Anyway we here are talking about Due Process. Even non-immigrants are not animals to be treated like this.
Hyperbole much? In what way are you treated like an animal?
If you found a wallet on the street, would you think the money inside belong to you, or would you try to find the owner to return it, or at least give it to the police to find the owner?
Sadly, most people will keep the money, but that is not the right thing.
In both cases you have not done anything illegal in finding the wallet or in being mistakenly told that you were selected. However, trying to hold onto that accidental windfall will deprive the rightful owner of it.
KCC cannot increase the number of visas because that number is stipulated by the Congress and cannot be changed on a whim. Most likely, the next changes approved by the Congress will be to terminate the program as it is now.
Drawing only 78K new selectees, again will deprive some people from a fair selection.
I know it is disappointing, but you are not losing anything which has been legitimately yours before. You will be part of the redraw like everybody else. It is as if we are back to April 30th before the results could be checked.
Besides, a random selection is what it is, random, even if the entire selection fell on people in one day or one hour, it still fits the definition of random, a random selection can be anything. They don't need to cancel the results because they don't look "random enough."
They did not cancel them because they did not look random enough. It is not a computer making decisions, but a program running on said computer.
A software bug, be it algorithmic or just coding error, can be actually identified and confirmed as such. If the software was OK, they would not have cancelled.
If the results are cancelled we must demand to know why this suddenly happened only this year. If they used the same algorithm in prior years it means every DV lottery selection has been faulty in years prior and hence PRIOR DIVERSITY VISA SELECTION RESULTS HAVE TO BE CANCELLED as well as they are not random and are against the law. A FOIA request will help us determine that.
Please go ahead with that request because I would like to know as well.
It is not clear that it is the same algorithm which they used in the past. What I know, is that last year the online status check had a bug, however the selection algorithm was fine. People received paper NLs, but the online status check was not working for all the selectees.
This year it is all online. It may be that they changed the program doing the selections, or it may be that just the online status check was broken. However, since the online status check is the only way to find if you were selected, that bug may have caused the entire mess.
It is unfortunate, but mistakes happen. In this case DOS took the difficult but correct decision. People complain that it is not fair, but it is a fair decision. Everybody will have an equal chance to get selected.