Some posters on this forum, to me, seem to spend their time arguing for the sake of arguing's sake, and not to contribute anything of value here. Habitually scanning through responses to find what you perceive to be faults and then quoting them with your own argument against them appears both pedantic and petty.
Just my opinion of course.
I believe this forum goes a long way in providing support, helpfulness and comradery from predominately lay people mixed in with those of professional experience. Lets not let it denigrate to one of bickering and constant attempts to pull down another in an effort to have the last say. That is neither constructive, helpful or polite, it comes across as quite arrogant in my books.
Q
You are very right, and also very kind. I'd go ahead and say some people simply lie, and when it becomes obvious, they try to hide that through convoluted logic and whole bunch nonsensical excerpts from old documents by picking and choosing only the parts that seem to support them.
Again, from an 1995 document, in its entirety:
5. EDUCATION OR EMPLOYMENT EXPERIENCE
Each DV-1 principal must show that he or she has at least a high
school education or its equivalent or, within the five years
preceding the date of application for adjustment of status, has two
years of work experience in an occupation requiring at least two
years training or experience. Although all applicants were
notified that they must be able to meet these requirements when
applying for adjustment of status or immigrant visa issuance
abroad, DOS has not pre-screened applicants. Principals who cannot
meet these requirements do not qualify for DV-1 adjustment of
status. Failure to qualify will necessitate denial of the
principal's adjustment application and the adjustment applications
of any DV-1 derivative family members.
EDUCATION
High school education or its equivalent means successful completion
of a twelve-year course of elementary and secondary education in
the United States or successful completion in another country of a
formal course of elementary and secondary education comparable to
completion of twelve years' elementary and secondary education in
the United States. Passage of the "G.D.E." (General Educational
Development) test or its foreign counterparts will not meet this
requirement.
Primary documentation would be a certification of completion, such
as a high school diploma. School transcripts may also be used for
this purpose. In general, any documentation on this point will be
acceptable, provided that it was issued by the person or
organization responsible for maintaining such records and describes
with specificity the course of study completed.
Adjudicators may also accept college or university diplomas or
transcripts, unless the adjudicator suspects that the applicant did
not successfully complete a formal course of study comparable to
twelve year's elementary and secondary education in the United
States. (
For example, an "honorary" college degree or one based
solely on work experience would not be evidence of completion of a
formal course of elementary and secondary education.)
Did anybody recognize the italicized parts? And the convenient omission of bold parts? No need to even mention the actual wording of
the law that authorizes the DV program. Some people just can't be wrong. Leave them alone and they will go away.