Xarthisius

Цитата
dobrykot пишет: Quote Xarthisius пишет: I'm not sure what you are asking. Do you mean the fact that density drops occurs for middle range case numbers? Yes, the density is higher for smaller case numbers .

Oh, that's just a result of how the lottery selection process works. Imagine a situation where a region has only two countries: A and B. Let's say that there were 3M entrants from A and 1M from B. Now if you order all entries randomly, statistically in every 1000 cases, there should be 250 selectees from B and 750 from A. For a first couple of thousand cases, density will be 100% (assuming of course there are no rejections due to other things: fraud/duplicated entries etc). After a while though, there will be enough selectees from country A to reach the country cap. Let's say it happens for case number EU5000 (in range EU1-5000 there should be roughly 3750 selectees from country A). KCC no longer "needs" cases from country A above EU5000, because they're certain the number of cases they have will be sufficient to reach the country cap for country A. They remove remaining entries from country A (they become holes) and we see that as overall density drop in charts.

For EU in DV2018, that first density drop is caused by Uzbekistan (our country A). It looks like there's enough people from Uzbekistan in range <EU10800 to reach the cap.

Цитата

dobrykot пишет: Quote pashtetx writes: By the way, I thought earlier that this number was the winning applicants. But now I was confused by the word (man). So, in particular, for Russia - 4500 questionnaires or 4,500 people (the sum of all family members) Hmm, but that's interesting. Where does this information come from? And yes, it's not entirely clear, 4500 are cases or + derivatives. Although, most likely - it's only cases.

This is an official information from DOS. Number of selectees is always printed in July VB. The numbers include selectees + derivatives.

[1] https://travel.state.gov/content/trave...-2017.html

Цитата

ВУВ пишет: Xarthisius, I 'll try again))). 2. There are cases before cut off 10700, which have READY status. There are about 1,000 of them. So I'm wondering, these cases will be transferred to ISSUED status or they are those cases for which visas will not be issued. You need to know this in order to determine the exact number of visas that have already been received or will be issued in the coming months. Do I need to summarize cases with ISSUED AND READY statuses to determine issued visas and applicants for visas? How to determine the number of remaining visas? This is 18300 total visas for Europe minus ISSUED (8064) + READY (5894) + AP (887) = 3455? Thanks I'll try again))). 2. There are cases before cut off 10700, which have the status READY. There are about 1000 of them. So I'm wondering, these cases will be transferred to ISSUED status or those cases when visas will not be issued. We need to know this in order to determine the exact number of visas that have already been received or will be issued in the coming months. How to determine the number of remaining visas? This is 18300 common visas for Europe minus ISSUED (8064) and READY (5894) and AP (887) = 3455? Thank you

Your guess is as good as mine. 'Ready' means that case was transferred to an embassy and an interview was scheduled. Nothing more. It doesn't necessarily mean they're all going to be converted to 'Issued': some people are denied, some people don't show up to the interview, etc.

It doesn't matter though that 'Ready' cases may have low # numbers. Some people submit DS-260 very late in the process. As an example: 2018EU11 or 2018EU16 are case numbers that were scheduled for April interviews.

One other thing to keep in mind is that 18300 is only a theoretical value. In the past visas were reallocated between the regions. So I wouldn't worry about visas running out for EU just yet...

Apart from the remarks above, your counts look good to me.

Цитата
dobrykot пишет: We really want to help you, but if it's really legal. Did you send only one request to U.S. Department about the problem with a captcha?

Simon did. Yes, only once. It's mentioned somewhere in his posts from 2016. I'm not a lawyer, I cannot give you a better justification...