USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
Sep 2nd 2004, 3:11 pm
#31
Don't Know, Don't Care
Joined: Jun 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,385
Re: USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
Originally Posted by Andrew DeFaria
inquisitive40 wrote:
> Is more a case of a new member posting all their details here and not
> realising that it gets posted to the usenet (maybe not even knowing
> what the usenet is) and so maybe even incriminate themselve in a much
> more public venue than here (people always posting about getting
> married in the US an dadjusting status on VWP would be a good example).
This place is really not all that less public than usenet. Anybody who
wants to can sign up and read, no? Plus the same bits are flying down
the same pipe just with a different protocol. If you think that your
postings here or the usenet are somehow guarded then you are only
fooling yourself.
--
I broke a mirror in my house. I'm supposed to get seven years of bad
luck, but my lawyer thinks he can get me five.
> Is more a case of a new member posting all their details here and not
> realising that it gets posted to the usenet (maybe not even knowing
> what the usenet is) and so maybe even incriminate themselve in a much
> more public venue than here (people always posting about getting
> married in the US an dadjusting status on VWP would be a good example).
This place is really not all that less public than usenet. Anybody who
wants to can sign up and read, no? Plus the same bits are flying down
the same pipe just with a different protocol. If you think that your
postings here or the usenet are somehow guarded then you are only
fooling yourself.
--
I broke a mirror in my house. I'm supposed to get seven years of bad
luck, but my lawyer thinks he can get me five.
I agree anyone can sign up here BUT if someone is abusive or spamming users, there is nothing expats can really do on the usenet side of the forum, all they can do is edit and update this web forum, the usenet is uncensored.
Again my point originally was that for someone new a lot of this is not clear to them and so their posts sometimes give more information than I would like to be posting considering it is going to the usenet.
Patrick
Sep 2nd 2004, 3:39 pm
#32
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 368
Re: USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
I wont defind or comment on anthing.... but... I just want to say, in fairness, that VJ does not promote any of the comments that were made about it. There are a lot of people there who may say something negative and we try to buffer that. I think this happens everywhere though -- here included. Negative comments are free speech. We can't moderate an opinion like that but we can try to curb it, which we do.
Regarding UPL. I will just say that VJ, this site, and about 100 others (actually thousands more) are all doing the same thing so if one site is guilty then they all are.
In the end, I am sure everyone is out to just help other people be less stressed out and confused about the whole marriage based immigration process. A good and noble cause.
-Steve
Regarding UPL. I will just say that VJ, this site, and about 100 others (actually thousands more) are all doing the same thing so if one site is guilty then they all are.
In the end, I am sure everyone is out to just help other people be less stressed out and confused about the whole marriage based immigration process. A good and noble cause.
-Steve
Sep 2nd 2004, 3:45 pm
#33
Concierge
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 46,392
Re: USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
Originally Posted by inquisitive40
Yes BUT a forum with no usenet posting can be moderated better and ALSO if you edit a post here after you have posted, the original post may still reach the usenet, this does not happen on forums with no usenet posting.
I agree anyone can sign up here BUT if someone is abusive or spamming users, there is nothing expats can really do on the usenet side of the forum, all they can do is edit and update this web forum, the usenet is uncensored.
Again my point originally was that for someone new a lot of this is not clear to them and so their posts sometimes give more information than I would like to be posting considering it is going to the usenet.
Patrick
I agree anyone can sign up here BUT if someone is abusive or spamming users, there is nothing expats can really do on the usenet side of the forum, all they can do is edit and update this web forum, the usenet is uncensored.
Again my point originally was that for someone new a lot of this is not clear to them and so their posts sometimes give more information than I would like to be posting considering it is going to the usenet.
Patrick
I cut my eye teeth on the Usenet nearly 7 years ago and that is where this forum that you are using was started and continues today. It was that newsgroup that gave you the FAQ and the kamya pages and the POE pages, etc. They were a gift to Steve2003 of VJ fame from the original webmaster and Steve is carrying on splendidly updating and refreshing old and inaccurate information.
It is never good to give out too much information online regardless of whether it is a newsgroup, a chatroom, an e-mail or a buying site. Caution is the keyword in all things.
Rete
Sep 2nd 2004, 4:15 pm
#34
Don't Know, Don't Care
Joined: Jun 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,385
Re: USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
Originally Posted by Rete
Actually there are things that can and have in the past been done about trolls and spammers originating from the Usenet from BE so don't sell us short.
I cut my eye teeth on the Usenet nearly 7 years ago and that is where this forum that you are using was started and continues today. It was that newsgroup that gave you the FAQ and the kamya pages and the POE pages, etc. They were a gift to Steve2003 of VJ fame from the original webmaster and Steve is carrying on splendidly updating and refreshing old and inaccurate information.
It is never good to give out too much information online regardless of whether it is a newsgroup, a chatroom, an e-mail or a buying site. Caution is the keyword in all things.
Rete
I cut my eye teeth on the Usenet nearly 7 years ago and that is where this forum that you are using was started and continues today. It was that newsgroup that gave you the FAQ and the kamya pages and the POE pages, etc. They were a gift to Steve2003 of VJ fame from the original webmaster and Steve is carrying on splendidly updating and refreshing old and inaccurate information.
It is never good to give out too much information online regardless of whether it is a newsgroup, a chatroom, an e-mail or a buying site. Caution is the keyword in all things.
Rete
This I knew, to old hands like ourselves we know all the pitfalls and advantages of the newsgroups, that is not my point, my point is for the newbies and their lack of understanding of what the usenet is.
I know you guys jump on posts and moderate as much as possible here in the forum BUT again once it hits the usenet and propagates to all the servers it is one hell of a job to try and catch something.
I personally have only used the newsgroups until very recently (6 years on the newsgroup side of expats) and I only subscribed here for the fact that I get notification of when people reply to my messages.
I still think that by far this forum is one of the best and as you said already, if a member doesn't catch a mistake posted a usenet poster probably will.
Patrick
Sep 2nd 2004, 7:47 pm
#35
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 368
Re: USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
I need to ask for the record, and sorry if this steps on anyones toes, but per your quote:
Quoting Matt:
"Plus, there is the whole UPL issue, which I don't want to discuss again (but their site really should be shut down for UPL, and the danger that poses to the immigration community)."
... what is the difference between this site here (expats) and VJ in regards to this issue? Is there something being done there that makes VJ the target versus any other site on the internet? I just think that any sweeping statement and action, in all fairness, should be consistant. Why just VJ now? I think it would be a fair question to ask based on your quote here (not refering to any offline discussions as I know you and I are on the same page on those topics).
I just want to clarify since the quote above seemed to single out VJ as the only site that you believe UPL is occuring at and should be shut down.
Please again realize I am just posting this publically because I think it is a fair response based on the comments made. Both VJ and Expats are good sites and both try to the best of their ability to control speech which may be destructive or violate the terms and conditions of use for the respective sites.
thanks again,
Steve
Quoting Matt:
"Plus, there is the whole UPL issue, which I don't want to discuss again (but their site really should be shut down for UPL, and the danger that poses to the immigration community)."
... what is the difference between this site here (expats) and VJ in regards to this issue? Is there something being done there that makes VJ the target versus any other site on the internet? I just think that any sweeping statement and action, in all fairness, should be consistant. Why just VJ now? I think it would be a fair question to ask based on your quote here (not refering to any offline discussions as I know you and I are on the same page on those topics).
I just want to clarify since the quote above seemed to single out VJ as the only site that you believe UPL is occuring at and should be shut down.
Please again realize I am just posting this publically because I think it is a fair response based on the comments made. Both VJ and Expats are good sites and both try to the best of their ability to control speech which may be destructive or violate the terms and conditions of use for the respective sites.
thanks again,
Steve
Last edited by Steve2003; Sep 4th 2004 at 8:59 pm. Reason: update relavence
Sep 2nd 2004, 8:02 pm
#36
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
Originally Posted by Steve2003
I need to ask for the record, and sorry if this steps on anyones toes, but per your quote:
Quoting Matt:
"Plus, there is the whole UPL issue, which I don't want to discuss again (but their site really should be shut down for UPL, and the danger that poses to the immigration community)."
... what is the difference between this site here (expats) and VJ in regards to this issue? Is there something being done there that makes VJ the target versus any other site on the internet? Expats as well as others are owned and hosting in the US and I just think that any sweeping statement and action, in all fairness, should be consistant. In the past I know you have mentioned UPL is happening here too. Why just VJ now? I think it would be a fair question to ask based on your quote here (not refering to any offline discussions as I know you and I are on the same page on those topics).
I just want to clarify since the quote above seemed to single out VJ as the only site that you believe UPL is occuring at and should be shut down.
Please again realize I am just posting this publically because I think it is a fair response based on the comments made. Both VJ and Expats are good sites and both try to the best of their ability to control speech which may be destructive or violate the terms and conditions of use for the respective sites.
thanks again,
Steve
Quoting Matt:
"Plus, there is the whole UPL issue, which I don't want to discuss again (but their site really should be shut down for UPL, and the danger that poses to the immigration community)."
... what is the difference between this site here (expats) and VJ in regards to this issue? Is there something being done there that makes VJ the target versus any other site on the internet? Expats as well as others are owned and hosting in the US and I just think that any sweeping statement and action, in all fairness, should be consistant. In the past I know you have mentioned UPL is happening here too. Why just VJ now? I think it would be a fair question to ask based on your quote here (not refering to any offline discussions as I know you and I are on the same page on those topics).
I just want to clarify since the quote above seemed to single out VJ as the only site that you believe UPL is occuring at and should be shut down.
Please again realize I am just posting this publically because I think it is a fair response based on the comments made. Both VJ and Expats are good sites and both try to the best of their ability to control speech which may be destructive or violate the terms and conditions of use for the respective sites.
thanks again,
Steve
Reasonable minds can differ. I've looked at visa journey and I repeat that reasonable minds can differ. You may want to consult with the Florida State Bar and perhaps the local district attorney.
Sep 2nd 2004, 8:19 pm
#37
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 368
Re: USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
Yeah, as a coutesy I am consulting the state bar myself to establish the presence or lack of presence of UPL, and to get their advice. I appreciate the support and comments. I would perfer to settle the issue this way and I will obide by their advice.
I just fail to find the difference between VJ and about a dozen if not more other sites that are far less moderated (this site is moderated very well fyi in my opinion).
I just fail to find the difference between VJ and about a dozen if not more other sites that are far less moderated (this site is moderated very well fyi in my opinion).
Sep 2nd 2004, 8:24 pm
#38
Don't Know, Don't Care
Joined: Jun 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,385
Re: USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
UPL = Unauthorized Practice of Law?
So if that is correct, where does that line get drawn? Surely unless someone states they are a lawyer in their credentials they could not be accused of this?
I know this is going down a road trodden before BUT it was VERY hard to even find any definition of what UPL stood for let alone anyone being definitive about what it is.
Patrick
So if that is correct, where does that line get drawn? Surely unless someone states they are a lawyer in their credentials they could not be accused of this?
I know this is going down a road trodden before BUT it was VERY hard to even find any definition of what UPL stood for let alone anyone being definitive about what it is.
Patrick
Sep 2nd 2004, 8:28 pm
#39
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
Originally Posted by inquisitive40
UPL = Unauthorized Practice of Law?
So if that is correct, where does that line get drawn? Surely unless someone states they are a lawyer in their credentials they could not be accused of this?
I know this is going down a road trodden before BUT it was VERY hard to even find any definition of what UPL stood for let alone anyone being definitive about what it is.
Patrick
So if that is correct, where does that line get drawn? Surely unless someone states they are a lawyer in their credentials they could not be accused of this?
I know this is going down a road trodden before BUT it was VERY hard to even find any definition of what UPL stood for let alone anyone being definitive about what it is.
Patrick
The line is quite fuzzy and the issue is complicated. That is why I am NOT giving any definite answer.
Also, what makes you think a lawyer can't be accused of UPL? In certain circumstances, it certainly is an issue. Although I think the Supremes have looked at the issue pretty throuroughly, the issue still comes up.
Sep 2nd 2004, 8:30 pm
#40
Concierge
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 46,392
Re: USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
Originally Posted by inquisitive40
UPL = Unauthorized Practice of Law?
So if that is correct, where does that line get drawn? Surely unless someone states they are a lawyer in their credentials they could not be accused of this?
I know this is going down a road trodden before BUT it was VERY hard to even find any definition of what UPL stood for let alone anyone being definitive about what it is.
Patrick
So if that is correct, where does that line get drawn? Surely unless someone states they are a lawyer in their credentials they could not be accused of this?
I know this is going down a road trodden before BUT it was VERY hard to even find any definition of what UPL stood for let alone anyone being definitive about what it is.
Patrick
If you have time on your hands, do a google search of alt.visa.us.marriage-based and code words UPL MUdall Rete Folinskyinla DekkaAngel and you will find a lot of information on disclaimers and the like.
Rete
Sep 2nd 2004, 8:32 pm
#41
Don't Know, Don't Care
Joined: Jun 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,385
Re: USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
Originally Posted by Rete
If you have time on your hands, do a google search of alt.visa.us.marriage-based and code words UPL MUdall Rete Folinskyinla DekkaAngel and you will find a lot of information on disclaimers and the like.
Rete
Rete
So does my disclaimer in my signature cover me enough so that I am not accused of UPL ??
Patrick
Sep 2nd 2004, 8:36 pm
#42
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 368
Re: USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
Originally Posted by Folinskyinla
Hi:
The line is quite fuzzy and the issue is complicated. That is why I am NOT giving any definite answer.
Also, what makes you think a lawyer can't be accused of UPL? In certain circumstances, it certainly is an issue. Although I think the Supremes have looked at the issue pretty throuroughly, the issue still comes up.
The line is quite fuzzy and the issue is complicated. That is why I am NOT giving any definite answer.
Also, what makes you think a lawyer can't be accused of UPL? In certain circumstances, it certainly is an issue. Although I think the Supremes have looked at the issue pretty throuroughly, the issue still comes up.
example:
In Formal Advisory Opinion 00-3, the Court restated its view that the real estate closing is a continuous, interconnected series of events. The Court made it clear that, in order for an attorney to avoid possible disciplinary sanctions for aiding a nonlawyer in the unauthorized practice of law, "[t]he lawyer must be in control of the closing process from beginning to end. The supervision of the paralegal must be direct and constant." The Court held that "[e]ven though the paralegal may state that they are not a lawyer and is not there for the purpose of giving legal advice, circumstances may arise where one involved in this process as a purchaser, seller or lender would look to the paralegal for advice and/or explanations normally provided by a lawyer. This is not permissible." A lawyer who aids a nonlawyer in the unauthorized practice of law can be disbarred. Georgia Rule of Professional Conduct 5.5.
There are lots of cases wher a lawyer was associated with a business (either direct or indirect). By virtue of that association the appearance of the company as that of being a "able to practice law". When the company was accused of UPL, the attourney who provided that association was also accused of UPL. My interpretation is that if an attourney contributes to an entitiy in a way that may lead a person to think there is a connection, that the lawyer can be held accountable.
I am not sure how this may apply to lawyers posting here (and their liability) or on this or other sites. Maybe I am way off... I dunno.
Sep 2nd 2004, 8:39 pm
#43
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 368
Re: USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
Originally Posted by inquisitive40
So does my disclaimer in my signature cover me enough so that I am not accused of UPL ??
Patrick
Patrick
If according to some people this:
http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?pg=terms
is not enough, then the signiture is not. I have the same belief as you, and I agree that in my opinion it should be enough. However, according to a few lawyers I haev asked, it may not be.
Sep 2nd 2004, 8:45 pm
#44
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 368
Re: USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
Another example:
http://www.sunethics.com/LE-UPL.htm
One could make the assumption that by a lawyer being a member of a forum community that they have and do represent (or are at least affiliated with) the site. Most sites will disclaim this relationship away in their Terms and Conditions of Use... however, I am sure it could be argued none the less.
This whole UPL issue has me confused to hell. How can someone be accused of breaking a law that is not defined clearly ya know.
http://www.sunethics.com/LE-UPL.htm
One could make the assumption that by a lawyer being a member of a forum community that they have and do represent (or are at least affiliated with) the site. Most sites will disclaim this relationship away in their Terms and Conditions of Use... however, I am sure it could be argued none the less.
This whole UPL issue has me confused to hell. How can someone be accused of breaking a law that is not defined clearly ya know.
Sep 2nd 2004, 8:58 pm
#45
Don't Know, Don't Care
Joined: Jun 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,385
Re: USCs without any pending immigration issues on this forum
Originally Posted by Steve2003
Another example:
http://www.sunethics.com/LE-UPL.htm
One could make the assumption that by a lawyer being a member of a forum community that they have and do represent (or are at least affiliated with) the site. Most sites will disclaim this relationship away in their Terms and Conditions of Use... however, I am sure it could be argued none the less.
This whole UPL issue has me confused to hell. How can someone be accused of breaking a law that is not defined clearly ya know.
http://www.sunethics.com/LE-UPL.htm
One could make the assumption that by a lawyer being a member of a forum community that they have and do represent (or are at least affiliated with) the site. Most sites will disclaim this relationship away in their Terms and Conditions of Use... however, I am sure it could be argued none the less.
This whole UPL issue has me confused to hell. How can someone be accused of breaking a law that is not defined clearly ya know.
Did these laws come from people sueing others for misinformation OR is it from attorneys not wanting this information to be given freely and so losing them money?
Patrick