Is there any "connection" between the speed of the

[m-coon]

I was thinking about this the other day. Just thought I would share my thoughts in the case anybody has ever made this connection...

 

After reading about the many cases here and then seeing that some people seem to make their way to the interview so much faster than many others do - Has anybody ever seen a connection between the speed of the application and the result of the application???

 

Is it possible that the applications that render a faster interview date - are more suseptable to being failed?... Or the opposite? My thought is that when an application draws a flag - it "possibly could" move on to the next stage (bypassing further investigation) with the applicant being told "there are problems" and getting the blue slip..... While the ones that do not draw a flag, might take longer as it continues through the entire process.

 

Is this a possibility? Does anybody have any data to confirm or deny this idea? Or is it likely that there is no connection at all between the speed of the process and the result?

 

Scott

[jkobman]

We rec'd our Visa July 2004. Most of the people that applied when I did rec'd their visas about the same time. Some of them were slow.

 

I guess I am saying there doesn't seem to be any way of knowing the time of application -> visa.

[notrevorich]

if you look at the most recent interview results , I would say that you theory is not correct since the poeple who have been having the shorter time periods are getting approved .

longer time periods are more likely if there is a issue with the security checks or that the paperwork submitted is incomplete or incorrect .

[castaway109]

Maybe it has to do with how the application is put together, how much information it already contains and how easy it is too access.

[david_dawei]

I think we would be hard pressed to find any rhyme/reason from petitions as to visa results. There is such a variety that get both approved and denied.

 

My petition had bare bones, I'd even suggest less than what they state is needed. Even later forms that my SO filled out, when she told me I cringed at the answers, from not understanding the questions really.

 

Others have 2" petitions...

 

One theory, which I heard quite a long time ago, was that Southern beneficiary's are more prone to review...

[nooneufo]

Simply put, no.

 

The data so far suggests no correlation between what service center the initial application goes through, (which determines the speed of approval) and the results of the interview.

 

The data goes on to suggest strongly that once your application arrives at the Guz machine, everyone is treated equally.

 

My take is pretty much you need to be prepared with the proper documents, based on your situation. Very simple really. But because of the complexity of the paperwork, it seems much more difficult, especially when your personal life is involved. I am pretty strong on the opinion that we should not see denials of CFL members if they read and prepare. Concerning third party issues, I think this can be dealt with premptively, if the person were willing to be proactive on the issue. I think this requires a letter outlining the situation before the interview naming names and explaining the situation to the consulate if you think you might fall into this catagory.

I would also add that there seems to be an implied correlation between those who get a blue slip and the kinds of posts they produce (perhaps 25-50%). The general impression from the total, is that there is much less information provided by those with blue slips before hand of their progress through the process. Often lots of questions are asked as to the particulars of what their situation is before help can be provided when they are blue slipped, as often they have no signature line. At one time, I had thought this could be because people don't post until they have a problem. I am more of the opinion now it is incorrect preparation for their situation. Often what we see is the emotional response to the situation, not the objective view. Guz has told us they don't even look at the file until the interview happens, so that if the VO has to take a big picture look at the file, and your stuff is not together before the interview, one could expect a problem if you did not have the general things needed obvious in the file.(for example for a K1, obvious things like how you met, some photos, travel tickets, previous marriage clearly ended with supporting documents, etc, that are easy to see). Based on the number of people who have posted about their petition preparation, ( and the series of polls I asked about this) this seems to be a factor. Then the supporting evidence to fill out any obvious questions at the interview. There is a faq on the question types and averages, that supports this view (DavidZixuan post, link to this please).

Edited November 8, 2005 by nooneufo (see edit history)

[natrigon]

I think there is a definate connection.

 

If you take the weight of your completed application, multiplied by the number of weeks you have spent in China, plus the minutes of direct phone conversation, times the number of translated documents. You will have a base number.

 

A X W + P X D = Base

 

Then take your base and divide it by the number of total siblings, times how many meals you ate in China, times how many of those meals you were out-eaten by a child under 10 years old, divided by the boxes of cigarettes you gave away, less the times you were treated bad in China (often 0), divided by the current USD/RMB factor. This is the consumption factor.

 

Base / S X F X C / CS - B / $ = Consumption Factor

 

Now we are getting close to the predictor. Total the times you were mislead, misinformed, treatly without concern, provided outdated forms, hung up on after waiting more than 20 minutes on hold or told that changes from 9/11 has caused a delay by the DOS, BCS, BCIS, DOD, NVC or any other branch. This is your main Pre-annoyed Core Number. If you take this Pre-annoyed Core Number (PCN) and enter it in at the appropriate location on the internet (note the appropriate location link varies from hour to hour, because of new security concerns there is no way to communicate the now current location, but outdated locations are available for $2.50 per minute at 900-555-5555). After entering this number and pressing submit once (and only once) you will be issued the correct and coded modifyer number by mail. It may be mailed to you or your spouse/fiance.

 

Now here is the easy part. By this time if you are still engaged or married you should no longer need this information.

[IluvmyLi]

could you please balance my checkbook?

[jim_julian]

Natrion ... I'm afraid your formula is out of date. You are giving too much weight to the box of cigarettes. I suggest factoring it down by the current year factorial divided by e.

[david_dawei]

Simply put, no.

 

The data so far suggests no correlation between what service center the initial application goes through, (which determines the speed of approval) and the results of the interview.

 

The data goes on to suggest strongly that once your application arrives at the Guz machine, everyone is treated equally.

 

My take is pretty much you need to be prepared with the proper documents, based on your situation. Very simple really. But because of the complexity of the paperwork, it seems much more difficult, especially when your personal life is involved. I am pretty strong on the opinion that we should not see denials of CFL members if they read and prepare. Concerning third party issues, I think this can be dealt with premptively, if the person were willing to be proactive on the issue. I think this requires a letter outlining the situation before the interview naming names and explaining the situation to the consulate if you think you might fall into this catagory.

I would also add that there seems to be an implied correlation between those who get a blue slip and the kinds of posts they produce (perhaps 25-50%). The general impression from the total, is that there is much less information provided by those with blue slips before hand of their progress through the process. Often lots of questions are asked as to the particulars of what their situation is before help can be provided when they are blue slipped, as often they have no signature line. At one time, I had thought this could be because people don't post until they have a problem. I am more of the opinion now it is incorrect preparation for their situation. Often what we see is the emotional response to the situation, not the objective view. Guz has told us they don't even look at the file until the interview happens, so that if the VO has to take a big picture look at the file, and your stuff is not together before the interview, one could expect a problem if you did not have the general things needed obvious in the file.(for example for a K1, obvious things like how you met, some photos, travel tickets, previous marriage clearly ended with supporting documents, etc, that are easy to see). Based on the number of people who have posted about their petition preparation, ( and the series of polls I asked about this) this seems to be a factor. Then the supporting evidence to fill out any obvious questions at the interview. There is a faq on the question types and averages, that supports this view (DavidZixuan post, link to this please).

167227[/snapback]

The Interview FAQ, Q.1.18 Most Important / Common / Frequent Items?

 

 

Also see the FAQ Interview Questions:

 

 

FAQ

http://candleforlove.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=11293

[david_dawei]

Concerning third party issues, I think this can be dealt with premptively, if the person were willing to be proactive on the issue. I think this requires a letter outlining the situation before the interview naming names and explaining the situation to the consulate if you think you might fall into this catagory.

167227[/snapback]

This is very interesting.. and maybe the Third Party post in the 'GUZ speaks' forum could ask if this is a worthwhile approach; to be preemptive and proactive (prior to the interview)...

 

I know that one person I talked to was worried to do this in case the person did not really send anything to GUZ. Then, would the person open a can of worms.. creating 'First party issue' (sorry, can't think of a decent term for falsely self-incrimination)...

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

Now we are getting close to the predictor.  Total the times you were mislead, misinformed, treatly without concern, provided outdated forms, hung up on after waiting more than 20 minutes on hold or told that changes from 9/11 has caused a delay by the DOS, BCS, BCIS, DOD, NVC or any other branch.  This is your main Pre-annoyed Core Number.

167267[/snapback]

Is there any way that we can arrange a get-together with all CFL members and those that:

 

1. Hung up on us during the process

2. Denied our petition without looking at evidence

3. Gave un mis-directed or incorrect advice

4. etc., etc., etc.,

 

We could exchange beer and cigarettes and later a nice little blanket party....

[natrigon]

Natrion ... I'm afraid your formula is out of date.  You are giving too much weight to the box of cigarettes.  I suggest factoring it down by the current year factorial divided by e.

167390[/snapback]

I think your right. It is tied into the google robots website indexing factor. Which by the way just changed again. Yes, I think it is directly related to giving too much weight to the box of cigarettes. Hehehee

 

Louis

[nooneufo]

Concerning third party issues, I think this can be dealt with premptively, if the person were willing to be proactive on the issue. I think this requires a letter outlining the situation before the interview naming names and explaining the situation to the consulate if you think you might fall into this catagory.

167227[/snapback]

This is very interesting.. and maybe the Third Party post in the 'GUZ speaks' forum could ask if this is a worthwhile approach; to be preemptive and proactive (prior to the interview)...

 

I know that one person I talked to was worried to do this in case the person did not really send anything to GUZ. Then, would the person open a can of worms.. creating 'First party issue' (sorry, can't think of a decent term for falsely self-incrimination)...

167430[/snapback]

I think that the consulate has answered that this approach would work. (Assuming you know about it, as warpbored has noted) See below partial quote from the consulate here:

http://candleforlove.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=13283

There are a few things you should keep in mind about third party correspondence:

 

1. Consular officers always consider the totality of circumstances when making a decision.

2. Consular officers are fully aware that the motivation of individuals sending us third party correspondence is often unclear.

3. If any petitioner or beneficiary feels they are being threatened or blackmailed by any outside party, they should immediately contact the Consulate with this concern. We will then take the appropriate actions to resolve the issue.

 

I think this is reasonable, if you are doing an objective and honest assesment of your situation. If you had used a meeting service, visa service, or dealt with some other person within your situation (like your beneficiary's boss/co-workers) and they have now given you some kind of indication that they are going to do a third party on you, I would hope a clearly written explanation of the facts of the situation to the consulate will provide a positive resolution before the interview.

[ameriken]

I was thinking about this the other day. Just thought I would share my thoughts in the case anybody has ever made this connection...

 

After reading about the many cases here and then seeing that some people seem to make their way to the interview so much faster than many others do - Has anybody ever seen a connection between the speed of the application and the result of the application???

 

Is it possible that the applications that render a faster interview date - are more suseptable to being failed?...  Or the opposite? My thought is that when an application draws a flag - it "possibly could" move on to the next stage (bypassing further investigation) with the applicant being told "there are problems" and getting the blue slip..... While the ones that do not draw a flag, might take longer as it continues through the entire process.

 

Is this a possibility? Does anybody have any data to confirm or deny this idea? Or is it likely that there is no connection at all between the speed of the process and the result?

 

Scott

166289[/snapback]

I dont know about P1 to interview, but my SO told me something she heard about the P1- P3 time frame. She visited another site similar to CFL, but for Chinese women, and there was a general consensus at the site most people will be about 4 months from P1 to P3. It does not matter how fast or slow the P1- P2 or P2 - P3 times are....it will be 4 months.

 

Their theory is, if P1- P2 is fast, then P2 - P3 will be slow.

 

And, if P1 - P21 was slow, then P2 to P3 would be fast.

 

...........but both cases would always average at 4 months.

 

I didnt put any stock in this when I heard it. So, I was excited when our P1 - P2 time was faster than we expected. I thought we would be ahead of the game.

 

What happened? P2 to P3 is taking longer than expected and we are now approaching the 4 month mark awaiting our P3!

 

Go figure.