Here's another language-interpretation issue. The Los Angeles Thai Consulate's website finally now has a live link and posted requirements for the Non-O visa. I've been advised by many people to enter on either a 6-day tourist visa or visa exempt, then apply for the Non-O once I'm in Thailand, later applying for the one-year extension based on retirement.

Here's the thing though—the number 3 item in the Non-O requirements on thaiconsulatela.org states:

3. Having the nationality of or residence in the country where applicant’s application is submitted.

This is confusing... if I go with the path to Non-O retirement that has been recommended to me, I'm going to be submitting the application in Thailand, but I'm American. Is that going to be a problem? Or does the "residence in" language simply mean that if I can show a rental agreement for a place I'm living in, for these purposes I would have "residence in" Thailand? Usually when the word "residence" or "resident" is used in an immigration law or policy context, it refers to legal permanent residency, so I just want to clarify this point. Thanks.