ILW Is Predgudice!

[MakeItRight!]

The post has been deleted by the administrator for violating the discussion board rules.

"In the posts designated as "Immigration Law Question:" replies to the post that are not relevant to answering of the question will be deleted."

[MakeItRight!]

The post has been deleted by the administrator for violating the discussion board rules.

"In the posts designated as "Immigration Law Question:" replies to the post that are not relevant to answering of the question will be deleted."

[ProudUSC]

In all fairness, this thread was not prefaced with Immigration Law Question, so why was MIR's post deleted?

[federale86]

Because the moderator is not doing his job. No Brain Brit, No Borders italiansrus, and other routinely use insults but are seldom deleted.

[Aroha]

I'd like to know that too. A thread with thinly veiled swearing and nastiness towards another member was left alone, and while it was eventually edited by it's author, still contains at least one post with the not-so hidden swearing. Yet MIR posts anything, including a correct and legitimate response to an immigration question, and it's removed.

Applying the rules is one thing. Applying the rules only to certain people and throwing them out the window for others is another.

[ProudUSC]

I saw his original post and nothing he said violated any of the forum rules. So, perhaps the title to this thread is correct, aside from the mispelling of prejudice?

[Aroha]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ProudUSC:
I saw his original post and nothing he said violated any of the forum rules. So, perhaps the title to this thread is correct, aside from the mispelling of prejudice? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Beginning to think that myself. I also saw the original post, and the correct answer that was removed from another thread. I remember doing a double-take at the time cos he was actually making sense!

BoardWizard, I appreciate that you've made it easier for people to ask and get answers to real issues, but please apply the rules fairly and with some show of consistency. Otherwise, you're gong to be left with nobody with any interest in actually helping. They're few and far enough between as it is.

[davdah]

Not only that, this place needs to have some intrigue and drama. What wrong with tossing out alternative ideas or questions a person might wish to ask? Isn't it possible an intending immigrant might be committing a fraud? Why should that be censored? Silencing that gives the appearance this place supports fraud against this country and it's citizens.

[Aroha]

What a load of nonsense, Davdah. The fact is that most of the comments regarding fraud don't offer an "alternate idea" or even ask any questions about the posters situation with any view toward helping. They simply assume the person is a con artist and hurl insults.

Drama and intrigue, even name-calling and insult-hurling, have plenty of threads already.

[Brit4064]

Is it possible that a USC might be trying to make some money out of would-be immigrants davdah? You seem to imply on your "alternative idea" that only immigrants are capable of bad deeds. The USCIS has uncovered a fair few immigration fraud rings run by USC's over the years.

[Hudson]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ProudUSC:
I saw his original post and nothing he said violated any of the forum rules. So, perhaps the title to this thread is correct, aside from the mispelling of prejudice? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Let's see:
Rule #1: Never question the integrity or the authority of the moderator of any forum.
Rule #2: If you violate rule #1, no other rules matter as far as the moderator is concerned.

This happens in any forum if you decided to question the authority. Some forum explicitly state this, some implicitly state this, and some forums have it assumed. The moderator here has stated repeatedly not to question the authority of the moderator. This tactic by MIR can be interpreted that way.

[ProudUSC]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The moderator here has stated repeatedly not to question the authority of the moderator. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Show me. I have never seen him or her state this. It is against the forum rules to pose as a moderator, but not to question the moderator. Clearly, MIR was singled out on this one.

[Aroha]

There are two problems with that, Hudson. First of all, along with Proud, I can't recall seeing anything that states you can't question BoardWizard's integrity. Secondly, MIR's posts, even a legitimate one, were removed before he went on his bender against the practice.

Even if what you say was the reason for BoardWizard's actions, MIR is not the first person who's questioned being moderated, or commented on the one-sided nature of it, yet he's been singled out. While most forums state that a moderators decision is final, they're still expected to apply the rules fairly and evenly regardless of their personal opinion of any given poster.

[davdah]

Maybe it wasn't in this post Aroha. But, in another he put up something about the would be fiance moving to the immigrants country for a while to see how that would be taken. We know the idea behind it. If it's mentioned and flat out rejected true intent is revealed. The alternative, based on the fact whiffs of fraud were already in the making, was a perfectly legitimate response.

[ProudUSC]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by davdah:
Maybe it wasn't in this post Aroha. But, in another he put up something about the would be fiance moving to the immigrants country for a while to see how that would be taken. We know the idea behind it. If it's mentioned and flat out rejected true intent is revealed. The alternative, based on the fact whiffs of fraud were already in the making, was a perfectly legitimate response. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree. Selective censorship is being practiced here with MIR being the fall guy.