I still remember asking on this forum if i was gonna go current or not, 13,6xx. Some dude said my number is safe due to the Nigeria exclusion plus less selectees than last year (125k vs 140k), last year's final number was 13,350 so a 300 increase isn't too much to ask for, i was initially hopeful for an interview when the first 2 vbs came out, 2500 was way ahead of last year (1800) and then as months went by my hope is lost...
I wish I hadn't been selected for dv2015 at all.. I have already told all my friends and family I'm going to the state next year, what am i gonna say to them?
And all i can do is blame nepal kcc and iran. But some "members" here keep on insisiting that it's fair for one country to stand in the way of us with high cns
Sigj.. I hope the lightning strikes again and i get selected with a cn below 10k
I would rather not get selected at all than getting selected with a high cn, it becomes a mind burden. Feels like you're so close to achieving something
Your number was always in the risky range. Having more or less selectees would not make any difference to the cut off number. More selectees, would only have led to more disappointed people, not less chance of getting through. Nigeria would not have had much of an impact on Asia chances either. You can blame Nepal KCC and Iran, but the fact remains that if over 2 Million people from Iran and Nepal apply for the DV, and only 11,000 get selected, then obviously those selected will have the low numbers. The KCC only needs 5000 or so visas a month, and they don't care how that is distributed within the region. It's a lottery, so chance plays the biggest part.So if you are from any part of Asia, you are within the same region. And what's more, one can not rely on the progress of any one year, to determine this year's cut off, particularly since this year has had the major change of introducing DS260 form.
I have to agree with Martin, siliconeslinger.
I too wished to have a number below 10K but it didn't happen and what
can we do about it? Nothing.
What are
you going to do about it? You can make the best out of it or you can feel negative, the choice is yours to make, that you can control.
Regarding fair or not, I used to think similarly, but here what I've figured out.
Imagine we have 1000 cases in total the KCC will see 100 each month for 10 months.
Ok, so let's play "fair" shall we?
In each 100 cases, we have 33 Nepal, 33 Iran and 34 ROA (ok, you caught me, I want ROA to have 1 more since I am like you, from ROA as well), with me so far?
In this case we are "fair" right? (33 Nepal, 33 Iran and 34 ROA )
For easy explanation, each case got a visa shall we? That means in the 1st 100 cases, we have 33 visas for Nepal, 33 for Iran and 34 for ROA.
Ok, now's there a limit, say......no single country can get more than 100 visa. Nepal and Iran are "single" countries each, ROA is made up of a lot of countries like where we are from. In other words, only Nepal and Iran are subject to this rule.
Think about the following:
1st 100 cases 33 visas for Nepal, 33 for Iran and 34 for ROA
2nd 100 cases 33 visas for Nepal, 33 for Iran and 34 for ROA
3rd 100 cases 33 visas for Nepal, 33 for Iran and 34 for ROA
4th 100 cases 1 visas for Nepal, 1 for Iran and 34 for ROA
Original 4th 100 cases before any removal - 33 visas for Nepal, 33 for Iran and 34 for ROA, but wait, do we need 33 for Nepal, 33 for Iran? (Remember the rule we set?no single country can get more than 100 visa), only 1 for Nepal and 1 for Iran is needed)
5th 100 cases - do we need any Nepal or Iran? No, they hit the limit, right? And ROA goes on with 34
Original 5th 100 cases before any removal - 33 visas for Nepal, 33 for Iran and 34 for ROA
In the example above, you can say they keep all the Iran and Nepal in front and that's not fair. But you can also say it's fair since they are removal as they are not necessary in most of the 4th 100 cases and for sure not inthe 5th 100 cases.
KCC could have kept those cases in to show you it's fair, but would that make a difference?
Hope this helps.