A link on this web site was used as an argument for a particular position regarding the Diversity Visa Lottery 2012. I received two e-mail messages from people in the Netherlands on this matter. The two messages and my responses to them can be viewed below. I know nothing about the Diversity Visa Lottery apart from what was contained in the two messages that were sent to me. However, it is clear that my work has no relevance to this issue. If you disagree with me about this (e.g., the second e-mail message below), my response can be seen below. I will not respond to any more messages about this matter. Please do not send any more such messages. 31 May 2011 **The two messages** Subject: Statistics question From: Oscar Gala Grano Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 11:42:31 -0400 To: hodge003@umn.edu Dear Mr. Hodges, I am on a forum about Dutch people who want to move to the US and with the errors made at the latest Diversity lottery, there has been quite a discussion on how statistically true random these lotteries are. One of the forum members provided me a link to one of your articles (http://www.biostat.umn.edu/~hodges/Transparencies_Topic_4.pdf) to prove his statement was correct. I believe that your article is very interesting, but cannot be used to prove his statement at all. If you have a minute to spare, I would appreciate your comment on his statement. For the diversity Green card lottery program, there is going to be a second draw this year. During the first draw there was a bug in the algorithm which caused 90% of the winners to be picked from the applicants who registered in the first two days. Now they have fixed that bug and are going to do a second draw. Unfortunately, there are people who thought they had already lost with the first draw and threw away their case number. So after the second draw there is no way for them to know if they are a winner or not. His statement is: If you have a lottery for which all applicants have received their own case number, but a lot of them have lost their case number, so they will be unable to check if they actually won after the draw, then the draw is not fully random anymore. My statement is that although it is a shame and might be unfair that not everyone has their case number anymore, statistically speaking, this will not influence the randomness of the draw. My question to you is: Is he right and does your article prove that? Or am I right and did he not understand your article and the concept about lottery draws correctly? Thank you for your time! With kind regards, Oscar Gala Grano Jinfo - Juggling Information Email: ogala@jinfo.nl US Mobile: (508) 524 2106 Dutch phone: 058-7110308 ********************************** Subject: Re: Statistics question From: Jim Hodges Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 10:55:11 -0500 To: Oscar Gala Grano Hello Mr. Gala: (I hope I have correctly identified your surname! If not, I apologize.) You are correct that that web page of mine has nothing whatsoever to do with this problem. I can't figure out why this person thought it *did* have a connection. Re the Lottery problem: The randomness of the *drawing* is determined solely by the device used to make the drawing, and thus cannot be affected by anything outside of that device, e.g., whether people threw away their tickets. The ultimate *result* of using this drawing in this context, where many people have thrown away their tickets, is obviously affected by who threw away their tickets. For what it's worth, JH ********************************** Subject: Urgent Question DV 2012 mismanagement From: Daniel Tonen Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 12:26:05 +1200 To: hodges@ccbr.umn.edu, hodge003@umn.edu Dear Mr. Hodges, This Email is written in the light of the Diversity Visa Lottery 2012. Your article on http://www.biostat.umn.edu/~hodges/Transparencies_Topic_4.pdf was used to further look into what exactly happened with the "randomness" of the lottery. It was said the article could not be used to compare the lottery. This is weird, the first pays clearly says; As usage of "random effect" has broadened, fewer people seem to recognize a related distinction that has important consequences, both conceptual and practical. This lecture is about that distinction. On the Dutch "America" forum someone says that you disagree on the fact that the first draw of the lottery was still random. In my humble opinion this is not right. My opinion is that there's a distinction between conceptual second draw en the paractical results. This is because for the second draw which is planned on the 15th of July 2011, not all the entrants received an Email with confirmation numbers in order to check if they won or not. These people are practically excluded from the lottery since they can't check their winning status and collect their prize. Could you maybe give me your thoughts on the current situation of the DV Lottery 2012. Was the first draw random? Is the second draw, conceptual AND practical random? Please mr. Hodges, these questions need to be answered by multiple experts in the field independently. You're help in this matter is greatly appreciated. I've also Emailed some of my old university professors from the RSM Erasmus University in Rotterdam. Please find more information in the attachments, they give you some more background information. Furthermore there's a little overview below this Email. Many thanks in advance for looking into this, it concerns 22.000 people their destiny. With kind regards, Daniel Tonen Msc. Little overview of current situation; Department of State voided the results http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYeX0RBXZZ0&feature=related Facebookgroup 22.000 winners can't be ignored http://www.facebook.com/dv2012 TV interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sYzMyzwLY0 CNN http://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/05/14/diversity.lottery/index.html?iref=allsearch SOME WINNERS http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBf0jvn76eY&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK_23uMN0d0&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WryDE_EdPQ0&feature=related IMMIGRATION LAWYER MR. WHITE BLOG http://blog.visarefusal.com MR WHITE'S REAL WEBSITE http://bridgewest.com/ GOOGLE; +/- 337.000 results (0,12 seconds) .....search "glitch green card lottery" donahuefinal13.doc ********************************** Subject: Re: Urgent Question DV 2012 mismanagement From: Jim Hodges Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 09:04:54 -0500 To: Daniel Tonen Hello Daniel Tonen: I received an e-mail from a Mr. Grano [Note: I apologize for using an incorrect name for Mr. Gala.] about the Diversity Visa Lottery and I responded to him. I assume that the post you refer to is about this message. I have attached to the present e-mail my response to Mr. Grano, which includes a copy of his message. First, let me state very clearly that I know nothing about the Diversity Visa Lottery apart from what was in Mr. Grano's e-mail. I continue to maintain that my work, on that web page, is about a technical matter that is completely unrelated to the problems with the Diversity Visa Lottery. Regarding your message, see my attached message to Mr. Grano. I believe this addresses your specific question below. See in particular "Re the Lottery problem". Feel free to forward this message to anyone who is interested. I will not comment further because I know nothing about the Diversity Visa Lottery and apparently anything I say is going to be used by partisans of one or another viewpoint, potentially in a manner that I do not support. Please do not contact me further about this matter, and please tell others not to contact me. I will not respond to further messages on this subject. I will post the messages I have received and sent on my web page. Yours truly, JH