Since when

[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.

[mox 298]

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.

[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.

[mox 298]

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.

Edited March 22, 2009 by mox

[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...

[mox 298]

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.

Just want to point out that this part of your post was added after I'd read your original post, but before I hit reply. So in my reply when I said "Agreed," I wasn't referring to this point. On this point I have no opinion, or at least no opinion I think is relevant to the discussion.

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

Good point. My comments are meant to address the "informational" parts of VJ. Off-topic is it's own world, although I think a little more thought could be given to what role it best serves here on VJ.

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

Bad information lingers.

Everything lingers...it's the nature of the internet. The problem is that what you consider bad information is not what pushbrk considers bad information. Your idea of conjecture is not pushbrk's idea of conjecture. pushbrk's idea of helpful information is not what you consider helpful information. Perhaps one of you is right and the other is wrong, but it doesn't matter because you are both entrenched in your positions, and nothing short of waterboarding is going to leverage you out of your respective positions.

If you really do consider pushbrk's information as bad information, there's really only one best way to minimize its impact. Debate it in a professional manner, citing sources if necessary, and then when it's clear that nobody is going to give, let it go. In the end, it's up to the OP to decide, and it makes it much easier for the OP to make the decision when the thread hasn't spun off into the land of the very angry people.

[mox 298]

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?

Because the conversation is about making VJ better. Expats does not make VJ better, so I think it's relevant.

And I think the worst thing that could happen right now is if this thread were closed. This, IMHO, has been an amazingly helpful thread, and as long as it continues to be helpful I think it needs to stay open.

[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?

Because the conversation is about making VJ better. Expats does not make VJ better, so I think it's relevant.

And I think the worst thing that could happen right now is if this thread were closed. This, IMHO, has been an amazingly helpful thread, and as long as it continues to be helpful I think it needs to stay open.

its not a matter of what u think is helpful or not...if its against tos it has to be closed.

expats is only bad for when people go there and hide out and read everything thats said and then come here and have an attiutude againt expats members. then they run off and tell their friends hurry go look and thats what causes the problems. if they want to confront the person at expats they are more then welcome but they wont...they bring it here and then start #######.

it has been told before that expats is not to be braught up here and people wont listen so they need to be the ones punished for no obeying what they were told.

Edited March 22, 2009 by Donna A

[KimandRuss 0]

expats discussion should be kept at expats.

This thread has been left open so that there can be some positive discussion regarding VJ. If we can't all agree to do that it will need to be clsoed.