₦airaland Forum

petlaz:
Thank you @ facelessbeing for this post.
The same moniker got his or her trv here but never comment or help in this forum.

I hate his attitude. As for me his post is meaningless.

@jnyuwa02 God bless you for your time and contributions in this forum.

It will surely end in praise for all of us.

To you it could be meaningless. My observation were raised and it remained my submission and atleast to me, it had relevance to the contextual issue.

facelessBeing:
Hi jnyuwa02, I have to equally create my own account to respond this moniker that came out of his shell to shade you. cc:ISK9

@jnyuwa02, I have been a fan of your posts and every good posts on this thread because I was once a guru on this very thread and contributed within some periods. It is amazing that this moniker who quoted your post ''carry your matter for mind tey tey''. and it is equally stunning that his response generated 33 likes +.. It signals something to me about the followers of this thread.

I like you in one aspect @jnyuwa02, because you tell most people the blunt truth here while some don't want to hear such truths.In the past years I have waited to see the testimony of those who I told the truth that I don't see the likelihood of commencing their TRV application with PGD or partially unrelated programs as their complex case/profile appeared to me while some on this same thread will tell them to paint a good SOP bla bla.. I guess those people were refused cos if they weren't, the joy of approval would make them come on the this thread to show their selves and prove me wrong equally but I never saw their comments.

@jnyuwa02 contributes meaningfully to this thread and it is left for whoever as the recipient to sieve from his posts and from others too and do as he/she wishes because at the end na still thank-you you/una go tell am without giving him a dime for an effort he made towards your application(s).. @ISK9 why didn't you come out to contribute too since he seems combative to you?. I hate people like you, and if you are amidst the persons that hit the like buttons on his post, I guess you all should follow him to put you through your applications. @jnyuwa02, you would be surprised that this fellows here who hit the like button in support of his post will still PM you to proof read their SOPs, quote you for help or PM you for one help or the other.. people are 2FACED!!!!

I can see you've got some time. Responding and reading posts of this composition would tell an intelligent mind that the poster will NEVER see the perspective and message no matter how it is presented. I simply will take your post from that stance point.

Telling the truth is not as important as how and when you tell it. Actually, in a forum as this where there is collective knowledge, ideas and contribution, there are ways as to how you share your opinions, contributions and facts! And just as @Justwise mentioned, people are making life changing decisions through this platform.

Mind you, this has nothing to do with me and also nothing to do with who "likes" and who are 2 faced. It doesn't even matter. Anybody can do that. Using the number of likes to base your inference only affirms the sentiments placed by you ahead of the reality of the post in itself. Anybody can be drawn to something that may not necessarily reflect their total take about it. One of the points or that i also confirmed the fact that one year funds are required as informed by CIC could have led to an agreement or what ever you have tagged it and not the subject. You obviously didn't see it from that purview.

Also, you FAIL to understand in part the essence of my post which largely buttress the idea of accomodating others contributions and the issue of funds for a year which even brought the whole tension. While you are also here to respond to me based on your perceptions of my post or your regards for @jynuwa02, it still hasn't short changed the attitude he frequently exhibit while making meaningful and sometimes not so accurate information. It has noting to do with whatever truth you have referred to. People intuitively read information and match them with what would work for them. Facts as informed by CIC are the end points and it is also important it is established as opinions are shared. I'd rather see @jynuwa02 as a nairaland member than combative to me. I hardly and barely know him nor have i had delibrations or arguments with him. To even say i have carried him in mind "tey tey" is not even placeable. So this part is non-inclusive same as "hating". It only does more harm to you than the "me" you have expressed. I'd admonish you to make objective points than sentimental ones when you have to respond. The internet always have a way to show you your level of intelligence and maturity even in future times. Avail information to it that would show progress in your interactions and how significant it would be.

Why i haven't contributed here since? Your guess would be as good as mine.

My points raised remained relevant as at when it was, hardly would i even use it to ferment rancor here. If you have seen it from this light, rather unfortunate.

By the way, you should redefine the term "guru" that you have claimed. Your post is not suggestive of one that can sustain dept in both knowledge and how translatable it should be.

@jnyuwa02, is still valuable to folks here irrespective of what i said, say or think. Infact, quite actually. The aim of the thread should not be defeated which is to share relevant, precise and factual information in a collective manner with respect to others and with reciprocity as well. You should ensure these too having been a "guru" in your own right.

I greet you.

thesoj:
I'm afraid I have to agree with the poster above. Stating your position authoritatively without being open to being challenged is very bad for the thread, and doesn't help future readers whatsoever. And this defeats the purpose of the thread, and causes unnecessary confusion to readers.

My points were also geared to the healthy interactive nature of this thread we all should foster. Being open for challenge is how one persive the points raised. The fact of my post still elucidate the attitude in driving this course which brings us to the same thing.

Everybody should have their opinion, agreements and disagreements while also ensuring the facts of the matter is explained as published by CIC. Personality difference is what we must also curtail to ensure everybody is a beneficiary of the information given or that whoever took time to contribute in one way or the other are valuable.

You are one person i have learnt from and i have never seen or read conflicting statements or post on attacks on people with contrary view to yours or even you trying to make another post less relevant. That's because you understand that this is a public forum and there should be manners of indulgence.

@jnyuwa02, most times, doesn't get things in this proportion. It's mostly about his opinion that fits the situation. If there is a contrary view, there is an attack. This is also not healthy for readers and any other person. We all must respect each other and apply the best possibly way in disagreements to depict we do.

jnyuwa02:
If they want you to fill out only one year, they will ask you to do so. They are law makers or enjoy some knowledge in the law and know how to be specific if they meant so. The question does not ask for one year, it ask for your stay. Why should you assume it is a year they asking for? The school forms filled on an IRCC forms do not fill out for one year. At least mine didn't. They fill for the entire studies. You will be wise to take cues and fill for entire studies. VOs enjoy such discretion to analyze for the entire studies and deny if you can't meet entire studies. It actually makes sense to analyze for entire studies. So going by your analysis, if a VO analyzes for only one year and applicant meets that, the rest of the other years, where do the funds come from? Does an applicant get a pass in demonstrating financial ability for prospective years of study after the first? Certainly not. The entire years of study is what is consonant to the retirements of the law that foreign student show financial ability for their studies.

Ps: the guideline you attached does not purport to say that is how to answer the question in contention by filling one year into the columns for the questions asked. It only says proof of one year is what is required, but VOs must assess for entire studies.

Hi jnyuwa02,

Actually this is my first post on this forum. As a matter of fact, i had to sign up so i can address you and your related post. Having followed this thread silently for over a year now, i must say it is one of the most insightful and informative so far.
I used most information gotten from here to process my study permit application which was approved on the first attempt. I have learnt from past elders in this house and i'm still learning from the current knowledgeable people here too because i also want to guide my siblings to pursue their study here in Canada.

Now to the issue, i have watched and read most of your comments filled with so much ambuiguity, aggressiveness, pride and very unwelcoming attitude towards everybody that have a contrary view and opinion about anything your post here. One thing you must learn to understand is that this is a forum and in as much as you 'think' you are knowledgeable or intelligent on a wide variety of issues, the bulk doesn't and won't stop at your table. Reading most of your post, i notice you only want anything you suggest or say to either stand out or be acceptable as the right thing probably because you use grammars or your well carved words project sense in the things you post.

You must learn to be humble, interact with people that have little or similar or more knowledge or idea than you. You flip a lot once someone challenges your post and this is simply because you see a contrary opinion in a competitive manner rather than in an interactive way. Nobody here is a VO or an immigration expert, if all you claim you know about laws, immigration and all were really what they are, you wouldn't be here in the first place. You would use those knowledge to build an independent empire for yourself in one way or the other and not here arguing and arguing. Real intelligent people don't argue a lot, the pick things from people's opinion and make the most of them either by studying more or using a better strategy.

I have followed @Austinpee4 very well all through the period i was preparing for my application and one thing i can tell about him is facts! He just has a way to give you facts than mere sentiments or assumed knowledge. Even in this still, he will advise that people go on the appropraite website to cross-check information put across. Even with the event of today, he still didn't disappoint. He attached a screen shot of the facts and even part of the screen shot was the same thing you started dragging. Do you even get tired

While filling my form, i filled funds for one year and the statements of accounts showed funds for one year. Deep into the processing of my application, CIC requested that i pay my tuition and show evidence of living expenses for a year because of the forex control policies at the time and not for two years like you have been struggling to prove today. I have lots of friends here in Canada who all filled funds for a year. Some didn't even have the funds but were able to show this using their sponsors. The required funds is for a year! If any applicant choose to show an exceeding amount to cover for the entire program, good! But it doesn't change the provisions of the ACT of CIC that requires funds for a year. They can't give conflicting statements either on their forms or the website as you noted.

Only in a case of a self sponsored applicant that this may apply if he or she does not have any source or sources of generating further income while studying in Canada. If your look carefully at the screenshot, the later part of it mention that the student must also show that there will be a possibility of generating funds for subsequent years. Then what are you even saying? If an applicant has a sponsor that is working and can earn enough to support the sponsored, i don't see how this would mean showing the entire funds. Why then is there a need for a sponsor when you have shown funds for your entire program.

Dude, you don't have to be combative to understand things neither do you need to lie to yourself when you do not have information about something. Own up to it, learn and improve on how you relate with people. This is one sure avenue for you to improve on yourself and as far as i'm concerned, your attitude towards your post are more important than what you are even writing sef. It's either you are reminding us on how long you have lived in the US or how you understand the Canadian system and laws but then it is not reflective in your post. I have a lot of respect for you but most times, i can't seem to understand why it is difficult for you to relate with people that have better understanding than yourself in an issue. Nobody knows it all. You have learnt a lot here since you joined and shows you have made progress in your knowledge.

Accomodate people's opinion and ideas, learn how to respond with some sense of agreement or disagreement. Keep your personal experience to yourself, majority of us are not interested. If you have a suggestion to make, give an accurate one and allow people make their decision. Most importantly, avoid resentful comments, it's just appalling each time you do. You are smart, yes. Allow this also to show in how you relate in the forum. It is a forum afteral and not a house of competition.

Have a good day sir.