DV 2018 OC Selectees
- Thread starter dilemma87
- Start date
-
- Tags
- dv 2018 dv-2018 oc selectees
why is that a 'Gulp'?
SusieQQQ
Well-Known Member
Sm1smom
Super Moderator
Wingpin
Active Member
@Britsimon REALLY?? That is bonkers. They've gone in the other extreme this year then. Maybe they've had intel that many people won't be following through with the entire process
SusieQQQ
Well-Known Member
They do actually seem to go to extremes every other year. It's like they have some kind of forecasting program that takes previous year's data and then overcompensates, but with a lag because of the overlap of one fiscal year's ongoing progress with the next year having already been selected. So almost leads to two years feast followed by two years famine and back again.
It may have been discussed somewhere on this forum but could you share a little about the impact of high selectee numbers? or even a link to explore?
SusieQQQ
Well-Known Member
found some info on @Britsimon website. Thanks
Britsimon
Super Moderator
DV2015 had 3500 OC selectees and the highest case number was 23XX. So - we are probably north of 3500 selectees - WAY too high to get current. The cutoff in DV2014 (also over selected) was 1450 and DV2015 was 1490.
Cases about 1400 and above have reason to be nervous.
Unless density is changed or some "big" factor changes the selectee/approval rate, the OC region is pretty predictable.
Lower than usual responses (anti Trump sentiment?) would increase the cutoff.
Higher than usual refusals (DV2017 re-used photos?) would increase the cutoff.
Cases about 1400 and above have reason to be nervous.
Unless density is changed or some "big" factor changes the selectee/approval rate, the OC region is pretty predictable.
Lower than usual responses (anti Trump sentiment?) would increase the cutoff.
Higher than usual refusals (DV2017 re-used photos?) would increase the cutoff.
scepticpsych
New Member
Just signed up to have a whinge. CN22xx here. It seems like the lottery is really a two-fold process. Getting selected in the first place, then a second lottery of your CN giving you a range of visa to be: guaranteed -> likely -> unlikely -> impossible.
I'm putting myself firmly in the impossible category for now. I really wish they would develop a fairer system like randomising or by application received.
SusieQQQ
Well-Known Member
It has been randomized already. That's as "fair" as they can be.
Only OC has been overselected,...or other regions too? For AF, until now the highest CN seen on this forum is 50XXX,..which is pretty "standard" for the region,...considering in 2014/2015 there were many AF posters by this time reporting case numbers in the 60/70/80.XXX range.
Also, have you noticed if the number of people reporting their "win" on this board has increased or decreased (or is about the same) compared to 2014/2015 (only veterans can make an estimation)? If this year's level of activity is the same as normal years (2016/2017 for example),..it can give a clue of the "density" of the pool of "valid" selectees (maybe they DID invalidate entries with old photos),....and maybe OC members with a case number north of 14XX still have a chance.
Also, have you noticed if the number of people reporting their "win" on this board has increased or decreased (or is about the same) compared to 2014/2015 (only veterans can make an estimation)? If this year's level of activity is the same as normal years (2016/2017 for example),..it can give a clue of the "density" of the pool of "valid" selectees (maybe they DID invalidate entries with old photos),....and maybe OC members with a case number north of 14XX still have a chance.
Last edited:
SusieQQQ
Well-Known Member
In 2014 Nigeria was still eligible so the AF numbers were way higher, just like they were for Asia when Bangladesh was still eligible. If they overselect (or underselect) they do it across regions. There is a formula they follow for the visa allocations, they can't arbitrarily decide to favor one region over another.
SusieQQQ
Well-Known Member
Incidentally any priority given by application received (I presume you mean first to submit DS260) totally disadvantages those applicants in parts of the world where internet access is shoddy and where they may have to even travel to Internet cafes to submit. And no, internet access is not equal across regions either, so an AF winner in rural DRC would be hugely disadvantaged compared to someone in Johannesburg. Even before you take into account that the systems problems with accessing results mean some people find out they're winners a day or two before others. So it would be very far from a fair system. The randomization on selection that they already do is as fair as they can be.
But as a veteran,...how do you rate the level of activity on the forum compared to the same period in previous years? just to have a small idea about the density of the case numbers (altough it's impossible,...but it may give some clues).
SusieQQQ
Well-Known Member
It's hard to tell. The forum was very busy with Nigerians at one stage and clearly they're not around anymore. It was also very busy with Kenyans before, but the Kenyans seem to have some local thing going on that's taken the place of the forum. So you can't draw conclusions from that. And we've never had many non English speakers here so we are pretty clueless as to what's going in Eastern Europe (some countries there have a lot of selectees), francophone Africa, swathes of Asia, etc.
You're more than welcome of course to search and browse old threads and try gauge where they were by this stage of each relevant fiscal year, though I don't know that you can draw any firm conclusions. It's clear already they haven't disqualified duplicate 2017 photos before notification so that isn't an explanation.
Sm1smom
Super Moderator
The level of activity in the forum isn't necessarily a good indicator of the density of case numbers - not with indigenous groups being formed on WhatsApp and Facebook