Since that number can be applied at any time to any form where that area is blank it MEANS NOTHING outside of the workflow.
Some Freepers came up with a need for the number on the form so that proper statistical measurement could be made ~ they were selecting only the odd, or even, forms on different days.
What blew that idea out of the water was the statistical measurement was claimed to be made on only HALF of the forms.
That's easy ~ take a stack ~ put one on the left, one on the right, repeat. Flip a coin to select the left stack or the right stack. Hand it to the data clerk.
That's as good as it gets boys and girls.
But why half? That was not addressed. I think that's where the story fell apart and interest waned.
You are so full of crap I don’t know how you can even walk.
Janice Okubo, the communications director for the Hawaii Department of Health, has said that the BC# was given by the state registrar’s office on the “date filed”.
The current HDOH Administrative Rules say the same (placing a state number on the file is used interchangeably with the HDOH “accepting” the BC).
The 1961 CDC Natality Report says the same - that the state file number was given by the state registrar’s office in sequential order. That fact was used to justify the accuracy of the 50% sampling method they used, since the local registrars would submit their BC’s all at once and the BC’s would be numbered sequentially, meaning that the BC#’s from that geographic area would be half-even and half-odd. The accuracy of the 50% sampling depends on those numbers being given sequentially rather than randomly. The numbers did NOT fall to chance and were NOT subject to manipulation by the HDOH because they were numbered sequentially according to when they were received at the HDOH office.
The Nordyke certificates illustrate the ascending sequential numbering at the state HDOH.
I can’t make any sense out of what you’re saying, but I can assure you that neither I nor any Freeper I’ve seen have “come up with a need” for anything. This is what the sources we have show. Period. If you want to argue it out with Janice Okubo, the DOH Administrative Rules, and the CDC from 1961, be my guest. Knock yourself out. But this is where this comes from and if the “debate” died down it was probably because the facts have been established to the best of our ability given the sources that are available.