I mean, why would they remake a checking process among the millions of entries if they didn't find some duplicate winner? Because checking 10s of millions of entries is a huge task even if you affect 100 peoples, it is still a huge work because they have to check each other result... Strange?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Do you think they catched duplicate entries?
- Thread starter jayo2k
- Start date
in an interview transcrip, they said the review ALL entries
They check only winners for duplicates. It does not make any sense to check anybody else.
in an interview transcrip, they said the review ALL entries
No they did not, they said that they only check winners, it's explained in the other thread you started on the same topic.
rinomanfroni
Registered Users (C)
I mean, why would they remake a checking process among the millions of entries if they didn't find some duplicate winner? Because checking 10s of millions of entries is a huge task even if you affect 100 peoples, it is still a huge work because they have to check each other result... Strange?
"Do you think they caught duplicate entries?"
whataboutno
Banned
you should pay more attention to lottery rules.I feel bad for twins
It takes the software 24 hours to check 100,000 entries versus the whole database. They do not have capacities to check the restThey have face recognition and other methods to scan for multiple applications. No a big deal with todays computers if they not also screwed up this software also.
If it's true then the wikipedia arcticle about the DV is complete BS therefore no 86% of nigerian were disqualified
It takes the software 24 hours to check 100,000 entries versus the whole database. They do not have capacities to check the rest
Why?If it's true then the wikipedia arcticle about the DV is complete BS therefore no 86% of nigerian were disqualified
If it's true then the wikipedia arcticle about the DV is complete BS therefore no 86% of nigerian were disqualified
I agree because that would mean that 86% of selected Nigerians were disqualified for whatever reason. A rather high estimate if you ask me. IMO even if they take the whole process, from selection to visa interview, into consideration, it's still a high number.
Yes, they were. If 86% is disqualified from 1000 or so random ones, it means about 86% would be disqualified from the whole set. I do not see a problem with that.
Also, the statement
Also, the statement
means that 86.83% of those who participated in selection process were disqualified. Not necessarily from the whole set. Participated means were initially tried to be selected but were disqualified.In DV-2011 program record number of entrants - 86.83% Nigerian entrants and 86.45% Bangladeshi entrants were disqualified during selection process because of illegitimate entries.
Last edited by a moderator:
So, are you questioning the official figures? I could understand how exactly it happens. A lot of fraudulent middlmen companies submit entries from phonebooks or from bribed local authorities. Two entries for the same person without his or her knowledge would still be be disqualified because they are duplicates.
Additional thought about why it is so high in Nigeria.
In addition to facial recognition software, KCC employees search for other fraud indicators as they collect additional documents from individuals selected in the lottery and prepare to send their cases to posts for adjudication. For example, they note, through “fraud flags,” if applicants (1) added a spouse or children to their case after being selected in the lottery, (2) if there were substantial changes to biographic details, or (3) if the applicant appeared in a different entry with different family members. In their scan of applicants selected in the 2005 DV program, KCC employees found 804 “pop-up” spouses or children; applicants from Ghana, Nigeria, and Ukraine had more “pop-ups” than any other country. KCC’s fraud flags are noted in both the electronic and hard copy files that are sent to posts, and several of the consular officers at the posts we reviewed said that the fraud flags were useful for their adjudication of DV cases. With the advent of e-DV it also became possible to provide an electronic comparison of the applicant’s lottery entry photograph to the photograph submitted with the visa application so that consular officers can review and compare these photographs. This process has assisted numerous posts in identification of imposters. Finally, in 2004, KCC hired a full-time fraud prevention manager, who oversees fraud prevention programs for both the DV program and petition-based nonimmigrant visa programs, which are also processed at the KCC. In commenting on this report, State mentioned some additional tools it uses to prevent DV fraud, such as fraud conferences and fraud prevention management training, which include DV patterns and issues.
In addition to public diplomacy efforts, DV posts also use a variety of antifraud tools to combat fraud after the applicant has come to the post for visa adjudication. Consular officers review the applicant’s documents, along with any fraud notes from KCC, and scrutinize the applicant during the visa interview. The consular chief in Dhaka said the post’s best antifraud tool is good interviewing skills. In Accra, Addis Ababa, and Warsaw, officers conduct split interviews for couples suspected of marriage fraud. Questionable cases are referred to the post’s fraud prevention unit for further review.37 These units investigate the facts of the case, such as by calling school boards to see if the education certificate is legitimate, or conducting field investigations to see if an applicant’s marriage is legitimate. Some posts also receive assistance from their regional security office, and some receive cooperation from local law enforcement. A consular officer in Accra said that the embassy made three DV fraud ring busts along with the help of local police. In Lagos, the consulate reported that its fraud prevention unit was working with the Nigerian authorities to prosecute several DV applicants who had admitted to marriage fraud.
In addition to facial recognition software, KCC employees search for other fraud indicators as they collect additional documents from individuals selected in the lottery and prepare to send their cases to posts for adjudication. For example, they note, through “fraud flags,” if applicants (1) added a spouse or children to their case after being selected in the lottery, (2) if there were substantial changes to biographic details, or (3) if the applicant appeared in a different entry with different family members. In their scan of applicants selected in the 2005 DV program, KCC employees found 804 “pop-up” spouses or children; applicants from Ghana, Nigeria, and Ukraine had more “pop-ups” than any other country. KCC’s fraud flags are noted in both the electronic and hard copy files that are sent to posts, and several of the consular officers at the posts we reviewed said that the fraud flags were useful for their adjudication of DV cases. With the advent of e-DV it also became possible to provide an electronic comparison of the applicant’s lottery entry photograph to the photograph submitted with the visa application so that consular officers can review and compare these photographs. This process has assisted numerous posts in identification of imposters. Finally, in 2004, KCC hired a full-time fraud prevention manager, who oversees fraud prevention programs for both the DV program and petition-based nonimmigrant visa programs, which are also processed at the KCC. In commenting on this report, State mentioned some additional tools it uses to prevent DV fraud, such as fraud conferences and fraud prevention management training, which include DV patterns and issues.
In addition to public diplomacy efforts, DV posts also use a variety of antifraud tools to combat fraud after the applicant has come to the post for visa adjudication. Consular officers review the applicant’s documents, along with any fraud notes from KCC, and scrutinize the applicant during the visa interview. The consular chief in Dhaka said the post’s best antifraud tool is good interviewing skills. In Accra, Addis Ababa, and Warsaw, officers conduct split interviews for couples suspected of marriage fraud. Questionable cases are referred to the post’s fraud prevention unit for further review.37 These units investigate the facts of the case, such as by calling school boards to see if the education certificate is legitimate, or conducting field investigations to see if an applicant’s marriage is legitimate. Some posts also receive assistance from their regional security office, and some receive cooperation from local law enforcement. A consular officer in Accra said that the embassy made three DV fraud ring busts along with the help of local police. In Lagos, the consulate reported that its fraud prevention unit was working with the Nigerian authorities to prosecute several DV applicants who had admitted to marriage fraud.
Simples that would mean that more than a million nigerian were picked & then thrown away & more than 2 to 3 million bangladeshi where picked then throwed away... this artticle is wrong.. dead wrong
Why?
Which official figure... You call wikipedia official? You (i think) admit writing this article... but then you do not show any sources & when you write the statistic, they are all wrong... You do not even know that deriviatives do not count in the selected but yet you count them.. that mean you wrote the wikipedia article wich too many false statements
So, are you questioning the official figures? I could understand how exactly it happens. A lot of fraudulent middlmen companies submit entries from phonebooks or from bribed local authorities. Two entries for the same person without his or her knowledge would still be be disqualified because they are duplicates.
What is wrong here? Yes, everything is correct, that is what is happening.Simples that would mean that more than a million nigerian were picked & then thrown away & more than 2 to 3 million bangladeshi where picked then throwed away... this artticle is wrong.. dead wrong
About the number of winners and the number of entries.Which official figure...
Of course I wrote the article in wiki. Based on those official numbers.
Another example.
Of course, the amount of entries in those phone books is huge. All this junk is in fact that 86%, as you see.In Bangladesh, for example, one agent is reported to have enrolled an entire phone book so that he could then either extort money from winning applicants who had never entered the program to begin with or sell their winning slots to others.