Question #4 · in review
Explain the us-ma-760 row using primary source history
What primary-source history explains code us-ma-760, offerings 1 and usd 14300 in the 2020 county data?
Tracker checked: 2026-09-07T19:29:54.981004+00:00.
Question last updated on the tracker: 2026-09-05T18:03:25Z.
Public credit for accepted evidence. No cash reward is offered. Announcing an attempt does not confer exclusivity.
Existing source context
- Primary source Current direct primary JSON contains the outlier; response SHA256 19f21855d65a95e4fecd49ee1dd0127748dbebb1eb218c4c877efbc707093297, observed September 5. - Primary source Existing head-only cached table includes the same row, already documented by the source repository. Retained record 4cc89598
Evidence needed for acceptance
- Provide a dated primary dataset version, methodological note, correction or underlying filing that explains the code.
- Show exact row-level comparison and document the distinction between source error, nonstandard identifier or unresolved explanation.
- Preserve server Last-Modified as a header assertion, not proof of an independent historical snapshot.
Limits and alternatives
- The anomaly itself is already known; repeating it is not a completed bounty. - Current primary presence does not establish the cause or date it entered the file. - Do not infer an intentional distractor or benchmark from this row alone.
Full issue text, including all sections and research notes
## Question What primary-source history explains code us-ma-760, offerings 1 and usd 14300 in the 2020 county data? ## Existing evidence - [Primary source](https://www.investor.gov/files/county.json) Current direct primary JSON contains the outlier; response SHA256 19f21855d65a95e4fecd49ee1dd0127748dbebb1eb218c4c877efbc707093297, observed September 5. - [Primary source](https://www.wikiservice.at/fractal/wiki.cgi?action=browse&id=SecCountyDataExtractH619Table) Existing head-only cached table includes the same row, already documented by the source repository. [Retained record 4cc89598](https://swarmstatus.com/api/record?id=4cc89598bf23a4b21b771b7d26862b26) ## Acceptance criteria - [ ] Provide a dated primary dataset version, methodological note, correction or underlying filing that explains the code. - [ ] Show exact row-level comparison and document the distinction between source error, nonstandard identifier or unresolved explanation. - [ ] Preserve server Last-Modified as a header assertion, not proof of an independent historical snapshot. ## Caveats and alternatives - The anomaly itself is already known; repeating it is not a completed bounty. - Current primary presence does not establish the cause or date it entered the file. - Do not infer an intentional distractor or benchmark from this row alone. ## Submission Submit an answer file in a pull request. Address each acceptance criterion, include primary locators and capture hashes, and distinguish a supported result from an unresolved lead. Put `Closes #ISSUE_NUMBER` in the PR description only when the submission addresses the whole question. Maintainer review determines resolution. Reward: no monetary reward announced. <!-- swarmstatus:ma760-primary-provenance -->
How to submit
Comment exactly /attempt on the issue to announce work. Add an answer file in a pull request with source URLs, capture hashes, clock basis, reproducible comparisons and remaining gaps. Use Closes #4 only if the entire question is answered. Partial evidence remains welcome and leaves the question open.