immique
07-18 11:45 PM
Spillover will occur from the first quarter itself this time. it has not happened in the last few years because, there were many applications from ROW(especially EB2 and EB3 ROW) coming from backlog centers and using up all the visa numbers as all the spillovers got passed on to EB3 bypassing EB2 retrogressed countries. this is exactly why EB2 was unavailable in February. now with the correct interpretation of the law and EB1 and EB2 ROW being current, the spillover will happen from Nov/dec of this year itself for 2009 quota. But I am not sure how quickly the dates move for Eb2 or how much spillover will happen. remember the visas allotted for a particular quarter will be used by the end of the quarter and I doubt if there will be much demand in EB1 and EB2 ROW that can use up all the visas for the quarter. this is why I think EB2 I and C will get spillover very early in the year and I don't think we will be waiting till the last quarter for this to happen
What makes you so sure the spillover can happen in the first quarter? Is there an example in the last 10 years? You may have forgot Feb. 2008 bulletin. If what you say is true, why it was U for EB2-I on Feb. 2008? No one in USCIS can take the responsibility if the spillover in first quarter causes EB2 RoW with cutoff date later, as they can't predict if there will be enough(or not) applicants to fullfill the quota. Therefore, spillover can only happen at 4th quarter. Unless if there's really mininum of usage, then it may start at 3rd quarter, but I don't think it will ever happen at 1st quarter.
Here is the Feb 2008 bulletin.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3925.html
INDIA EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE HAS BECOME �UNAVAILABLE�
Despite two retrogressions of the India Employment Second preference cut-off date, demand for numbers by CIS Offices for adjustment of status cases has remained extremely high in recent months. As a result the annual limit for the India Employment Second preference category has been reached, and the category has become �unavailable� effective immediately.
What makes you so sure the spillover can happen in the first quarter? Is there an example in the last 10 years? You may have forgot Feb. 2008 bulletin. If what you say is true, why it was U for EB2-I on Feb. 2008? No one in USCIS can take the responsibility if the spillover in first quarter causes EB2 RoW with cutoff date later, as they can't predict if there will be enough(or not) applicants to fullfill the quota. Therefore, spillover can only happen at 4th quarter. Unless if there's really mininum of usage, then it may start at 3rd quarter, but I don't think it will ever happen at 1st quarter.
Here is the Feb 2008 bulletin.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3925.html
INDIA EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE HAS BECOME �UNAVAILABLE�
Despite two retrogressions of the India Employment Second preference cut-off date, demand for numbers by CIS Offices for adjustment of status cases has remained extremely high in recent months. As a result the annual limit for the India Employment Second preference category has been reached, and the category has become �unavailable� effective immediately.
wallpaper Toyota#39;s pioneering new 2.4
royus77
06-28 05:14 PM
right, and the worry (as is also noted in the AILA complaint that someone posted earlier) is that USCIS can consider the update from DOS to be the 'updated' Visa Bulletin.
There is nothing that prevents DOS from issuing a visa bulletin at any time and making it effective then-and-there. AILA has raised concerns with this, that it is a problematic thing to do, but it seems to be well within the law. I dont think there is a chance of a lawsuit here.
Even If there is a law suit by AILA and negotiations .bla bla ...if they decide to go for a interm memo , the first victims will be us . AILA will collect money one more time and they will be happy ...
There is nothing that prevents DOS from issuing a visa bulletin at any time and making it effective then-and-there. AILA has raised concerns with this, that it is a problematic thing to do, but it seems to be well within the law. I dont think there is a chance of a lawsuit here.
Even If there is a law suit by AILA and negotiations .bla bla ...if they decide to go for a interm memo , the first victims will be us . AILA will collect money one more time and they will be happy ...
krish2005
01-14 03:17 PM
She says AILA is aware and very well understands all the repercussions of this on attorneys too. She will post back on their updates as and when she gets.
Hope they will help us fight together.
Hope they will help us fight together.
2011 2010 Toyota Verso LIVE at
illusions
05-11 05:05 PM
Correct! And it is not even a "Civil War". It is really a war ti erradicate terrorism from Sri Lankan soil. The term Civil War refers to a war between people in a country. The SL government is not waging a war against it's Tamil citizens but against a terrorist group.
my bad, what i meant was war. Jerrome that reports is one sided, bias and is opinionated.
my bad, what i meant was war. Jerrome that reports is one sided, bias and is opinionated.
more...
ronhira
01-13 08:28 PM
how'll this affect those on ead or ac21...... it seems that this has no affect on us if we r using ead with the sponsoring employer or ac21 employer..... is that correct?
mnkaushik
07-14 10:18 AM
My Priority date is Jan 2004, EB3-India category having approved I-140 and applied 485. I have sent my EAD and aP for renewal which expire in last week of September. My spouse is in EB2-India having pd Dec 2005, also applied I-485 (140 is approved) and has applied for EAD and aP renewal which expire in last week fo October. We both applied independently and are using our H1bs and not EAds.
Since my spouse's PD is going to be current in August'2008, I was planning on applying for a second 485 as a dependent on my spouse's application. Questions i have are -
1) I did my medical for previous 485 in June of last year, is that still valid?
2) Can I still keep my previous 485 application or should I cancel it.
3) What should i do about my AP and EAD? I have travelling job and am thinking of looking for a local job around end of the year or begining of next year. So would like to know what I should do about EAD and AP
Lastly is there something i am not thinking of?
Will greatly appreciate your response.
Since my spouse's PD is going to be current in August'2008, I was planning on applying for a second 485 as a dependent on my spouse's application. Questions i have are -
1) I did my medical for previous 485 in June of last year, is that still valid?
2) Can I still keep my previous 485 application or should I cancel it.
3) What should i do about my AP and EAD? I have travelling job and am thinking of looking for a local job around end of the year or begining of next year. So would like to know what I should do about EAD and AP
Lastly is there something i am not thinking of?
Will greatly appreciate your response.
more...
srikondoji
07-03 09:50 PM
Under the section "Why does it hurt?
Lawyers who charged upwards of $2000 for filing will not refund the service fee, so candidates have to pay again when dates become current in future.
The biggest loss is the trust, coz, next time people will not believe these mid month bulletins at all as they can come around anytime and revise the dates. So, applicants will always have to live in fear untill they receive the receipt.
I am trying an outline for sending to media + lawmakers + ...
The following is a very rough draft without reading some of the letters posted in the thread. I will read the posts tomorrow and polish it by tomorrow evening. I will need everyone's input since I don't know all the issues.
Introduction
Retrogression in GC process.
What happened
USCIS announced at the time the forms were due.
Applicants started filling forms 2-3 weeks before July 2.
Applicants changed their schedules to submit forms.
Advantages of EAD + AP
Don't know all!
Travel without visa -> saves Embassy overhead.
Spouse can work.
Can switch job.
Why does it hurt
Medical will not be valid after 1 year.
Rejected June filers can not file.
June filers did not file because they thought they will file in July.
Fees more then doubling
Name checking (which can take 1+ year) done in parallel with waiting for GC #.
Load balancing for USCIS.
USCIS which is supported 90% by application fee needs to care for applicants.
Very little chance of legislative relief for a looong time.
Lawyers who charged upwards of $2000 for filing will not refund the service fee, so candidates have to pay again when dates become current in future.
The biggest loss is the trust, coz, next time people will not believe these mid month bulletins at all as they can come around anytime and revise the dates. So, applicants will always have to live in fear untill they receive the receipt.
I am trying an outline for sending to media + lawmakers + ...
The following is a very rough draft without reading some of the letters posted in the thread. I will read the posts tomorrow and polish it by tomorrow evening. I will need everyone's input since I don't know all the issues.
Introduction
Retrogression in GC process.
What happened
USCIS announced at the time the forms were due.
Applicants started filling forms 2-3 weeks before July 2.
Applicants changed their schedules to submit forms.
Advantages of EAD + AP
Don't know all!
Travel without visa -> saves Embassy overhead.
Spouse can work.
Can switch job.
Why does it hurt
Medical will not be valid after 1 year.
Rejected June filers can not file.
June filers did not file because they thought they will file in July.
Fees more then doubling
Name checking (which can take 1+ year) done in parallel with waiting for GC #.
Load balancing for USCIS.
USCIS which is supported 90% by application fee needs to care for applicants.
Very little chance of legislative relief for a looong time.
2010 Test drive 2010 Toyota Verso S
chintu25
02-13 10:22 AM
:mad:BUMP:mad:
more...
coopheal
02-12 04:43 PM
Per country quota sucks big time. DOL/USCIS needs to get rid of it ASAP.
hair Toyota Verso Driver Interior
digmetalq
09-04 03:16 AM
Guys why are we fighting over something that is not helping us, no Indian politician has helped us in our journey to GC, nor have they taken interest in our welfare. We are on our own in this mess, so let us unite as one, no north south east or west we are one HINDUSTANI.
My condolences to the Andhra CM YSR family.
My condolences to the Andhra CM YSR family.
more...
chintu25
02-13 11:23 AM
Ok - so what is it going to cost us to get a consult with Rajiv Khanna? Anyone know this? Until we have more details on this, I commit $25 for this first consultation. (I will gladly raise the commitment once I know how much this will cost and if IV Core Members support this initiative).
We have three now and atleast 8 who supported this issue on the thread
We have three now and atleast 8 who supported this issue on the thread
hot Toyota Verso 2010 Wallpapers
cs.0
05-29 03:20 PM
hi friends,
My suggestion is as follows : Let USCIS issue GC for primary applicants without considering PD :) and, issue GC to family members as per PD.
Anyhow getting GC for primary applicant is important then dependent or let them consider whole family as single case instead of considering each family member as single.
regards,
chethan
My suggestion is as follows : Let USCIS issue GC for primary applicants without considering PD :) and, issue GC to family members as per PD.
Anyhow getting GC for primary applicant is important then dependent or let them consider whole family as single case instead of considering each family member as single.
regards,
chethan
more...
house Törmäystesti Toyota Verso
glus
02-13 07:19 AM
Clear up your mind for a little while and consider this:
The whole working world lives by on one simple rule ..... GETTING PEOPLE OFF YOUR BACK.
The bigger PITA (pain-in-the-ass) you are... the higher is the priority you get.
As a community we will need to become a PR nightmare for govt. officals... simply being an inconvenience is not going to cut it... we will have to become a "a cactus that is stuck in the colon".
USCIS says EBs are retrogressed because there are XXXXX people in the queue. Why is the queue so long? Because they wasted numbers in the past and kept the queue long. This is pure operational inefficiency that is resulting in monetary, emotional and mental loss to about a million people.
This is a valid ground for a class action lawsuit.
By filing this suit, we will become the "cactii in the colon" that they will have to address. And you know what the easy out of court settlement will be..... RECAPTURE!
We will keep lobbying and crying as we usually do.. But this thing has a far better shot than anything else.
Class actions are not performed easily. First,one needs to show that an agency acted illegally and that action caused many people harm. The fact that USCIS did not use all the visa numbers is not automatically illegal. The law says that the MAXIMUM number of visas, for example, in the EB is 140,000 per fiscal year. It does not say what's the minimum. I am not an attorney, but if that were an easy case, many times would someone else have tried it. Good idea, but as far as I know, difficult to fight from a legal point of view. I'll ask my attorney about this and will keep you posted.
The whole working world lives by on one simple rule ..... GETTING PEOPLE OFF YOUR BACK.
The bigger PITA (pain-in-the-ass) you are... the higher is the priority you get.
As a community we will need to become a PR nightmare for govt. officals... simply being an inconvenience is not going to cut it... we will have to become a "a cactus that is stuck in the colon".
USCIS says EBs are retrogressed because there are XXXXX people in the queue. Why is the queue so long? Because they wasted numbers in the past and kept the queue long. This is pure operational inefficiency that is resulting in monetary, emotional and mental loss to about a million people.
This is a valid ground for a class action lawsuit.
By filing this suit, we will become the "cactii in the colon" that they will have to address. And you know what the easy out of court settlement will be..... RECAPTURE!
We will keep lobbying and crying as we usually do.. But this thing has a far better shot than anything else.
Class actions are not performed easily. First,one needs to show that an agency acted illegally and that action caused many people harm. The fact that USCIS did not use all the visa numbers is not automatically illegal. The law says that the MAXIMUM number of visas, for example, in the EB is 140,000 per fiscal year. It does not say what's the minimum. I am not an attorney, but if that were an easy case, many times would someone else have tried it. Good idea, but as far as I know, difficult to fight from a legal point of view. I'll ask my attorney about this and will keep you posted.
tattoo Toyota Verso 2010 poster NC210204
yabadaba
07-04 08:57 AM
also sent it to the drudge report...if he picks it up other talk show hots will pick it up too.
more...
pictures Toyota Verso 2.0 D-4D TR
thomachan72
09-15 04:26 PM
with everyone worried abt the economy and health reforms.. Immigration reforms are toast this year.
While we must pursue the overall reforms,
i suggest that we also seek temporary relief seeking lifting of the ban on filing for 485 for the next 2-3 months... this will help most EB3 and EB2 (I/C/) who missed the 2007 window.
What are the chances of such a relief being provided?
Will a mail campaign work?..plz raise your hand if you are interested..;)
Good idea but could you clarify why "next 2-3 months"? what after that? Just curious why you put that time frame there
While we must pursue the overall reforms,
i suggest that we also seek temporary relief seeking lifting of the ban on filing for 485 for the next 2-3 months... this will help most EB3 and EB2 (I/C/) who missed the 2007 window.
What are the chances of such a relief being provided?
Will a mail campaign work?..plz raise your hand if you are interested..;)
Good idea but could you clarify why "next 2-3 months"? what after that? Just curious why you put that time frame there
dresses Test drive 2010 Toyota Verso S
senthil1
06-26 01:35 PM
The main reason for this kind of fear is many people waited more than 5 years and PD was moving 2 weeks per 3 months. Suddenly PD become current everyone could not believe themselves and still Skeptical about it. This kind of PD movements happened many times in past. This kind of fear is unneccessary and try to file I485 ASAP to get earliest Receipt date.
Logiclife,
All I am saying is, the DOS or USCIS can be unpredictible at times. I know TECHNICALLY there is NO way the July bulletin can retrogress IN JULY. However I would NOT be surprised if that happens. Coz this suddenly creates a FLOOD of Ead applications and AP applications not to mention Finger printing.
Logiclife,
All I am saying is, the DOS or USCIS can be unpredictible at times. I know TECHNICALLY there is NO way the July bulletin can retrogress IN JULY. However I would NOT be surprised if that happens. Coz this suddenly creates a FLOOD of Ead applications and AP applications not to mention Finger printing.
more...
makeup 2010 Toyota Verso gry-10mx.
msp1976
02-13 02:50 PM
I don't think so. 7% limit has been there for a very long time. Unused visas from prior years for ac21 purposes were still subject to 7% in current year. The 7% rule was unchanged.
It seems that you think that the unused visas from prior year were not subject to 7%. There is nothing of the sort that allows this.
Refer to this text.....
http://www.fourmilab.ch/uscode/8usc/www/t8-12-II-I-1152.html#_a_
TITLE 8, CHAPTER 12, SUBCHAPTER II, Part I, Sec. 1152.
Look at paragraph a(5)
(5) Rules for employment-based immigrants
(A) Employment-based immigrants not subject to per country
limitation if additional visas available
If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 1153(b) of this title for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
(B) Limiting fall across for certain countries subject to
subsection (e) of this section
In the case of a foreign state or dependent area to which subsection (e) of this section applies, if the total number of visas issued under section 1153(b) of this title exceeds the maximum number of visas that may be made available to immigrants of the state or area under section 1153(b) of this title consistent with subsection (e) of this section (determined without regard to this paragraph), in applying subsection (e) of this section all visas shall be deemed to have been required for the classes of aliens specified in section 1153(b) of this title.
This is the section that allows for the 7% cap to be violated in case additional visas are available.................
This is the one many anti immigrant people tried to get removed again and again......
USCIS did not do anything wrong in 2005 nor in 2006.....By allocating additional visas to India/China USCIS did not do anything wrong...You can sue them ....USCIS has good grounds to defend their position.....You would not get anywhere...
It seems that you think that the unused visas from prior year were not subject to 7%. There is nothing of the sort that allows this.
Refer to this text.....
http://www.fourmilab.ch/uscode/8usc/www/t8-12-II-I-1152.html#_a_
TITLE 8, CHAPTER 12, SUBCHAPTER II, Part I, Sec. 1152.
Look at paragraph a(5)
(5) Rules for employment-based immigrants
(A) Employment-based immigrants not subject to per country
limitation if additional visas available
If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 1153(b) of this title for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
(B) Limiting fall across for certain countries subject to
subsection (e) of this section
In the case of a foreign state or dependent area to which subsection (e) of this section applies, if the total number of visas issued under section 1153(b) of this title exceeds the maximum number of visas that may be made available to immigrants of the state or area under section 1153(b) of this title consistent with subsection (e) of this section (determined without regard to this paragraph), in applying subsection (e) of this section all visas shall be deemed to have been required for the classes of aliens specified in section 1153(b) of this title.
This is the section that allows for the 7% cap to be violated in case additional visas are available.................
This is the one many anti immigrant people tried to get removed again and again......
USCIS did not do anything wrong in 2005 nor in 2006.....By allocating additional visas to India/China USCIS did not do anything wrong...You can sue them ....USCIS has good grounds to defend their position.....You would not get anywhere...
girlfriend Toyota Verso
drirshad
07-30 05:24 AM
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5766
posted 07-24 09:59 AM
Ron Gotcher has some thoughts on India E2 movement over the next two months.
More and more, I see people posting messages containing the unspoken assumption that since the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward, it is likely to move forward further in the coming months. This is a false hope.
Even with a cutoff date in early 2003, the CIS has sufficient inventory of Indian E2 adjustments on file to use up the remaining inventory of E2 visas for this fiscal year. The reason that the Visa Office advanced the priority date is to move it up to the point where overseas consular posts can take up the slack left by the CIS's inability to close out enough cases and avoid wasting visas this year.
The CIS inventory of pending cases is massive. If there were no quota at all - if everyone were suddenly "current" - and no new cases were filed after today, it would still take the CIS four to five years to close out all of the pending cases that they already have in their inventory.
Overseas consular posts maintain inventories of cases as well. When the priority date for a particular case starts to edge forward and it appears that the applicant may become "current' in the not too distant future, the applicant is told to submit all required supporting documents to the post or the NVC. When this is done, the applicant is reported to the Visa Office as being "documentarily qualified." This means that the case is in a position where an immigrant visa can be issued to the applicant as soon as a visa number becomes available.
The inventory of documentarily qualified cases with current priority dates at a consular post never exceeds that post's ability to process all such cases within sixty days. Consular posts have very high bandwidth processing capabilities. No matter how many cases become current, they are able to process all of them within sixty days.
The reason that the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward is that the Visa Office fears that the CIS will not be able to adjudicate enough adjustment of status applications to exhaust the annual quota. They have advanced the cutoff date in order to make more cases overseas eligible for final processing.
This means that overseas consular posts have exhausted their inventories of Indian E2 cases with priority dates earlier than 2006 and the Visa Office had to move the cutoff date forward in order to make more cases eligible to be closed out.
This does not mean that the CIS has closed out all of the pre-2006 cases pending in their inventory. Far from it. When the new fiscal year starts, Indian E2 is likely to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003. This is roughly the point reached by the CIS in processing their inventory of pending cases.
Please understand that this is a temporary phenomenon and due entirely to the difference in the processing capabilities of the CIS and the overseas consular posts.
I hope this clarifies matters.
Ron Gotcher
posted 07-24 09:59 AM
Ron Gotcher has some thoughts on India E2 movement over the next two months.
More and more, I see people posting messages containing the unspoken assumption that since the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward, it is likely to move forward further in the coming months. This is a false hope.
Even with a cutoff date in early 2003, the CIS has sufficient inventory of Indian E2 adjustments on file to use up the remaining inventory of E2 visas for this fiscal year. The reason that the Visa Office advanced the priority date is to move it up to the point where overseas consular posts can take up the slack left by the CIS's inability to close out enough cases and avoid wasting visas this year.
The CIS inventory of pending cases is massive. If there were no quota at all - if everyone were suddenly "current" - and no new cases were filed after today, it would still take the CIS four to five years to close out all of the pending cases that they already have in their inventory.
Overseas consular posts maintain inventories of cases as well. When the priority date for a particular case starts to edge forward and it appears that the applicant may become "current' in the not too distant future, the applicant is told to submit all required supporting documents to the post or the NVC. When this is done, the applicant is reported to the Visa Office as being "documentarily qualified." This means that the case is in a position where an immigrant visa can be issued to the applicant as soon as a visa number becomes available.
The inventory of documentarily qualified cases with current priority dates at a consular post never exceeds that post's ability to process all such cases within sixty days. Consular posts have very high bandwidth processing capabilities. No matter how many cases become current, they are able to process all of them within sixty days.
The reason that the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward is that the Visa Office fears that the CIS will not be able to adjudicate enough adjustment of status applications to exhaust the annual quota. They have advanced the cutoff date in order to make more cases overseas eligible for final processing.
This means that overseas consular posts have exhausted their inventories of Indian E2 cases with priority dates earlier than 2006 and the Visa Office had to move the cutoff date forward in order to make more cases eligible to be closed out.
This does not mean that the CIS has closed out all of the pre-2006 cases pending in their inventory. Far from it. When the new fiscal year starts, Indian E2 is likely to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003. This is roughly the point reached by the CIS in processing their inventory of pending cases.
Please understand that this is a temporary phenomenon and due entirely to the difference in the processing capabilities of the CIS and the overseas consular posts.
I hope this clarifies matters.
Ron Gotcher
hairstyles Pink cars gt; Toyota Verso 2010
ItIsNotFunny
11-06 03:17 PM
Time to push it.. 200K will buy houses is quite believable given the points that we have monies to do it, and given the market. We need a campaign. Also once the new President wins, never forget to congratulate him and at the same time request help.
Lets do this. Contgratulate Obama with proposal of GC for House scheme (need better words though :)).
Lets do this. Contgratulate Obama with proposal of GC for House scheme (need better words though :)).
swethanjit
07-09 07:29 PM
Dear Sir / Madam,
I am currently on OPT which is valid till July 2009. Also, my H1-B is approved through a company X starting oct 2008. Currently I got a job with company Y on my OPT. Can I continue to work on my OPT with company Y till July 2009? OR Do I need to transfer my H1B to company Y to be able to continue to work after Oct 2008?
Regards
Swetha.
I am currently on OPT which is valid till July 2009. Also, my H1-B is approved through a company X starting oct 2008. Currently I got a job with company Y on my OPT. Can I continue to work on my OPT with company Y till July 2009? OR Do I need to transfer my H1B to company Y to be able to continue to work after Oct 2008?
Regards
Swetha.
PlainSpeak
01-14 09:50 AM
PlainSpeak has a new sock puppet account called actaccord who has no choice but to support him/her. how many more accounts did gcperm create who don't donate ot participate?
Guys lets not waste our time on manipulative salespeople.
In cases like PlainSpeak we need a background check for free members posting more than 10 messages a day, not only charge them.
I agree this member has been inciting people to start fighting with him/her and into arguments, and playing a emotional manipulative card by pretending to be a woman. did you take acting classes at a dollar store, its so fake and cheap?
plainspeak is just trying to keep negative threads alive and incite more in-fighting.
PlainSpeak has a new sock puppet account called actaccord who has no choice but to support him/her. how many more accounts did gcperm create who don't donate ot participate?
Ok here is the fallacy in your argument. Why do i need mutiple accounts to get you guys to realize what u you are doing is wrong when this one account and this one post is all that takes to get everyone to see the real side of the so called senior members and donaters.
Regarding GC PERM (Rolling my eyes NOT Again) see my previous post and please read it carefully and if you do not get it please read it a couple of time more. i am sure you will get it.
And yes my friend TinyHK12 you might have just lost the support of the one guy on this forum who while not being abusive about my post also did NOT support me. He was rooting for AmitJoye a senior member here and some one with whose idea you agree 100%. Thats called as shooting yourselves in the foot
In cases like PlainSpeak we need a background check for free members posting more than 10 messages a day, not only charge them.
Sure that is a great idea. As i said before (I think i was responding to you post in another thread) a paid subscription for posting messages on this forum is agreat idea and background checks wow that is a new one. How about a criminal background check like they do for jobs in financial sectors. Great idea but please remeber this will have to be a requirement which wil have to be implemented for each and every member of this forum and yes that includes background check on you yourselves my friend TonyHK. And please dont even think about the privacy issues IV will face
I agree this member has been inciting people to start fighting with him/her and into arguments, and playing a emotional manipulative card by pretending to be a woman.
Ok first please get this one fact straight that i am a women but just so that all you abusive senior members and donors will breathe a little easy i will become a man for you. Then you guys will not have any constraints and will not hold back and will not feel bad about abusing a women becasue for your convieneice and so that you can abuse guilt free i hav ebecome a man. Now there is just one thing wrong with this logic
ABUSING ON FORUM IS WRONG WHETHER IT IS AGAINST A MAN OR A WOMEN PERIOD
Sheesh you guys are shooting yourselves in the foot every time you post on this forum
plainspeak is just trying to keep negative threads alive and incite more in-fighting.
If you senior members and donars will step back and think about this for a moment you will realize the truth and the truth is that you guys have accused me of mob mentality but the fact is it is you guys who have a mob mentality.
How let me explain .........
If you do no agree to a post all of you gang up and start abusing the posters and any unfortunate souls who agree with the posters. Normally that is enough to scare the poster away. He/she either decides that this is not worth it and takes an out or is coerced by you so called senior members in such a way that their will is broken and they are just plain scared (YES SCARED !!).
Now coming to my post. There is nothing wrong in what i said. I asked for discussion to an idea. This is just like all the other guys and gals before me to tried the same. The only difference is that i stand by my comment and i do not abuse you guys back because i reply back to every argument of yours (No matter how stupid/illogical/abusive) with valid arguments. Now you guys do not know how to deal with that and the only way to respind is to answer back with strong arm tactics.
But guys the answer is really simple. Answer back with logical arguments and if you do not have any more logical arguments please rethink about the arguments (Do brainstorming and come up with one argument). Do not spend your valuable time working out HOW TO DISCREDIT PLAINSPEAK AND GET HIM (I am a man for you sake) OUT OF THE FORUM. Instead think about a logical argument to my post and convince me. Hey i am here to be convinced, Not my brow beating Not by strong arm tactis and certainly Not by abuses but by Logic.
(Logic in india is called Tarq. So bai log bhuddi or Tarq sa bate karo )
Guys lets not waste our time on manipulative salespeople.
In cases like PlainSpeak we need a background check for free members posting more than 10 messages a day, not only charge them.
I agree this member has been inciting people to start fighting with him/her and into arguments, and playing a emotional manipulative card by pretending to be a woman. did you take acting classes at a dollar store, its so fake and cheap?
plainspeak is just trying to keep negative threads alive and incite more in-fighting.
PlainSpeak has a new sock puppet account called actaccord who has no choice but to support him/her. how many more accounts did gcperm create who don't donate ot participate?
Ok here is the fallacy in your argument. Why do i need mutiple accounts to get you guys to realize what u you are doing is wrong when this one account and this one post is all that takes to get everyone to see the real side of the so called senior members and donaters.
Regarding GC PERM (Rolling my eyes NOT Again) see my previous post and please read it carefully and if you do not get it please read it a couple of time more. i am sure you will get it.
And yes my friend TinyHK12 you might have just lost the support of the one guy on this forum who while not being abusive about my post also did NOT support me. He was rooting for AmitJoye a senior member here and some one with whose idea you agree 100%. Thats called as shooting yourselves in the foot
In cases like PlainSpeak we need a background check for free members posting more than 10 messages a day, not only charge them.
Sure that is a great idea. As i said before (I think i was responding to you post in another thread) a paid subscription for posting messages on this forum is agreat idea and background checks wow that is a new one. How about a criminal background check like they do for jobs in financial sectors. Great idea but please remeber this will have to be a requirement which wil have to be implemented for each and every member of this forum and yes that includes background check on you yourselves my friend TonyHK. And please dont even think about the privacy issues IV will face
I agree this member has been inciting people to start fighting with him/her and into arguments, and playing a emotional manipulative card by pretending to be a woman.
Ok first please get this one fact straight that i am a women but just so that all you abusive senior members and donors will breathe a little easy i will become a man for you. Then you guys will not have any constraints and will not hold back and will not feel bad about abusing a women becasue for your convieneice and so that you can abuse guilt free i hav ebecome a man. Now there is just one thing wrong with this logic
ABUSING ON FORUM IS WRONG WHETHER IT IS AGAINST A MAN OR A WOMEN PERIOD
Sheesh you guys are shooting yourselves in the foot every time you post on this forum
plainspeak is just trying to keep negative threads alive and incite more in-fighting.
If you senior members and donars will step back and think about this for a moment you will realize the truth and the truth is that you guys have accused me of mob mentality but the fact is it is you guys who have a mob mentality.
How let me explain .........
If you do no agree to a post all of you gang up and start abusing the posters and any unfortunate souls who agree with the posters. Normally that is enough to scare the poster away. He/she either decides that this is not worth it and takes an out or is coerced by you so called senior members in such a way that their will is broken and they are just plain scared (YES SCARED !!).
Now coming to my post. There is nothing wrong in what i said. I asked for discussion to an idea. This is just like all the other guys and gals before me to tried the same. The only difference is that i stand by my comment and i do not abuse you guys back because i reply back to every argument of yours (No matter how stupid/illogical/abusive) with valid arguments. Now you guys do not know how to deal with that and the only way to respind is to answer back with strong arm tactics.
But guys the answer is really simple. Answer back with logical arguments and if you do not have any more logical arguments please rethink about the arguments (Do brainstorming and come up with one argument). Do not spend your valuable time working out HOW TO DISCREDIT PLAINSPEAK AND GET HIM (I am a man for you sake) OUT OF THE FORUM. Instead think about a logical argument to my post and convince me. Hey i am here to be convinced, Not my brow beating Not by strong arm tactis and certainly Not by abuses but by Logic.
(Logic in india is called Tarq. So bai log bhuddi or Tarq sa bate karo )