Dear List, My intent was not to 'trash' or abuse' anyone. I am sorry if you feel that way. I was simply making the point that, particularly in the case of the BREAKELL query, that 3 listers that we know of replied to that query. Terrific, there are people who are willing and happy to freely give their time, I know I certainly am. Family history would get nowhere if people had to pay professional researchers. Time is the operative word. There is we all know, less and less time to go around. It is frustrating in the extreme to spend time and effort doing something, and ten minutes later find that it has already been done, and twice over in the BREAKELL instance. Hence my 'dummy spit'! All that I am asking is quite simple. After replying to the person that posted the query, a brief posting, 1 line, to the list, 'I have sent.....'. The way the list is at the moment, very quiet, I doubt this is going to cause problems for the archives?? Then anyone else who has the same 'source' does not have to look it up, and send. They can maybe then look for other information, perhaps the first person to respond didn't have a Marriage disc and was only able to provide a Birth.... Different people have different resources. To quote an old adage 'Many hands make light work.' Also, for people referring to the archives in the future, there is some information to advise that an 'event' has been found, or not, and that they can, assuming email addresses don't change, contact the person that provided the information or the person that made the initial query. I sincerely, hope that we can with ListMum Ros's permission discuss this on list. That's all, I wish you all a good day and happy hunting! Steph. :-))) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Genie" <c_tillett@yahoo.com.au> To: <AUS-SAGEN-L@rootsweb.com>; "Judy Holding" <judyfh@bigpond.com> Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 11:52 PM Subject: Re: [AUS-SAGEN] Queries and Answers. I havent bothered answering anyone since the last blow up and I wont anymore. Anyone is welcome to email me privately and I will gladly help. So those who are inferring I have can go twist. I was just thinking how quiet the trashing of others had been recently..maybe I should have kept that thought to myself. You dont even have to do anything to be abused on this list. Genie http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/group.php?gid=295203197016 http://geniesgenealogyhelp.blogspot.com/

The fact that people don't tell others that they have sent a reply direct to a person has caused me to stop spending time chasing things up and I now only reply when a simple quick answer is needed, as the time delay from when a person posts to when the answer is researched and formulated can also allow others to think nothing has been replied to and also do research. Thus I would suggest if anyone is going to do an answer then they immediately post that they will follow this up, as some do. I personally have always tried to follow the philosophy that if a question is asked on the list, then it should generally be answered on the list, unless it breaches copyright etc. or contains photos or attachments etc. eg SAGHS BDM extracted data in their format, which they get touchy about. Others don't agree with this, SO nowadays I just sit in the background and don't answer most of the asks. If most answers to POSTED LIST QUERIES (they are not private queries but public posting queries) were POSTED TO THE LIST instead of privately it gives a full archive for later, and it allows others to see what was found, and those others may sometimes have other resources and are able to find different or additional data and post in answer to the original posters query, But as answers are being done off list then who knows what was found!! or not found!! Likewise I often see where an other person requests that answer be posted to list so they can gain something from it, as they may also be related to that family etc. This request would be unneccesary if answers were always posted. Hence my decision to nowadays only answer occasionally. I can spend my time productively elsewhere instead of spending time only to find others have answered it off list, (often by a reply from the poster, no one else) which is very frustrating and wastes the other researchers time. Thus I can appreciate the "dummy spit " by Steph. who (as do many others), spends quite considerable time answering peoples queries. So a little thought on part of those answering postings could assist all to make the list a valuable resource within itself to everyone. regards Freda ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephanie Cocks" <steph-ken@bigpond.com> To: "Aus-sagen" <aus-sagen@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, August 13, 2010 9:13 AM Subject: Re: [AUS-SAGEN] Queries and Answers. > > Dear List, > > My intent was not to 'trash' or abuse' anyone. I am sorry if you feel > that > way. > > I was simply making the point that, particularly in the case of the > BREAKELL > query, that 3 listers that we know of replied to that query. > > Terrific, there are people who are willing and happy to freely give their > time, I know I certainly am. Family history would get nowhere if people > had > to pay professional researchers. > > Time is the operative word. > > There is we all know, less and less time to go around. It is frustrating > in > the extreme to spend time and effort doing something, and ten minutes > later > find that it has already been done, and twice over in the BREAKELL > instance. > Hence my 'dummy spit'! > > All that I am asking is quite simple. > > After replying to the person that posted the query, a brief posting, 1 > line, > to the list, 'I have sent.....'. > > The way the list is at the moment, very quiet, I doubt this is going to > cause problems for the archives?? > > Then anyone else who has the same 'source' does not have to look it up, > and > send. They can maybe then look for other information, perhaps the first > person to respond didn't have a Marriage disc and was only able to provide > a > Birth.... Different people have different resources. To quote an old > adage > 'Many hands make light work.' > > Also, for people referring to the archives in the future, there is some > information to advise that an 'event' has been found, or not, and that > they > can, assuming email addresses don't change, contact the person that > provided > the information or the person that made the initial query. > > I sincerely, hope that we can with ListMum Ros's permission discuss this > on > list. > > That's all, I wish you all a good day and happy hunting! > Steph. :-))) > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Genie" <c_tillett@yahoo.com.au> > To: <AUS-SAGEN-L@rootsweb.com>; "Judy Holding" <judyfh@bigpond.com> > Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 11:52 PM > Subject: Re: [AUS-SAGEN] Queries and Answers. > > > I havent bothered answering anyone since the last blow up and I wont > anymore. > Anyone is welcome to email me privately and I will gladly help. > So those who are inferring I have can go twist. > I was just thinking how quiet the trashing of others had been > recently..maybe I should have kept that thought to myself. > You dont even have to do anything to be abused on this list. > Genie > > http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/group.php?gid=295203197016 > > > > http://geniesgenealogyhelp.blogspot.com/ > > > Advertising on AUS-SAGEN is forbidden by Rootsweb Rules. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > AUS-SAGEN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

On Friday 13 August 2010 12:02:19 Freda wrote: > I personally have always tried to follow the philosophy that if a question > is asked on the list, > then it should generally be answered on the list, unless it breaches > copyright etc. > or contains photos or attachments etc. eg SAGHS BDM extracted data in their > format, which they get touchy about. > This is the only FH list I subscribe to (and I am on about 20 lists) where there is this fetish about not posting answers to the list. Frankly I find it annoying. I keep opening messages that contain no information. If there really is some concern about breaching copyright, then paraphrasing the data is enough to get around that, along with an acknowledgment of the source, which should always be done anyway as data without a source is unsatisfactory. I am a member of lists where people do Ancestry lookups for other people and then post to the list. Ancestry doesn't seem to bother too much about it, so why are we being so precious here? -- ==== Michael Lightfoot Canberra, Australia OPC Merther, St Breock & Egloshayle, Cornwall see http://www.cornwall-opc.org michael.lightfoot@pcug.org.au ====