Returned from China Smooth process and wasn’t asked a single question. Don’t trust Anonymous members they spread rumours
1,669
views
22
likes
54
all likes
19
replies
0
images
6
users
TLDR : Answer Summary
A member shared their personal experience returning to Thailand from China, noting a smooth entry process without any questions. This prompted a discussion about the reliability of anonymous members' posts, the importance of understanding one's rights as a visa holder, and insights into the DTV visa process. Others chimed in, reinforcing that as long as visa holders respect their 180-day duration of stay, they typically face few, if any, problems with immigration, providing tips on travel frequency to enhance their standing with immigration officials.
Hardly anyone on a DTV faces any issues coming and going. As long as you don't overstay your 6 month (180 day) stamp or if you've extended it, your extension, which gives you an additional 180 days, then you're fine.
While not required, it does look better to immigration if you're coming and going regularly, let's say, spending 1 or 2 months in the country leaving for 3 or 5 days, coming back for 2 weeks, leaving against for a week, coming for 4 months then departing for 3 weeks that sort of thing, rather than spending 180 days, doing a same day land or air border run and then returning.
However, I have generally not heard of anyone facing trouble for doing that on a DTV just that it's best not to do it more than once. Look like someone who has a reason to travel, on business or for pleasure (or both) and immigration will just wave you through.
Waqar’s information is that despite previous posts to the contrary, there was no interrogation and/or request to provide sight of the documents he submitted for his application.
Who suggested that everybody should be questioned? If Waqar’s post is meaningless then the value of anonymous posts about immigration officers checking the documents used for the DTV application are total troll drivel. Each consulate has different rules. How could an IO tell if a DTV had been correctly issued?
You suggested this...you said Wagars post proved not everybody is checked: "Waqar’s information is that despite previous posts to the contrary, there was no interrogation and/or request to provide sight of the documents he submitted for his application." The anonymous posts contain a lot more information, but it is not what you experienced and what you want to hear, so you have to defame it. And now you try to get consulates with different rules connected to IO, and argue IO cannot check visa requirements. We are not talking here about how consulates work, but how IO checks. IO not checks if consulate issued correct, IO checks if visa holder compleet to visa requirements. But I guess you don't want to hear that and certainly do not understand that because it is to complicated for you.
Waqar ******
ORIGINAL POSTER
Ignore bro they are bunch of jokers who know nothing about DTV and they promote just rumours
You are the leader of that brunch, or only a small joker?
Reply to
Luit *****************
Reply
Anonymous ******************
What's the point you're trying to make exactly? Are you trying to say that your visa guarantees an entry? Or that you'll never get questions? Well, instead of talking about anonymous posters, you may start getting educated about your real rights as a visa holder and check what's the MFA website has to say about it...
What makes your contribution more valuable than a contribution from an anonymous member?
Personally I think the downsite of anonymous posters is that they are confusing because only a number distinguishes one from another, but that is no reason at all to say they should not be trusted without any good reason why they should not be trusted.
Maybe we also should not trusting members anymore who accuse anonymous posters of all kind untruths...
This group allows posters to post anonymous, so we should accept that and treat them just as anybody else.
Anonymous = Troll Heaven. Genuine posters advising others of their own recent experiences (not theories, beliefs and opinions) never need to hide behind anonymity.
Luit *****************
I agree that anonymous makes trolling easier, but since it is accepted here we should not discriminate. A lot of not anonymous posters also have profiles that don't show anyything, so what is the difference?
And I mostly see this discrimination where posters tell their experiences.
When somebody has different experiences than you have that is no reason not to believe the experience is true.
Why should sharing an experience be trolling? And I can think of a lot of reasons why people sharing experiences might do this anonymous.
Posting anonymous does not mean you have something to hide, and for the information about the experience the name of the poster is irrelevant.
Posting theories beliefs and opinions anonymous also don't need anonymity, so why treat them different?
I don't agree with that, in a lot of situations people telling the truth just need anonimity, that has nothing at all to do with hiding something.
Personally I am in favour that anonymous posts are not allowed in this group, but that is not up to me to decide.
It is allowed, so anonymous posters do nothing wrong, and should be treated equal to others.
And when I look in this group, there is a number of people who treat only a certain group of anonymous posters that tell about their experiences als liars, fearmongerers, trolling and so on, and do not critisize all the other anonymous posters.
That just is unfair and discriminiation. Simple as that.
Because we read all the posts. Helpful and constructive ones are great. The ones calculated to create unease and uncertainty e.g. ‘Had a grilling trying to get back into Thailand, immigration asked for……..’ and never offering any advice are almost certainly troll posts.
So you are cherrypicking, the posts that have a content thats is your opinion or complies with your conspiricy theory are OK, and when somebody has a different experience it is a liar, or creating uneasy and uncertainty in your opinion, it is trolling.
Those posts you call creating unease and uncertainty and not offering advice, just show not everything is as you expect it and like it, and therefore are valuable. Other people can take those events into account and decide if they have influence on what they do.
So they are just as constructive as the post you call constructive.
Personally I do not see all confirmations of the most common situation as constructive, because is is telling nothing new.