From: Ira Kurzban ira@kkwtlaw.com
To: "azilee.france.34@gmail.com"
Date: Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 1:45 PM
WE NEED TO CONTRIBUTE. THIS IS AN EMERGENCY. WE ARE AT RISK THAT THE LAWYER DECREASES THE INTENSITY OF HIS WORK, THE QUALITY OF THE WORK, AND THE TIME PUT INTO IT. YOU DECIDE.
Armande: How is the fundraising going? I am truly stunned that so small a group has contributed. This is costing us a huge amount of money. Ira.
Kurzban Kurzban Weinger Tetzeli & Pratt P.A.
Ira Kurzban
Hey guys !!!
ReplyDeletePlease donate !!!
You can send $100,
if you only save $5 every day.
Are you going to make the lawyer offer a pro bono lawsuit ???
It's so rude and unfair to the lawyer.
You must have answered that you agree the appeal.
You must pay money.
I'll transfer another $100 again soon.
Thank you.
Mr. Kurzban,
ReplyDeleteI have donated and I am proud of it. It is now for us, the small group of donors, to convince the larger group of victims.
Babaki has volunteered to donate on my behalf.
ReplyDeletei will donate this week ,i wishe you best lucky and we are all with you
ReplyDeleteI will donate more only if Mr. Kurzban will try to explain to us how we are going to have enough time if the lawsuit is won.
ReplyDelete3 or 4 months will not be enough for us to go through all the dv processing. And what if the DoS then tries to go to appeal? It will be all over for us after Oct.1, 2012, regardless.
Dear ALL
ReplyDeletefirst thing ..i'm want to say thank you mr kurzban . and we will donate for him , he work hard for us and you should to know mr that we will never forgot you you help us for our rights to get back our green card ..please don't forgave up be with us all time ... keep it up
to "Anonymous Feb 21, 2012 12:26 AM"
ReplyDeleteAs you can see appeal takes a long time (almost 9 months), so DoS can't accomplish another appeal before 10/01/2012.
As you remember, last year redrawing was on July 15. And some winners already got their visas in October (~3 months)! So we have enough time for everything. Especially for donation ;)
What is the goal for $$$?
ReplyDeleteFor example: Our goal is $100,000 and so far we have $5,000.
Everybody knows what they want from Mr. Kurzban,
but nobody knows what he wants($$).
Just make things clear, so people know.
as long as you think is this way we will not win because our mission is donation and let alwyer do the rest
ReplyDeleteHi Guys, This is to confirm my payment.
ReplyDeleteDear Mr. Hamid,
This is to confirm payment received from you today in the amount of $100.00 regarding the 2012 DV Lottery Appeal.
Any questions you may have, you may direct them to 22000hopes@gmail.com. Thank you.
Nelida Plaza
A donation of $100 was made today and I promise more to come.
ReplyDeleteThanks Ira for the tremendous effort.
S.M.H
Hi all!
ReplyDeleteThe random number is generated by computer software is pseudorandom numbers, because computer can do only determinated steps (some calculation) [1]. So immpossible to achive true random by using computer.
Most pseudorandom generator algorithms produce sequences which are uniformly distributed by any of several tests[2]. In other random it’s some kind of function that generate a number with probability 1/n. Where ‘n’ is all possible variants. Obviously, this function can generate some number twice. For example, if we are using dice to generate a random number then we can get twice same number, so for computer generated numbers this rule worked too. In the lottery result we can’t find who won twice in same lottery. As result of this we can’t use statistics methods to results of lottery, because it’s result and not random numbers. And we can’t consider fact that 90% in first two days. Even if it’s not uniformly distributed the rule that we can get some number twice worked too, because if not than all next number depend on previous and it’s highly determenistic numbers.
Obviously, it’s incorrect to consider people who ‘won’ as random numbers and say about statistics and so on. Also incorrect say about strickly random.
In science and engineering, a black box is a device, system or object which can be viewed solely in terms of its input, output and transfer characteristics without any knowledge of its internal workings, that is, its implementation is "opaque" (black). Almost anything might be referred to as a black box: a transistor, an algorithm, or the human mind [3]. In the Law of DV lottery there is no any strickly rule how computer program must work, and no any source code avaible for download. I want to say that we can consider this program as black box, with input and output, and for us important that it is random and fair. DV-2012 results was random and fair. And it’s not important how this program work and what kind of error was in it. If it’s important I want to see part of source code for be sure that they had to cancel results of DV-2012. In the DV-2012 result we can see the input, and the output. And no rule how to get output before the result was published.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomness#In_information_science
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudo-random_number_generator
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_box
Dear all,
ReplyDeleteI'm one of the "winners" of the voided DV-2012. I just found about this blog and about this lawsuit. Better late than never.
I want to thank Mr. Kurzban for his efforts and everyone who donated so far.
I took a look at the Brief_1.pdf. At the end of plaintiffs there's a sentence "On behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated". I want to ask what "similarly situated" individuals can do at this point as well as donating?
I hope we win.
Thank you,