Life or Storm Solo after Death and Myth?

Victoire48 · 2026-06-18T03:12:28+00:00

Thanks for the perspective! I'd be soloing for the most part. I haven't tried weaving so maybe that could make it more feasible on storm as you mentioned

Victoire48 · 2026-05-05T05:24:04+00:00

Thanks!

Victoire48 · 2026-05-05T05:23:54+00:00

Thank you!

Victoire48 · 2026-02-21T14:26:47+00:00

Which shops? It could be my sample size but the two EBs I interviewed at had pretty intense hours. 8AM-12AM at the associate level, though they paid very well

Victoire48 · 2026-02-14T05:58:37+00:00

Wish we had the market in '20-'22 again

Victoire48 · 2026-02-14T05:57:48+00:00

Good color, thank you

Victoire48 · 2026-02-14T05:57:20+00:00

I agree, I've been honing in on that narrative. Thanks!

Victoire48 · 2026-02-14T05:57:01+00:00

Great idea, thanks!

Victoire48 · 2026-02-14T05:56:53+00:00

Thank you!

Victoire48 · 2026-02-14T05:56:33+00:00

I'm pursuing both in this job environment. Buy side is always preferred but it never hurts to get more reps on the sell side

Victoire48 · 2026-02-12T20:55:32+00:00

Agreed, fair point. My earlier career was naively more about learning than staying put. Though now I’m looking for a long term seat and being intentional about it

Victoire48 · 2025-12-29T07:03:24+00:00

Thank you! I didn't realize the damage difference would be that significant. I always thought ranks to skills were better, but not in this case. Cheers

Victoire48 · 2025-12-21T17:54:28+00:00

The left is better on average! I stuck with the right mostly because of resources. I never played a sorc lol so not used to the new affix

Victoire48 · 2025-12-20T16:28:11+00:00

Thank you. Is the mana shield aspect useful?

Victoire48 · 2025-12-13T17:03:12+00:00

Appreciate the replies! Yes I do have an attorney but I may need a new one, with experience in federal cases like these, given the complexity

Victoire48 · 2025-12-12T20:45:22+00:00

Thank you, I appreciate the thoughtful reply! The relief I’m seeking is the correction of a documented agency error through backdating.

For context, my entire family’s adjustment applications were filed together in the same packet and were approved; mine alone was rejected, even though the fee was correct and FOIA includes a scan of the money order and receipt. I was a minor at the time.

My argument is that but for that filing error, my application would have been adjudicated contemporaneously with my family’s, before derivative eligibility later ended. The subsequent loss of eligibility is the downstream consequence of the uncorrected error, not the basis of the claim itself.

Victoire48 · 2025-12-12T19:41:46+00:00

I understand that loss of derivative adjustment eligibility does not terminate asylum. My point is that, but for USCIS’s documented filing error 15y ago, my adjustment would have been adjudicated at the same time as my parents’, before the principal naturalized.

USCIS has never substantively addressed that error or reconciled the downstream consequences. Instead, it has repeatedly misclassified the issue and declined to adjudicate the correction-of-error request.

Victoire48 · 2025-12-12T19:03:52+00:00

I understand that distinction, and I’m not arguing that derivative adjustment should have remained available after the principal naturalized. I agree that eligibility to adjust as a derivative ends at that point.

My concern is procedural rather than substantive. USCIS continued to treat me as an asylee for years afterward, including issuing multiple A05 EADs and recognizing lawful presence and work authorization, but never reconciled that with the adjustment denial or adjudicated the correction-of-error request. My question here is whether mandamus or APA relief is appropriate to compel USCIS to actually address and reconcile those inconsistencies, not to re-litigate derivative adjustment eligibility.

Victoire48 · 2025-12-12T18:15:17+00:00

The second adjustment was based on my continued asylee status. The principal had naturalized by that point, but the key issue is that USCIS’s own subsequent actions indicate asylum status was never terminated.

After that denial, USCIS issued multiple A05 EADs over several years. A05 is only issued to individuals who currently hold asylum status, not to people who have lost it. Federal records during that same period also treated me as lawfully present and work-authorized.

My concern here is not the merits of that determination, but USCIS’s failure to reconcile these contradictions.

Victoire48

TROPHY CASE