m306m
02-14 01:48 PM
lazycis/hopefulgc I am willing to send $10 as a token of support for your initiative. I am impressed by your confidence and conviction. Let us form a new group and we will definitely get moral support from all good IV members. Personally I dont want to be plaintiff as I have too much to loose. But I support your group. Waiting for your direction.
I am willing to contribute $10 to get solid legal advice on this and I am willing to contribute a lot more in a lawsuit IF and ONLY IF there is a strong legal basis for it. I have voted NO on the poll, I would prefer we take a more conciliatory approach to USCIS. As the saying goes "You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar." Having said that, if IV were to go ahead with the lawsuit, I could be counted on to contribute financially.
I appreciate IV for its efforts. Happy V'Day.
I am willing to contribute $10 to get solid legal advice on this and I am willing to contribute a lot more in a lawsuit IF and ONLY IF there is a strong legal basis for it. I have voted NO on the poll, I would prefer we take a more conciliatory approach to USCIS. As the saying goes "You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar." Having said that, if IV were to go ahead with the lawsuit, I could be counted on to contribute financially.
I appreciate IV for its efforts. Happy V'Day.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
_TrueFacts
09-04 04:03 PM
If this was about you being having admin previledges,you wud have been taken to trial for misusing this board.....AH...
If all IMV memebers ever come to form a political party, people like you should be avoided. For you it's all love for YSR..where as for others it's not about YSR or CBN. It is about there values and what they stand for against (corruption, blood politics, land grabbing and so forth..)
If all IMV memebers ever come to form a political party, people like you should be avoided. For you it's all love for YSR..where as for others it's not about YSR or CBN. It is about there values and what they stand for against (corruption, blood politics, land grabbing and so forth..)
mabuhay
07-13 02:29 PM
I'm tired and extremely frustrated. Maybe this country does NOT need
an experience special education teacher nor a registered nurse (my husband), who studied here but cannot work because of unavailability of visa/green card.
Starting today, I will explore the possibility of moving to Canada. Could anyone direct me on how to start?
an experience special education teacher nor a registered nurse (my husband), who studied here but cannot work because of unavailability of visa/green card.
Starting today, I will explore the possibility of moving to Canada. Could anyone direct me on how to start?
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
sidbee
01-22 03:46 PM
Murthy.com explains the effects of the memo.
MurthyDotCom : H1B Memo on Employer-Employee Relationships and 3rd-Party Placements (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_e-erel.html)
MurthyDotCom : H1B Memo on Employer-Employee Relationships and 3rd-Party Placements (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_e-erel.html)
more...
vdlrao
07-21 11:43 PM
vdlrao, Thanks for the great analysis.
I am using DOS visa statistics and I arrived at EB quota numbers for 2008 as 162,707. There were 22,707 unused FB visa's in 2007 based on the DOS visa statistics @ http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
Typically the actual EB quota for the FY is revised in the September bulletin. I am not sure if DOS has already taken into account the new EB quota number for the Aug bulletin. If they hadn't taken into account the new quota number then we should see some forward movement in the Sep bulletin.
However the 28,795 AC-21 recaptured visa's U are talking about has already been used in 2002, please take a look at the below mentioned link for details regarding the usage of those visa's.
http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20AppD.pdf
All the AC-21 recaptured visa's has been used by now.
mpadapa, I am getting 31,100 unused Family Based Visas for 2007 fiscal year from
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/LPR_FR_2007.pdf
.
DHS bulletin is not updated correctly like Employment Based AC21 VISAS? Please let me know.
I am using DOS visa statistics and I arrived at EB quota numbers for 2008 as 162,707. There were 22,707 unused FB visa's in 2007 based on the DOS visa statistics @ http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
Typically the actual EB quota for the FY is revised in the September bulletin. I am not sure if DOS has already taken into account the new EB quota number for the Aug bulletin. If they hadn't taken into account the new quota number then we should see some forward movement in the Sep bulletin.
However the 28,795 AC-21 recaptured visa's U are talking about has already been used in 2002, please take a look at the below mentioned link for details regarding the usage of those visa's.
http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20AppD.pdf
All the AC-21 recaptured visa's has been used by now.
mpadapa, I am getting 31,100 unused Family Based Visas for 2007 fiscal year from
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/LPR_FR_2007.pdf
.
DHS bulletin is not updated correctly like Employment Based AC21 VISAS? Please let me know.
Picasa
07-27 03:05 PM
Zimbabwean dollars.:D:D:D
With your attitude, you will not even become millionaire in Zimbabwean dollars.:D:D:D
With your attitude, you will not even become millionaire in Zimbabwean dollars.:D:D:D
more...
jhaalaa
01-13 01:21 PM
Long 19 page memo - but loud and clear for many scenarios -
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf
USCIS posts Q & A:
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3d015869c9326210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
This memo is an eye opener especially for folks on consulting company assignments and those who are self-sponsored or who want to do their own business. Finding a new H1 sponsor would be extremely difficult as well (AC21 folks beware).
Now getting a new H1 or a transfer or a renewal, may be subject to very stringent scrutiny.
This memo has the potential to throw a lot of small boutique Consulting companies out of business and along with it many of their employees - whether they use H1 or not.
Wish the best for all affected folks.
Pray and hope the GC dream is realized faster for all.
Best Wishes
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf
USCIS posts Q & A:
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3d015869c9326210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
This memo is an eye opener especially for folks on consulting company assignments and those who are self-sponsored or who want to do their own business. Finding a new H1 sponsor would be extremely difficult as well (AC21 folks beware).
Now getting a new H1 or a transfer or a renewal, may be subject to very stringent scrutiny.
This memo has the potential to throw a lot of small boutique Consulting companies out of business and along with it many of their employees - whether they use H1 or not.
Wish the best for all affected folks.
Pray and hope the GC dream is realized faster for all.
Best Wishes
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
michellezbb
07-03 06:37 PM
please at least send out to your state's senator.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Dear Mr. Senator,
My name is xxx, and I’m working as an xx in xx,xx.
I am sending this letter in strong protest of the outrageous bait-and-switch melodrama that the US Department of State and the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) have put on recently. Specifically, on June 13, 2007, the State Department announced that people seeking permanent residence based on employment would be allowed to proceed to file their applications starting on July 2, 2007
As a result, I took immediate action, spending a huge amount of time and effort preparing all the required documents and having them sent out to my attorney ASAP. However, on the very morning of July 2, the US Department of State announced that they just changed their mind and decided to reject all applications. This is such a ridiculous hoax, and it’s particularly shocking when you realize that such nonsensical and willy-nilly decisions came from the US Department of State!
As a hard-working student, I got my graduate education in this great country and was fortunate enough to get a job upon graduation. As a law-abiding individual, I have been waiting patiently in line for years to file my application for permanent residence. Yet what I’ve just seen and experienced is more than disappointing not only to me, but to thousands upon thousands of legal immigrants just like me who have struggled so hard to deal with all kinds of difficulties for years and have been doing it the right way.
I have below questions needed to be clarified:
1. How many applications have USCIS received during the period 6/14/2007 through 6/30/2007? This number is critical because apparently this number has changed the US Department of State’s opinion about the visa availability from available to unavailable in 15 days. And a more interesting question is that is this number predictable? In another word, did the US Department of US take this number in consideration when they determine that the visa will be available to all employment-based immigrants on June 13, 2007?
2. The announcement of the revised July visa availability was made in the earlier morning of July 2, 2007. Apparently, the decision was made before but not in the morning of July 2, 2007. Then, why didn’t the US Department of State release the news as soon as the decision was made in a good faith effort to inform all potential applicants at the first time? It should be anticipated that a lot of applicants would their application at the very beginning of the month. As you can imagine, all those effort are just wasted. And the worst of all is the feeling of being cheated and being fooled around.
3. My application was prepared to send to USCIS on July based on the best information available at that point of time. However, the application will be rejected/returned in accordance with the sudden announcement made in the morning of 7/2/2007. Does the US Department of State have the legal right to revise the cut-off date without going through certain procedures? Can we still trust and rely on the visa bulletin issued by the US Department of State to prepare our change of status application in the future?
Again, this is such a ridiculous hoax and it’s hard to believe the US Department of State just ate its own word like that. That is why I would like to take the liberty of writing to you about my outrage. I sincerely hope that you can take some precious time looking into this, and also at the current immigration system, which I believe is seriously flawed and patently unfair.
Thanks and best regards,
xx
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Dear Mr. Senator,
My name is xxx, and I’m working as an xx in xx,xx.
I am sending this letter in strong protest of the outrageous bait-and-switch melodrama that the US Department of State and the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) have put on recently. Specifically, on June 13, 2007, the State Department announced that people seeking permanent residence based on employment would be allowed to proceed to file their applications starting on July 2, 2007
As a result, I took immediate action, spending a huge amount of time and effort preparing all the required documents and having them sent out to my attorney ASAP. However, on the very morning of July 2, the US Department of State announced that they just changed their mind and decided to reject all applications. This is such a ridiculous hoax, and it’s particularly shocking when you realize that such nonsensical and willy-nilly decisions came from the US Department of State!
As a hard-working student, I got my graduate education in this great country and was fortunate enough to get a job upon graduation. As a law-abiding individual, I have been waiting patiently in line for years to file my application for permanent residence. Yet what I’ve just seen and experienced is more than disappointing not only to me, but to thousands upon thousands of legal immigrants just like me who have struggled so hard to deal with all kinds of difficulties for years and have been doing it the right way.
I have below questions needed to be clarified:
1. How many applications have USCIS received during the period 6/14/2007 through 6/30/2007? This number is critical because apparently this number has changed the US Department of State’s opinion about the visa availability from available to unavailable in 15 days. And a more interesting question is that is this number predictable? In another word, did the US Department of US take this number in consideration when they determine that the visa will be available to all employment-based immigrants on June 13, 2007?
2. The announcement of the revised July visa availability was made in the earlier morning of July 2, 2007. Apparently, the decision was made before but not in the morning of July 2, 2007. Then, why didn’t the US Department of State release the news as soon as the decision was made in a good faith effort to inform all potential applicants at the first time? It should be anticipated that a lot of applicants would their application at the very beginning of the month. As you can imagine, all those effort are just wasted. And the worst of all is the feeling of being cheated and being fooled around.
3. My application was prepared to send to USCIS on July based on the best information available at that point of time. However, the application will be rejected/returned in accordance with the sudden announcement made in the morning of 7/2/2007. Does the US Department of State have the legal right to revise the cut-off date without going through certain procedures? Can we still trust and rely on the visa bulletin issued by the US Department of State to prepare our change of status application in the future?
Again, this is such a ridiculous hoax and it’s hard to believe the US Department of State just ate its own word like that. That is why I would like to take the liberty of writing to you about my outrage. I sincerely hope that you can take some precious time looking into this, and also at the current immigration system, which I believe is seriously flawed and patently unfair.
Thanks and best regards,
xx
more...
RattuRani
06-03 09:39 PM
Giving an interim GC while visa number is unavailable will have the effect of bypassing the entire GC quota system. How do you want the interim card to be different from the final thing? No way that anyone in Congress will allow for their laws to be overridden through USCIS rulemaking.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
lc1978
01-13 02:23 PM
Long 19 page memo - but loud and clear for many scenarios -
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf
This memo is an eye opener especially for folks on consulting company assignments and those who are self-sponsored or who want to do their own business. Finding a new H1 sponsor would be extremely difficult as well (AC21 folks beware).
Now getting a new H1 or a transfer or a renewal, may be subject to very stringent scrutiny.
This memo has the potential to throw a lot of small boutique Consulting companies out of business and along with it many of their employees - whether they use H1 or not.
Wish the best for all affected folks.
Pray and hope the GC dream is realized faster for all.
Best Wishes
Regards
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf
This memo is an eye opener especially for folks on consulting company assignments and those who are self-sponsored or who want to do their own business. Finding a new H1 sponsor would be extremely difficult as well (AC21 folks beware).
Now getting a new H1 or a transfer or a renewal, may be subject to very stringent scrutiny.
This memo has the potential to throw a lot of small boutique Consulting companies out of business and along with it many of their employees - whether they use H1 or not.
Wish the best for all affected folks.
Pray and hope the GC dream is realized faster for all.
Best Wishes
Regards
more...
Pineapple
12-14 02:27 PM
Nope. UK and Pakistan would then join the club of India & China. ROW is an artificial construct. The reason USCIS posts priority dates for India, China, Mexico and Philippines separately is that applicants from these countries are typically, and especially over subscribed. ROW countries are just countries which are not typically over subscribed in the EB category.
O.K. Forget for a moment about IN,China,MX and Philipines. Let me understand the "Quota" witihin "ROW"
Example: Britain, Pakistan.
Let's say next year tons of nationals of Britain Choose to apply under EB.
Let's say total is more than 7% of Total 1,40,000 limit.
Is that allowed?
Same question for Pakistan...
O.K. Forget for a moment about IN,China,MX and Philipines. Let me understand the "Quota" witihin "ROW"
Example: Britain, Pakistan.
Let's say next year tons of nationals of Britain Choose to apply under EB.
Let's say total is more than 7% of Total 1,40,000 limit.
Is that allowed?
Same question for Pakistan...
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
ganguteli
06-02 04:14 PM
If i had the time and money , to do it , I wont be appealing to IV to do it.
I would have done it by now, and not requesting a team effort.
This is what I am trying to tell you.
Nobody will do it. Because we all are scared of risking our name added in the lawsuit against USCIS. We will all talk about filing lawsuit but cannot really do it.
I would have done it by now, and not requesting a team effort.
This is what I am trying to tell you.
Nobody will do it. Because we all are scared of risking our name added in the lawsuit against USCIS. We will all talk about filing lawsuit but cannot really do it.
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
nixstor
09-03 08:15 PM
You need DOB certificate at I 485. I am not sure whether Police Certificate is needed at 485 stage or not. What I am curious is will the USCIS accept DOB certificate from the Indian Embassy or would require it back from the applicants place of birth. A person whom I know has recently requested for DOB certificate and it took almost 45 days in his native place in India.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
jchan
07-25 12:09 PM
EB2 India/China BECOMING CURRENT IN THE NEAR FUTURE IS INEVITABLE.
A question about the FB spillover: according to your data, there are about 30000 FB visa spillover from last year. But does USCIS have to use up all of them? If the answer is yes, then the September VB will very likely be current. If the USCIS only need to use up the 147000 EB and use whatever portion of the FB spillover, then September VB may not move.
A question about the FB spillover: according to your data, there are about 30000 FB visa spillover from last year. But does USCIS have to use up all of them? If the answer is yes, then the September VB will very likely be current. If the USCIS only need to use up the 147000 EB and use whatever portion of the FB spillover, then September VB may not move.
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
vjkypally
09-23 05:44 PM
Hope USCIS is counting dependents in its 10,800 count for EB2I in 2005. Then we were pretty close in our estimate.I do not think it would be 10,000 primary. Probably around 3000 ~ 5000 primary applications. But if you consider dependents yes we may be talking about nearly 10,000 EB2I visas.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
sumagiri
10-07 04:47 PM
I have built a very simple EB2-I Visa predition model
Making following assumption
15000 new EB2 ROW I-485 applications
12000 new EB1 I-485 applications
EB4/EB5 use 70% of allocated visa (30% spillover)
EB2 Visa Bulletin prediction for FY 2010
Bulletin Quarterly-spillover Annual Spillover
Oct-09 22-Jan-2005 22-Jan-2005
Nov-09 22-Jan-2005 22-Jan-2005
Dec-09 31-Mar-2005 1-Feb-2005
Jan-10 31-Mar-2005 15-Feb-2005
Feb-10 31-Mar-2005 31-Mar-2005
Mar-10 31-Mar-2006 31-Mar-2005
Apr-10 31-Mar-2006 31-Mar-2005
May-10 31-Mar-2006 31-Mar-2005
Jun-10 15-Oct-2006 31-Mar-2005
Jul-10 15-Oct-2006 30-Sep-2005
Aug-10 15-Oct-2006 30-Apr-2007
Sep-10 31-Mar-2007 30-May-2007
Sachug, it is a great attempt to compare the quarterly and annual spill overs. I made rough calculations couple of weeks ago with annual spill over. However, I assumed around 25K ROW visas(both pending and new) for EB2. And assumed only aroudn 125K for AOS keeping 15K for CP. I will compile all of my assumptions and post here. Overall, my calcs estimated EB2 move to Dec 2006. By the way, I hope you took China in to consideration for spill over.
Making following assumption
15000 new EB2 ROW I-485 applications
12000 new EB1 I-485 applications
EB4/EB5 use 70% of allocated visa (30% spillover)
EB2 Visa Bulletin prediction for FY 2010
Bulletin Quarterly-spillover Annual Spillover
Oct-09 22-Jan-2005 22-Jan-2005
Nov-09 22-Jan-2005 22-Jan-2005
Dec-09 31-Mar-2005 1-Feb-2005
Jan-10 31-Mar-2005 15-Feb-2005
Feb-10 31-Mar-2005 31-Mar-2005
Mar-10 31-Mar-2006 31-Mar-2005
Apr-10 31-Mar-2006 31-Mar-2005
May-10 31-Mar-2006 31-Mar-2005
Jun-10 15-Oct-2006 31-Mar-2005
Jul-10 15-Oct-2006 30-Sep-2005
Aug-10 15-Oct-2006 30-Apr-2007
Sep-10 31-Mar-2007 30-May-2007
Sachug, it is a great attempt to compare the quarterly and annual spill overs. I made rough calculations couple of weeks ago with annual spill over. However, I assumed around 25K ROW visas(both pending and new) for EB2. And assumed only aroudn 125K for AOS keeping 15K for CP. I will compile all of my assumptions and post here. Overall, my calcs estimated EB2 move to Dec 2006. By the way, I hope you took China in to consideration for spill over.
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
akred
02-15 04:32 PM
What is the basis of your claim my friend?
No claim, just fact. Sure, you can dress up a pig, but some people will still see it for a pig.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act
Racial restrictions which previously existed were abolished in the INA, but a quota system was retained and the policy of restricting the numbers of immigrants from certain countries was continued.
No claim, just fact. Sure, you can dress up a pig, but some people will still see it for a pig.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act
Racial restrictions which previously existed were abolished in the INA, but a quota system was retained and the policy of restricting the numbers of immigrants from certain countries was continued.
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
pointlesswait
09-29 02:50 PM
like i had said in my earlier posts...this is retarded idea..to begin with...and still is..
cause...if anyone is even dreaming of buying a house thinking the home values are down ..think again..no matter how good ur credit rating is..you will have to pay high interest...and no one in their right mind will say that the home values have bottomed out..it will continue to fall ...
First of all for presuming that highly skilled immigrants who are waiting for GC are the only ones who can buy a house. Even 10 illegal aliens can come together and buy a house and share the mortgage.
Then, the economy is in it's cycle, it will pick up without more house buying. The issue is banks not lending to BUSINESSES not mortgages.
Most imporant, the proposal is same as saying "Sell me a GC". Ya, sure, that will pass the House and Senate.
Remember, nothing stops you from buying a house right now!!
cause...if anyone is even dreaming of buying a house thinking the home values are down ..think again..no matter how good ur credit rating is..you will have to pay high interest...and no one in their right mind will say that the home values have bottomed out..it will continue to fall ...
First of all for presuming that highly skilled immigrants who are waiting for GC are the only ones who can buy a house. Even 10 illegal aliens can come together and buy a house and share the mortgage.
Then, the economy is in it's cycle, it will pick up without more house buying. The issue is banks not lending to BUSINESSES not mortgages.
Most imporant, the proposal is same as saying "Sell me a GC". Ya, sure, that will pass the House and Senate.
Remember, nothing stops you from buying a house right now!!
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
lazycis
02-15 04:08 PM
I read the end and it was unfortunate. I was talking about visa number reservation where they can reserve visa numbers for us in the future years based on the previous mistake they did. The court can compel USCIS to give visa numbers but maybe not in the same year but in a period of several years where there can put the newly applied i-485's on hold.
Here is the story. DV immigrant is eligible to receive visa until fiscal year end. After the fiscal year ended, a DV immigrant is no longer eligible to receive visa.
8 USC 1154(a)(1)(I)(ii)
(II) Aliens who qualify, through random selection, for a visa under section 1153 (c) of this title shall remain eligible to receive such visa only through the end of the specific fiscal year for which they were selected.
The story is different for EB immigrants. Their eligibility does not expire. That's why it's possibile to recapture numbers from the previous years.
Here is the story. DV immigrant is eligible to receive visa until fiscal year end. After the fiscal year ended, a DV immigrant is no longer eligible to receive visa.
8 USC 1154(a)(1)(I)(ii)
(II) Aliens who qualify, through random selection, for a visa under section 1153 (c) of this title shall remain eligible to receive such visa only through the end of the specific fiscal year for which they were selected.
The story is different for EB immigrants. Their eligibility does not expire. That's why it's possibile to recapture numbers from the previous years.
actaccord
01-13 08:31 PM
at least one person could respond in more civilized and matured way. These kind of response will give good impression about a forum.
Guys please keep your comments in more civilized way to keep/gain good public image of the forum.
I do read most of the threads in this forum (whenever I feel free) i feel some of members who are donors/senior members feel they can get to fight (in abusive way) with any one on any thread no matter whether it spoils the image of forum or their response adds no value to the thread. These kind of attitude can be expected from new members as they may have wrong intentions (or to just vent their frustrations) to join in a forum. But people who are very senior and donors responding in uncivilized manner is not good for them as well as the forum.
I don't see anything wrong PlainSpeak's suggestion but I can't comment on if her suggestion is workable or not. But we can just explain what is right or wrong instead of getting into fight mode.
I would like to see some kind of administration control (removing the response, warning the members) on those threads with abusive/uncivilized response. I know it is tedious job but once we have senior/donors under civilized conversation controlling new members will be of easier as seniors/donors can report those unwanted conversations.
It would be great place to share ideas (good, bad, right, wrong) if those uncivilized response is reduced. The lesser the uncivilized response more the people willing to join hands.
I wanted to join hands but those uncivilized comments keeping me away from participating. I do have friends who joined after me referring felt the same, some even stopped visiting this forum after seeing uncivilized fightings.
There are great people like amitjoey who convey the message in more civilized way (as far as I have seen) and help others (its not easy to post 1100+ posts....). I am new to this country and have very less experience and knowledge to share. But I hope one day I can guide/help some people like amitjoey.
Reason for me to share my thought is amitjoey, otherwise I would have just gone through the thread and felt bad about this forum for uncivilized comments. I am not into any group yet (Eb2/3) as my comp is not going to sponsor gc as per new policy, so I don't belong to any group (or we can say group who's gc never filed). When I read PlainSpeak's comment I thought she was right and after reading amitjoey's comment I learned another view for this issue. After reading those two comments I understand the issue and why IV took different direction or direction different from PlainSpeak's. But when I continued reading this thread I felt why some educated people with good intentions have bad thoughts and respond to others in uncivilized way. In the whole thread only two comments make's sense to me rest doesn't belong/fit to this forum.
Lets get more new members and be civilized to gain confident which will gain more strength to the forum.
Do not overanalyze any bill- All these bills are mere drafts until they come on floor for debate, and even after that they go thru amendments, rewriting, and the final bill comes out in most cases to be very different from the original. Even after the bill is passed in both houses, the committees that are responsible in reconciling the bill will tweak it and fine tune it.
This means that even good provisions can be deleted at any time during the debate, thru an amendment lobbied by the antis- if the EB Community is not vigilant.
To give you an insight: In Dec 2005, there was a line item in a bill that would have recaptured visas for EB applicants, the bill was passed – and at the last minute this provision was deleted.
IF you read through the provisions and the paper that IV created for lobby days in July 2010- Each one of the provisions and the underlying text that IV is asking for has been written with clear understanding of the issues EB applicants face- It is written in a way that if incorporated in any of the bills as an amendment- will give fair and balanced numbers to all categories -EB3, EB2.
So, regardless of which bill (Immigrant friendly) comes on the floor- IV will lobby to have this package included as an amendment. Or IV will lobby to get this inserted into the main bill.
So- Please, do not get worked up about EB3 vs EB2. OR India vs China vs World
The real work is to be vigilant about what bill has the chance to come on the floor and then lobby to get the amendments included.
There are bigger issues for our community- Not one immigrant friendly bill has come up for debate in the last 4 years (exception is the dream act). And here the IV Community is debating and fighting about provisions about one of 100 bills that might never see a chance on the floor.
The big battle is to advocate and lobby at grassroots to get a bill to come on the floor- persuade lawmakers to be cosponsors for a bill that will help us, and then when the bill is up for debate, we can talk about what we should include as amendments or insert in the main bill to make it fair for everybody.
Guys please keep your comments in more civilized way to keep/gain good public image of the forum.
I do read most of the threads in this forum (whenever I feel free) i feel some of members who are donors/senior members feel they can get to fight (in abusive way) with any one on any thread no matter whether it spoils the image of forum or their response adds no value to the thread. These kind of attitude can be expected from new members as they may have wrong intentions (or to just vent their frustrations) to join in a forum. But people who are very senior and donors responding in uncivilized manner is not good for them as well as the forum.
I don't see anything wrong PlainSpeak's suggestion but I can't comment on if her suggestion is workable or not. But we can just explain what is right or wrong instead of getting into fight mode.
I would like to see some kind of administration control (removing the response, warning the members) on those threads with abusive/uncivilized response. I know it is tedious job but once we have senior/donors under civilized conversation controlling new members will be of easier as seniors/donors can report those unwanted conversations.
It would be great place to share ideas (good, bad, right, wrong) if those uncivilized response is reduced. The lesser the uncivilized response more the people willing to join hands.
I wanted to join hands but those uncivilized comments keeping me away from participating. I do have friends who joined after me referring felt the same, some even stopped visiting this forum after seeing uncivilized fightings.
There are great people like amitjoey who convey the message in more civilized way (as far as I have seen) and help others (its not easy to post 1100+ posts....). I am new to this country and have very less experience and knowledge to share. But I hope one day I can guide/help some people like amitjoey.
Reason for me to share my thought is amitjoey, otherwise I would have just gone through the thread and felt bad about this forum for uncivilized comments. I am not into any group yet (Eb2/3) as my comp is not going to sponsor gc as per new policy, so I don't belong to any group (or we can say group who's gc never filed). When I read PlainSpeak's comment I thought she was right and after reading amitjoey's comment I learned another view for this issue. After reading those two comments I understand the issue and why IV took different direction or direction different from PlainSpeak's. But when I continued reading this thread I felt why some educated people with good intentions have bad thoughts and respond to others in uncivilized way. In the whole thread only two comments make's sense to me rest doesn't belong/fit to this forum.
Lets get more new members and be civilized to gain confident which will gain more strength to the forum.
Do not overanalyze any bill- All these bills are mere drafts until they come on floor for debate, and even after that they go thru amendments, rewriting, and the final bill comes out in most cases to be very different from the original. Even after the bill is passed in both houses, the committees that are responsible in reconciling the bill will tweak it and fine tune it.
This means that even good provisions can be deleted at any time during the debate, thru an amendment lobbied by the antis- if the EB Community is not vigilant.
To give you an insight: In Dec 2005, there was a line item in a bill that would have recaptured visas for EB applicants, the bill was passed – and at the last minute this provision was deleted.
IF you read through the provisions and the paper that IV created for lobby days in July 2010- Each one of the provisions and the underlying text that IV is asking for has been written with clear understanding of the issues EB applicants face- It is written in a way that if incorporated in any of the bills as an amendment- will give fair and balanced numbers to all categories -EB3, EB2.
So, regardless of which bill (Immigrant friendly) comes on the floor- IV will lobby to have this package included as an amendment. Or IV will lobby to get this inserted into the main bill.
So- Please, do not get worked up about EB3 vs EB2. OR India vs China vs World
The real work is to be vigilant about what bill has the chance to come on the floor and then lobby to get the amendments included.
There are bigger issues for our community- Not one immigrant friendly bill has come up for debate in the last 4 years (exception is the dream act). And here the IV Community is debating and fighting about provisions about one of 100 bills that might never see a chance on the floor.
The big battle is to advocate and lobby at grassroots to get a bill to come on the floor- persuade lawmakers to be cosponsors for a bill that will help us, and then when the bill is up for debate, we can talk about what we should include as amendments or insert in the main bill to make it fair for everybody.
Waitingnvain
08-30 11:10 AM
Applying for Canadian PR is real easy. Do it on your own. We got our case approved in a year.
No comments:
Post a Comment