Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There is no point in arguing with you, you either refuse to understand it or you are trying purposefully to mislead people. You acknowledge weighting for sibs and IB (which only applies for PS/PK), but you are denying that you are also weighted on your ranking. That makes you half right, HALF WRONG.

There isn't weighting of sibs and IB. Those are in effect separate lotteries. IB goes first, then sibs, then everyone else. If there are more people in the IB round than there are slots everybody in the sibs or general rounds has zero chance. Zero chance -- not a slim chance, zero chance.

There is no weighting.

Post an official, verifiable source that this is the way the lottery will go. Otherwise, you're lumped in with the other "there's no weighting rankings" poster who is saying this with no source and in total opposition from what actual, real life, official common lottery staff are saying.

CONFUSED? CALL THE COMMON LOTTERY YOURSELF. DO NOT LET ANONYMOUS POSTS ON DCUM MAKE YOU PUT LESS STOCK IN YOUR RANKINGS!

From the FAQ:
"When there are more students than spaces at a school, students who have a preference (such as a sibling preference) will be the first to be offered spaces. Then, random selection decides which other students will be offered spaces.

Students will be matched with no more than one school. My School DC will try to match each student with their 1st choice, then their 2nd choice, and so on through the student’s list."

No weighting. Priority. Random selection. Students matched in order of their choices.
http://www.myschooldc.org/faq/#common-3

I bet $100 there are people in DME who don't understand the difference between weighting and priority and so incorrectly answer questions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There is no point in arguing with you, you either refuse to understand it or you are trying purposefully to mislead people. You acknowledge weighting for sibs and IB (which only applies for PS/PK), but you are denying that you are also weighted on your ranking. That makes you half right, HALF WRONG.

There isn't weighting of sibs and IB. Those are in effect separate lotteries. IB goes first, then sibs, then everyone else. If there are more people in the IB round than there are slots everybody in the sibs or general rounds has zero chance. Zero chance -- not a slim chance, zero chance.

There is no weighting.

Wow, now people are just making random rules up. This is ridiculous. Also, note the lack of verifiable source for this post as well. Believe at your own risk.

Anonymous wrote:

What's wrong, afraid to call them youself and confirm that you're full of crap? Yes, you are, because you know you're full of crap. The person I spoke to was quite able to explain the algorithm, was not reading off a script, gave examples, and answered my specific "What if...?" questions with ease. I'll take their accurate, relevant info over your admittedly (because if you had an official, verifiable source you would have posted it by now) not-official musings/misleading.

I read your posting of your conversation with the lottery person, and I can see where you misunderstood. There is a difference between weighting and priority. Weighting means you have a better chance. Priority means the person with priority gets it every time over the person without priority. We do not have a weighted system, we have a priority system. IB first priority, sibs second priority, then priority by lottery number.

What the nice person in the lottery office was saying to you is that even if you have a good lottery number, there might be a higher priority person than you who gets the spot. The "might" isn't whether they get the spot, if they exist they get it, the "might" is they might exist.

In my experience DCPS doesn't like to admit that it's a strict priority system, they tend to waffle around that point because it's so depressing for the people who don't have priority.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There is no point in arguing with you, you either refuse to understand it or you are trying purposefully to mislead people. You acknowledge weighting for sibs and IB (which only applies for PS/PK), but you are denying that you are also weighted on your ranking. That makes you half right, HALF WRONG.

There isn't weighting of sibs and IB. Those are in effect separate lotteries. IB goes first, then sibs, then everyone else. If there are more people in the IB round than there are slots everybody in the sibs or general rounds has zero chance. Zero chance -- not a slim chance, zero chance.

There is no weighting.

Post an official, verifiable source that this is the way the lottery will go. Otherwise, you're lumped in with the other "there's no weighting rankings" poster who is saying this with no source and in total opposition from what actual, real life, official common lottery staff are saying.

CONFUSED? CALL THE COMMON LOTTERY YOURSELF. DO NOT LET ANONYMOUS POSTS ON DCUM MAKE YOU PUT LESS STOCK IN YOUR RANKINGS!

Anonymous wrote:
There is no point in arguing with you, you either refuse to understand it or you are trying purposefully to mislead people. You acknowledge weighting for sibs and IB (which only applies for PS/PK), but you are denying that you are also weighted on your ranking. That makes you half right, HALF WRONG.

There isn't weighting of sibs and IB. Those are in effect separate lotteries. IB goes first, then sibs, then everyone else. If there are more people in the IB round than there are slots everybody in the sibs or general rounds has zero chance. Zero chance -- not a slim chance, zero chance.

There is no weighting.

There is no weighting by rank.

They don't go through all the number 1's first, then all the #2's. They go through every application, in lottery number order. They do it in batches: in-boundary first, then siblings, then everyone else. When they get to your number, you're assigned to the highest pick of yours that still has spaces left, and wait-listed at all of your higher picks.

Rank your choices in your actual order of preference. There is no way to increase your odds by changing up the order.

What I don't know is what happens if you have sibling preference and put another school ahead of your sibling school. My bet is either you forfeit your preference or forfeit your chance at the higher ranked school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope, you're still not getting it. The only way they're doing a better job of "matching" students is because they're removing your name from the applicant pools at the schools you ranked lower than where you got in. This could conceivably really help some people, so that is why they are calling it "improved matching." There is no weighting, other than the preferences for siblings and IB. This is why they keep telling you to put them in the order in which you would like to go. You're not hurting your chances of getting into your third choice by ranking your true number one. However, it is smart to have your safety schools, since you really do not want to have to into the second chance lottery.

There is no point in arguing with you, you either refuse to understand it or you are trying purposefully to mislead people. You acknowledge weighting for sibs and IB (which only applies for PS/PK), but you are denying that you are also weighted on your ranking. That makes you half right, HALF WRONG.

Everyone else, feel free not to take my or this PPs word for this and call yourself. I'm trusting what 3 different common lottery staff told me about this exact question over this anonymous person who, frankly, sounds invested in posting wrong info. Especially since they haven't said where they are getting official word that the ranking doesn't get weighted.

Feel free not to take my word for it either, but please, do NOT believe this person, because the lottery folks are saying rankings will be weighted, along with preferences. Period.

And by "lottery folks," you mean the people who are answering the phones and reading off of the FAQ that was provided to them. I guarantee that most of them don't understand the algorithm because most of the people in the administration don't understand it either.

What's wrong, afraid to call them youself and confirm that you're full of crap? Yes, you are, because you know you're full of crap. The person I spoke to was quite able to explain the algorithm, was not reading off a script, gave examples, and answered my specific "What if...?" questions with ease. I'll take their accurate, relevant info over your admittedly (because if you had an official, verifiable source you would have posted it by now) not-official musings/misleading.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There is no point in arguing with you, you either refuse to understand it or you are trying purposefully to mislead people. You acknowledge weighting for sibs and IB (which only applies for PS/PK), but you are denying that you are also weighted on your ranking. That makes you half right, HALF WRONG.

This is not true. Sibs and IB applies to all grades.

Fine, if you're IB for a school for K and up, and you want to waste a lottery spot on that school, cool by me. More spots to go around elsewhere!

Yeah, if it really is the same as last year, how hard would it be to train people on the phone to say, "it's the same as last year, only with more schools."

Suit yourself!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope, you're still not getting it. The only way they're doing a better job of "matching" students is because they're removing your name from the applicant pools at the schools you ranked lower than where you got in. This could conceivably really help some people, so that is why they are calling it "improved matching." There is no weighting, other than the preferences for siblings and IB. This is why they keep telling you to put them in the order in which you would like to go. You're not hurting your chances of getting into your third choice by ranking your true number one. However, it is smart to have your safety schools, since you really do not want to have to into the second chance lottery.

There is no point in arguing with you, you either refuse to understand it or you are trying purposefully to mislead people. You acknowledge weighting for sibs and IB (which only applies for PS/PK), but you are denying that you are also weighted on your ranking. That makes you half right, HALF WRONG.

Everyone else, feel free not to take my or this PPs word for this and call yourself. I'm trusting what 3 different common lottery staff told me about this exact question over this anonymous person who, frankly, sounds invested in posting wrong info. Especially since they haven't said where they are getting official word that the ranking doesn't get weighted.

Feel free not to take my word for it either, but please, do NOT believe this person, because the lottery folks are saying rankings will be weighted, along with preferences. Period.

And by "lottery folks," you mean the people who are answering the phones and reading off of the FAQ that was provided to them. I guarantee that most of them don't understand the algorithm because most of the people in the administration don't understand it either.

Right, I am going to believe an anonymous DCUM poster over what people who actually work for the Deputy Mayor of Education's office.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope, you're still not getting it. The only way they're doing a better job of "matching" students is because they're removing your name from the applicant pools at the schools you ranked lower than where you got in. This could conceivably really help some people, so that is why they are calling it "improved matching." There is no weighting, other than the preferences for siblings and IB. This is why they keep telling you to put them in the order in which you would like to go. You're not hurting your chances of getting into your third choice by ranking your true number one. However, it is smart to have your safety schools, since you really do not want to have to into the second chance lottery.

There is no point in arguing with you, you either refuse to understand it or you are trying purposefully to mislead people. You acknowledge weighting for sibs and IB (which only applies for PS/PK), but you are denying that you are also weighted on your ranking. That makes you half right, HALF WRONG.

Everyone else, feel free not to take my or this PPs word for this and call yourself. I'm trusting what 3 different common lottery staff told me about this exact question over this anonymous person who, frankly, sounds invested in posting wrong info. Especially since they haven't said where they are getting official word that the ranking doesn't get weighted.

Feel free not to take my word for it either, but please, do NOT believe this person, because the lottery folks are saying rankings will be weighted, along with preferences. Period.

And by "lottery folks," you mean the people who are answering the phones and reading off of the FAQ that was provided to them. I guarantee that most of them don't understand the algorithm because most of the people in the administration don't understand it either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
There is no point in arguing with you, you either refuse to understand it or you are trying purposefully to mislead people. You acknowledge weighting for sibs and IB (which only applies for PS/PK), but you are denying that you are also weighted on your ranking. That makes you half right, HALF WRONG.

This is not true. Sibs and IB applies to all grades.

To clarify, sibs apply to all grades. IB isn't a factor beyond PS/PK because you're guaranteed a spot if you're IB.

Anonymous wrote:
There is no point in arguing with you, you either refuse to understand it or you are trying purposefully to mislead people. You acknowledge weighting for sibs and IB (which only applies for PS/PK), but you are denying that you are also weighted on your ranking. That makes you half right, HALF WRONG.

This is not true. Sibs and IB applies to all grades.