inaccurate data?------Thread Closed by Rajiv :-(

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

ECGC

Registered Users (C)
inaccurate data?

Looking through the various graphs and "scans" over time, it appears to me that most of this is made by people seeking popularity and approval from others in this forum. Random checks indicate that these quoted WAC numbers may not even be 485 notices. I ask that people explain things a little more about their methods of screening BCIS' work and not post inaccurate data just to show that they are "high tech" and doing something fancy.Thanks.
 
Ouch .. can we get anymore hostile.

No I don't think we do this for popularity. We do this becase we are sick of INS, bored out of minds waiting for that message to change, and have the option of scanning their website using our skills, and garner useful data. So far scanning has been EXTREMELY helpful in gathering estimates.

And, once we have that data, it can't hurt to share it with others in the same wait boat.

Regards, "I ask that people explain things a little more about their methods of screening BCIS' work and not post inaccurate data just to show that they are "high tech" and doing something fancy." ...

Do you have any specific questions? We "techies" pretty much know what we are scanning already :)
 
HAHA ....ECGC these scans are as good as the BCIS website is . IF you do't think they are ,why do't you write your own program and run the scan May be you will become more popular then these persons , who r posting the results of scans. OR if you cannot write a program then go to site and type each and every WAC number and do your reserch.
 
Well so nice of you to join us!

Seeing this is your first post, you're off to a great start.


Couple of things,

1) You obviously have been using the information and not contributing up to this point, I suggest you contribute more from now on and criticize less.

2) Try to be a little more friendly in your posts and avoid deliberate flaming, we are all too busy for such childish behavior.

3) Don't judge others, you are mostly likely wrong in your judgements, no strike that, YOU ARE WRONG

4) If you do have questions, try to be specific, your post is anyones guess what you are talking about. This way we can actually address what you are talking about.
 
Silly Man kinda comment

Ok I am sick of restraining myself.

ECGC .. if you don't like the data we provide .. then STFU !!!

LOL :D Ok this feels good hehehe :)
 
I haven't so far seen a single graph that i was able to make sense out of. And I am not alone. The usual response to such postings are 'could you please explain what that means?" what is x-axis; y axis etc.,and there is no response from the originator.

i didn't say this whole site was useless.I find the experiences of various people who'd gone for interviews and who had run into various problems with their application process and how they tackled it a valuable learning experience for those of us who are waiting.
For the person who asked me to contribute I'd like to say that whenever i have an experience i think would help others by sharing, i would do so.I don't want to 'contribute' just for the sake of 'contributing'- which is exactly what i am asking others to refrain from.
For the person who thinks i should write a program i would say i don't think any of these scans have been useful thus far-why add another?
And for those who think i am hostile i'd like to say that i am not. There is something called 'constructive criticism' and that's what i was trying to do. Instead of offering explanations i see a lot of defensive statements. I agree that none of you owe me any "explanation".If you are content with your scans, that's cool.I would be interested in hearing from other visitors if they found these "data" useful.More useful than what is reported by BCIS from time to time?
 
Let me see if I understood your question properly!

ECGC,

In your original post you wrote:
"..Random checks indicate that these quoted WAC numbers may not even be 485 notices."

May be you are making that comment because you used one of the WAC# mentioned with those graphs etc to search BCIS site but actually (based on the info provided on this board -from the originator of those WAC#s) that is not an actual WAC#! To maintain privacy the originator coded those WAC#s with running sequence numbers in the series.

See following thread for the source of those WAC#s and scan results etc. Project Kashmir - scan all WAC-02 I485 case status at BCIS Case Status Online "WAC-02 all I485 case status"

Especially this post talks about logic behind those psudo WAC#s: scanned data format and case number

- PCee
 
Last edited by a moderator:
why bother???

Sillyman and all,

Why bother for such nonsense Q's?

We need not explain some "naive" people our humble efforts...

I would suggest is not to reply to such emails and waste our energies....
 
Dude, I have plenty of energy .. plus yea, his criticism is constructive .. all those graphs are mind boggling .. especially with no legend whatsoever .. but that comment CERTAINLY does not apply to all sorts of scanning we do here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Even though I agree with pagero and neeru, I think PCee's answer was the most appropriate. I wouldn't waste my time or energy trying to answer any inappropriate question unless I have a professional answer.

No point in igniting passion. If you think anything is immature, deliberate and inappropriate, ignore and let the thread die its natural death.
 
Pcee, Who cares,

Thanks. That explains some of the "other" (non-485 ) applications but still does not explain why some actual applications of people i know were not included in the scan. Plus, the graphs!!!I will look at project kashmir again

Silly man,

you are quite a piece of work!! You are the one who was whining like a wounded dog a while back that BCIS is being racist discriminating brown people. Within days you were foaming in the mouth against your own country man making racist remarks (gulti)

You have created a circle of people who think you are a "guru" and living in your false empire.If you write programs like you are, the sorry software company that hired you will be bankrupt in a few days. i think the reason why they are still afloat is because you spend most of your time posting on this site and not do any work- which is good for your company.

Every one else,

I am not here to provoke another nasty thread. Silly man's comments were way out of line. For others who think my post was a spam or 'naive', that's your opinion and you are entiltled to it.Good luck to every one.
 
Oooooooooohhh !! ECGC :) .. finally some fun !! :D hehe :D

BITE ME !!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ECGC is Version 2 of IamShantanuB.....

ECGC .. We are happy with whatever data we have here. If it sounds useless or inaccurate .. SIMPLE .. then don't refer it ..

If you do not think that people here have not done a great job .. then WHAY VISIT THIS WEBSITE???????? and comment on people who have contributed in this community.
 
Why can't we all f****** get along. I am just sick of all the personal attacks that have been going on lately.

ECGC,

There are people who are taking time to do some work. If you have any specific questions about some data that is being posted, please address it to the guy who posted it. I am sure they will be able to answer any doubts you have...please don't BS about constructive criticsm. Your criticism is harsh and unfair and on the contrary very unconstructive
 
last_gasp,

Point well taken!!

Did not anticipate this thread to go in this direction. Would have been different if Pcee was the first responder. In the end it sure doesn't seem like "constructive" criticism.

silly man,

"Constuctive criticism" doesn't need to include legends, graphs etc., You ain't that bright after all.
PS: I'm lovin this too. :)

FOR THE GENERAL GOOD OF THIS COMMUNITY AND BY POPULAR DEMAND, I WILL STOP POSTING ON THIS THREAD. WILL POST UPON 485 APPROVAL, HOWEVER.SINCE THIS THREAD DIDN'T HELP ANYONE (INCLUDING ME) IT MAY BE DELETED.
 
Ok this is really pathetic. Since you are enjoying this ECGC, why not just post and be merry?

Thats what I do .. if anyone gets pissed off .. it's their problem.

Y'know lately this board has seen a lot of bitterness, and somehow thats all revolved around me being moderator and what posts should be deleted and others trying to teach others on how should posts be written. I am not enjoying being moderator because I can't say "ECGC u got sand up ur vagina so shut the fuck up" .. but I think what we need to do is,

a) Get Sillyman off the moderator so he can be himself.
b) Quit being grand daddy to everyone and just be more tolerating and considerate of others on this board. If you don't like what you read .. then don't read it .. but don't frickin' advertise and censure others .. we all have our daddys to do that.

Sound good?

Now chill ECGC, no hard feelings.

can we all get along now?? DARN IT !!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Silly man,

I knew u would respond to this. Sure u ain't got nothin to do so why not post obscenities on this portal?

So you admit that you are a lousy moderator!! You don't do any work for the company that pays you and that makes you a lousy comp. engineer too!!Are you good at anything at all?

You see the main difference in our postings? You are angry, off balance and talk foul. Not that I am short in my vocabulary. Just more civilized. You have your daddy to correct you, huh? Doesn't seem like he's done a good job raising you.

PS: Still love it:D :D :D

Sorry folks, silly man is too tempting to let go!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top