.

[Nagishkaw 510]

Maybe the solution, for the time being, is that rather than a mod getting involved and asking for people to "stop bickering or the thread will be closed" they should simply pop on and say something along the lines of "opposing opinions, parties please cite your sources".

1. If one does and the other doesn't, then the object of the thread has been accomplished. The question has been answered and some veracity to one party's "opinion" has been provided.
2. If both do, then the debate was useful and necessary to weed through and demonstrate that there is conflicting information "out there".
3. If neither does, both will know that they are simply conjecturing, (or as Pushbrk refers, offering anecdotal knowledge, that can hardly be regarded as fact, but just an observation), and the OP will know that neither has enough factual background on the matter to be taken as expert.

I am not advocating sources or citations for each and every post on this forum. Rather for when it is clear that an opposing opinion has developed and a discourse between two or more has ensued. Those that should then go back to an arsenal of knowledge or links to reputable sources know "instantly" when that becomes necessary. The mod directing the parties to do so, is only a warning that the discussion, so far, has been insufficiently "backed up" with factual sources.

It's a good idea, but this really only works when one party says that immigration works like *this* and the other party says it works like *that.* In the case of what started this entire post in the first place, it wouldn't work because push's argument was based on his collective understanding of how the consulates work. (and PLEASE let's not drag that argument back into this thread, I'm just using it as an example, and continuing that argument will be detrimental to the value of this thread.) There's a lot of collective understandings out there that you're just not going to find in a PDF on USCIS's or the State Department's website. There *is* a place for opinion, and while it's important to have a back-and-forth on subjective answers, it's also important for people to feel like they can post without be launched on for every single tiny little detail, or have their motives called into question every time their answer could possible be interpreted a certain way. Discussion good. Heated debate good. Crushing your enemies, seeing them driven before you, and hearing the lamentation of their women...it's awesome in war, but it's not good for VJ.

The best moderation system is for people to just behave. To realize that, unless you are the OP, the thread is not about you. To realize that we are all adults and after some healthy back-and-forth, the OP will just need to make the decision who is right. I'm not sparkly-eyed enough to believe that self-moderation is the answer, but it would make it easier in support of other moderation systems.

Oh, and either close or overhaul Expats. It started off as a great idea. It's turned into nothing but a place where those in the know can run off-site and ridicule VJ members without having to worry about TOS violations. It is now a meta-game, where the Expats membership feeds off each others' bitterness and cynicism, and then bring it back to VJ in order to score points back at Expats. There is a rule here that Expats conversations are forbidden to bleed over onto VJ. There is no such rule going the opposite direction, and it is poisoning VJ.

Lastly, I want to say that I agree with rebeccajo's last comment--community-specific filters need to be lifted. The goal is, and always has been, to get people through the process. Blocking access to helpful information is unhelpful. We're asking members here to swallow their pride and back off from hurting useful threads. I think it's only right that the VJ administration heed that same advice.

Very well said and I couldn't agree with you more. :thumbs:

Edited March 22, 2009 by Nagishkaw

[bakofoil 27]

A very good post with extremely constructive suggestions mox.

[rebeccajo 14]

It's a good idea, but this really only works when one party says that immigration works like *this* and the other party says it works like *that.* In the case of what started this entire post in the first place, it wouldn't work because push's argument was based on his collective understanding of how the consulates work. (and PLEASE let's not drag that argument back into this thread, I'm just using it as an example, and continuing that argument will be detrimental to the value of this thread.) There's a lot of collective understandings out there that you're just not going to find in a PDF on USCIS's or the State Department's website. There *is* a place for opinion, and while it's important to have a back-and-forth on subjective answers, it's also important for people to feel like they can post without be launched on for every single tiny little detail, or have their motives called into question every time their answer could possible be interpreted a certain way. Discussion good. Heated debate good. Crushing your enemies, seeing them driven before you, and hearing the lamentation of their women...it's awesome in war, but it's not good for VJ.

Mox -

I do not wish to drag the argument back into the thread, but I do think it is important you understand this.

People may indeed have different 'collective understandings' of the process. That is what makes open discussion fruitful. And it's true lots of things can't be found in PDF or written guidance. BUT - if one person has a 'collective understanding' that is not founded in anecdotal proof, then they should be willing to look at the other parties 'argument' (for lack of a better word). Simply standing on your position and saying it 'may' happen is not good enough. ESPECIALLY when the member does what happened in the thread in question - literally putting on the boards a subjective, previously unheard of criteria.

I think it's important for me to say - if it is not abundantly clear - my concern is for the OP and for other members reading threads who may be researching the topic. It is SO VERY IMPORTANT that we not come to sideways conclusions based upon our 'collective experience'. If a member allows himself or herself to become so sure of their knowledge that they begin to introduce speculation into their writings....well IMO that's so very very harmful to those reading.

To put it bluntly and be right out in the open about what happened (and often happens with Push and I) - I don't give one damn about winning an argument with him. I care VERY MUCH that he not overstep the bounds of his membership and service. People are looking to him for answers - I would love to see him operate from a more cautionary standpoint.

Real cases can literally be at stake.

Edited March 22, 2009 by rebeccajo

[DARUMA07 25]

Mox and diadromous mermaid for Moderator.... You two seem to have the most level head on this thread.

[rebeccajo 14]

Mox -

I do not wish to drag the argument back into the thread, but I do think it is important you understand this.

People may indeed have different 'collective understandings' of the process. That is what makes open discussion fruitful. And it's true lots of things can't be found in PDF or written guidance. BUT - if one person has a 'collective understanding' that is not founded in anecdotal proof, then they should be willing to look at the other parties 'argument' (for lack of a better word). Simply standing on your position and saying it 'may' happen is not good enough. ESPECIALLY when the member does what happened in the thread in question - literally putting on the boards a subjective, previously unheard of criteria.

I think it's important for me to say - if it is not abundantly clear - my concern is for the OP and for other members reading threads who may be researching the topic. It is SO VERY IMPORTANT that we not come to sideways conclusions based upon our 'collective experience'. If a member allows himself or herself to become so sure of their knowledge that they begin to introduce speculation into their writings....well IMO that's so very very harmful to those reading.

To put it bluntly and be right out in the open about what happened (and often happens with Push and I) - I don't give one damn about winning an argument with him. I care VERY MUCH that he not overstep the bounds of his membership and service. People are looking to him for answers - I would love to see him operate from a more cautionary standpoint.

Real cases can literally be at stake.

Agreed. And I'm not taking sides. What I'm saying is that there comes a point in an argument or debate when the back and forth needs to stop. And I realize that it's DAMN hard to stop when you're in the thick of it (go back through my posting history and you'll see a LOT of times I should have walked away, but I didn't), but after a coupe go-'rounds, when the argument has turned into the irresistible force paradox, then it just needs to stop, and at that point the OP and/or other readers need to step up and decide the course of the rest of the thread. What's been happening is that the OP and/or other readers try to get the thread back on track, but the fighting between a couple members has become so intense that their attempts are just lost in the noise. This, in my mind, is more harmful than members introducing speculation into their advice.

I guess it depends on which 'portion' of the site you feel is most important. The 'get along/social' aspect or the 'informational'.

People can spat and make up later on. I've spat my way into several friendships around here .

Bad information lingers.

[bakofoil 27]

I guess it depends on which 'portion' of the site you feel is most important. The 'get along/social' aspect or the 'informational'.

People can spat and make up later on. I've spat my way into several friendships around here .

Bad information lingers.

... more so when the thread is closed and the OP's question remains unresolved as a result of those spats.

[Donna A 4]

how about we leave expats out of this since its not to be braught up here and how about we close this tread since it was reopened to finish a closed thread?

isnt thats the way its been done before?

[Otto 83]

how about we leave expats out of this since its not to be braught up here and how about we close this tread since it was reopened to finish a closed thread?

isnt thats the way its been done before?

Yup - and the OP (of this thread) was responded to also - now it seems to have derailed into who wants who for Mod... and/or what changes need to be made to VJ...