• 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.

September VB - DV14 Last Chapter

eliolaz said:
I hope they don't play save, but from what i have seen from the last 2 years when there was cut off for most of the regions i.e. 2004 and 2005 they gave a bit over 48k visas.1,9K selectees in high CN can make a difference. I see they have changed a bit since then. Don't get me wrong with my number EU48k nearly 49 i still hope i will be current. Just i am less hopeful after the last VB.
Click to expand...

Bear in mind another big difference to back then, which was that then they were still sending out notification letters by mail. This led to a lot of problems in certain countries, the two principal ones identified by KCC being (1) mail never arrived or (2) got intercepted (always had KCC return address..) and either used fraudulently or used to blackmail the selectee. So this may have been a reason for the lower visa issuance too. To the extent that it was misjudgement, that was 10 years ago, they should have figured that bit out now.
 
Wow you almost got me :D.But no...
First of all let me quote Susie from one post on visajourney, and thats correct statement"current means they think they have visas for everyone.." so think is quite unstable term isn't it.
About spending money on medical etc...Who guarantees you for any visa type that if you pay some fee you'll get it?We live in capitalism...
And third no I don't think they do it deliberately, but thats the way.Glass analogy isn't appropriate here because this isnt so simple process.I'm not trying to convince you of anything, but it does not look all black and white as you explained.

Britsimon said:
I have already proven that and shown exactly how the errors get into the statistics. It isn't in dispute at all - up to you whether you accept it or not.

I agree that you can get a glass completely full if you fill it to overflowing, but you also create a mess and that is more work your yourself. Is that what you do when you fill a glass?

You seem to think KCC will go through the work of trying to schedule THOUSANDS of interviews in the certain knowledge that those interviews will need to be cancelled. People would spend money on medicals, police certificates and travelling to interviews purely to have those appointments cancelled at the last minute. They might do that for a few people because they make a mistake in calculations, BUT I really do not think they would do that deliberately. Do you?

And then of course there is the small detail that current is defined in every visa bulletin as meaning there are enough visas to satisfy predicted demand.
Click to expand...
Britsimon said:
I have already proven that and shown exactly how the errors get into the statistics. It isn't in dispute at all - up to you whether you accept it or not.

I agree that you can get a glass completely full if you fill it to overflowing, but you also create a mess and that is more work your yourself. Is that what you do when you fill a glass?

You seem to think KCC will go through the work of trying to schedule THOUSANDS of interviews in the certain knowledge that those interviews will need to be cancelled. People would spend money on medicals, police certificates and travelling to interviews purely to have those appointments cancelled at the last minute. They might do that for a few people because they make a mistake in calculations, BUT I really do not think they would do that deliberately. Do you?

And then of course there is the small detail that current is defined in every visa bulletin as meaning there are enough visas to satisfy predicted demand.
Click to expand...
 
Slikk said:
Wow you almost got me :D.But no...
First of all let me quote Susie from one post on visajourney, and thats correct statement"current means they think they have visas for everyone.." so think is quite unstable term isn't it.
About spending money on medical etc...Who guarantees you for any visa type that if you pay some fee you'll get it?We live in capitalism...
And third no I don't think they do it deliberately, but thats the way.Glass analogy isn't appropriate here because this isnt so simple process.I'm not trying to convince you of anything, but it does not look all black and white as you explained.
Click to expand...

Don't misinterpret me please. When I say they think they have enough, it means based on their best calculations and estimates. Acceptance rates higher, less no-shows, they may not have enough for everyone. I agree 100% with Simon, in fact an argument I myself have made, they are not going to deliberately schedule 1000s of appointments - which involves sending thousands of files around the world to embassies and using up interview slots that could be used on other (non-DV) immigrant visas, almost all of which are in backlog - if they are pretty sure most of those would be cancelled.

KCC does not get fees from the medicals btw. The only fees they get is the visa fee, just before the interview. So if the interview is cancelled, no fee. The "capitalist" (non)argument doesn't work therefore.

As Simon said, "current" actually has a specific meaning. Why do people choose to ignore it to come up with fanciful theories? His glass analogy is perfect.
 
Slikk said:
Wow you almost got me :D.But no...
First of all let me quote Susie from one post on visajourney, and thats correct statement"current means they think they have visas for everyone.." so think is quite unstable term isn't it.
About spending money on medical etc...Who guarantees you for any visa type that if you pay some fee you'll get it?We live in capitalism...
And third no I don't think they do it deliberately, but thats the way.Glass analogy isn't appropriate here because this isnt so simple process.I'm not trying to convince you of anything, but it does not look all black and white as you explained.
Click to expand...

LOL - ok, it seems you are determined to believe it - that's fine - I don't begrudge you that right!

On the VB by the way - here is what is says. ""C" means current, i.e., numbers are available for all qualified applicants;"
 
Ohh ok I didn't mean to misinterpret you.
For ME glass analogy isnt perfect and you know why because KCC has enough time to deal with the rest of the winners, and with glass your done in a sec.Medical is set after interview date change, you know the process you cant do it before status change, so please do not change the thesis...KCC isnt stupid they inform you in letter that selection doesn't guarantee you a visa, but almost two months before september gives them enough time to know where they stand at and how to handle situation if they set current, and again at any time they can easy drop all the rest at the bottom of pile. In that form off logic I quoted you :).
 
Hah come on man...
On the chart below, the listing of a date for any class indicates that the class is oversubscribed (see paragraph 1); "C" means current, i.e., numbers are available for all qualified applicants;
This is for other visa types :)

Britsimon said:
LOL - ok, it seems you are determined to believe it - that's fine - I don't begrudge you that right!

On the VB by the way - here is what is says. ""C" means current, i.e., numbers are available for all qualified applicants;"
Click to expand...
 
Slikk said:
Hah come on man...
On the chart below, the listing of a date for any class indicates that the class is oversubscribed (see paragraph 1); "C" means current, i.e., numbers are available for all qualified applicants;
This is for other visa types :)
Click to expand...


Yes I know. Do you think they use the same word with a different meaning for different visa types? Really???
 
Slikk said:
Ohh ok I didn't mean to misinterpret you.
For ME glass analogy isnt perfect and you know why because KCC has enough time to deal with the rest of the winners, and with glass your done in a sec.Medical is set after interview date change, you know the process you cant do it before status change, so please do not change the thesis...KCC isnt stupid they inform you in letter that selection doesn't guarantee you a visa, but almost two months before september gives them enough time to know where they stand at and how to handle situation if they set current, and again at any time they can easy drop all the rest at the bottom of pile. In that form off logic I quoted you :).
Click to expand...

Exactly...two months before is when they make the final decision. I don't see the logic in spending all that extra time and energy and cost (their own costs of couriers etc) wasting interview slots that are desperately needed for other immigrant visas when they don't need to. Can you explain why they would do this? It's not a form of logic I understand...

And of course simon is absolutely correct in that USCIS do not use current differently for different visa types. If they did it is quite simple, on your logic we would never before have seen years with cutoffs and we have.... And why do you think in some years some regions went current earlier than September too? But if you don't believe this please call KCC and ask them and report back...
 
Please, now you're starting to insult basic intelligence. I respect you but I do not have time to argue all night unless you have a valid arguments.About what couriers you are talking about in the 21st century, do you think that everything is sent by mail...And what slots wasting, scheduling is done by KCC with planning..In some years they went current earlier simple because of less winners, different distribution or maybe because we had Government shutdown for one month etc whatever..This is not connected to my view of current at the end, you are again change the thesis.
 
Slikk said:
Please, now you're starting to insult basic intelligence. I respect you but I do not have time to argue all night unless you have a valid arguments.About what couriers you are talking about in the 21st century, do you think that everything is sent by mail...And what slots wasting, scheduling is done by KCC with planning..In some years they went current earlier simple because of less winners, different distribution or maybe because we had Government shutdown for one month etc whatever..This is not connected to my view of current at the end, you are again change the thesis.
Click to expand...

Well OK Slikk - I suggest we leave it there - you are starting to sound aggressive and that is not appropriate for this forum - so please believe what you want to believe.

Good luck to you and everyone for next month.
 
Aggresive pls hah ok attack is best form of defence :), I was just looking for good debate...But np,bye.
 
Slikk said:
Please, now you're starting to insult basic intelligence. I respect you but I do not have time to argue all night unless you have a valid arguments.About what couriers you are talking about in the 21st century, do you think that everything is sent by mail...And what slots wasting, scheduling is done by KCC with planning..In some years they went current earlier simple because of less winners, different distribution or maybe because we had Government shutdown for one month etc whatever..This is not connected to my view of current at the end, you are again change the thesis.
Click to expand...

I am not changing the thesis at all. You seemed to need more detail to understand.

I can absolutely confirm to you that in "this day and age", the paper files until and including DV2014 are being physically sent around the world. I know this from talking about my own case with my consulate, when I was asked to call back about something as the case file was still en route, and from joking with the CO about how much the kids had grown since the photos we had sent with the DV230s....sent to KCC but physically in the hands of the officer across from me. DV2015 is the first DV with electronic forms and the first one where files will be transferred to consulates electronically. So from October you would be correct, but right now - including the interviews to be scheduled for September - you are categorically wrong. Feel free to call KCC and confirm this with them.

As for slots, let me explain: the consulates do not employ people only to interview DV applicants. The immigrant visa unit interviews all immigrant visas. There are as you know 50000 DV visas a year. What you may not be aware of is that there are slightly more than 1 million other immigrant visas a year. Every DV slot prevents one of these people being interviewed. Anyone who has been for interviews can confirm that other immigrant visas get interviewed as well in the same place.

And on top of the above there was the direct quote from a US embassy.

Apparently presenting you with facts insults basic intelligence? I'm not quite sure what to make of that, but yes do enjoy the rest of your evening with "your view of current".
 
Britsimon said:
The data Dalius was using took each selectee and derivative with their status. There were lots of cases where the principal selectee had been approved (or denied, or AP) and the derivatives for that case were still marked as ready. That is not correct. If the main applicant is denied the others are denied. If the main applicant is approved the others are probably approved. CEAC data wasn't being accurately updated (still isn't) but the way the data was collected fed through a larger inaccuracy to Dalius' graphs.

The read cases with dates in the past are not officially dead. If the applicant wanted to revive the case they could contact KCC and get it rescheduled. However, in practice, I doubt that would happen often. I also doubt it is having much if any impact on the VB movement. People reviving their cases still would need to go back to KCC so there is no need to keep their spots open for them - KCC are already taken into account that they are unlikely to revive.

As for all regions going current - feel free to believe that - but that view cannot be supported by the data.
Click to expand...

Simon your assumption is totally incorrect. When Rafik data was presented in our (Bulgarian) forum two users said strait away that data is not correct because one of them said that they could not take custody of their 2 kids witch were from previous marriage. So their kids are ready and they will stay as ready till the end of Sept. The other didn't give specific reason but it was the same story 2 issued and 2 ready wile on the data sheet there are 4 issued.
At the same time I don't know what will be your explanation about cases like EU8209 in witch the 3rd applicant is refused and first and second issued, or EU8829 where 2nd applicant is refused and 1st and 3rd issued.
Believe me it is not a mistake by CEAC. When it comes to issued visas Dalius data is more correct than Rafik's!!!
Thanks to Rafik and Dalius for their effort and the difference is not that big although 500 visas can make a huge difference even for a region like EU.
 
eliolaz said:
Simon your assumption is totally incorrect. When Rafik data was presented in our (Bulgarian) forum two users said strait away that data is not correct because one of them said that they could not take custody of their 2 kids witch were from previous marriage. So their kids are ready and they will stay as ready till the end of Sept. The other didn't give specific reason but it was the same story 2 issued and 2 ready wile on the data sheet there are 4 issued.
At the same time I don't know what will be your explanation about cases like EU8209 in witch the 3rd applicant is refused and first and second issued, or EU8829 where 2nd applicant is refused and 1st and 3rd issued.
Believe me it is not a mistake by CEAC. When it comes to issued visas Dalius data is more correct than Rafik's!!!
Thanks to Rafik and Dalius for their effort and the difference is not that big although 500 visas can make a huge difference even for a region like EU.
Click to expand...
Guys, decorum please - something seems to be in the air today. causing some rather unnecessary excitement...
 
Also i can assure you that the data is updated frequently and i will give you another very good example:
If you look at CN EU19592 you will see that on data provided by Rafik at the beginning of April he was with status issued on March 20. After he was approved he said to the CO that he is about to get married. The CO told him to file updated ds230 and to attend an interview with his wife. On the updated ds230 he put his 2 kids which he never mentioned before. Then he was called back to the embassy on 25 of April and he was refused with ban to enter USA for the next 90 (ninety) years. His refusal was updated and it was in Rafik's data on May 3rd.
 
eliolaz said:
Simon your assumption is totally incorrect. When Rafik data was presented in our (Bulgarian) forum two users said strait away that data is not correct because one of them said that they could not take custody of their 2 kids witch were from previous marriage. So their kids are ready and they will stay as ready till the end of Sept. The other didn't give specific reason but it was the same story 2 issued and 2 ready wile on the data sheet there are 4 issued.
At the same time I don't know what will be your explanation about cases like EU8209 in witch the 3rd applicant is refused and first and second issued, or EU8829 where 2nd applicant is refused and 1st and 3rd issued.
Believe me it is not a mistake by CEAC. When it comes to issued visas Dalius data is more correct than Rafik's!!!
Thanks to Rafik and Dalius for their effort and the difference is not that big although 500 visas can make a huge difference even for a region like EU.
Click to expand...

No Eliolaz, my assumption is not totally incorrect. This has all been discussed before:-

http://forumarchive.immigration.com...-all-algerian-africa-dv2014-winner-here/page2

I assume you understand that if a main applicant is refused, all the derivatives are refused too - correct? In the same way, if the main applicant is on AP, the derivatives are on AP also - because their case can only be resolved The data used by Dalius has examples like that - and that means that CEAC is not updated correctly all the time. That cannot be argued or explained in any other way. Let us call this CASE A.

Then there are cases where the main applicant is issued but the derivatives show as ready/refused/AP. Again, those exist in Dalius' data. These are not (as I clearly explained before) all wrong/bad updates. There are some examples (such as the ones you gave and others I have seen) that could be genuine. However, there are too many of such cases to be all genuine. Given that CASE A exists, it is logical to assume that at least some of these cases exist because of the same bad process that causes the CASE A situation. My earlier reasoning was that I accepted that for the issued cases, neither method was entirely accurate, but Dalius' method is bound to be less accurate in my opinion because the wacky cases are rare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top