• 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.

Just called the KCC

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.

DV - 2010 Countries with highest disqualifications

Africa: Nigeria 82.77%, Egypt 70.54% Ethiopia 68.57%, Sierra Leone 46.21%, Sudan 30.94%, Ghana 24.68%, Guinea 23.81%, Liberia 17.93%, Cameroon 11.64%

Europe: Ukraine 71.91%

Asia: Bangladesh 78.95%

Oceania, South America and the Bahamas got no high country percentile disqualifications.
 
this i know, taken from wikipedia.
But you said that 4% of kebanin were disqualify so I asked you where did you see that
LoveAmerica said:
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.

DV - 2010 Countries with highest disqualifications

Africa: Nigeria 82.77%, Egypt 70.54% Ethiopia 68.57%, Sierra Leone 46.21%, Sudan 30.94%, Ghana 24.68%, Guinea 23.81%, Liberia 17.93%, Cameroon 11.64%

Europe: Ukraine 71.91%

Asia: Bangladesh 78.95%

Oceania, South America and the Bahamas got no high country percentile disqualifications.
Click to expand...
 
The other source is the number of winners including dependents. It is published annually. And the third piece is the fact that the chances to win are the same throughout each region. That is enough to make the numbers.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
so based on tthe winner, you determine the fraud level? Geez, I will lay off wikipedia for now, it's known for being a bad source, but sorry budy, you haven't convince me
raevsky said:
The other source is the number of winners including dependents. It is published annually. And the third piece is the fact that the chances to win are the same throughout each region. That is enough to make the numbers.
Click to expand...
 
jayo2k said:
so based on tthe winner, you determine the fraud level? Geez, I will lay off wikipedia for now, it's known for being a bad source, but sorry budy, you haven't convince me
Click to expand...
I really don't think that this information is available.
 
the chance are not the same at all.... Simple logic
Concidering that asian are the ones who participate the most & get few selection compared to europe & africa who get the most selection... just based on that, you can tell that the chances are not the same
raevsky said:
Based on the fact that the chances are the same throughout the region. I do not understand what you mean by the winner.
Click to expand...
 
Hi ..i am sorry to disturb you but can you please tell me how to start a new thread in the forums . I would greatly appreciate it .
 
amrutabhsl said:
Hi ..i am sorry to disturb you but can you please tell me how to start a new thread in the forums . I would greatly appreciate it .
Click to expand...
See figure:

1si345.jpg
 
same region from countries who doesn't get too many participans... & how comes that from time to times, peoples from the same countries always get the same chances of winning?
African born on wikipedia have like 2%... angolan have 5.2.. explain
CraigToomy said:
> chances are the same throughout the region
> same throughout the region
> throughout the region
> throughout the region
Click to expand...
 
For DV-2011:
Angola 55 winners (including family members) for 2330 entries (including family members). 55/2330 ~ 2.36%
For Africa it is 2.06%
55 is a rather small number to have enough statistics, so the difference between 2.36% and 2.06% is within tolerance limits.
 
deriviatives doesn't count in the selected do you know that? Because deriviatives doesn't get case number, only the main aplican...
So basicaly when you wrote the statistics, you included thee deriviatives? I'd guess yes so your stats are false because deriviatives only come into play when it's time to get the visa, not during the selection process
raevsky said:
For DV-2011:
Angola 55 winners (including family members) for 2330 entries (including family members). 55/2330 ~ 2.36%
For Africa it is 2.06%
55 is a rather small number to have enough statistics, so the difference between 2.36% and 2.06% is within tolerance limits.
Click to expand...
 
The main point here is that: with or without a computer error, the selection is still RANDOM.

As this situation is an "error", nobody knew about it. As a result, nobody could gain from it. Nobody knew that applying on the earlier dates would increase your chance. As a result the whole process is still RANDOM.

The selection process is a blackbox. The internal coding is NOT known. As a result people applied at any random time within the given time limits. The code could have selected applicants from any application time period.

This "error" has just ADDED to the RANDOMNESS.

Think of it like this: Assume that each application is a 1 penny coin dropped in a big jar. Also, assume the coins are made of iron. The selection is to be done by opening a hole at the bottom of the jar and let some random coins fall out. The coins falling out are the selected ones.

By "error" there is also a magnet in the jar as well. When the small hole is opened at the bottom of the jar it opens just below the magnet; the few coins (selectees) start falling through the hole. The magnet with all the coins stuck to it also falls through. Nobody knew that there was a magnet ("error") in the jar. So nobody tried to throw their coin next to the magnet.

The process is STILL COMPLETELY RANDOM.

Noone has been favoured.

There is no reason for the voiding.


Please let me know if you disagree.
 
jayo2k said:
Geez, I will lay off wikipedia for now, it's known for being a bad source, but sorry budy, you haven't convince me
Click to expand...

Yes, I found it a couple of months back. Information containing plenty of fantasy is not informative.

jayo2k said:
same region from countries who doesn't get too many participans...
Click to expand...

Most likely DOS considers 7% rule to determine numerical cap of winners set around 5000-7000 for each country having many entrants, based on "demand-success" rate of immigrant visa issuance of each country in the past outcomes. Please make sure that this is a reasonable interpretation in accordance with 7% rule and previous stats published.

To me, success (visa issuance) rate of Ukraine looks like not significantly changed or even worse recently, suggesting no apparent evidence of fraud prevention method during selection process. I remember in some article somewhat 7000 fraud entries were detected by DOS' fancy software during DV 2007 or 2008 selection process, that's it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
deriviatives doesn't count in the selected do you know that? Because deriviatives doesn't get case number, only the main aplican...
So basicaly when you wrote the statistics, you included thee deriviatives? I'd guess yes so your stats are false because deriviatives only come into play when it's time to get the visa, not during the selection process
Click to expand...
They do not have exactl count of winning entries. However, that is not necessary to know. The truth is the number of winning entries divided by the number of all entries is about the same as the number of winners including dependents divided by the number of all participants including dependents. Just because the average size of winning family is the same as the average size of submitting family.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top