Sloner axiom or Britsimon theory.... which due you think will be right at last.....

[rocky72]

=raevsky;2679817]So I would think they estimate that type of recent technological advances and that is why increase for Africa is lower than for other regions

wait ,
if we agree that they used 2012 visa issuance statistic to predict number of winners for 2014 blindly , then they should do the same for African quota .
or - if KCC was able to understand that shortage of visa issuance was caused by redraw(and low and high , technological advances ) they wouldn't take this wrong statistic's at all .
If they took this statistic just because it was recent one which was ready , that means they were careless with its nuances , and same, they should did with africa with its nuances of "low technological advances

 

[raevsky]

She may ask about how many visa will AS get this year and what is the highest CN that may have an interview.

All I could say is that Iran and Nepal both are going to be exhausted between CN 10000 and 12000. Situation with the rest of Asia is difficult to predict. If Asian quota decreases from 9800 to 8800, it will be exhausted at about the same level as Iran and Nepal - all 3 at about 11000. If Asian quota is the same as now, the max CN will be about 17K, and if Asian quota is increased to 10800, max CN could go as high as 22600.
From what I know (Guatemala included, that is the only change since 2013) I could predict increase of quota for SA and simultaneous decrease of quota for AS by the same amount (the same as SA increases). That amount will not be large, maybe several hundred at most. So my most likely bet would be Asian max CN between 14K and 18K (except Iran and Nepal who will exhaust their per country quota earlier than that). But it could go as low as 11000 and as high as 22600, especially depending on NACARA. About 1000 visas out of 5000 for NACARA could go to Asia, and each additional 1000 for Asia would mean 6000 increase in CNs

 

[rocky72]

So you are proving that it is NOT calculated by region - correct? If so - I agree.

i'm not proving anything, this is just statistic ...
and if they blindly increased number of winners - why they switch on their brains when figured out number of selecties by regions.

 

[Britsimon]

i'm not proving anything, this is just statistic ...
and if they blindly increased number of winners - why they switch on their brains when figured out number of selecties by regions.

I don't think these things are controlled by their brains. There are procedures, formulas, laws and rules that control all this. I don't think there is a small group of people making smart decisions - because this is a regulated, bureaucratic process, not a democratically controlled one.

 

[raevsky]

wait ,
if we agree that they used 2012 visa issuance statistic to predict number of winners for 2014 blindly , then they should do the same for African quota .
or - if KCC was able to understand that shortage of visa issuance was caused by redraw(and low and high , technological advances ) they wouldn't take this wrong statistic's at all .
If they took this statistic just because it was recent one which was ready , that means they were careless with its nuances , and same, they should did with africa with its nuances of "low technological advances

I disagree with both reasons why they use 2012 statistics. I think the reason why they use it is because they are afraid of another lawsuit on whatever reason. However, they estimate how many people would not be able to apply NOW if the situation of 2012 repeated.

 

[rocky72]

i know your opinion more or less .. from govorimpro.
but "situation of 2012" means new replay(redraw) , right ?
so ONLY in case of NEW(2ND) redraw they should been take more winners to cover shortage of visa issuance...
...which. caused by ,as you said "low and high technological advances" in my words "many people won't check their application 2nd time and it will cause of low percent of sent forms to KCC"

Normally , for DV2014 they should been take usual 100-105K winners , then in case of new redraw for any reason, they should been add more 40% to avoid 2012stats.
why they increased number of winners from the beginning?

 

[Kayend]

All I could say is that Iran and Nepal both are going to be exhausted between CN 10000 and 12000. Situation with the rest of Asia is difficult to predict. If Asian quota decreases from 9800 to 8800, it will be exhausted at about the same level as Iran and Nepal - all 3 at about 11000. If Asian quota is the same as now, the max CN will be about 17K, and if Asian quota is increased to 10800, max CN could go as high as 22600.
From what I know (Guatemala included, that is the only change since 2013) I could predict increase of quota for SA and simultaneous decrease of quota for AS by the same amount (the same as SA increases). That amount will not be large, maybe several hundred at most. So my most likely bet would be Asian max CN between 14K and 18K (except Iran and Nepal who will exhaust their per country quota earlier than that). But it could go as low as 11000 and as high as 22600, especially depending on NACARA. About 1000 visas out of 5000 for NACARA could go to Asia, and each additional 1000 for Asia would mean 6000 increase in CNs

Why you think with inclusion of Guatemala in DV14, Asia quota has to decrease by 600+? Why only Asia have to decrease and why by 600+ when Guatemala only have 225 selectees? Moreover, in DV13, Asia issued 9.4k+ and yet the regional quota still not exhausted. Generally, I think your calculation is right but not the quota decreasing part.

 

[rocky72]

i think we still know just 2 possible reason for winners increase
1)they used 2012 stats blindly - but there are questions about regions quotas
2)new software , as Sloner says -
but this is just words , empty words , and past months of visa issuance didn't prove a bit of that theory

 

[raevsky]

i know your opinion more or less .. from govorimpro.
but "situation of 2012" means new replay(redraw) , right ?
so ONLY in case of NEW(2ND) redraw they should been take more winners to cover shortage of visa issuance...
...which. caused by ,as you said "low and high technological advances" in my words "many people won't check their application 2nd time and it will cause of low percent of sent forms to KCC"

Normally , for DV2014 they should been take usual 100-105K winners , then in case of new redraw for any reason, they should been add more 40% to avoid 2012stats.
why they increased number of winners from the beginning?

No, you understand my point incorrectly. Not only in case of redraw. In case they need to return to original draw as well. For instance, the court decides to return original draw back, and to abandon redraw. That is why they need more numbers in the beginning. Because in that case a lot of people would not know about that fact that the results are reinstated back.
By the way, you should know those details from govorimpro - I wrote there about them.

 

[raevsky]

i think we still know just 2 possible reason for winners increase
1)they used 2012 stats blindly - but there are questions about regions quotas
2)new software , as Sloner says -
but this is just words , empty words , and past months of visa issuance didn't prove a bit of that theory

No, know more than two.

 

[raevsky]

Why you think with inclusion of Guatemala in DV14, Asia quota has to decrease by 600+? Why only Asia have to decrease and why by 600+ when Guatemala only have 225 selectees? Moreover, in DV13, Asia issued 9.4k+ and yet the regional quota still not exhausted. Generally, I think your calculation is right but not the quota decreasing part.

Regions are separated into two categories - underrepresented regions and overrepresented regions. I am elaborating about the DOS formula for quota. According to the formula, underrepresented regions are OC, EU and AF. Overrepresented regions are NA, AS and SA. Changes in participation of countries only cause changes in quotas in the same category. So, Guatemala inclusion could only change quotas for AS, SA and NA. Quotas for EU, AF and OC are intact.
Inclusion of Guatemala, according to the formula, increases SA quota. Because NA has only a dozen of winners, we could safely assume that AS quota will be decrease exactly the same number of winners SA in increased.
The formula is not straightforward, however, and I cannot be sure that SA quota is increased exactly to the number of Guatemala winners. It could be more or less. However, it is possible that we are talking about only 200 increase in SA or so, and, correspondingly, 200 or so decrease in AS. If that is only 200, it would be only 1200 decrease in CN from 16.7K figure (that corresponds to 9800 quota for AS, without changes in NACARA). I was talking about a few hundred, that could mean 300-400 winners, at most. 200 is even less.

 

[rocky72]

No, you understand my point incorrectly. Not only in case of redraw. In case they need to return to original draw as well. For instance, the court decides to return original draw back, and to abandon redraw. That is why they need more numbers in the beginning. Because in that case a lot of people would not know about that fact that the results are reinstated back.

in case if court decides to return original draw back ... and abandon new draw?
thats why they need more winners from the beginning?
don't you think it is too complicated ???

Lets figure out that situation in details
a) they selected 140K winners in 1st game

b)1st game canceled -and if even 2/3 of applicants checked their status before cancellation it gives to KCC about 90-100K winners (almost like in normal year) ,

c)2nd game drawn (how many selecties they should choose now ? )

d)the court decides to return to results to 1st game and cancel the 2nd game.

e) KCC have enough wnners from 1st game to fill global quota of visas!

am i right now ? this is what you mean ?

 

[raevsky]

Yes, exactly, I am talking about e
It does not seem too complicated for me though.

 

[Kayend]

Regions are separated into two categories - underrepresented regions and overrepresented regions. I am elaborating about the DOS formula for quota. According to the formula, underrepresented regions are OC, EU and AF. Overrepresented regions are NA, AS and SA. Changes in participation of countries only cause changes in quotas in the same category. So, Guatemala inclusion could only change quotas for AS, SA and NA. Quotas for EU, AF and OC are intact.
Inclusion of Guatemala, according to the formula, increases SA quota. Because NA has only a dozen of winners, we could safely assume that AS quota will be decrease exactly the same number of winners SA in increased.
The formula is not straightforward, however, and I cannot be sure that SA quota is increased exactly to the number of Guatemala winners. It could be more or less. However, it is possible that we are talking about only 200 increase in SA or so, and, correspondingly, 200 or so decrease in AS. If that is only 200, it would be only 1200 decrease in CN from 16.7K figure (that corresponds to 9800 quota for AS, without changes in NACARA). I was talking about a few hundred, that could mean 300-400 winners, at most. 200 is even less.

Let assume Guatemala need 200 visas and it get from Asia, so worst case the quota will be 9.3k. So we can safely assume Asia quota should be 9.3k at the minimum because we don't know what is the exact Asia quota from DV13. All we know is that Asia can go higher than 9.5k in DV13 if not because of Iran country limit reached.

 

[raevsky]

2nd game drawn (how many selecties they should choose now ? )

That is an interesting question. They still need much more, because a lot of winners of the second draw would not know about the second draw.

 

[Britsimon]

I disagree with both reasons why they use 2012 statistics. I think the reason why they use it is because they are afraid of another lawsuit on whatever reason. However, they estimate how many people would not be able to apply NOW if the situation of 2012 repeated.

in case if court decides to return original draw back ... and abandon new draw?
thats why they need more winners from the beginning?
don't you think it is too complicated ???

Lets figure out that situation in details
a) they selected 140K winners in 1st game

b)1st game canceled -and if even 2/3 of applicants checked their status before cancellation it gives to KCC about 90-100K winners (almost like in normal year) ,

c)2nd game drawn (how many selecties they should choose now ? )

d)the court decides to return to results to 1st game and cancel the 2nd game.

e) KCC have enough wnners from 1st game to fill global quota of visas!

am i right now ? this is what you mean ?

Yes, exactly, I am talking about e
It does not seem too complicated for me though.

Thanks for explaining that both of you - but I have to say that just seems too far fetched to be possible.

The draw does not concern just the top 140k people - it concerns all 7 million entrants. In 2012, they could not possible have used any part of the draw that was made because the software glitch gave rank order preference to people who registered in the first few days of the registration period. They would have had to renumber all the entries.

So, if a similar thing happened again, they couldn't let some of the 140k entries go through and some not - they would have had to start again from scratch. Of course - that would only have been possible before the year started - once the year has started and visas are being handed out based on that selection - we are in a different ballgame.

 

[raevsky]

Let assume Guatemala need 200 visas and it get from Asia, so worst case the quota will be 9.3k. So we can safely assume Asia quota should be 9.3k at the minimum because we don't know what is the exact Asia quota from DV13. All we know is that Asia can go higher than 9.5k in DV13 if not because of Iran country limit reached.

In DV-13 quota was 9.8K. I do not have any doubts Nepal and Iran will use 3500 or so visas each, maybe even more. Also, do not forget only 51000 issues were issued, but there is some evidence NACARA did not use the rest 4000, and 2000 to 4000 could be still issued. Out of those about 20% could be used for Asia, that is 400 to 800. So, we have 9.8K maybe minus 200-400 visas (because of Guatemala) and maybe plus 400 to 800 visas (because of NACARA). So, the quota will be 9.4K though 10.6K. 9400 will lead to about 14300 max CN for the rest of AS, while 10600 will lead to 21400 max CN for the rest of AS.

 

[rocky72]

That is an interesting question. They still need much more, because a lot of winners of the second draw would not know about the second draw.

ok, how many winners knew about their win in dv2012 we think? give us pls this info if it exists?

 

[raevsky]

Thanks for explaining that both of you - but I have to say that just seems too far fetched to be possible.

The draw does not concern just the top 140k people - it concerns all 7 million entrants. In 2012, they could not possible have used any part of the draw that was made because the software glitch gave rank order preference to people who registered in the first few days of the registration period. They would have had to renumber all the entries.

So, if a similar thing happened again, they couldn't let some of the 140k entries go through and some not - they would have had to start again from scratch. Of course - that would only have been possible before the year started - once the year has started and visas are being handed out based on that selection - we are in a different ballgame.

I believe the court could reverse the draw even after the fiscal year started. For instance, 2012 appeal was completed by July 2012, what was already at the end of 2012 fiscal year. The decision could reverse the pool of winners, if course, if the court could find it right. The appeal started at the very end of fiscal 2011.

But I am talking about lawsuit on any possible reason, not necessarily because of randomness

 

[dvbibasd]

Rest of AS means??