Raevsky, do you know what were the highest open (= notified) EU numbers for DV12 and DV13?
DV-2014 Lottery High number or not? Please help.
- Thread starter AldoBlack
- Start date
Raevsky, do you know what were the highest open (= notified) EU numbers for DV12 and DV13?
franko
Well-Known Member
Raevsky,
What about calculating what are the chances of you being wrong/off - I mean all your calculations are based on DV2014 following a trend, based on previous years, excluding/compensating for "corrupted" data like DV2012. As we all know "anything can happen" and this coming year something unpredictable could occur. You could still say "According to my calcs 12358 people from Asia will get 2nl but there is a 3.5% chance of an unusual event happening which could influence the final outcome of DV2014 both positively or negatively.
I think it might be an interesting exercise. Something similar is done for lets say aircraft flight control system failure event. Based on the number of components in the system, number of people working on it/human error, statistical and empirical test failure data for each part of the system, weather, people having their phone on during the flight - EMC failure, etc, we can calculate/predict a chance of a complete system failure and feed it in to the aircraft model. You could probably list the number of factors effecting the final outcome of the lottery: KCC/DOS employee error based on the number of people doing DV work, data loss/error between KCC and consulates, fraud - Bangladesh again, computer system/software failure, other deviations from expected behaviour which you have already listed. I am assuming that most of the information needed could be found on the internet. Not specific to DV but general data about human error, data transfer errors, fraud, computer system programming error, etc.
Simon could you do the honors
What about calculating what are the chances of you being wrong/off - I mean all your calculations are based on DV2014 following a trend, based on previous years, excluding/compensating for "corrupted" data like DV2012. As we all know "anything can happen" and this coming year something unpredictable could occur. You could still say "According to my calcs 12358 people from Asia will get 2nl but there is a 3.5% chance of an unusual event happening which could influence the final outcome of DV2014 both positively or negatively.
I think it might be an interesting exercise. Something similar is done for lets say aircraft flight control system failure event. Based on the number of components in the system, number of people working on it/human error, statistical and empirical test failure data for each part of the system, weather, people having their phone on during the flight - EMC failure, etc, we can calculate/predict a chance of a complete system failure and feed it in to the aircraft model. You could probably list the number of factors effecting the final outcome of the lottery: KCC/DOS employee error based on the number of people doing DV work, data loss/error between KCC and consulates, fraud - Bangladesh again, computer system/software failure, other deviations from expected behaviour which you have already listed. I am assuming that most of the information needed could be found on the internet. Not specific to DV but general data about human error, data transfer errors, fraud, computer system programming error, etc.
Simon could you do the honors
Britsimon
Super Moderator
Raevsky,
What about calculating what are the chances of you being wrong/off - I mean all your calculations are based on DV2014 following a trend, based on previous years, excluding/compensating for "corrupted" data like DV2012. As we all know "anything can happen" and this coming year something unpredictable could occur. You could still say "According to my calcs 12358 people from Asia will get 2nl but there is a 3.5% chance of an unusual event happening which could influence the final outcome of DV2014 both positively or negatively.
I think it might be an interesting exercise. Something similar is done for lets say aircraft flight control system failure event. Based on the number of components in the system, number of people working on it/human error, statistical and empirical test failure data for each part of the system, weather, people having their phone on during the flight - EMC failure, etc, we can calculate/predict a chance of a complete system failure and feed it in to the aircraft model. You could probably list the number of factors effecting the final outcome of the lottery: KCC/DOS employee error based on the number of people doing DV work, data loss/error between KCC and consulates, fraud - Bangladesh again, computer system/software failure, other deviations from expected behaviour which you have already listed. I am assuming that most of the information needed could be found on the internet. Not specific to DV but general data about human error, data transfer errors, fraud, computer system programming error, etc.
Simon could you do the honors
LOL - sure. Actually that was what I was trying to say in my last post to Raevsky above - but you have made it sound much more interesting to a mathmatician/programmer. Well done.
Raevsky, with excellent input like this, don't you think Franko deserves to be off your ignore list?
Yes, I could admit that. I cannot know all factors. 1% is different though. It is an exact number without any basis to have an exact number here.
BTW, thanks to CEAC I just figured out a couple of months ago that 5 countries have caps. Ukraine, Ghana, Egypt, Ethiopia, Nigeria. Because of high amount of winners those countries have caps on the max number. Their max numbers are much lower than max numbers for region. That means DOS just cuts everyone who played from those countries with high numbers. For instance, in DV-13 that number for Ukraine is about 14700.
There is 6th country in that list - Uzbekistan. But CEAC does not give data for Uzbekistan.
Another interesting thing is the cup applies not to everybody, but to some winners only. I believe only to residents of the country. I suspect those country natives who live outside, do not have that cup. I do not know why.
That is an example of a factor that I did not know about.
In DV-13 those caps are:
Ukraine 14682 (max CEAC number)
Uzbekistan 19800 (data from forum)
EU max number 30532 (CEAC data)
Ghana 30538 (max CEAC number)
Egypt 22899 (max CEAC number)
Ethiopia 32912 (max CEAC number)
Nigeria 19997 (max CEAC number)
AF max number so far 97005 (CEAC data)
This means that probability to win from those countries is in fact much lower than from other countries of corresponding region. And that is contrary to what is written in DV lottery instructions.
http://travel.state.gov/pdf/DV_2014_Instructions.pdf
If someone believes that me not knowing ALL factors increases their chances compared to my prediction - good luck.
Last edited by a moderator:
For DV13 the max EU number in CEAC system is 30532. As I said, there could be numbers a little bit higher, because CEAC does not include some consulates, AOS and those who did not apply for immigration process. However, statistically that means that having a regular number more than 30800 is not really possible.
At the same time it does not guarantee us from bugs where a number like 2012EU45118 appear. That would not be a regular number, but is in fact a chance (with unknown odds, but very low ones)
For DV12 we do not have CEAC data available. I also have some data from a forum, but I could get the max number with much lower accuracy. I did not see regular EU numbers larger than 31999. I saw maybe half a dozen 31xxx numbers. Forum data does not usually give those xxx precisely. Anyway, with that low amount of data I could only be sure max for regular number in EU was less than 33500.
At the same time schedule for Ankara consulate had number 2012EU45118 scheduled. That is definitely not a regular number, that is a result of some kind of bug when they sent reminders fro those who never read their status before.
Last edited by a moderator:
I thought about that too. However, his input is mixed.Raevsky, with excellent input like this, don't you think Franko deserves to be off your ignore list?
At the same time I identified a number of users (about a dozen) who:
- spent a lot of time on the forum discussing nothing, just producing meaningless posts that look nice but do not contain any real information
- doing it regularly from 9am until 5pm every day
- producing quite a lot of posts during this period as if that were their full time job
- giving incorrect information at the forum (KCC allows sending forms by email)
- misrepresenting their personal information (like rank number)
- trying to suppress all other activity on the forum
- working as a team
- providing an illegal schema to get more clients
That did not look fishy to him, but looked very fishy to myself.
I uncovered cases of misrepresenting personal information.
BTW, we have someone on the forum here with 2013AF case above 105000 that also seems incorrect provided CEAC data gives 97005 as a max number. Of course, that individual is from Kenya, and CEAC data does not include September schedule for Nairobi consulate yet (it will include it later). However, I am almost certain that is a misrepresentation as well.
As I said, I reported some of that information to federal authorities.
I think I would wait until federal authorities investigate the situation. And I might reconsider and remove my ban on those users who are still actively on the forum by then (that would mean they did not get a jail sentence for running an illegal business).
And before that I am in the state of ignorance.
Last edited by a moderator:
Britsimon
Super Moderator
The country cap information is interesting on a lot of levels.
Firstly I wonder what the “experience” would be of a person in Ukraine with a number higher than 14682. They would presumably be waiting for their 2NL and appointment but would they simply be ignored or would they be told something like “sorry your country has reached the cap of 7% for a single country so you will not be invited to interview”. Would there even people that had interviews scheduled but either have the appointments cancelled or they attend the appointments but never get the visa?
Second thing that strikes me about the news you have just learned. Taking Ukraine again as an example, they had 6,424 selectees in DV2013. From what you are saying they hit the 7% limit with less than half the total EU CNs That makes perfect sense – it probably only took less than 3000 selectees to meet the 3500 with derivatives. That will mean that around 3500 Ukraine selectees are now out of the process which would be a large proportion of the CNs between 14682 and the EU max of around 30800. That increases the “chances” for the high Case number selectees in EU and of course the same can be said for Uzbekistan over 19800. So has this been taken into account with your model and published predictions for DV2014, because it seems it would have a dramatic effect on the corridor/cutoff.
Britsimon
Super Moderator
Regarding Franko thinking you were sounding a bit paranoid, I thought the same thing at the time of you banning and your comments here have a touch of paranoia about them. Let me contrast your take aon a few points with my take on those same points....
- spent a lot of time on the forum discussing nothing, just producing meaningless posts that look nice but do not contain any real information YEAH I've noticed that too - I just ignore those posts and didn't read anything into them
- doing it regularly from 9am until 5pm every day In what time zone are those people - perhaps they are busy at home or only have access to a PC at work???
- producing quite a lot of posts during this period as if that were their full time job I've posted nearly 500 times in the last 10 weeks compared to your 2600 in 6 years. That is pretty prolific, but you know this isn't my full time job
- giving incorrect information at the forum (KCC allows sending forms by email) My understanding is that KCC will accept corrections by email, including forms.
- misrepresenting their personal information (like rank number) I did notice there was a person with an AS70XXX in her sig. I just assumed it was an honest mistake and it was an African number. I didn't call the feds, I just ignored it.
- trying to suppress all other activity on the forum Well I saw people trying to suppress you and your comments, but that was just because you pissed them off with your delivery style which I always understood to be cultural
- working as a team Well yes you seemed to be able to unite people against you, but again I think it was to do with your delivery style
- providing an illegal schema to get more clients I never saw suspicious activity like that, but perhaps I am not suspicious enough..
The 105000 number one does indeed sound more interesting but I don't know the specifics on that so I won't comment (but again I wouldn't jump to any conclusion and frankly don't give a damn if someone is misrepresenting their case for some personal reason - it just makes the analysis a bit harder.
Simon
Ukraine is very far from reaching the 7% cap. They cut Ukraine without any visible to me reason. Of course, Ukraine has more than 6000 winners, but the application rate is very low and historically Ukraine got about 1700 visas per year only.
That would all be exactly the case if the 3500 limit is in fact reached for either country. That argument was presented here by someone else regarding DV-1 program with Bangladesh having more than 14000 winners. And Bangladesh did not in fact reach the 3850 max in DV-1 in terms of visas. The same here in DV-13 with Ukraine and Uzbekistan. The limit was not reached (will not be reached) or if reached will be very close to it (cutoff 14700 was exceeded long ago and Ukraine is still available; for Uzbekistan after cutoff was 19000 in August, it became current for September)
So, your logic is not applicable because the 3500 limit is only an imaginary limit for DV-13. It does not actually limit anything.
My question was more about what was the max open numbers for DV12 and DV13 (information you could have taken from various forums), and not the last ones available in the CEAC. In other words, were there open (= notified) numbers that were never invited to an interview, despite the region being current?
Britsimon
Super Moderator
OK, so you believe the cut you have noticed is not the 7% limit, but you don't know why those countries are being limited. Surely, whether the cap is due to the 7% or something else it would have the same effect, and that impact is apparently not reflected in your model. That seems like a big potential hole in the theory that you can't explain. You must be pulling your hair out!!!
By the way, the other thing you mentioned of the limit being not applied if someone is not resident in their home country seems like a massive loophole that USCIS probably wouldn't want to reveal. It might be that AoS is allowed for those countries and perhaps consular interviews outside of those countries but no interviews are being scheduled in country. Interesting.
Don't they add a cutoff on the high admission countries in the visa bulletin, which means that the high CN numbers of those countries never get interviewed and will never appear in the CEAC system? I don't think DOS will arrange for an interview knowing that the applicant will not get a visa because the cap has been reached for his/her country.
I am here on this forum for about 12 years (it changed ownership during those years). My delivery style was about the same for all those years. Only this year I had this type of problem, when this group of individuals did what I cal hijacked forum. They were not asking questions for the sake of finding out the answers. They were asking questions and answering them themselves to create what I call Public Relations for what I call their illegal business. They allegedly hired a dozen of people to operate it full time. That is all my personal opinion only, I am not saying it is true, but that is at least suspicious, of course, and I trust federal authorities to investigate it. As I said, that has never happened before, this year only. And the reason for all that was allegedly running an illegal business with what I interfered with my knowledge, contradicting to what they were saying.
AF20xxx
Exactly, forum is a tool that I and others use to analyze the situation, and misrepresenters make the analysis much harder. That is like investigating DOS's errors I described above except that those errors were deliberate. here on the forum they are.
Last edited by a moderator:
OK, so you believe the cut you have noticed is not the 7% limit, but you don't know why those countries are being limited. Surely, whether the cap is due to the 7% or something else it would have the same effect, and that impact is apparently not reflected in your model. That seems like a big potential hole in the theory that you can't explain. You must be pulling your hair out!!!
By the way, the other thing you mentioned of the limit being not applied if someone is not resident in their home country seems like a massive loophole that USCIS probably wouldn't want to reveal. It might be that AoS is allowed for those countries and perhaps consular interviews outside of those countries but no interviews are being scheduled in country. Interesting.
Would that be legal to put a cap on countries if they don't even reach the 7% limit? Does the 7% limit include all other immigrant visas? They may not grant 3500 DV visas, but overall (with other family and work sponsored visa), did these countries get 3500 visas?
Britsimon
Super Moderator
Regarding the 7%, not it is only for the DV process and it is 7% of the 50,000 (so that means 3500 visas INCLUDING derivatives (family of the selectees).
Could there be a legal way to stop a country before the 7% figure - good question - I don't know the answer, but Raevsky seems to have found the evidence that it has happened.
Nope. I am not aware about those cases in DV12 and DV13, but I know a number in prior lotteries.
Yes, and I guess there are many countries that get more than 3500 immigrant visas without being caped below 3500 DV visas. Still, I don't see how they could legally put a cap, if there is not another limit set in the law.
I believe it is POTENTIALLY a 7% limit. But it never came close to the limit. However, the number of winners with dependents definitely exceeded per country quota and theoretically 7% limit could apply. It just never did and was never close to.OK, so you believe the cut you have noticed is not the 7% limit, but you don't know why those countries are being limited. Surely, whether the cap is due to the 7% or something else it would have the same effect, and that impact is apparently not reflected in your model. That seems like a big potential hole in the theory that you can't explain. You must be pulling your hair out!!!
.
I do not see a hole if the cap was never reached. Situation is absolutely equivalent as if the limit does not exist at all, if it was never reached and was never close to. A limit not working is not a limit.
USCIS has nothing to do with it. DV is conducted by DOS not by USCIS.
That is incorrect. Interviews are scheduled in Egypt, for example, with egyptians exceeding those numbers for Egypt. However, I suspect that that was with those only who lived outside of Egypt during the process of initial submission, and later moved to Egypt.
Last edited by a moderator:
They do. Not for Ukraine or Ghana, though. They do not have cutoffs for those two countries, but still have limits for them.
Also, cutoff for 4 other countries is current for September, that means not cutoff is set for them.
DV12 was abnormal, that's for sure, but the EU45118 had the right to get an interview as the region became current. I don't believe on a personal favor for that Case Number. What is odd is indeed the big gap between the highest CN number Raevsky saw in various forums (just below 32k) and this high number. When I look at the visa bulletins during that time, I notice the cutoff jumped from 32k to 40k between April and May 12, then became current in June. As if DOS wanted desperately to fill the quota and interview people above 32k. There is no explanation there should be a hole of 8k entries, since they number the original entries one by one. Statistically, there is no chance 8k entries in a row got disqualified. I don't really believe in a bug, because that would void again the DV12 selection.