A Plea to Long Time, Level-Headed Members Who Still Post Here

[ValerieA 350]

Woot!

Hey, as soon as you bring up hookers and blow, you have my attention. I don't care what the thread was about initially.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Hey, as soon as you bring up hookers and blow, you have my attention. I don't care what the thread was about initially.

Good good good. You will be mentioned in this week's VJ Army of the Night dispatches, wherein we also discuss availability of hookers and blow for $187 and a Ralphs gift card.

[TBoneTX 45,088]

I personally wonder why the OT-only (or OT-mostly) posters rarely if ever contribute to the actual immigration-related threads, especially if they're finished with their own journeys. And why aren't many of their timelines updated, to provide extra meaning to the statistics upon which so many members here rely? If these questions aren't confronted, what is the purpose of the OT posters' memberships here, and of the OT forum itself, given the stated mission of the VisaJourney site?

My other questions:

1. What would be the benefit or harm of a 30-day "hiatus from posting" for, say, the 10 or 20 posters who have been most prolific in OT over a defined recent period? In this way, we (and they) could see how the tenor of OT might change during their absence. On the basis of those observations, new or refined policies regarding OT could be developed.

2. Alternatively, is there a way to arrange a 30-day "hiatus from posting in OT only" for the above group -- meaning that if they wished to post some (it's hoped) constructive information in an Immigration forum, they still could?

Brand-new VJ members are regulated in certain ways, aren't they (for example, to guard against spammers)? Why not consider standards for the most prolific OT posters that don't involve seemingly arbitrary "moderation" policies?

Policing "content" and "tone" will always be a slippery slope, and such policing will always be applied with some subjective criteria that will make one faction or another unhappy. Because "objectionable" content and tone have been expressed by members at both ends of the political spectrum, why not test the effect of placing the 20 most prolific posters (whatever their views) on hiatus? This would be independent of previous suspensions or probationary status.

If the most active OT posters are sincere in wishing to improve OT, it seems logical that they would agree. In the meantime, perhaps they could communicate with each other through PM if they feel strongly enough about an issue to want to do so.

Si, man?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I personally wonder why the OT-only (or OT-mostly) posters rarely if ever contribute to the actual immigration-related threads, especially if they're finished with their own journeys. And why aren't many of their timelines updated, to provide extra meaning to the statistics upon which so many members here rely? If these questions aren't confronted, what is the purpose of the OT posters' memberships here, and of the OT forum itself, given the stated mission of the VisaJourney site?

My other questions:

1. What would be the benefit or harm of a 30-day "hiatus from posting" for, say, the 10 or 20 posters who have been most prolific in OT over a defined recent period? In this way, we (and they) could see how the tenor of OT might change during their absence. On the basis of those observations, new or refined policies regarding OT could be developed.

2. Alternatively, is there a way to arrange a 30-day "hiatus from posting in OT only" for the above group -- meaning that if they wished to post some (it's hoped) constructive information in an Immigration forum, they still could?

Brand-new VJ members are regulated in certain ways, aren't they (for example, to guard against spammers)? Why not consider standards for the most prolific OT posters that don't involve seemingly arbitrary "moderation" policies?

Policing "content" and "tone" will always be a slippery slope, and such policing will always be applied with some subjective criteria that will make one faction or another unhappy. Because "objectionable" content and tone have been expressed by members at both ends of the political spectrum, why not test the effect of placing the 20 most prolific posters (whatever their views) on hiatus? This would be independent of previous suspensions or probationary status.

If the most active OT posters are sincere in wishing to improve OT, it seems logical that they would agree. In the meantime, perhaps they could communicate with each other through PM if they feel strongly enough about an issue to want to do so.

Si, man?

I deleted my timeline a little while back, because in my opinion it doesn't much of a role after 360 days, and I'm a little paranoid about data theft.

[Darnell 8,478]

Si, man?

Si!!! Rest is useful, both for those resting, and for the 'tone' of the OT forum. IMO, less 'monitoring' work for any mod, as well.

[TBoneTX 45,088]

I deleted my timeline a little while back, because in my opinion it doesn't much of a role after 360 days, and I'm a little paranoid about data theft.

Interesting. Did you discuss the pros & cons with the Admiral, specifically regarding potential data theft?

Si!!! Rest is useful, both for those resting, and for the 'tone' of the OT forum. IMO, less 'monitoring' work for any mod, as well.

My thoughts were inspired by yours, si man. (Where's my +1?)

[rsn 135]

I personally wonder why the OT-only (or OT-mostly) posters rarely if ever contribute to the actual immigration-related threads, especially if they're finished with their own journeys. And why aren't many of their timelines updated, to provide extra meaning to the statistics upon which so many members here rely? If these questions aren't confronted, what is the purpose of the OT posters' memberships here, and of the OT forum itself, given the stated mission of the VisaJourney site?

To answer the above questions:

1. It's probably best if members who are either done with their journey or are in-between steps not contribute. Unless, of course, they are willing to stay on top of all of the recent immigration-related developments.
2. As Sousuke mentioned, old timelines aren't very useful to anyone.
3. Members who are between steps and are not motivated to stay on top of immigration issues until they begin to close in on their next step are not going to leave the site, and for good reason. OT may be a hang-out for them until their time comes.
4. Members who are done with their journey may possibly not want to leave the community of people that they have known for so long.

[Jenn! 918]

People who are done with their journies tend to post less in the immigration forums because much of their experience is outdated. I'll chime in on select topics that I have experience with that is still relevant, mostly with a regional focus.

As for why we hang around and post in OT, you kind of get comfortable with the other regulars, whether you like them or not. I suppose I could go join some general discussion forum and start all over again rebuilding a rapport with the posters there, but it's easier to just stick around here.

[TBoneTX 45,088]

1. It's probably best if members who are either done with their journey or are in-between steps not contribute. Unless, of course, they are willing to stay on top of all of the recent immigration-related developments.
2. As Sousuke mentioned, old timelines aren't very useful to anyone.
3. Members who are between steps and are not motivated to stay on top of immigration issues until they begin to close in on their next step are not going to leave the site, and for good reason. OT may be a hang-out for them until their time comes.
4. Members who are done with their journey may possibly not want to leave the community of people that they have known for so long.

Reasonable responses, but certain Immigration fora still afford the chance to offer general wisdom -- "Moving Here," "Finding Work," "Welcome to New Members," even "Effects." The OT-primarily posters are largely intelligent & caring (underneath the "noise") and can be assets in those fora, si man. And, the larger question looms of "if OT isn't immigration-related, why is it part of VJ?" Let people who are at a "waiting point" in their journey simply check in periodically, communicate via PM with their amigos, and offer what they can in one or more Immigration fora, si man. Edited May 27, 2010 by TBoneTX

[The_Dude 1,142]

Reasonable responses, but certain Immigration fora still afford the chance to offer general wisdom -- "Moving Here," "Finding Work," "Welcome to New Members," even "Effects." The OT-primarily posters are largely intelligent & caring (underneath the "noise") and can be assets in those fora, si man.

You could make the case to question why everyone on these boards don't post more in those forums you listed. We all have jobs and lived in the U.S. for some period of time and could offer invaluable information regarding life and culture in the U.S.. So I ask, why don't you post more in those threads?

[Fandango 1,439]

I personally wonder why the OT-only (or OT-mostly) posters rarely if ever contribute to the actual immigration-related threads, especially if they're finished with their own journeys. And why aren't many of their timelines updated, to provide extra meaning to the statistics upon which so many members here rely? If these questions aren't confronted, what is the purpose of the OT posters' memberships here, and of the OT forum itself, given the stated mission of the VisaJourney site?

My other questions:

1. What would be the benefit or harm of a 30-day "hiatus from posting" for, say, the 10 or 20 posters who have been most prolific in OT over a defined recent period? In this way, we (and they) could see how the tenor of OT might change during their absence. On the basis of those observations, new or refined policies regarding OT could be developed.

2. Alternatively, is there a way to arrange a 30-day "hiatus from posting in OT only" for the above group -- meaning that if they wished to post some (it's hoped) constructive information in an Immigration forum, they still could?

Brand-new VJ members are regulated in certain ways, aren't they (for example, to guard against spammers)? Why not consider standards for the most prolific OT posters that don't involve seemingly arbitrary "moderation" policies?

Policing "content" and "tone" will always be a slippery slope, and such policing will always be applied with some subjective criteria that will make one faction or another unhappy. Because "objectionable" content and tone have been expressed by members at both ends of the political spectrum, why not test the effect of placing the 20 most prolific posters (whatever their views) on hiatus? This would be independent of previous suspensions or probationary status.

If the most active OT posters are sincere in wishing to improve OT, it seems logical that they would agree. In the meantime, perhaps they could communicate with each other through PM if they feel strongly enough about an issue to want to do so.

Si, man?

'No, man'

'Oh you have too many posts, ####### off for a month' These 'prolific posters' are part of the backbone of VJ, and many have paid their dues and are done doing so. Along the way, they/we have 'made friends' and forged relationships with others. Why the fuque would Ewok thank the backbone of VJ by banning them for a month?

My timeline isn't there because I yanked my petition a month before interview. Plus, data from 07 isn't necessarily 'new and updated' now is it? What good would a 3 year old timeline do someone now?

I always see members here try to reinvent the wheel. As an aside, Steven is notorious for it. Let's split this forum, let's install this new rule, let's do this that and the other. OT is fluid, it'll go on its own. You don't like it, speak up or report the person. No need to have all these new changes and whatnot.

And the simple fact is, drama on OT creates a lot of activity. Tons of hits on each page, spillage over to other forums (like this thread), etc. Look at the 'other site'...it's dead. No one wants VJ OT to become a ghost town, least of all Ewok.

[TBoneTX 45,088]

why don't you post more in those threads?

Check my record of posts. When I don't post, it's because I usually think twice before doing so: Do I have something to offer of value, and beyond what others have said?

[The_Dude 1,142]

'No, man'

'Oh you have too many posts, ####### off for a month' These 'prolific posters' are part of the backbone of VJ, and many have paid their dues and are done doing so. Along the way, they/we have 'made friends' and forged relationships with others. Why the fuque would Ewok thank the backbone of VJ by banning them for a month?

I always see members here try to reinvent the wheel. As an aside, Steven is notorious for it. Let's split this forum, let's install this new rule, let's do this that and the other. OT is fluid, it'll go on its own. You don't like it, speak up or report the person. No need to have all these new changes and whatnot.

That is the problem that a lot of people have with OT currently. You report something that is either blatantly, or latently racist and the moderators sit on their thumbs. They will then come back a couple hours later, pick up some innocuous insult that someone said along the way and use that as the reason the thread was closed. Thread closures need to be public and point out who was the culprits for it closing and why.

And the simple fact is, drama on OT creates a lot of activity. Tons of hits on each page, spillage over to other forums (like this thread), etc. Look at the 'other site'...it's dead. No one wants VJ OT to become a ghost town, least of all Ewok.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Check my record of posts. When I don't post, it's because I usually think twice before doing so: Do I have something to offer of value, and beyond what others have said?

Then how can you call out other members who refrain from posting in upper forums and the ones pertaining to moving to the U.S.? That seems very hypocritical to me. Who is to say that they don't feel comfortable enough with their own level of expertise to answer immigration questions.

[Fandango 1,439]

That is the problem that a lot of people have with OT currently. You report something that is either blatantly, or latently racist and the moderators sit on their thumbs. They will then come back a couple hours later, pick up some innocuous insult that someone said along the way and use that as the reason the thread was closed. Thread closures need to be public and point out who was the culprits for it closing and why.

Then let's place the blame where it belongs: with the moderators. And I agree with the public thread closures thing.

I also agree with a public outing of who got banned and why.