belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
someone's after your crownSo, how's it been going in here, then?
someone's after your crownSo, how's it been going in here, then?
This is just 100% completely wrong.
I am a council employee and there is a note on our intranet asking if we want to help.OK, give me evidence why it is 100% wrong. Fool.
For knocking on doors?I am a council employee and there is a note on our intranet asking if we want to help.
Their names; yes.Are you really asking why they want a list of people who are residing at a particular address?
They need to make sure there are no duplicates - a householder may fill out the form for everyone in the house, but others living there might also fill it in as individualsTheir names; yes.
Instead of person 1, 2 etc.
I see; that makes sense.They need to make sure there are no duplicates - a householder may fill out the form for everyone in the house, but others living there might also fill it in as individuals
People might share DoBsI see; that makes sense.
There being no other fool-proof means of checking for any duplication at any one household like DoB?
tbf, people might share names.People might share DoBs
I would think that allowing (online) census returns over a 3 week period might produce more duplication, tbh.Duplication (very important if people are allowed visitors), counting the number of ‘family’ units as opposed to HMOs. The alternative would be a large database of everybody.
Because people wouldn’t all respond on the same day. And they’d likely go ‘oh I missed the day, sod it then’I would think that allowing (online) census returns over a 3 week period might produce more duplication, tbh.
If respondents accurately recorded the household on one day why should anonymised data produce more duplication?
Maybe.Because people wouldn’t all respond on the same day. And they’d likely go ‘oh I missed the day, sod it then’
In 2011 were there any convictions for false data?You would be eligible for a fine as you were providing untrue information. There are umpteen checks that can be carried out, as I believe the ONS have access to other info (HMRC, DWP etc) that they can double check against. There is always a double check on submitted details for random postcodes (a fairly standard procedure).
no ideaIn 2011 were there any convictions for false data?
Reckon Mary and Robert Smith might be over-represented.no idea
just did it and feel very disappointed, seems like an amazing opportunity to ask questions that might actually be useful or interesting for future planning and there's really nothing there, just what sort of job you do and do you have a car.
such as?questions that might actually be useful or interesting for future planning
now you've got me, idk. Was vaguely thinking nhs capacity planning, or what 3 things would make your life better, are you lonely, do you have any plans to reproduce, do you hope to emigrate, that sort of thing. Stuff i'd be interested in looking at the results from millions of people's input.such as?
The form is available in many languagesThat last option for Q 19 is proper lol
View attachment 257899
,,,kinda begs the question of how you chose that option!
Is that helping folk to complete online?I’m doing my first phone census thing tomorrow, will report back