I 134 question

[pushbrk 12,801]

your initial comment could be misconstrued as being a bit rough around the edges. The OP did not asked to be lectured either.

Then don't add to the stress by construing it as "jumping down anybody's throat". Perhaps the OP's response could be used as your example.

[k.loveh 0]

your initial comment could be misconstrued as being a bit rough around the edges. The OP did not asked to be lectured either.

Then don't add to the stress by construing it as "jumping down anybody's throat". Perhaps the OP's response could be used as your example.

I think it was more likely your comment of .... "your question indicates you did not carefully read the instructions for the I-134" as well as the tone used and your assumption that he hadn't 'carefully' read the guides. I see this a lot, 'READ THE GUIDES'. Ok, fine, good advice and so we read the guides.

Most of us here do read everything we can get our eyes and hands on, including the guides even before ever having posting here questions that the guides themselves answer, but on the human side of things we still 'cannot help' but feel insecure about a process that we're still very new to. Then to add to our insecurity, what do we do when the 'Guides' and new I-134 (10/30/08) instructions are agreeable and yet the instructions given somewhere else, such as on the Embassy websites are not agreeable? We go post a thread and ask other's to 'help' us sort it all out.

This, I believe was the OP's purpose....clarification of verification only.

Edited November 11, 2009 by k.loveh

[pushbrk 12,801]

your initial comment could be misconstrued as being a bit rough around the edges. The OP did not asked to be lectured either.

Then don't add to the stress by construing it as "jumping down anybody's throat". Perhaps the OP's response could be used as your example.

I think it was more likely your comment of .... "your question indicates you did not carefully read the instructions for the I-134" as well as the tone used and your assumption that he hadn't 'carefully' read the guides. I see this a lot, 'READ THE GUIDES'. Ok, fine, good advice and so we read the guides.

Most of us here do read everything we can get our eyes and hands on, including the guides even before ever having posting here questions that the guides themselves answer, but on the human side of things we still 'cannot help' but feel insecure about a process that we're still very new to. Then to add to our insecurity, what do we do when the 'Guides' and new I-134 (10/30/08) instructions are agreeable and yet the instructions given somewhere else, such as on the Embassy websites are not agreeable? We go post a thread and ask other's to 'help' us sort it all out.

This, I believe was the OP's purpose....clarification of verification only.

You are free to believe as you wish. Had the OP indicated he found a discrepancy between the instructions and a Consulate website the answer would have been different. My advice is the same. The question itself, not some assumption I made about it, indicated the instructions had not been carefully read. I pointed that out politely and indicated that reading form instructions would be critical to the couple's eventual success.

I'm here to help people have success. I do it in a direct manner so that any advice given is as clear and understandable as possible. If my direct manner affects you in such a way you can't refrain from exaggeration and confrontation, I politely invite you to use the "ignore" function so kindly provided by the management.

[k.loveh 0]

your initial comment could be misconstrued as being a bit rough around the edges. The OP did not asked to be lectured either.

Then don't add to the stress by construing it as "jumping down anybody's throat". Perhaps the OP's response could be used as your example.

I think it was more likely your comment of .... "your question indicates you did not carefully read the instructions for the I-134" as well as the tone used and your assumption that he hadn't 'carefully' read the guides. I see this a lot, 'READ THE GUIDES'. Ok, fine, good advice and so we read the guides.

Most of us here do read everything we can get our eyes and hands on, including the guides even before ever having posting here questions that the guides themselves answer, but on the human side of things we still 'cannot help' but feel insecure about a process that we're still very new to. Then to add to our insecurity, what do we do when the 'Guides' and new I-134 (10/30/08) instructions are agreeable and yet the instructions given somewhere else, such as on the Embassy websites are not agreeable? We go post a thread and ask other's to 'help' us sort it all out.

This, I believe was the OP's purpose....clarification of verification only.

You are free to believe as you wish. Had the OP indicated he found a discrepancy between the instructions and a Consulate website the answer would have been different. My advice is the same. The question itself, not some assumption I made about it, indicated the instructions had not been carefully read. I pointed that out politely and indicated that reading form instructions would be critical to the couple's eventual success.

I'm here to help people have success. I do it in a direct manner so that any advice given is as clear and understandable as possible. If my direct manner affects you in such a way you can't refrain from exaggeration and confrontation, I politely invite you to use the "ignore" function so kindly provided by the management.

It absolutely does not have anything to do with believing. I know how to read, thank you.

I am sure you are a good and decent person, and a big help to others here, but there was no attack on your character, just trying to explain what we had read into your post and how it was interpreted. Thats all. Perhaps it is your 'direct' manner?

Hope you have a great evening.

[pushbrk 12,801]

your initial comment could be misconstrued as being a bit rough around the edges. The OP did not asked to be lectured either.

Then don't add to the stress by construing it as "jumping down anybody's throat". Perhaps the OP's response could be used as your example.

I think it was more likely your comment of .... "your question indicates you did not carefully read the instructions for the I-134" as well as the tone used and your assumption that he hadn't 'carefully' read the guides. I see this a lot, 'READ THE GUIDES'. Ok, fine, good advice and so we read the guides.

Most of us here do read everything we can get our eyes and hands on, including the guides even before ever having posting here questions that the guides themselves answer, but on the human side of things we still 'cannot help' but feel insecure about a process that we're still very new to. Then to add to our insecurity, what do we do when the 'Guides' and new I-134 (10/30/08) instructions are agreeable and yet the instructions given somewhere else, such as on the Embassy websites are not agreeable? We go post a thread and ask other's to 'help' us sort it all out.

This, I believe was the OP's purpose....clarification of verification only.

You are free to believe as you wish. Had the OP indicated he found a discrepancy between the instructions and a Consulate website the answer would have been different. My advice is the same. The question itself, not some assumption I made about it, indicated the instructions had not been carefully read. I pointed that out politely and indicated that reading form instructions would be critical to the couple's eventual success.

I'm here to help people have success. I do it in a direct manner so that any advice given is as clear and understandable as possible. If my direct manner affects you in such a way you can't refrain from exaggeration and confrontation, I politely invite you to use the "ignore" function so kindly provided by the management.

It absolutely does not have anything to do with believing. I know how to read, thank you.

I am sure you are a good and decent person, and a big help to others here, but there was no attack on your character, just trying to explain what we had read into your post and how it was interpreted. Thats all. Perhaps it is your 'direct' manner?

Hope you have a great evening.

Please see bold above from your post. You asserted a belief. Who is "we"? How do you leap from "direct manner" that "could be misconstrued" to "jumping down a throat"?

Again, please don't add to our stress by overreacting to every little thing that doesn't suit your fancy. I invite you again to just use the ignore button.

[gary9891 10]

Hi all

Does the I 134 needs to be notarised?

Thank you in Advance

The newer version of the 134 does not need or even have an area for a notary to sign. Just make sure you have the newest edition of the 134, there are a lot of older versions floating around the web and the older version does have a notary signature space.

[k.loveh 0]

your initial comment could be misconstrued as being a bit rough around the edges. The OP did not asked to be lectured either.

Then don't add to the stress by construing it as "jumping down anybody's throat". Perhaps the OP's response could be used as your example.

I think it was more likely your comment of .... "your question indicates you did not carefully read the instructions for the I-134" as well as the tone used and your assumption that he hadn't 'carefully' read the guides. I see this a lot, 'READ THE GUIDES'. Ok, fine, good advice and so we read the guides.

Most of us here do read everything we can get our eyes and hands on, including the guides even before ever having posting here questions that the guides themselves answer, but on the human side of things we still 'cannot help' but feel insecure about a process that we're still very new to. Then to add to our insecurity, what do we do when the 'Guides' and new I-134 (10/30/08) instructions are agreeable and yet the instructions given somewhere else, such as on the Embassy websites are not agreeable? We go post a thread and ask other's to 'help' us sort it all out.

This, I believe was the OP's purpose....clarification of verification only.

You are free to believe as you wish. Had the OP indicated he found a discrepancy between the instructions and a Consulate website the answer would have been different. My advice is the same. The question itself, not some assumption I made about it, indicated the instructions had not been carefully read. I pointed that out politely and indicated that reading form instructions would be critical to the couple's eventual success.

I'm here to help people have success. I do it in a direct manner so that any advice given is as clear and understandable as possible. If my direct manner affects you in such a way you can't refrain from exaggeration and confrontation, I politely invite you to use the "ignore" function so kindly provided by the management.

It absolutely does not have anything to do with believing. I know how to read, thank you.

I am sure you are a good and decent person, and a big help to others here, but there was no attack on your character, just trying to explain what we had read into your post and how it was interpreted. Thats all. Perhaps it is your 'direct' manner?

Hope you have a great evening.

Please see bold above from your post. You asserted a belief. Who is "we"? How do you leap from "direct manner" that "could be misconstrued" to "jumping down a throat"?

Again, please don't add to our stress by overreacting to every little thing that doesn't suit your fancy. I invite you again to just use the ignore button.

Now I'm losing my patience...you just don't give up do you? Whats your point? That you want people to read into your post that you were being polite when you obviously were not? And when I say 'we' I mean the other poster who 'read' the same as I did...that you were rude and chastised where you hadn't any business chastising. Period. Additonally your 'Direct manner' is your lame excuse for being r-u-d-e.

As to overreacting? Misconstrued?....go back and read your own post! You might learn the true meaning of these overly-used words you seem to like so much!

Now...take your good advice of using 'ignore' function to heart and use it on yourself.

Again, Have a great evening.

Edited November 12, 2009 by k.loveh

[Kathryn41 3,205]

I would suggest that now is a good time for all parties involved here to step back from this issue and take a break. The OPs question has been answered and the OP has expressed his gratitude. That is what VJ is about.

Perhaps it is good for each of us to remember that we all have different styles in presenting information. Some of us are blunt while others prefer a more diplomatic approach. Each may find the other's style off-putting and may make more out of certain comments than they deserve. Regardless, try to take these differences with a grain of salt and ignore comments that may seem provocative or callous unless they are actual insults or personal attacks (in which case report them to a moderator). Even if there is a comment that comes across as harsh or judgmental or unnecessary, please decide if it needs to be made into a central topic discussion or if you can find other ways of dealing with it rather than diverting the thread away from the original question.

Edited November 12, 2009 by Kathryn41

[k.loveh 0]

I would suggest that now is a good time for all parties involved here to step back from this issue and take a break. The OPs question has been answered and the OP has expressed his gratitude. That is what VJ is about.

Perhaps it is good for each of us to remember that we all have different styles in presenting information. Some of us are blunt while others prefer a more diplomatic approach. Each may find the other's style off-putting and may make more out of certain comments than they deserve. Regardless, try to take these differences with a grain of salt and ignore comments that may seem provocative or callous unless they are actual insults or personal attacks (in which case report them to a moderator). Even if there is a comment that comes across as harsh or judgmental or unnecessary, please decide if it needs to be made into a central topic discussion or if you can find other ways of dealing with it rather than diverting the thread away from the original question.

Bravo Angel! And thank you very much for the good advice.

[Ak+Tk 0]

Before we jump down the OP's throat how about some compassion? We all make mistakes and the OP could have been confused by something similar to what I had experienced.

Please don't add to everybody else's stress by confusing encouragement to read instructions as jumping down somebody's throat. The OP didn't ask about a conflict between a website and the I-134 instructions.

Before you interpret this as jumping down YOUR throat, please notice it is a simple "request" that begins with the word "please".

I am in no way trying to add stress or pick a fight. Just a simple conversation.

No, the OP did not ask about the instructions and the website, you are correct.

But, you are under the presumption that the OP did not read the instructions and your initial comment could be misconstrued as being a bit rough around the edges. The OP did not asked to be lectured either. This is a common question that I have seen on here that many people have had some confusion about.

In my situation there wasn't continuity between what the form had stated and what the embassy has posted on the website. So naturally, confusion ensued. I was merely suggesting that there could have been a similar situation. We should let the OP explain the situation before we assume anything.

I do not think you are jumping down my throat. I understand your position. If it is a case of the OP not following instructions then yes, it is in their best interest to read more carefully.

The website is supposed to be one of the mouthpieces of the embassies and if they are giving you misguided info then who do you ask?

You're right. It took a long time to update the I-134 to follow the new laws. It's the I-864 that hasn't needed notarization since sometime in 2005.

I agree with Karen Thanks Margarita for such a sweet comment! You and Zahid have also heled out Mani and i. Thats what Vj friends are for!

Tasha

[Chris_Жанна 11]

Ok,

I would like to say a few things.

First, Pushbrk has been a great resource for many VJ members. He offers great, knowledgeable advice and probably is one of the best people to ask a question with on VJ he has helped many other members (myself included). I would like to thank him for being a valuable asset to the VJ community and I look forward to seeking his and other senior members council in the future.

My intent was not to add stress or rock the boat. I was just asking for some thoughtfulness with the advice. I am about at the same place in my journey as the OP an can say the last thing I would want to hear after asking a question would be "You should read the directions better". So I took a little offense at the initial statement. It was not my place to be offended here and I offer an apology to Pushbrk if I have anyway offended you or made you feel that you had to take a defensive stance ,I am truly sorry.

I'm sure everyone knows or can remember how very high strung before their interview is and emotions are at their peak.

I understand directness, I was in the Navy. No matter how good the info anyone can give being too direct can be perceived as harsh and not all ppl respond positively to this type of direction. We are still dealing with humans and not sailors/soldiers and a little bit of humanity and understanding is needed with this great info as well. That was the gist of what I mean when I said "Let's not jump down anyone's throat." No-one is asking to candy coat the truth, just have some empathy. That is all I was trying to convey.

This thread has gotten a little silly for us as adults to go back and forth when the intention of all of us was to help the OP.

I am offering an olive branch of peace. I do not want to argue with anyone on here. I hope in the future we can solve our differences in constructive manner.

[Starlight95 1]

I do agree everyone has ways of answering the posts. Some may be more direct then others. Just as we communicate in person, the same concept applys to our writing style. Everybody here is in here for help. I have a tendency to as well read everything, and still come on VJ for clarification.

[Starlight95 1]

Back to the topic the I-134 does not have to be notarized. I submitted the latest form to my fiance which does not require notarization. Let me know if you have any other questions.

Star

[Ak+Tk 0]

Before we jump down the OP's throat how about some compassion? We all make mistakes and the OP could have been confused by something similar to what I had experienced.

Please don't add to everybody else's stress by confusing encouragement to read instructions as jumping down somebody's throat. The OP didn't ask about a conflict between a website and the I-134 instructions.

Before you interpret this as jumping down YOUR throat, please notice it is a simple "request" that begins with the word "please".

I am in no way trying to add stress or pick a fight. Just a simple conversation.

No, the OP did not ask about the instructions and the website, you are correct.

But, you are under the presumption that the OP did not read the instructions and your initial comment could be misconstrued as being a bit rough around the edges. The OP did not asked to be lectured either. This is a common question that I have seen on here that many people have had some confusion about.

In my situation there wasn't continuity between what the form had stated and what the embassy has posted on the website. So naturally, confusion ensued. I was merely suggesting that there could have been a similar situation. We should let the OP explain the situation before we assume anything.

I do not think you are jumping down my throat. I understand your position. If it is a case of the OP not following instructions then yes, it is in their best interest to read more carefully.

The website is supposed to be one of the mouthpieces of the embassies and if they are giving you misguided info then who do you ask?

You're right. It took a long time to update the I-134 to follow the new laws. It's the I-864 that hasn't needed notarization since sometime in 2005.

I agree with Karen! THanks for the sweet comment Margarita we are all here to help!

I did not get my I134 Notarized either!

Tasha

[k.loveh 0]

Ok,

I would like to say a few things.

First, Pushbrk has been a great resource for many VJ members. He offers great, knowledgeable advice and probably is one of the best people to ask a question with on VJ he has helped many other members (myself included). I would like to thank him for being a valuable asset to the VJ community and I look forward to seeking his and other senior members council in the future.

My intent was not to add stress or rock the boat. I was just asking for some thoughtfulness with the advice. I am about at the same place in my journey as the OP an can say the last thing I would want to hear after asking a question would be "You should read the directions better". So I took a little offense at the initial statement. It was not my place to be offended here and I offer an apology to Pushbrk if I have anyway offended you or made you feel that you had to take a defensive stance ,I am truly sorry.

I'm sure everyone knows or can remember how very high strung before their interview is and emotions are at their peak.

I understand directness, I was in the Navy. No matter how good the info anyone can give being too direct can be perceived as harsh and not all ppl respond positively to this type of direction. We are still dealing with humans and not sailors/soldiers and a little bit of humanity and understanding is needed with this great info as well. That was the gist of what I mean when I said "Let's not jump down anyone's throat." No-one is asking to candy coat the truth, just have some empathy. That is all I was trying to convey.

This thread has gotten a little silly for us as adults to go back and forth when the intention of all of us was to help the OP.

I am offering an olive branch of peace. I do not want to argue with anyone on here. I hope in the future we can solve our differences in constructive manner.

Agreed...very good post

.. Pushbrk 'is' a good adviser in most part, I haven't any doubts about that.

The problem with the I-134 question is that it is a very common confusion that so many here have and still are experiencing, that the guides do not alleviate their concerns due to the conflicting info from other sources such as the web and Embassy websites. And this is where and why patience is very much needed. I could relate to this because I myself just recently went through the same confusion, so I understood very well why Zahid had asked this question.

Your offering of the Oilive Branch is first class and wish I had thought to use this as well before losing my patience and had 'thought' before I wrote, so to speak. It is a lesson that would be well for all to learn.

Thank you for it.