January VB numbers released!!!
- Thread starter Britsimon
- Start date
engmtolera
Registered Users (C)
for me I don't care about CN,what I care is the total number of selectee in my country that is 209 and the total number of visa available in my country that is 3500,i do hope that this number 209 will not cover all 3500 visa, therefore, I do hope that, I will have interview even though my case number is high
Kayend
Active Member
My view is this, it doesn't matter how the numbers appears within a specific range if we accept the fact that special countries will have a different drawing function. As long as the numbers fall with the same range, that tell us that USCIS is prepare to put them into separate queue to handle, if not it is not a fair systems. Of course, it you don't agree special cut off to have a different drawing functions then the argument of the possibilities of evenly distributed across 0 to max case # make sense. But based on the progress in Asia so far, I think that possibility of putting special countries into separate drawing functions make sense if not I don't see DV14 will make it above 10k case # and that also mean it will not meet the regional quota which defect the purpose of increasing the selectees in DV14.
vladek15425
Well-Known Member
90 % of the countries around the world got less than 3500 selectees in the dv game,
Unfortunatly not all of them can't get a chance up to 7% visa top up,otherwise
The 50k visas quota available will be exausted between less than 15 countries,
That's why they proceed with (low and high) case numbers to be able to
Diversify the winner from different countries and ethenicities,
therefore its first come first served. This. How it works high numbers won't a get a fair chance.
All I'm saying is that the 99 data points for Nepal do not support a uniform distribution.
Country-specific cut-offs are a separate topic.
vladek15425
Well-Known Member
Simon ;
why do appear with a + on your name ?
why do appear with a + on your name ?
Kayend
Active Member
Yes, I totally agreed with you that removing duplicate to make it uniform distribution doesn't sound right.
Britsimon
Super Moderator
Because I am a friend of yours!
vladek15425
Well-Known Member
When getting data from a forum, I would better assume that forum data is faulty than that distribution is non-uniform. We have trusted data for DV-13, and we see that distribution is uniform. If we want to reconsider the type of distribution for DV-14, we need to have trusted data for DV-14.
Without that my bet is distribution is the same as before, just forum data needs to be interpreted correctly. That is just an example how forum data could be invalidated by posting absolutely correct numbers, just in an incorrect way. For uniformly distributed data just one parameter is important, and we have that - the max number for nepalese winners. We get that, and the rest is the problem of the forum.
Last edited by a moderator:
Kayend
Active Member
Your case # is 45xx or 45xxx? And which country or region are you from?
Are you from Iran, or do you just live in Tehran? Do you have a nationality other than Iranian?
Are you married to or a dependent of a Non-Iranian?
Are you from Iran but living abroad?
Thanks!
vladek15425
Well-Known Member
My friend, I got to say that your number is very high range. I'm actually very surprise to see a cn like yours from iran.regarding the whole Discussions we having about countries with special cut offs!
However if and if things goes well for u u might have an interview september months.
Hopefully the same senario of last year won't happen .
i am from Iran yes , and living her , i am married and i have 3 child , thnks
I'm glad to read this.
You can say that you're assuming the distribution is uniform based on some other source. But saying "if I haphazardly do this and then do that and this other thing then you see the data is uniform" is not the way to go.
Actually it is reasonable to assume that the plot that I posted represents the actual population to some extent. You can obviously see that there are fewer CN's from Nepal below 8000 (except for 3K, which could be an outlier), which we know is because of a higher concentration of CN's from Iran in that range. But that doesn't go by your long held theses, so feel free to dismiss it.
Kayend
Active Member
I think you have the highest case # in Asia so far and if Asia region goes current your interview will be Sept 14.
I am really surprise to see Asia has a case # of 45xxx with the current progress.
Based on DV-13 trusted data I still assume the distribution for DV-14 for Nepal is combination of 2 uniform distributions - from 1 to certain limit (one uniform distribution, 97%-99% of cases) and from that limit to 27000 (another uniform distribution; 1%-3% of cases).
Based on untrusted forum data for DV-14 I estimate that limit (where we have a break of CDF function) to about ~15K (German Tank Problem).
If we do not care why forum data is untrusted, even though it is supposed to model the real distribution, that is enough. If we want to know why it is not trusted, I provided one of (probably, several) possible explanations how real data could be transformed by people without any intent to falsify it, and become untrusted.