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

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

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.

I don't see the value in this.

[The_Dude 1,142]

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.

To be fair, you would have to list all the infractions which in some of the illegal immigration threads could get quite lengthy. I think that there also needs to be some clarifications regarding some of the more vague aspects of the TOS, namely references and citing.

[The_Dude 1,142]

I don't see the value in this.

Why? It's quite clear and obvious. Just look at any of the closed/locked illegal immigration threads. Thre are numerous racial slurs as well as pety insults thrown out there, and in the end, there is just a curt little message saying "closed for further review for breach of TOS". I think people need to know who is getting banned and for what, and why threads are being closed. Is it being closed for someone using a racial slur? Or is it because someone called someone else a fvcking moron? There is a vast difference between the two, yet both are technically a breach of the TOS.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

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?

Wow, dumbest post so far. Congrats.

Why? It's quite clear and obvious. Just look at any of the closed/locked illegal immigration threads. Thre are numerous racial slurs as well as pety insults thrown out there, and in the end, there is just a curt little message saying "closed for further review for breach of TOS". I think people need to know who is getting banned and for what, and why threads are being closed. Is it being closed for someone using a racial slur? Or is it because someone called someone else a fvcking moron? There is a vast difference between the two, yet both are technically a breach of the TOS.

Yes, since it is next to impossible to write TOS in a manner that covers all possible infractions, it is important for moderators to let the community know which behaviors resulted in suspensions, so we all know what to do or not to do. I expect a suspension for my previous post, I've been suspended for milder 'attacks' in the recent past.

[Fandango 1,439]

I don't see the value in this.

because then, maybe ppl wouldn't moan so much about things being 'unfair' and nothing ever being done.

If things are done that the rest of us don't see, then everyone assumes nothing's done.

If it's public, then at least those who are in favor of moderation will feel content under the visible iron fist

[The_Dude 1,142]

Wow, dumbest post so far. Congrats.

Yes, since it is next to impossible to write TOS in a manner that covers all possible infractions, it is important for moderators to let the community know which behaviors resulted in suspensions, so we all know what to do or not to do. I expect a suspension for my previous post, I've been suspended for milder 'attacks' in the recent past.

Are you suggesting that the ToS could be a living document?

Don't let the constitutionalists hear you say that.

because then, maybe ppl wouldn't moan so much about things being 'unfair' and nothing ever being done.

If things are done that the rest of us don't see, then everyone assumes nothing's done.

If it's public, then at least those who are in favor of moderation will feel content under the visible iron fist

And we, as posters would get a better understanding of what specifically is unacceptable behavior beyond this vague notion of a "ToS violation".

[TBoneTX 45,291]

These 'prolific posters' are part of the backbone of VJ and many have paid their dues and are done doing so.

Elaborate about "backbone," please. (Question without rancor) If they're so done, why are they still here?

Along the way, they/we have 'made friends' and forged relationships with others.

Why aren't they/you availing themselves/yourself of avenues outside VJ to do so? As one example, I have special pals here, too, and I have their personal e-mail addresses.

Why the fuque would Ewok thank the backbone of VJ by banning them for a month?

The answer is obvious, and it's in the OP's opening message.

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?

Then there should be some timeline function added to incorporate withdrawals. Regarding the value of historical data, the Admiral or a moderator can answer this in detail. (Did you ask anyone before yanking your timeline?)

I always see members here try to reinvent the wheel. As an aside, Steven is notorious for it. You don't like it, speak up or report the person. No need to have all these new changes and whatnot.

Or, is it seeking to invent a better mousetrap? Is Steven's plea so wrong or misguided? Darnell (for one) and I (for two) believe that the current system is untenable -- and perhaps the moderators & the Admiral believe similarly.

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.

Drama for its own sake is not usually healthy; see some of the opinions in this very thread. Someone else bemoaned the spillage into this thread -- for, what, 7 pages or more? And 100% good riddance to that other site, in my firm opinion.

No one wants VJ OT to become a ghost town, least of all Ewok.

How do you speak for him on this matter, please? The immigration-related fora seem quite healthy to me... and your own contributions there are quite wise and well-stated, incidentally. It's disappointing that you saw the need to use "#######" and "fuque" here, though -- OT spillage into a non-OT forum. Edited May 27, 2010 by TBoneTX

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Why? It's quite clear and obvious. Just look at any of the closed/locked illegal immigration threads. Thre are numerous racial slurs as well as pety insults thrown out there, and in the end, there is just a curt little message saying "closed for further review for breach of TOS". I think people need to know who is getting banned and for what, and why threads are being closed. Is it being closed for someone using a racial slur? Or is it because someone called someone else a fvcking moron? There is a vast difference between the two, yet both are technically a breach of the TOS.

Maybe it would be okay to say "thread closed for - racial slur or blah blah" but most of these threads have 10+ violations in them, the mods shouldn't have to waste their time like that. Are you sure you don't want to see why someone is banned or suspended for entertainment?

Edited May 27, 2010 by Sousuke

[TBoneTX 45,291]

Wow, dumbest post so far. Congrats.

Elaborate, please.

I expect a suspension for my previous post, I've been suspended for milder 'attacks' in the recent past.

In comparison, I've never been suspended or directly warned, so perhaps I'm not prone to dumb posts.

[TBoneTX 45,291]

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.

The fora that I mentioned are not the truly "upper" fora with the nuts-&-bolts immigration questions. Almost everyone has some insight to offer about adjusting to life here, etc.

[Fandango 1,439]

And we, as posters would get a better understanding of what specifically is unacceptable behavior beyond this vague notion of a "ToS violation".

lol, that too

[TBoneTX 45,291]

Here is a repeat of the original post of this thread.

We need more of you to participate in the Off Topic Forum. For those who are level-headed, you know who you are and you've probably avoided OT because of the handful of posters who've made it less enjoyable to have reasonable discussions about a lot of topics that deserve some serious thought. Of course, not every thread needs to be serious, but I think the ones here who've been long time members and are still here, are staying in the upper forums where there is less tolerance for playground behavior.

Who in this non-OT thread is fitting into (or not helping supersede) the qualities in the bolded statement above?

[SMOKE 1,426]

How do you speak for him on this matter, please?

she isn't 'speaking' for him. she has been here for years. this topic gets brought up almost quarterly. if ewok wanted the OT gone or moderated differently it would be.

[The_Dude 1,142]

So according to you TBone, everyone should be posting to help each and every immigration member, despite their level of expertise. Many people do help, in their respective regional forums because many consulate and immigration questions are country specific. But apparently, that does not suffice for you. I don't know ####### your problem is with people who post more than you, and to be blunt, I don't care either. Thirty day bans for anyone over a certain post count is imbecilic. If you don't understand why Ewok wants higher traffic on this site, then I simply can't be bothered to explain internet advertising revenue streams to you. Don't you have wedgies to go post on

[TBoneTX 45,291]

moderated differently

This seems to be the indication.