I-129f June 2017 filers (merged)

[Josiah angela 23]

6 minutes ago, Josiah said:

@vocaledge could you add our WAC1790353426 number to your list?

Yes please @vocaledge add our cas number, thanks in advance

[vocaledge 3,340]

@Josiah @Josiah angela - You've been added

I also see @SatinderSabiee and @SwimminginSync too.

 

[John & Rose 7,239]

6 minutes ago, Larissa&Jo said:

I was the one of the person that called you pessimist , but honestly my apologies you are right

It was all in fun.  Squirrel was the optimist at 160, DandY was the realist at 170 and I was the pessimist at 180.  We ALL wanted Squirrel to be correct.  DandY's algorithm and analysis and my experience with government workers made us add some time.  I was very concerned about the holidays.  I still am.  

 

Seriously, we had a bad day and it did get out of hand.  I accept some of the blame for that.  I completely respect Squirrel and DandY.  It was just a difference of opinion based on their own logic and analysis.  There is no right or wrong.  All we really have is a bunch of people who want this to part of the journey to end.  I am still rooting for the quickest dates possible.  I am a very optimistic person.  This will end.  Hopefully sooner then later.

[Naes 12,205]

1 hour ago, Deusebom said:

those numbers are beyond mine!!!!!!!!!!!

I didn't expect to hear this line this early in the June filer 😊😂

[Ivan D 46]

14 minutes ago, Larissa&Jo said:

I am same day 

Nice!!! I can't wait, just like the rest of us haha

[DandY 134]

10 minutes ago, John & Rose said:

DandY was the realist at 170

Hey, hey hey John! That was you rounding mine to get nice blocks of 10 (160, 170, 180)! I admit that an earlier version of the model that did not consider backlogs as effectively was predicting 168 average at one point, but let the record show (!!!) well over a month ago, I changed the model and got the 174-178 average. 

 

But as I said, if June 1 is not touched by day 168 for them (tomorrow), then it will be longer than 174-178 average (since as we all know, they do not work all of a day at once--the bulk of a day tends to be spread over 12 days).

[DandY 134]

19 minutes ago, John & Rose said:

There is no right or wrong. 

True, but as with any analysis like this, there are better and worse approaches based upon the logic and data used. I get very frustrated when someone just keeps shouting an unsubstantiated claim which is why I just chose to leave. And I will retire into the background again now.  

[Naes 12,205]

Wow to the biggest hypocrite I've ever seen in my life...

[John & Rose 7,239]

19 minutes ago, DandY said:

Hey, hey hey John! That was you rounding mine to get nice blocks of 10 (160, 170, 180)! I admit that an earlier version of the model that did not consider backlogs as effectively was predicting 168 average at one point, but let the record show (!!!) well over a month ago, I changed the model and got the 174-178 average. 

 

But as I said, if June 1 is not touched by day 168 for them (tomorrow), then it will be longer than 174-178 average (since as we all know, they do not work all of a day at once--the bulk of a day tends to be spread over 12 days).

I think we did flip flop a little.  I went from 180 to 170 and you went from 170 to 178.  I think as far as accurate estimates, you are probably closest.

[George & Roth 1,485]

It’s evident the algorithm was filled with a litany of errors and false assumptions, I would rather term it as a lucky guess since it’s a fairer description. 

 

 

[John & Rose 7,239]

41 minutes ago, Naes said:

Wow to the biggest hypocrite I've ever seen in my life...

I give him a little slack.  People were very unforgiving when they didn't agree with his honest conclusions.  We were called all kinds of names because we did not agree with the shortest estimate.  We were considered bad and negative because we were honest.  My day job is helping a government agency manage expectations on multi billion dollar capital programs.  I have to be honest.  I will never tell them unrealistic expectations.  I will let them know the truth so they can be prepared for what is coming.  Some of these expectations are up to 15 years from now.  It is not easy to do.  We were giving honest expectations and we were both exiled for it.  

 

I didn't want to get into this again because it doesn't help anyone.  I did receive some very nice messages of support but I decided to let it go.  160 was never even a possibility.  That was based on flawed logic.  Hindsight is 20/20.  When we had longer timeframes we were lambasted as the enemy and as a negative influence here.  Nothing could be farther from the truth.  We were just telling people an honest and accurate estimate per our analysis.  

 

It really doesn't matter now as we are all waiting on NOA2 no matter when it comes. I anticipate mine between day 174 and 179.

 

June 1 filers are now at day 167.  We were called nasty names for estimating 170.  Ironic, isn't it?

 

 

Edited November 15, 2017 by John & Rose

[Naes 12,205]

4 minutes ago, John & Rose said:

I give him a little slack.  People were very unforgiving when they didn't agree with his honest conclusions.  We were called all kinds of names because we did not agree with the shortest estimate.  We were considered bad and negative because we were honest.  My day job is helping a government agency manage expectations on multi billion dollar capital programs.  I have to be honest.  I will never tell them unrealistic expectations.  I will let them know the truth so they can be prepared for what is coming.  Some of these expectations are up to 15 years from now.  It is not easy to do.  We were giving honest expectations and we were both exiled for it.  

 

I didn't want to get into this again because it doesn't help anyone.  I did receive some very nice messages of support but I decided to let it go.  160 was never even a possibility.  That was based on flawed logic.  Hindsight is 20/20.  When we had longer timeframes we were lambasted as the enemy and as a negative influence here.  Nothing could be farther from the truth.  We were just telling people an honest and accurate estimate per our analysis.  

 

It really doesn't matter now as we are all waiting on NOA2 no matter when it comes. I anticipate mine between day 174 and 179.

 

 

My problem is not about estimations. Nor with any kind of information has been give (if any??)

 

I asked for info and what it means.

I've been told offensive.

I've been asked instead about an info in an absolute rudeness. Even though I've been told about who knows what about something the person didn't even read.

i gave info yet just got rudeness only

 

i believe in what I see. No it doesn't have to be the final truth. The only thing is needed is a logic that explains I did it this way.

 

hypocracy here : not doing something yet asking in return.

 

i don't like rude people

 

 

I have to add: I didn't call anyone nasty names for saying any kind of number. I just gave my estimations based on a possible outcome. I haven't been rude here other than saying "not giving any data or info is like saying you have skills when your resume says something different" and this is called an analogy I stand by it

 

Edited November 15, 2017 by Naes

[John & Rose 7,239]

11 minutes ago, Naes said:

My problem is not about estimations. Nor with any kind of information has been give (if any??)

 

I asked for info and what it means.

I've been told offensive.

I've been asked instead about an info in an absolute rudeness. Even though I've been told about who knows what about something the person didn't even read.

i gave info yet just got rudeness only

 

i believe in what I see. No it doesn't have to be the final truth. The only thing is needed is a logic that explains I did it this way.

 

hypocracy here : not doing something yet asking in return.

 

i don't like rude people

 

 

No, please don't get me wrong.  You are amazing and DandY was rude at times.  I just wanted you to realize that he is a human and he was completely trashed for telling the truth and being as honest as he could possibly be.  You were actually caught in the crossfire.  Your name was brought up as someone for DandY to "thank" for giving honest numbers.  DandY took offense to that but it really didn't involve you.  You are an amazing woman who just happened to be caught in the middle of a disagreement.  Yes, he was rude.  A lot of us were rude during those exchanges, including me.  I know that everyone here is frustrated with the wait.  

 

 

Edited November 15, 2017 by John & Rose

[Kathy&Edward 32]

7 hours ago, vocaledge said:

@Kathy&Edward @JRLee 

Thanks for adding yourselves to the NOA1 Tag List - your tags are working correctly!
 

 

@scruffer&myamee

@PaulnNicole

I can't seem to get either of you to tag... can you make yourselves known by replying in the thread here, and then I can tag you from there and get you added!

 

Thanks for letting us know and thank you so much for everything you have been doing it is much appreciated!!

[DandY 134]

44 minutes ago, John & Rose said:

I think we did flip flop a little.  I went from 180 to 170 and you went from 170 to 178.  I think as far as accurate estimates, you are probably closest.

You were over 180 at one point and for those impacted by Thanksgiving, you are going to be closest to correct. So bully to you!