I believe that HCI research is for women. The men in the HCI research are only contributing garbage. This is not bad. Women are generally more aesthetic than (straight) men. It is hardly surprising that they will produce tidier UIs for a better user experience. Women should be better than men for Human Form Interaction (HFI) research. HFI focuses on creating better forms that everyone has to fill up (tax forms, visa forms, etc).
The Canadian visa form has a big design error. The end of a visa form typically has these meaningless questions - do you have guns, are you a felon, do you want to terrorize the people in the country etc. As if a felon would admit that he is a felon. Anyways, the Canadian form had that. But, hidden between these questions, like a booby trap, was another question - Have you ever applied for a visa in Canada. An unsuspecting user, who have applied for a Canadian visa before, would go ahead and answer all the questions in the negative because
it is wrapped (and hidden) between all these questions demanding a positive answer. I was that unsuspecting user. As a result my visa application got refused.
I blame the guy who designed the visa form. A lady designing the form would have been cleaner and less confusing. Paul once told a guy in the HCI group at UIUC that he is working in a discipline fit for women. That guy left before finishing his Ph.D. Great job Paul, because you have saved us from another guy producing bad HCI stuff.
My passport clearly showed that I have been to Canada before. The visa officials could have ignored my mistake. They did not do so, because they thought that my "lack of truth" would mean that I might be lying about my intention, and I would not return from Canada. I provided solid evidences showing my ties in the US, but those were not convincing enough.
I blame Canada, because they still believe that someone with a life in the US would want to go to Canada. They are living in a foolish reality.
Note. HFI is a fake acronym.
Note2. That guy in the HCI group did not leave because of Paul's comment. I exaggerated it for dramatic purposes.