I always understood the AF cutoffs were because of the high number of selectees from these countries, to prevent a nepal type scenario happening.
And I'm not sure if i misunderstand your comments about Iran, but the year before last they did hit the country limit before year end. Not sure about previous years as I wasn't following.
And I would also not really agree with your point about not caring about being "fair" to the rest of Asia considering the entire motivation behind the DV lottery in the first place....
Not a problem, I enjoy a different opinion from you, britsimon and others.
Let me also point out my view is
just a wild guess based on what we know (the cut off numbers, beyond that, it's all speculation)
Now, let's take a moment to examine some points:
Predictability of issue rate: I suspect the predictability of Nepal and Iran is not as clear as Egypt and Ethiopia.
As you have mentioned, the special cut off treatment is different between AS and AF countries with high number of entrants and selectees. If they are seen similarly, the special cut off would have been the same.
Like you said, the AF cutoffs were because of high number of selectees. However, let's consider why only Egypt and Ethiopia (and Nigeria in previous year have special cut off) while other countries such as Cameroon, Liberia and DR Congo don't.
Known number of 2015 selectees are as follow:
Egypt 4988
Ethiopia 4988
Cameroon 5000
Liberia 5000
DR Congo 4943
My guess is that the predictability of issue/AP/denial dictates the different treatment. We can further deduce that Egypt and Ethiopia need a special cut off to get the "spread" through out the year while the others are just fine to run their own course.
Ratio: Let's also consider the ratio of selectees: each of these countries with close to 5000 selectees (3500 max winners) are positioned to take up to 15.7% of total AF visa issued
approximately . That is, without knowing the density of each country, the 5000 selectees (3500 max winners) can take up to 15.7 of the 20K visa issued to AF (AF issued is 22364 for 2014, another credit to Rafikbo76 and Britsimon for running the extract).
Density: That's another part we don't know for sure, we can see AF number and assume the bulk of these selectees will make up the bulk of local post interviews (each national going to be interviews at each respective post).With that said, we can take another guess that Egypt and Ethiopia have a much higher density up to and beyond the final cut off, hence the special cut off.
Conclusion for AF: Let me say it again, my guess is just what it is, a wild guess based on what I see. A mere reversed engineered thought about is known as fact. The guess itself is
not fact, just a guess.
With everything being equal (predictability, ratio and density), all 5 countries would have special cut off, but only 2 does. It leads me to believe the other 3 countries are different in 1 or more (any combination of the 3) reasons I have mentioned. I am also glad to accept other factors such as britsimon's what have worked in previous years.
For Asia: Let's consider the 3 factors that came to my mind.
Predictability of issue rate: Back to SusieQQQ's point about Iran regarding them hitting the limit in year 2013 and before. My guess to that is the AP process has changed for them. Considering what's been going on in that part of the world in DoS's view, I can speculate the AP clearing rate are lower as they are now more time consuming. Therefore a special cut off is not required since the 3 posts are more than capable seeing all the selectees under normal cut off without hitting the visa limit due to AP not cleared.
Ratio: Nepal and Iran are the countries with the higher number of selectees.
Nepal 4991
Iran 4992
Cambodia 2079
Both countries are positioned to take 43.02% of visas (3500 max / 8136 visa issued in 2014). This percentage is far more than 15.7% for the big AF countries.Following this logic, one would think they should have special cut off "right off the bet" to be "fair". This leads me to believe there must be some other factors (such as predictability and density) in play for the special cut off to come on very late in the year.
Density: Nepal and Iran make up 40+% each (80% total) of the initial 10000 CN. I am guessing this is the main reason of the late special cut off.
In DoS's view (again my guess only), it is fair to give more visa to Nepal and Iran since more people got randomly selected due to the amount of applications received from them.
It means the "fair" is applied in selection, and not necessarily the rank order after selection. I haven't been able to find any law or regulation to apply the randomness or fairness to each counties other than the 3500(7%) per countries limit.
Conclusion for AS: You should know by now
, it's only a guess. The late special cut off for AS has very different reason than AF. In DoS's view, putting special cut off for Nepal and Iran will give them the disadvantage. The "fair" portion of the lottery happens primarily in selection, and another safety catch for 3500 visa limit. Obviously, this is compounded by Nepal being the highest country with success rate at 90+%.
Am not debating whether this practice is fair or not, just pointing out the possibility which may be (part of) the reasoning of DoS. With a mid-high CN as AS10xxx, a special cut off would be favorable to me
(I am from rest of Asia, not Nepal or Iran).
My intention to write here is to learn from all of you and hopefully we all learn from each other in the process. Special shout out to KingKong and Macanese who reached out to me, really appreciate it
.
I hope this will clear up some of the misunderstanding/question from SusieQQQ and others. I always
welcome another school of thought from anyone.
