To Ingo Pakleppa
Oct 18th 2002, 7:13 pm
#1
Just Joined
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 10
To Ingo Pakleppa
dear Mr. Pakleppa,
this is ccornell, whom you previously responded to my query. I find your answers to be very useful. I would like to discuss some matters with you please give me your email. mine is : [email protected]
this is ccornell, whom you previously responded to my query. I find your answers to be very useful. I would like to discuss some matters with you please give me your email. mine is : [email protected]
Oct 19th 2002, 6:47 am
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: To Ingo Pakleppa
On Fri, 18 Oct 2002 12:13:30 -0700, CCornell wrote:
> dear Mr. Pakleppa,
> this is ccornell, whom you previously responded to my query. I find your
> answers to be very useful. I would like to discuss some matters with you
> please give me your email. mine is :
> [email protected]
> --
My email is in each post. Thanks for asking before emailing me directly!
I appreciate that.
> dear Mr. Pakleppa,
> this is ccornell, whom you previously responded to my query. I find your
> answers to be very useful. I would like to discuss some matters with you
> please give me your email. mine is :
> [email protected]
> --
My email is in each post. Thanks for asking before emailing me directly!
I appreciate that.
Oct 19th 2002, 11:59 am
#3
Just Joined
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 10
Re: To Ingo Pakleppa
Originally posted by Ingo Pakleppa:
On Fri, 18 Oct 2002 12:13:30 -0700, CCornell wrote:
> dear Mr. Pakleppa,
> this is ccornell, whom you previously responded to my query. I find your
> answers to be very useful. I would like to discuss some matters with you
> please give me your email. mine is :
> [email protected]
> --
My email is in each post. Thanks for asking before emailing me directly!
I appreciate that.
On Fri, 18 Oct 2002 12:13:30 -0700, CCornell wrote:
> dear Mr. Pakleppa,
> this is ccornell, whom you previously responded to my query. I find your
> answers to be very useful. I would like to discuss some matters with you
> please give me your email. mine is :
> [email protected]
> --
My email is in each post. Thanks for asking before emailing me directly!
I appreciate that.
Oct 20th 2002, 5:36 am
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: To Ingo Pakleppa
Ingo
I am concerned about you. I remember you were laid off a while ago.
Could you find another job in IT field in San Diego?
Al
> > dear Mr. Pakleppa,
> > this is ccornell, whom you previously responded to my query. I find your
> > answers to be very useful. I would like to discuss some matters with you
> > please give me your email. mine is :
> > [email protected]
> >
> > --
> My email is in each post. Thanks for asking before emailing me directly!
> I appreciate that.
I am concerned about you. I remember you were laid off a while ago.
Could you find another job in IT field in San Diego?
Al
> > dear Mr. Pakleppa,
> > this is ccornell, whom you previously responded to my query. I find your
> > answers to be very useful. I would like to discuss some matters with you
> > please give me your email. mine is :
> > [email protected]
> >
> > --
> My email is in each post. Thanks for asking before emailing me directly!
> I appreciate that.
Oct 20th 2002, 6:30 am
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: To Ingo Pakleppa
On Sat, 19 Oct 2002 22:36:42 -0700, Al wrote:
> Ingo
> I am concerned about you. I remember you were laid off a while ago.
> Could you find another job in IT field in San Diego? Al
Actually, I found a new job within two weeks - and just got laid off again a
couple of days ago. On the bright side, that finally gives me more time
for alt.visa.us; I haven't shown my pixels for a while.
Thanks for your concern!
Ingo
> Ingo
> I am concerned about you. I remember you were laid off a while ago.
> Could you find another job in IT field in San Diego? Al
Actually, I found a new job within two weeks - and just got laid off again a
couple of days ago. On the bright side, that finally gives me more time
for alt.visa.us; I haven't shown my pixels for a while.
Thanks for your concern!
Ingo
Oct 20th 2002, 9:40 pm
#6
Just Joined
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 10
Re: To Ingo Pakleppa
Originally posted by Ingo Pakleppa:
On Sat, 19 Oct 2002 22:36:42 -0700, Al wrote:
> Ingo
> I am concerned about you. I remember you were laid off a while ago.
> Could you find another job in IT field in San Diego? Al
Actually, I found a new job within two weeks - and just got laid off again a
couple of days ago. On the bright side, that finally gives me more time
for alt.visa.us; I haven't shown my pixels for a while.
Thanks for your concern!
Ingo
On Sat, 19 Oct 2002 22:36:42 -0700, Al wrote:
> Ingo
> I am concerned about you. I remember you were laid off a while ago.
> Could you find another job in IT field in San Diego? Al
Actually, I found a new job within two weeks - and just got laid off again a
couple of days ago. On the bright side, that finally gives me more time
for alt.visa.us; I haven't shown my pixels for a while.
Thanks for your concern!
Ingo
I hate to bother you again but could you email me your emaiL. Your email doesn't show on your posts..my email is: [email protected]
One more thing please..on one of your posts, you answered someone who won the DV lottery that if they fail to get the green card for any reason they woul "lose out forever" do you mean that they won't be able to apply for DV anymore in their life?
Tschuss!
CCornel
Oct 21st 2002, 11:12 am
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: To Ingo Pakleppa
On Sun, 20 Oct 2002 14:40:36 -0700, CCornell wrote:
> Originally posted by Ingo Pakleppa:
>> On Sat, 19 Oct 2002 22:36:42 -0700, Al wrote:
>> > Ingo
>> > I am concerned about you. I remember you were laid off a while
>> ago.
>> > Could you find another job in IT field in San Diego? Al
>> Actually, I found a new job within two weeks - and just got laid off
>> again a
>> couple of days ago. On the bright side, that finally gives me more time
>> for alt.visa.us; I haven't shown my pixels for a while.
>> Thanks for your concern!
>> Ingo
> Dear Ingo,
> I hate to bother you again but could you email me your emaiL. Your email
> doesn't show on your posts..my email is: [email protected] One more
> thing please..on one of your posts, you answered someone who won the DV
> lottery that if they fail to get the green card for any reason they woul
> "lose out forever" do you mean that they won't be able to apply for DV
> anymore in their life? Tschuss! CCornel
> --
[email protected]
As for "losing out forever" - no. They can reapply the next year.
What I meant was that even though they were notified that they won, in the
end they would lose their Green Card, and would never again have a chance
to use this winning lottery entry. Of course they can try again. But given
that the chances of winning are about one in 100 (one in 50 for married
couples), it's not likely that somebody would win the lottery twice.
Ingo
> Originally posted by Ingo Pakleppa:
>> On Sat, 19 Oct 2002 22:36:42 -0700, Al wrote:
>> > Ingo
>> > I am concerned about you. I remember you were laid off a while
>> ago.
>> > Could you find another job in IT field in San Diego? Al
>> Actually, I found a new job within two weeks - and just got laid off
>> again a
>> couple of days ago. On the bright side, that finally gives me more time
>> for alt.visa.us; I haven't shown my pixels for a while.
>> Thanks for your concern!
>> Ingo
> Dear Ingo,
> I hate to bother you again but could you email me your emaiL. Your email
> doesn't show on your posts..my email is: [email protected] One more
> thing please..on one of your posts, you answered someone who won the DV
> lottery that if they fail to get the green card for any reason they woul
> "lose out forever" do you mean that they won't be able to apply for DV
> anymore in their life? Tschuss! CCornel
> --
[email protected]
As for "losing out forever" - no. They can reapply the next year.
What I meant was that even though they were notified that they won, in the
end they would lose their Green Card, and would never again have a chance
to use this winning lottery entry. Of course they can try again. But given
that the chances of winning are about one in 100 (one in 50 for married
couples), it's not likely that somebody would win the lottery twice.
Ingo
Oct 21st 2002, 6:59 pm
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: To Ingo Pakleppa
> What I meant was that even though they were notified that they won, in the
> end they would lose their Green Card, and would never again have a chance
> to use this winning lottery entry. Of course they can try again. But given
> that the chances of winning are about one in 100 (one in 50 for married
> couples), it's not likely that somebody would win the lottery twice.
Ingo, could you tell me where you got this 1% figure? I searched on the web,
but there are so many sites that want to increase your odds of winning that
all I get is junk. I suppose it varies from one region to the other.
Tony
> end they would lose their Green Card, and would never again have a chance
> to use this winning lottery entry. Of course they can try again. But given
> that the chances of winning are about one in 100 (one in 50 for married
> couples), it's not likely that somebody would win the lottery twice.
Ingo, could you tell me where you got this 1% figure? I searched on the web,
but there are so many sites that want to increase your odds of winning that
all I get is junk. I suppose it varies from one region to the other.
Tony
Oct 22nd 2002, 4:52 am
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: To Ingo Pakleppa
On Mon, 21 Oct 2002 11:59:31 -0700, Tony Bruguier wrote:
>> What I meant was that even though they were notified that they won, in
>> the end they would lose their Green Card, and would never again have a
>> chance to use this winning lottery entry. Of course they can try again.
>> But given that the chances of winning are about one in 100 (one in 50
>> for married couples), it's not likely that somebody would win the
>> lottery twice.
> Ingo, could you tell me where you got this 1% figure? I searched on the
> web, but there are so many sites that want to increase your odds of
> winning that all I get is junk. I suppose it varies from one region to
> the other.
It somewhat varies from one region to the next. The figure comes from
simple math (and is an approximation). In the past few years, Department
of State said that there were about 6 to 8 million entries each year.
Divide that by 50,000 available Green Cards, and you arrive at the one
percent number (give or take a few).
This is actually not entirely accurate. For one, DoS actually notifies
about twice as many people as will actually get their Green Card. For
another, some entries are for whole families. And finally, some entries
will be disqualified for various reasons. These effects tend to
compensate each other, though.
>> What I meant was that even though they were notified that they won, in
>> the end they would lose their Green Card, and would never again have a
>> chance to use this winning lottery entry. Of course they can try again.
>> But given that the chances of winning are about one in 100 (one in 50
>> for married couples), it's not likely that somebody would win the
>> lottery twice.
> Ingo, could you tell me where you got this 1% figure? I searched on the
> web, but there are so many sites that want to increase your odds of
> winning that all I get is junk. I suppose it varies from one region to
> the other.
It somewhat varies from one region to the next. The figure comes from
simple math (and is an approximation). In the past few years, Department
of State said that there were about 6 to 8 million entries each year.
Divide that by 50,000 available Green Cards, and you arrive at the one
percent number (give or take a few).
This is actually not entirely accurate. For one, DoS actually notifies
about twice as many people as will actually get their Green Card. For
another, some entries are for whole families. And finally, some entries
will be disqualified for various reasons. These effects tend to
compensate each other, though.
Oct 22nd 2002, 12:09 pm
#10
Just Joined
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 10
Re: To Ingo Pakleppa
Originally posted by Ingo Pakleppa:
On Mon, 21 Oct 2002 11:59:31 -0700, Tony Bruguier wrote:
>> What I meant was that even though they were notified that they won, in
>> the end they would lose their Green Card, and would never again have a
>> chance to use this winning lottery entry. Of course they can try again.
>> But given that the chances of winning are about one in 100 (one in 50
>> for married couples), it's not likely that somebody would win the
>> lottery twice.
> Ingo, could you tell me where you got this 1% figure? I searched on the
> web, but there are so many sites that want to increase your odds of
> winning that all I get is junk. I suppose it varies from one region to
> the other.
It somewhat varies from one region to the next. The figure comes from
simple math (and is an approximation). In the past few years, Department
of State said that there were about 6 to 8 million entries each year.
Divide that by 50,000 available Green Cards, and you arrive at the one
percent number (give or take a few).
This is actually not entirely accurate. For one, DoS actually notifies
about twice as many people as will actually get their Green Card. For
another, some entries are for whole families. And finally, some entries
will be disqualified for various reasons. These effects tend to
compensate each other, though.
On Mon, 21 Oct 2002 11:59:31 -0700, Tony Bruguier wrote:
>> What I meant was that even though they were notified that they won, in
>> the end they would lose their Green Card, and would never again have a
>> chance to use this winning lottery entry. Of course they can try again.
>> But given that the chances of winning are about one in 100 (one in 50
>> for married couples), it's not likely that somebody would win the
>> lottery twice.
> Ingo, could you tell me where you got this 1% figure? I searched on the
> web, but there are so many sites that want to increase your odds of
> winning that all I get is junk. I suppose it varies from one region to
> the other.
It somewhat varies from one region to the next. The figure comes from
simple math (and is an approximation). In the past few years, Department
of State said that there were about 6 to 8 million entries each year.
Divide that by 50,000 available Green Cards, and you arrive at the one
percent number (give or take a few).
This is actually not entirely accurate. For one, DoS actually notifies
about twice as many people as will actually get their Green Card. For
another, some entries are for whole families. And finally, some entries
will be disqualified for various reasons. These effects tend to
compensate each other, though.
thanks a lot for throwing those rays of hope into my life..
I'll let you know when something happens..
