about to submit my timeline (affidavit)

[hniHnitsuJ 8]

Honestly, I personaly thanks to all the advices in this forum. I have a friend that already went throught my papers. My question is any important items that I missed out in this timeline?. I still need for the advice. thank you

It looks good to me, just use OUTLOOK 2003 or 2007 to correct grammar, and you are good to go.

[lindal24 1]

My opinion is if you can get some grammatical help, you should request it. Sure unedited writing will be your own, but if it's to the extent that makes a CO consider the competency of the petitioner, I don't think it helps the case anymore.

[BinhJerome 14]

No doubt that people are judged by the words they use. It's also very probable that my reading of my friend's timeline was affected by the fact that I knew him already, and I could hear him speaking in my head as I read it. The CO will not know my friend, and won't hear the same voice in his head when he reads the timeline. In my friend's case, I thought it was pretty clear from the grammar that English was not his first language, and that was the primary reason for the grammatical errors, and not because he was a native born American with a double digit IQ. In other words, he didn't come across as uneducated - just not very well versed in English.

It also occurred to me that my friend might have reasons to contact the consulate at some point. If the CO reads his correspondence and compares that with what is written in his timeline then the grammar should be consistent, and the CO won't be wondering who wrote the eloquent prose in his timeline.

Even if the CO does read the emails (many people say they do not read the emails just look at the dates) then in my opinioin it stays the same, the Timeline is almost ALWAYS read while the emails are either denied and never looked at or in many cases just simply "looked" at for dates or for number of emails at the interview. regardless I still feel that the timeline should be grammar checked some errors I say leave in, but for the most part they should be fixed. My feeling is that if it slows the reader down any then fix it, but if it is a simple "went to Hue" instead of "we went to Hue" those can be left in, but if it causes the reader to stop and go back because they feel they missed two or three words then it needs to be fixed, even with English being a second language there will be people that judge people based on this. Once again this is my view, and there is no way to prove or disprove my assumptions, but if history repeats its self (which it usually does) then I would not want to take the chance of being judged well before my interview, I would personally want to go in with as clean a slate as possible, remember this is HCMC, they lie, deny for no reason, some feel there is a quota system, and the list goes on and on, this is not ANY consulate I would want to mess around with. Jerome

[hong tran 0]

Yea yea, My Hanh got her visa approved today ... Pink Pink, I'm so happy . Thanks to all of you for yours advices.

[hniHnitsuJ 8]

Yea yea, My Hanh got her visa approved today ... Pink Pink, I'm so happy . Thanks to all of you for yours advices.

Congrats,, I guess Office word 2003 or 2007 help out .. hahahaa...

[NODINK 0]

Opinions on whether frontloading a timeline with numerous grammatical errors... can it be beneficial?

About front loading:

Yes, in my case. Thru the whole process, USCIS/US Consular didn't request aditional RFE at all.

[BinhJerome 14]

Congrats, glad that it all worked out for you! :dance:

[Tuanv 2]

Great new!