Please join our group the green card 2012 winners can't be ignored

[kiara_lyn 1]

www.facebook.com/dv2012

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

www.facebook.com/dv2012

I won't join for the following reasons:

1. I'm not a member of Facebook, and do not intend to join. Ever.

2. I disagree with what you're trying to accomplish. For most of the people who were erroneously notified that they'd won a visa, there are many people who were never given a chance. The only fair way to fix this is to do it again.

[Darnell 8,478]

smells like the diversity visa lotto, in recent news - a computer error picked only those who submitted the first 2 days of the lotto, letters were generated, then the error discovered, all reset to 0 again, was big mess.

*** moving to Diversity Visa forum ***

[KASH2011 382]

Please note what is stated on the www.dvlottery.state.gov website !!

"**IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE 2012 DIVERSITY LOTTERY PROGRAM**

We regret to inform you that, due to a computer programming problem, the results of the 2012 Diversity Lottery that were previously posted on this website have been voided......

We expect the results of the new selection process to be available on this website on or about July 15, 2011."

So there's no Dv 2012 winners yet until the computer draws new winners right? Post this again at the end of next month...JULY i mean oh and good luck to you.

[VanessaTony 3,567]

Please note what is stated on the www.dvlottery.state.gov website !!

"**IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE 2012 DIVERSITY LOTTERY PROGRAM**

We regret to inform you that, due to a computer programming problem, the results of the 2012 Diversity Lottery that were previously posted on this website have been voided......

We expect the results of the new selection process to be available on this website on or about July 15, 2011."

So there's no Dv 2012 winners yet until the computer draws new winners right? Post this again at the end of next month...JULY i mean oh and good luck to you.

The point of the OP is that all the people that were told they won (in May I think it was) want to still be "winners". They don't think it's fair that they aren't winners any more and that it's being re-drawn.

I however, agree with Bob. It's like someone fixing a race and then when the winner is disqualified complaining that you should still be paid. It wasn't legal and needs to be redone. End of story.

[AYMAN_RINA 92]

www.facebook.com/dv2012

I do have facebook but there is noway I would sign this petition because- The people that was picked was the one's who submitted in the first 2 days for the visa.Question is: Do you think it's fair to the other people that submitted after the first 2 days?I agree to re-do the lotto visa

[Rearviewmirror 370]

There seems to be a fair bit of misperception here. The only stipulation in US law regarding the diversity visa lottery is that it has to be random (which it was). There's also no way of knowing that the way applicants were selected disenfranchised those who didn't apply in the first few days - the sample may simply have come out that way randomly.

Regardless, there has been a lack of a clear explanation by the Department of State and no clarity on how the original 22,000 will be affected in future - i.e. as they showed 'intent to immigrate' they may never be allowed to visit the USA as tourists if their country isn't part of the visa waiver program.

The current class action lawsuit filed by Ken White against the Department of State will hopefully clear this up.

Edited June 26, 2011 by Rearviewmirror

[francastor 1]

There seems to be a fair bit of misperception here. The only stipulation in US law regarding the diversity visa lottery is that it has to be random (which it was). There's also no way of knowing that the way applicants were selected disenfranchised those who didn't apply in the first few days - the sample may simply have come out that way randomly.

Regardless, there has been a lack of a clear explanation by the Department of State and no clarity on how the original 22,000 will be affected in future - i.e. as they showed 'intent to immigrate' they may never be allowed to visit the USA as tourists if their country isn't part of the visa waiver program.

The current class action lawsuit filed by Ken White against the Department of State will hopefully clear this up.

It's is unfortunate that it happened, but they have clearly laid out why it happened that way. It wasn't "random" that it only included the people that applied early, if that were the case the results wouldn't have been voided. Like I said it really is unfortunate and a bit embarrassing, but there really is nothing else they can do.

[VanessaTony 3,567]

There seems to be a fair bit of misperception here. The only stipulation in US law regarding the diversity visa lottery is that it has to be random (which it was). There's also no way of knowing that the way applicants were selected disenfranchised those who didn't apply in the first few days - the sample may simply have come out that way randomly.

Regardless, there has been a lack of a clear explanation by the Department of State and no clarity on how the original 22,000 will be affected in future - i.e. as they showed 'intent to immigrate' they may never be allowed to visit the USA as tourists if their country isn't part of the visa waiver program.

The current class action lawsuit filed by Ken White against the Department of State will hopefully clear this up.

ACTUALLY it was explained that they code was written wrong and it definitely WAS only the first 2 days. It was a random selection yes, of ONLY the first two days. It's completely unfair and needs to be re-drawn. it is a statistical near impossibility that out of a 30 days period that ALL of the 22000 numbers drawn that all would be selected from the first two days. That's why they investigated it and found the code error.

[Used to be broken 143]

There seems to be a fair bit of misperception here. The only stipulation in US law regarding the diversity visa lottery is that it has to be random (which it was). There's also no way of knowing that the way applicants were selected disenfranchised those who didn't apply in the first few days - the sample may simply have come out that way randomly.

Regardless, there has been a lack of a clear explanation by the Department of State and no clarity on how the original 22,000 will be affected in future - i.e. as they showed 'intent to immigrate' they may never be allowed to visit the USA as tourists if their country isn't part of the visa waiver program.

The current class action lawsuit filed by Ken White against the Department of State will hopefully clear this up.

thats like saying if you only throw the first ten bingo balls in the hopper and leave the other numbers in a basket on the table and pick 8 numbers from the hopper the remaining numbers sitting outside the hopper ever had a chance of being picked. The only names in the "diversity lottery hat" that were drawn from came from the first couple days, no one else had a chance. The bad programing code absolutely disenfranchised the remainder of the applicant pool as it only drew names from the first names in the pool.

I get the issue of the immigrant intent, and that should be addressed, the applicants should not be penalized just for entering and I am not sure I agree they would be.

As for fairness, you will never be able to fix the emotional damage done to those notified they won, then notified the draw was invalidated. Another of the many issues in Immigration law that are heartbreaking.

Edited June 27, 2011 by brokenfamily

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

There seems to be a fair bit of misperception here. The only stipulation in US law regarding the diversity visa lottery is that it has to be random (which it was). There's also no way of knowing that the way applicants were selected disenfranchised those who didn't apply in the first few days - the sample may simply have come out that way randomly.

Regardless, there has been a lack of a clear explanation by the Department of State and no clarity on how the original 22,000 will be affected in future - i.e. as they showed 'intent to immigrate' they may never be allowed to visit the USA as tourists if their country isn't part of the visa waiver program.

The current class action lawsuit filed by Ken White against the Department of State will hopefully clear this up.

I think my perception of what's going on is quite clear. The pool of candidates submitted applications over the course of 30 days, and because the computer software was flawed a large percentage of applicants chosen were from the first few days of submissions. When the results are skewed that badly it's impossible to claim that the results were random, as the law requires.

I've read Mr. White's letters to David Donahue, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Visa Services, and also to Harold Geisel, Deputy Inspector General for the Department of State. Mr. White fails to make a cogent legal argument in these letters, though he claims these letters spell out his legal strategy for a class action lawsuit. His arguments are laughable:

"Many people who got jilted are going to sue. This is a waste of taxpayer money."

This is a ridiculous assertion. If DoS reinstates the original drawing winners then there will be nearly 15 million whose applications were never even considered because of the software flaw. Doesn't he think they would have an even

better

basis for a lawsuit? I don't think the potential cost of litigation should even be a factor in deciding whether or not to do the right thing, but if it

WAS

a factor then I'd think DoS would be far more worried about being sued by 15 million people who were disqualified because of a clear mistake then they would be by 22 thousand who had to try again because the mistake had been corrected.

"US public image abroad will be adversely affected."

By what? Making an obvious mistake and then correcting it? I would think that letting the mistake ride would have a worse effect on US public image abroad. Nobody will trust the visa lottery again if the US government admits it was unintentionally rigged, and they didn't do anything about it.

"The existing lottery was random and fair."

Mr. White's reasoning was that it's physically possible that a truly random drawing could have yielded the same results. This is like admitting that there's a magnet under the roulette wheel, and saying the results are fair because it's possible the same number would have come up if the magnet weren't there. Would anyone think this argument would fly in Las Vegas? Why does Mr. White think it should fly with DoS?

"Department of State has a duty to honor those notices."

Mr. White further claims that there's no procedure outlined in the law for redoing the visa lottery based on an obvious error. The fact is that there's no procedure whatever in the law for actually

conducting

the lottery. The procedures are established by Department of State policy. There's also nothing in the law that states that Department of State is legally bound by the results of the lottery, regardless of any irregularities they find. Further, Department of State frequently makes mistakes and grants benefits erroneously, and they routinely revoke those benefits when it's determined that they were granted in error. How does this particular event qualify for immunity from DoS revocation?

I'll withhold my final opinion until I read his petition. So far, it sounds like he's drumming up donations for a lawsuit he doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell of winning.

[Rearviewmirror 370]

Has the State Department explicit said that only those who applied in the first 2-3 days were considered for application? No. There may well have been selection bias in the algorithm used but as yet we don't have a concrete explanation as to what went wrong. If all applicants were put into the electronic 'hat' and 22,000 were chosen - surely that's random? Unless it picked applicants 1 through 22,000 which I don't think happened.

Secondly, none of the 22,000 is asking for them to be the only people offered a DV place this year - all they're asking is that the offers made to them are honoured - and a further 78,000 people are selected from the remaining applicants. The 22,000 constitute less than 25% of the total number of visas to be offered, do you really think it so unfair that the offers already made to them be upheld?

There is also no legal stipulation that the draw has to be 'fair' (counterintuitive as that sounds) - the only stipulation is that it must be random. People seem to have preconceived notions of what random should offer - should each day be weighted the same (i.e. X amount of people out of 100,000 are selected from each day of the 30 day period?) or should it be random over the entire period - i.e. someone who applied 2nd has exactly the same chance as someone who applied 15 millionth. If you flip a coin five times and it comes up all heads, is that still not random?

[Sergi9 110]

Has the State Department explicit said that only those who applied in the first 2-3 days were considered for application? No. There may well have been selection bias in the algorithm used but as yet we don't have a concrete explanation as to what went wrong. If all applicants were put into the electronic 'hat' and 22,000 were chosen - surely that's random? Unless it picked applicants 1 through 22,000 which I don't think happened.

People seem to have preconceived notions of what random should offer - should each day be weighted the same (i.e. X amount of people out of 100,000 are selected from each day of the 30 day period?) or should it be random over the entire period - i.e. someone who applied 2nd has exactly the same chance as someone who applied 15 millionth. If you flip a coin five times and it comes up all heads, is that still not random?

If the program only selected applicants from the first couple of days instead of randomly selecting from the entire applicant pool than the odds were skewed. In order to meet the definition of random each applicant in the pool has to have the same odds of selection, in this case apparently the computer program only selected applicants who were registered in the first couple of days eliminating the remaining applicants from the selection pool altogehter.

Your coin flipping analogy is not relevant here. Every time you flip a coin the odds are 50% and 50% tails. The odds never change. In this case the odds were changed electronically by the computer system in favor of the early applicants which negates a "random" drawing.

I hate this happened to you.

[Harsh_77 716]

Sorry would not join such a group nor support such a petition, all the ppl who had applied for the lottery should had been given fair chance.

[Blob18 111]

Sorry would not join such a group nor support such a petition, all the ppl who had applied for the lottery should had been given fair chance.

Exactly, everyone who applied should get a fair chance.

--------------------------------------------------------------

This lawsuit will be a waste of $$$ and time. There is nothing to sue about for one. Two, it involves non-citizens so I don't know what you can 'sue' about. Of those selected for the DV lottery only half or less end up getting the visas, so to say "These 22k should get the visa" is flat out wrong.

Lets say 4 million people apply over a 30 day period. However, the computer only picks 44,000 from the first 4 days of the open filing process. Explain to me, how that is fair to the other millions of people who happened to file after the first 4 days.

To put it simply. To be FAIR, the computer would have had to have selected people at random from all of the dates in which the lottery process was open, NOT just the first couple days, which is what happened for the 2012 DV lottery.

It was a coding mistake, nothing more. Yea it sucks but that's life and suing because of it won't accomplish anything.

Edited June 27, 2011 by Blob18