• Hello Members, This forums is for DV lottery visas only. For other immigration related questions, please go to our forums home page, find the related forum and post it there.

dv 2016

Status
Not open for further replies.
cherry_pancakes said:
See, the thing is that the matter is not reduced to two categories only: 1) Not selected, 2) Session time out. There is also a third one - those who enter their data carefully and correctly but the form validation doesn't let them through. What about these guys? They are quite a few people on my local forum, most of whom have been around for a while and know what they are doing.

In my opinion, we should be thinking in a different direction and it's not just that whoever gets a session time out is a likely winner. It seems to me that whatever the error is, it is affecting the whole sample of applicants including the not selected ones and the false validation ones. In fact, i am afraid that by stressing on the session time out only we are biasing the situation. We need to also bring up the issues with filling out the form with CORRECT information
Click to expand...

Have they tried retrieving their confirmation details again through the confirmation retriever then using that? They're most likely just making some simple mistake entering their details.
 
violetion said:
Have they tried retrieving their confirmation details again through the confirmation retriever then using that? They're most likely just making some simple mistake entering their details.
Click to expand...
from what I've read people have tried that. still no luck. someone suggested they should try the first name or both names.
 
cherry_pancakes said:
See, the thing is that the matter is not reduced to two categories only: 1) Not selected, 2) Session time out. There is also a third one - those who enter their data carefully and correctly but the form validation doesn't let them through. What about these guys? They are quite a few people on my local forum, most of whom have been around for a while and know what they are doing.

In my opinion, we should be thinking in a different direction and it's not just that whoever gets a session time out is a likely winner. It seems to me that whatever the error is, it is affecting the whole sample of applicants including the not selected ones and the false validation ones. In fact, i am afraid that by stressing on the session time out only we are biasing the situation. We need to also bring up the issues with filling out the form with CORRECT information
Click to expand...


That isn't a third category - that is people who make a simple mistake. Anyone in IT will understand....
 
Sorry, @Britsimon but I disagree. These are not just one or two cases and they have been unsuccessful even when they ask a spouse or a friend to enter the data for them. Isn't it possible that the form is looking up values against the wrong database and some confirmation numbers are simply not there? Which is consistent with another poster's observation that the DS260 submission page interprets 2016 case numbers as 2014 ones
 
cherry_pancakes said:
Sorry, @Britsimon but I disagree. These are not just one or two cases and they have been unsuccessful even when they ask a spouse or a friend to enter the data for them. Isn't it possible that the form is looking up values against the wrong database and some confirmation numbers are simply not there? Which is consistent with another poster's observation that the DS260 submission page interprets 2016 case numbers as 2014 ones
Click to expand...

i think your logic is right. if people can't log in then maybe it's looking at the wrong database.

i wonder if the people that can't log in applied last year. and if the session error people won last year. im just wondering. thats all. i don't know what the issue is

at the moment everyone is speculating. no concrete answers.
 
cherry_pancakes said:
Sorry, @Britsimon but I disagree. These are not just one or two cases and they have been unsuccessful even when they ask a spouse or a friend to enter the data for them. Isn't it possible that the form is looking up values against the wrong database and some confirmation numbers are simply not there? Which is consistent with another poster's observation that the DS260 submission page interprets 2016 case numbers as 2014 ones
Click to expand...

No - the DS260 is a totally separate and explainable issue. There is NO connection between the two things.

For the cases where people can't login, they need to check their conf numbers and check whether they miss entered their first/last names or DOB and so on. There are ALWAYS some (all year round) that can't login, swear there is some major hitch and later they figure it out. 30 years in IT. Seen that about 59582 times. Approximately.

And about the wrong database. Their system is logging logins. They have record 12000 selected entries checking their cases. No one can see of course, but they (US DoS) don't seem to grasp that. The point is, if this was using the wrong db - that would not be happening.
 
HI- just checked my status and got a "not selected", anyway I think some people, including me, make a common mistake by entering our whole name, when it only ask for surname.
 
Britsimon said:
No - the DS260 is a totally separate and explainable issue. There is NO connection between the two things.

For the cases where people can't login, they need to check their conf numbers and check whether they miss entered their first/last names or DOB and so on. There are ALWAYS some (all year round) that can't login, swear there is some major hitch and later they figure it out. 30 years in IT. Seen that about 59582 times. Approximately.

And about the wrong database. Their system is logging logins. They have record 12000 selected entries checking their cases. No one can see of course, but they (US DoS) don't seem to grasp that. The point is, if this was using the wrong db - that would not be happening.
Click to expand...

The logic should be as follows:

1. Checking login credentials
2. Checking if applicant was selected
3. Displaying CN, First/Last names etc

Session timeout is related to 3rd step. Invalid login is related to 1st step. Has not been selected - to the second step.
This is my opinion only, of course. I am also from IT and this is the most common logic for IT guys.
 
n.n. said:
The logic should be as follows:

1. Checking login credentials
2. Checking if applicant was selected
3. Displaying CN, First/Last names etc

Session timeout is related to 3rd step. Invalid login is related to 1st step. Has not been selected - to the second step.
This is my opinion only, of course. I am also from IT and this is the most common logic for IT guys.
Click to expand...

Yup. Step 3 is displaying an image (the 1NL). They would only do that if step 2 confirmed they were selected - if it is not selected the NOt selected notice is a generic message.
 
Britsimon said:
Yup. Step 3 is displaying an image (the 1NL). They would only do that if step 2 confirmed they were selected - if it is not selected the NOt selected notice is a generic message.
Click to expand...

I think we should propose a more robust system to the DoS and see if they bite. There's money in them thar government contracts!
 
[QTE="dougkaich, post: 2397279, member: 346711"]channy me to buh lets wait thy say keep checking till june6[/QUOTE]
I ha
dougkaich said:
channy me to buh lets wait thy say keep checking till june6
Click to expand...
I have checked with KCC but did not say like you said :( . The current result is correct
 
They are lying.....its all scripted what they say, yesterday when I called the lady told me "we have been told that there are no issues in the dvlottery portal and blah blah......actually in background someone is really trying to fix the issue, hope he can do it.......
 
First and foremost, I would like to commend @@Britsimon for all the goodwill he is doing in these forums. I have been a member for quite a while and even though I have not been posting anything but I've been a regular viewer and an ardent reader of Britsimon's posts. Besides putting up with people's critism and insults, this gentleman has quite some energy and may God bless him!

My (optimistic) opinion is that, as a programmer, I think of one possibility; they have setup everything correctly but they probably have not linked the queries into the DV 2016 database. Specifically, I think that they have the queries directed to the DV 2015 database hence all confirmation numbers will be given a NOT SELECTED notice. What they need to do is just correct that and we will all get proper results. For DV 2015, of the people I had submitted applications for, one was my nephew's. When I checked on the 1st of May last year, his was NOT SELECTED and then after they sent an email to all applicants to recheck the status the next day, he was RANDOMLY SELECTED! Therefore, I think the query was the case last year and it is the case this year.

I have been applying for DV since 1993 and only skipped DV 2005 (the first online DV) and have still not been selected. I lived in the US between 1998 and 2002 as a student, so I know why I would like to go back and live there - its a beautiful country with lots of opportunities. Therefore, I'm already immuned to the disappointment of NOT BEING SELECTED! However, I'm still a hopeful.

Therefore, my fellow hopefuls, understand Britsimon when he tries not to give anyone unconfirmed hopes. He is only protecting you and himself. If there really is a technical glitch, it will be corrected (believe me, Americans are thorough), and appropriate action will be taken to correct the situation. However, in the meantime, if our fates say that we are NOT SELECTED, then let's accept that as reality and move on with our lives. If any corrections will be made, they will officially communicate through email.

All the best to everyone!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top