images Baptise Giabiconi – Male Model 
sc3
07-02 07:08 PM
leave my indian employer soon. they are saying they have 90 days notice period.... which was set from india. I work in ohio which has "employment at will" law... I am not going to serve the full notice period..... but if they deduct any money..... I am going fight like hell.... planning to complain to DOL and state govt office......I will keep updated on what happens....
"Employment at will" does not invalidate your notice period requirements. If you have an agreement with your company for a notice period, as long as it is not unduly restrictive, 90 days is probably arguably restrictive, you will have to honor your word.
"Employment at will" does not invalidate your notice period requirements. If you have an agreement with your company for a notice period, as long as it is not unduly restrictive, 90 days is probably arguably restrictive, you will have to honor your word.
wallpaper aptiste giabiconi height.
kc_p21
12-12 10:54 AM
After sending their stories?
Leo07
12-03 11:51 AM
I can understand where you are coming from...with only few people participating in the core efforts and many people commenting on the efforts online. I can agree to that part.
However, we must not under play the fact that an organizations of need-based and issue based type ALWAYS has floating members.
For example....if your GC gets approved tomorrow...I'll bet that you'll not care less about the forum.
Best!
IMO, this is the biggest problem plaguing IV - perception of IV as just another online forum (community) or a "chat room" as a newspaper reporter put it ! (http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071123/NEWS07/711230422/1009) (under the heading "Taking Action").
This point IV = chat room has come to the fore, several times in discussions. A lot of persons have refused to join IV efforts with the ruse "IV is just an online forum where members discuss mundane matters". Whether someone admits it or not, IV has a serious image problem !. It needs to be corrected soon (by more than making another announcement type "We are not a forum" post !)
Strength of an(y) organization comes from contributing, active members. And not from MINOWs (Members-In-Name-Only Wusses)
However, we must not under play the fact that an organizations of need-based and issue based type ALWAYS has floating members.
For example....if your GC gets approved tomorrow...I'll bet that you'll not care less about the forum.
Best!
IMO, this is the biggest problem plaguing IV - perception of IV as just another online forum (community) or a "chat room" as a newspaper reporter put it ! (http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071123/NEWS07/711230422/1009) (under the heading "Taking Action").
This point IV = chat room has come to the fore, several times in discussions. A lot of persons have refused to join IV efforts with the ruse "IV is just an online forum where members discuss mundane matters". Whether someone admits it or not, IV has a serious image problem !. It needs to be corrected soon (by more than making another announcement type "We are not a forum" post !)
Strength of an(y) organization comes from contributing, active members. And not from MINOWs (Members-In-Name-Only Wusses)
2011 Baptiste Giabiconi
bestin
12-13 05:27 PM
If IV becomes a paid site
pro:we can restrict the site to those who r serious about immigration
con:lots of other sites similar to IV would crop up.
25 initial is good.10 recurring would have been apt and would attract many.just think of sacrificing a sunday buffet for u or spending on Gas to visit some place.
personal opinion.opinion varies.
pro:we can restrict the site to those who r serious about immigration
con:lots of other sites similar to IV would crop up.
25 initial is good.10 recurring would have been apt and would attract many.just think of sacrificing a sunday buffet for u or spending on Gas to visit some place.
personal opinion.opinion varies.
more...
FraudGultee
04-17 09:03 AM
I dont see any issues here. he is applicable, he has required skill and education. he should be file for EB2
zoooom
09-24 01:04 PM
Take it easy! He vented out his anger for no reason, just forgive him or ignore his ignorance. IV welcomes donations but its for a reason, to maintain such a good portal. May be he dint like this.
Yeah He is just a frustrated guy (and probably drunk) when he was writing this blog :)....
Yeah He is just a frustrated guy (and probably drunk) when he was writing this blog :)....
more...
AirWaterandGC
07-16 02:15 PM
Signed it !
2010 photo Baptiste Giabiconi
sam_hoosier
02-09 03:04 PM
I have an MS degree, so IF the SKIL is passed, my PD will become current. However, I guess the earliest time for SKIL to be passed is Oct, if it is ever passed.
Does the SKIL bill apply only to MS, or MBA too ?
Does the SKIL bill apply only to MS, or MBA too ?
more...
ras
07-03 03:25 AM
Yes. That member and probably other such members are now on other site posting anti-IV posts.....
It is shameful to have such members among us.
Anyways, good thread. This site should help people fix the broken system rather than abuse each other or track all day. I hope due to the discussion, people can get some ideas and take action against such employers. IV will be willing to help as needed.
Wish discussions on this thread leads to some concrete suggestions/steps that one take to counter an abusive employer. and ofcourse IV should take steps to make these employers visible to the whole community so that others will not fall pray to them. Exposing abusive employers to the whole community is the most important thing that could thwart efforts of exploitation by such employers. This sounds some times more effective than than even going legal or to DOL.
It is shameful to have such members among us.
Anyways, good thread. This site should help people fix the broken system rather than abuse each other or track all day. I hope due to the discussion, people can get some ideas and take action against such employers. IV will be willing to help as needed.
Wish discussions on this thread leads to some concrete suggestions/steps that one take to counter an abusive employer. and ofcourse IV should take steps to make these employers visible to the whole community so that others will not fall pray to them. Exposing abusive employers to the whole community is the most important thing that could thwart efforts of exploitation by such employers. This sounds some times more effective than than even going legal or to DOL.
hair aptiste giabiconi height.
villamonte6100
11-02 03:21 PM
What are you smoking dude? You 100 people go back, 1000s more are in line to replace them. Get real..!!
You're rigth.
You're rigth.
more...
gc28262
01-28 04:39 PM
I didn't find where in the PDF AILA is saying the definition is illegal!
They provide one example a court ruling where the EE definition was established in the case of an insurance agent. But such an issue has already been address by the EE memo by USCIS (Temporary/Occasional Off-Site Employment).
Is it your own interpretation that the EE definition in the memo is illegal or did you read it somewhere in AILA's response?
AILA Memo (http://www.laborimmigration.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/AILA-Memo-Seeking-Revokation-of-Neufeld-Memorandum.pdf)
Page 3
The AAO�s analysis contained in non-precedent decisions but cited repeatedly by adjudicators to justify RFEs, NOIDs and Denials -- and now expressed in the AFM revisions regarding H-1B petitions -- begins with the proposition that the beneficiary in any employment-based nonimmigrant or immigrant petition must be an �employee� of the petitioning employer. The AAO then notes that the term �employee� is not clearly defined anywhere in the INA and concludes that absent such a definition, under Darden and Clackamas, it must look to the common law definition of employee to determine who is and is not eligible for employment-based benefits under the INA.2 While the common law definition employs a multi-factor test, the AAO and subsequent adjudications, and the Neufeld Memorandum, have focused almost exclusively on one element: control.
AILA memo deals with multiple issues in the memo, not just consulting company scenario. (L1, Self sponsoring employee etc) Hence we can get lost while reading the memo. Central to the argument is "Common Law" that AILA hasn't gone in depth.
desi3933,
Please refer AILA memo (http://www.laborimmigration.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/AILA-Memo-Seeking-Revokation-of-Neufeld-Memorandum.pdf) as they have already detailed the law points in it.
Also you seem to be quoting USCIS documents. If USCIS was clear about the law, they wouldn't have issued this memo in the first place. If USCIS memo contradicts INA, INA prevails.
They provide one example a court ruling where the EE definition was established in the case of an insurance agent. But such an issue has already been address by the EE memo by USCIS (Temporary/Occasional Off-Site Employment).
Is it your own interpretation that the EE definition in the memo is illegal or did you read it somewhere in AILA's response?
AILA Memo (http://www.laborimmigration.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/AILA-Memo-Seeking-Revokation-of-Neufeld-Memorandum.pdf)
Page 3
The AAO�s analysis contained in non-precedent decisions but cited repeatedly by adjudicators to justify RFEs, NOIDs and Denials -- and now expressed in the AFM revisions regarding H-1B petitions -- begins with the proposition that the beneficiary in any employment-based nonimmigrant or immigrant petition must be an �employee� of the petitioning employer. The AAO then notes that the term �employee� is not clearly defined anywhere in the INA and concludes that absent such a definition, under Darden and Clackamas, it must look to the common law definition of employee to determine who is and is not eligible for employment-based benefits under the INA.2 While the common law definition employs a multi-factor test, the AAO and subsequent adjudications, and the Neufeld Memorandum, have focused almost exclusively on one element: control.
AILA memo deals with multiple issues in the memo, not just consulting company scenario. (L1, Self sponsoring employee etc) Hence we can get lost while reading the memo. Central to the argument is "Common Law" that AILA hasn't gone in depth.
desi3933,
Please refer AILA memo (http://www.laborimmigration.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/AILA-Memo-Seeking-Revokation-of-Neufeld-Memorandum.pdf) as they have already detailed the law points in it.
Also you seem to be quoting USCIS documents. If USCIS was clear about the law, they wouldn't have issued this memo in the first place. If USCIS memo contradicts INA, INA prevails.
hot Baptiste Giabiconi.
chanduv23
01-30 09:52 AM
Though most people here would want retroactive action, I think such a rule will only be applicable for applicants based on a cut off date that will be a future date.
Thats how all laws have been in past.
This is something that is most unwelcome by employers and lawyers and thats why this may have opposition. Especially those consulting companies that thrive on these things.
Thats how all laws have been in past.
This is something that is most unwelcome by employers and lawyers and thats why this may have opposition. Especially those consulting companies that thrive on these things.
more...
house aptiste giabiconi nu. TGFKL.
klpd
01-30 06:45 PM
it is question #35 now
tattoo Height: 1,88 m
whoever
02-07 04:51 PM
can someone draft a template like the nurses letter to congress for us with subject "Please provider retrogression relief for Employment Based Immigrants." and the body of the letter with the provisions and proposals including "recapture of unused visas". I feel the nurses will deplete our unused visas by recapturing unused ones several times and we may not have that option anymore.
more...
pictures aptiste giabiconi height. of
Jaime
12-07 03:51 PM
bump
dresses d#39;men - photo gallery
Gravitation
03-13 10:20 AM
Looks like I need to take up a priests job somewhere and file another GC in E4 category which is current. God willing, I might get GC soon.
I remember a few "shlokas" from Gita... that should suffice. I wish they allowed interfiling from EB3 to EB4.
I remember a few "shlokas" from Gita... that should suffice. I wish they allowed interfiling from EB3 to EB4.
more...
makeup 2010 Baptiste Giabiconi
thakurrajiv
07-30 10:34 AM
Dont even think about it unless you are a quant and have resources that can compete with the Hedge funds. Commodities do not behave like stocks, you need to be able to model prices using multi variate models. Then there is jumps. You should be familiar with jump diffusion/step functions etc. To be able to model these you will need to use a factor model like the Pilipovic model. Even then it will only be an approximation.
Commodities are purchased as futures. Futures are derivatives and you will need to hedge them. A perfect hedge for a future is 1:1 in the spot. Since there is no arb here you will have to use options. To model the price of an option you will have to be a master of Black-Scholes option pricing model or a similar method like monte carlo simulation. Even if you figure all this out you will have to delta hedge. Delta hedging commodity options is very expensive, you will bleed money. Look up Hodges-Nuberger model for delta hedging options on derivatives.
I suggest a book by Daragana Pilipovic called "Energy Risk", buy it and read it. After that if you still feel you can take on hundreds of computers running parallel with teams of quants modelling prices and programs trading algarithimic models; then Good luck!!
Trade stocks as modelling stocks is comparitively easy. Stocks have drift (mu). If you are saturated with stocks look into options and Fixed income. Leave all these complicated stuff to the pros. You have better chance of hitting a jackpot in a casino than making money in trading commodities.
Wow, smisachu summarized the issue in 2 paragraphs !! Great post smisachu.
As smisachu pointed out for futures, forwards or options trading you will be going against the pros. Hedging is also not a static process, it is dynamic which means you need scale(lots of money) to trade. Unless you have lot of money and big heart for loss, it does not make sense to play in those markets. If you really want to try, try playing with options using optionsExpress or some other cheap trading website.
Now fundamental investing is different. Instead of directly playing with commodities you can play commodity stocks which are proxy for the commodity. The issue here is there are a few big players and bunch of small players. Small plays are too risky as most of them have resources outside US. You might be able to play big ones or medium sized ones. Have a look at companies like COP, EAC etc. You might be interested in looking at Canadian oil sands and trust plays.
Let me warn you about the volatility. As covered by smisachu, the pros can manipulate the prices in futures. Futures seem to be affecting spot a lot. Oil prices or any commodity can be very volatilile. So if you can't take 10% swings in days/hours, don't even think about commodity stocks !!
Personally I am long bull of oil and will stay like this in forseable future. I have interesting stories on my boom and bust experiences but that is a good beer talk :).
Commodities are purchased as futures. Futures are derivatives and you will need to hedge them. A perfect hedge for a future is 1:1 in the spot. Since there is no arb here you will have to use options. To model the price of an option you will have to be a master of Black-Scholes option pricing model or a similar method like monte carlo simulation. Even if you figure all this out you will have to delta hedge. Delta hedging commodity options is very expensive, you will bleed money. Look up Hodges-Nuberger model for delta hedging options on derivatives.
I suggest a book by Daragana Pilipovic called "Energy Risk", buy it and read it. After that if you still feel you can take on hundreds of computers running parallel with teams of quants modelling prices and programs trading algarithimic models; then Good luck!!
Trade stocks as modelling stocks is comparitively easy. Stocks have drift (mu). If you are saturated with stocks look into options and Fixed income. Leave all these complicated stuff to the pros. You have better chance of hitting a jackpot in a casino than making money in trading commodities.
Wow, smisachu summarized the issue in 2 paragraphs !! Great post smisachu.
As smisachu pointed out for futures, forwards or options trading you will be going against the pros. Hedging is also not a static process, it is dynamic which means you need scale(lots of money) to trade. Unless you have lot of money and big heart for loss, it does not make sense to play in those markets. If you really want to try, try playing with options using optionsExpress or some other cheap trading website.
Now fundamental investing is different. Instead of directly playing with commodities you can play commodity stocks which are proxy for the commodity. The issue here is there are a few big players and bunch of small players. Small plays are too risky as most of them have resources outside US. You might be able to play big ones or medium sized ones. Have a look at companies like COP, EAC etc. You might be interested in looking at Canadian oil sands and trust plays.
Let me warn you about the volatility. As covered by smisachu, the pros can manipulate the prices in futures. Futures seem to be affecting spot a lot. Oil prices or any commodity can be very volatilile. So if you can't take 10% swings in days/hours, don't even think about commodity stocks !!
Personally I am long bull of oil and will stay like this in forseable future. I have interesting stories on my boom and bust experiences but that is a good beer talk :).
girlfriend giabiconi height. aptiste
485_spouse
11-14 09:55 AM
worldnetdaily.com (http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52944)
INVASION USA
GOP senator: Filibuster guest-worker program
Arizona's Kyl believes there might be enough votes to block legislation
A filibuster by Republicans is in order if President Bush presses forward in the new Congress with legislation to establish a guest-worker program with a path to citizenship, says Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.
Kyl, however, speaking yesterday to nationally syndicated radio host Laura Ingraham, said he was uncertain whether or not Republicans would have the 40 votes necessary to block the legislation.
"I would certainly hope that the majority of Republicans in the Senate would not be complicit in passing legislation that is not wise, that for example, would put everybody on a path to citizenship and say that temporary workers get to get U.S. citizenship, and so on," Kyl said, according to HotAir.com
In January, Democrats will have a 51-49 majority over Republicans in the Senate. A supermajority of 61 votes would be needed to prevent a filibuster.
"I would certainly hope that we would have the 40 votes to be able to stop [the legislation], but, I don't know, we're going to have to wait and see; it'll be very close," said Kyl, who won re-election to another six-year term last week.
Arguing for the guest-worker program, the Bush administration has insisted it's not practical to deport the millions of foreigners who are in the country illegally.
"The cost of identifying all of those people and sending them back would be stupendous. It would be billions and billions of dollars," Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said in an interview last year.
"One of the reasons I think that we've been focusing on the idea of a temporary worker program as part of a larger strategy for border security is because it would be a way to siphon off people who really want to do nothing more than work here, put them into a regulated program � we would know who they are � we would then be able to send them back at the end of a period of three years or six years," he told Sean Hannity on the Fox News Channel program "Hannity & Colmes."
"They would have made some money, they could take it back home, and then we could focus our other resources on the people that don't want to do it the right way, and we could get those people sent out."
Last May, just 36 senators � three of them Democrats � voted against a bill that included a guest-worker program. The Senate was unable to work out a comprise before the Nov. 7 midterm elections with the House, which passed legislation rebuffing Bush's desire for foreign workers to gain legal employment.
Last summer, Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., announced a compromise plan called the "No Amnesty Reform Act," which would require all illegal aliens to leave the United States and apply at "Ellis Island Centers," operated by private companies in Mexico under a license from the U. S. government. They would then obtain a "Good Neighbor Safe Visa" qualifying them to re-enter the U.S. as "guest workers."
As But members of a group called the Secure Borders Coalition have opposed Pence's proposal, labeling it "amnesty lite." The group argues the plan would provide for the "wholesale importation of aliens and a path to citizenship for them."
Minuteman Project founder Jim Gilchrist told WND in August he believed the result of the Pence plan would be to flood the U.S. with millions more illegal immigrants.
"Probably within hours of the Ellis Island Centers opening, counterfeit copies of the required documentation to re-enter the U.S. will be available on the streets of Los Angeles and dozens of other U.S. cities," he said.
INVASION USA
GOP senator: Filibuster guest-worker program
Arizona's Kyl believes there might be enough votes to block legislation
A filibuster by Republicans is in order if President Bush presses forward in the new Congress with legislation to establish a guest-worker program with a path to citizenship, says Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.
Kyl, however, speaking yesterday to nationally syndicated radio host Laura Ingraham, said he was uncertain whether or not Republicans would have the 40 votes necessary to block the legislation.
"I would certainly hope that the majority of Republicans in the Senate would not be complicit in passing legislation that is not wise, that for example, would put everybody on a path to citizenship and say that temporary workers get to get U.S. citizenship, and so on," Kyl said, according to HotAir.com
In January, Democrats will have a 51-49 majority over Republicans in the Senate. A supermajority of 61 votes would be needed to prevent a filibuster.
"I would certainly hope that we would have the 40 votes to be able to stop [the legislation], but, I don't know, we're going to have to wait and see; it'll be very close," said Kyl, who won re-election to another six-year term last week.
Arguing for the guest-worker program, the Bush administration has insisted it's not practical to deport the millions of foreigners who are in the country illegally.
"The cost of identifying all of those people and sending them back would be stupendous. It would be billions and billions of dollars," Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said in an interview last year.
"One of the reasons I think that we've been focusing on the idea of a temporary worker program as part of a larger strategy for border security is because it would be a way to siphon off people who really want to do nothing more than work here, put them into a regulated program � we would know who they are � we would then be able to send them back at the end of a period of three years or six years," he told Sean Hannity on the Fox News Channel program "Hannity & Colmes."
"They would have made some money, they could take it back home, and then we could focus our other resources on the people that don't want to do it the right way, and we could get those people sent out."
Last May, just 36 senators � three of them Democrats � voted against a bill that included a guest-worker program. The Senate was unable to work out a comprise before the Nov. 7 midterm elections with the House, which passed legislation rebuffing Bush's desire for foreign workers to gain legal employment.
Last summer, Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., announced a compromise plan called the "No Amnesty Reform Act," which would require all illegal aliens to leave the United States and apply at "Ellis Island Centers," operated by private companies in Mexico under a license from the U. S. government. They would then obtain a "Good Neighbor Safe Visa" qualifying them to re-enter the U.S. as "guest workers."
As But members of a group called the Secure Borders Coalition have opposed Pence's proposal, labeling it "amnesty lite." The group argues the plan would provide for the "wholesale importation of aliens and a path to citizenship for them."
Minuteman Project founder Jim Gilchrist told WND in August he believed the result of the Pence plan would be to flood the U.S. with millions more illegal immigrants.
"Probably within hours of the Ellis Island Centers opening, counterfeit copies of the required documentation to re-enter the U.S. will be available on the streets of Los Angeles and dozens of other U.S. cities," he said.
hairstyles Baptiste+giabiconi+height
neelu
10-30 02:17 AM
Hello friends,
We finally got CPO emails 10/28/2009 (only checked last evening), 11 years after first stepping foot on this land. My story is very much like those that others have posted, so I will not say more.
But I would like to go over what I did since October 1st (which is when my PD became current). Most of us on this forum know a little something about waiting for our PDs to be current or for some legislation to happen. But what I learnt in October is that once your PD becomes current, you go from one opaque waiting area to another one. The case status website does not have any useful info. May be we (IV) should work to get USCIS to add some real status information there (like if our case is assigned to an IO etc.). Anyway, these are what I did:
1) I had called NSC using the POJ method on 10/9/2009. But did not get any useful info.
2) I had called again on 10/13/2009 and this time a very friendly and I think very knowledgeable IO put me on hold for 5 mins - when she returned she told me that my case (and my wife's) was shelved because they thought that our finger prints were not done. But she said that she thinks they are all there and that she would make a request for the case to be assigned to an IO for adjdication.
3) On 10/21/2009, I called up my senator's office and requested them to open an inquiry. A couple of days later I got a reply from the senators office which included the response from USCIS - the USCIS response was practically useless asking me to wait 90 days.
4) On 10/28/2009, I got the CPO email.
Frankly, I dont know what helped, if anything at all did. The only thing I think that helped me is the support that I got from folks on this forum. You guys are a fabulous bunch.
Like others who have posted, I have been closely involved with IV since May 2006 and plan on keeping it that way going forward (cannot NOT check IV at least once a day :D). Go IV!!!!!
Please let me know if you want any specific information about my case/experience that can help in your case.
Wishing the best of luck for everyone waiting....
~Neelu
We finally got CPO emails 10/28/2009 (only checked last evening), 11 years after first stepping foot on this land. My story is very much like those that others have posted, so I will not say more.
But I would like to go over what I did since October 1st (which is when my PD became current). Most of us on this forum know a little something about waiting for our PDs to be current or for some legislation to happen. But what I learnt in October is that once your PD becomes current, you go from one opaque waiting area to another one. The case status website does not have any useful info. May be we (IV) should work to get USCIS to add some real status information there (like if our case is assigned to an IO etc.). Anyway, these are what I did:
1) I had called NSC using the POJ method on 10/9/2009. But did not get any useful info.
2) I had called again on 10/13/2009 and this time a very friendly and I think very knowledgeable IO put me on hold for 5 mins - when she returned she told me that my case (and my wife's) was shelved because they thought that our finger prints were not done. But she said that she thinks they are all there and that she would make a request for the case to be assigned to an IO for adjdication.
3) On 10/21/2009, I called up my senator's office and requested them to open an inquiry. A couple of days later I got a reply from the senators office which included the response from USCIS - the USCIS response was practically useless asking me to wait 90 days.
4) On 10/28/2009, I got the CPO email.
Frankly, I dont know what helped, if anything at all did. The only thing I think that helped me is the support that I got from folks on this forum. You guys are a fabulous bunch.
Like others who have posted, I have been closely involved with IV since May 2006 and plan on keeping it that way going forward (cannot NOT check IV at least once a day :D). Go IV!!!!!
Please let me know if you want any specific information about my case/experience that can help in your case.
Wishing the best of luck for everyone waiting....
~Neelu
mirage
10-06 07:42 PM
What you are seeing right now in US, you'll see that in India begining next year. Indian Property market is ripe for a crash. I wouldn't invest a penny until the dust settles...
aristotle
02-11 06:21 PM
IV's goal is to fight retrogression. So whoever wants to fight retrogression should stay on board.
However, it is the privilege of a few affected people to discuss their problems on these threads. You are not obligated to follow these discussions if they are not to your taste. It is a legitimate question. Clearly USCIS is using one interpretation of the law while there is another possible one.
The discussion here doesn't mean that IV will flip tomorrow and say they will fight for only India/China EB2s.
Anytime such discussions come up, invariably a few people jump on board threatening to quit IV. Who are you threatening? Are you helping yourself by quitting the fight to solve your problem?
Right and wrong are relative.
You and I both agree about what is going on.
Interpretation of the law is also subjective.
What I am trying to tell you my friend, like I have tried to tell others like you before, is this. If IV hurts my interest, I would have to be an absolute moron to support it.
I really want to contribute more, and get active in my state chapter, but it is posts like these that make me pause and have second thoughts about it.
However, it is the privilege of a few affected people to discuss their problems on these threads. You are not obligated to follow these discussions if they are not to your taste. It is a legitimate question. Clearly USCIS is using one interpretation of the law while there is another possible one.
The discussion here doesn't mean that IV will flip tomorrow and say they will fight for only India/China EB2s.
Anytime such discussions come up, invariably a few people jump on board threatening to quit IV. Who are you threatening? Are you helping yourself by quitting the fight to solve your problem?
Right and wrong are relative.
You and I both agree about what is going on.
Interpretation of the law is also subjective.
What I am trying to tell you my friend, like I have tried to tell others like you before, is this. If IV hurts my interest, I would have to be an absolute moron to support it.
I really want to contribute more, and get active in my state chapter, but it is posts like these that make me pause and have second thoughts about it.
