To J. P. Gilliver BK does not have the option to exclude just certain people or just people with certain sources. It will exclude Notes attached to people if the Notes have the Print Where column set to Never Print. John Steed ----- Original Message ----- From: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> To: <bk@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2012 5:40 PM Subject: [BK] Can I exclude a source? Multiple sources? from a GedCom etc.... > Some of the information in my tree is from people who have made it a > condition of giving it to me (or had such imposed on them by other > people who have given it to them) that it is not "published". > > While I don't agree with such views, I respect them - after all, I > wouldn't have the information at all (until I corroborate it from other > sources) without them. > > It would be useful if BK could - say, when creating a GedCom - omit > information from a specified source - or, better, sources. Can it, and > I've missed it? > -- > J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf > > Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to > prove > that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are > right. -H.L. Mencken, writer, editor, and critic (1880-1956) > Remember - Use the Archives at > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message >

To Rennie Brown That problem happens on a few computers, and I am not sure why. It may be related to some other program that you recently installed or that is running in the background. If you start the computer in SAFE mode, does it still happen? If not, that is a clue. You can use WinZip or any zip program to compress the *.DT6 files and copy them to your backup disk. John Steed ----- Original Message ----- From: "R L Brown" <wiseguy_wv@yahoo.com> To: <bk@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2012 11:02 AM Subject: [BK] Backup Zip Error -7 I'm running BK 6.5.11, registered, on Windows XP. For years, I've done frequent backups without a problem... until now. When choosing to COMPRESS the data files, I get the following BK error message: zip error=-7 No matching files c:\BK6\*.DT6 Stop BK and stop Windows and restart computer and try again. Or if you have Windows Vista or Win 7, you may need administrator rights for that location. If problems continue, use the COPY and not the COMPRESS option. I stopped and rebooted twice, but got the same error. I downloaded and reinstalled the full BK program, but got the same error. I stopped and rebooted again, same error. I then chose to COPY the data files, and that worked. But the result is more files taking up 3-1/2 times the space. I use the Backup/Restore function to transfer my BK database between three computers, so I would really rather stay with the zipped method that I've been using. What may have caused this sudden problem, and how can I fix it? Rennie Brown West Union, WV ======================= We're all in this together http://www.doddridgecountyroots.com/ Remember me in the family tree, My name, my days, my strife; Then I'll ride upon the wings of time And live an endless life. --------------------------------------- Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

To Michael Diamant What is the exact error message. Does it say the file is attached to person x or marriage x or that it is an event note, or what exactly does it say? And what is the exact name of the file that is missing, with the drive, folder, and file name? Are you using BK 6.5 or what version? John Steed ----- Original Message ----- From: "Palekaiko" <palekaiko@gmail.com> To: <bk@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2012 6:58 PM Subject: [BK] Backup error 53 >I routinely back up all my files to two hard drives. Lately, I've > been getting an error message for two different text files, indicating > that the two files are associated with people who don't exist. I've > checked and the text files do exist, but I can't find the "missing > people" to whom they are supposed to be associated. How do I solve > this dilemma? > > Michael Diamant > Remember - Use the Archives at > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message >

Is my name in a computer? In my genealogy travels I have met people that said they didn't want their name in a computer. Well I am sorry to say that regardless if they are in my computer here, there are other computers in which their name might appear 1 Birth Your birth record is in the county's and state's computer. Also depending on the state you were born in it may be online since some states sold their birth indexes. 2 Social Security Card Do you have a social security card? If you do, your name in their computers & the IRS. 3 School Did you go to school? Each school will have a computerized record of you attending. And the Alumni Associations probably have you in their computers. 4 Work Do you have a job? Your name is in the company's payroll system. 5 Resumes How many resumes have you sent out? Each of those was probably scanned and added to the companies computers. Did you post it on the internet? If yes add another 100 computers. 5 401K Have a 401K? You name is in their computers. 6 Married Your name is in the marriage records at the county & state level. 7 Children Have any children? Your name is on their birth record see #1 above. 8 Divorced Your name is in the divorce records computers and possibly in online divorce indexes Military The Air Force, Army, Navy, or Marines (Coast Guard is here) has your name in their computer. 9 Own a car Your name is in the automobile title system. 10 Own a house Your name is in the real estate records of the county. 11 Have a bank account Your name is in their computers 12 Got a credit card Your name is in their computers Buy any stocks? Your name is in their computers 13 Get junk mail Your name is in their computers 14 Taxes Multiple computers here City, State & Federal. 15 Got a ticket or arrested? Your name is in their computers 16 Belong to a club or association? Your name is in their computers 17 Been in a hospital? Your name is in their computers 18 Been to a doctor? Your name is in their computers 19 Been to a dentist? Your name is in their computers 20 Ordered a pizza for delivery Your name is in their computers 21 Ordered anything online or over the phone Your name is in their computers 22 Got a passport? Your name is in their computers 23 Traveled commercially (airplane, train, bus) Your name is in their computers Have a lawn service? Your name is in their computers Have any utility bills? Your name is in their computers Ever voted? Your name is in their computers Has the government ever counted you in a census? Your name is in their computers Anybody ever done your family tree on a computer? You are in their computer and possibly the LDS's in Salt Lake. Jim -----Original Message----- From: bk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Jack Sent: Monday, July 02, 2012 5:27 PM To: bk@rootsweb.com Subject: [BK] Genealogy & Privacy These notes reminds me of questions I've had for some time. Is there an archive of discussions regarding privacy issues? Or a link? I don't want to rehash it all if that's available. Standard policies that I should be aware of? Surely, genealogists must deal with privacy frequently, especially with respect to dates. I'm an amateur and only have a few hundred names, so far, and have not yet taken the step of making the database available on-line. I've run into relatives who are clearly reluctant to provide *any* information beyond name, rank & serial number, and I know I'd be in trouble if they discovered I published personal information beyond that (either paper or digital). As a result, I've become much more careful than I was when starting this project. For example, now I would not make a data base available on-line anywhere which included significant details for people under age 100, living or not. Perhaps even that's not good enough. How do genealogists deal with this? In my case, I'd sure like to stay on speaking terms with all my relatives. //jack On 7/2/2012 12:46 PM, Jim Dell wrote: > Rootsweb is still there and FREE and is owned by Ancestry. > > If you only want non-paying customers of Ancestry NOT to see your data > post it there. > > But if you want the new genealogist and casual lookers to see it, put > it on Rootsweb. > > Mine is on Rootsweb. > > Jim > > -----Original Message----- > From: bk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On > Behalf Of Robert Kirk > Sent: Monday, July 02, 2012 3:10 PM > To: bk@rootsweb.com > Subject: [BK] GEDCOM to the Internet > > This is somewhat off topic, so skip if uninterested. > > I have a reasonably extensive BK database of some 4600 names, some of > whom are only relatives of relatives and not at all blood kin to me - > but they were fun to track down. I keep the database to myself and > have given extract reports& trees to those relatives who expressed > interest. Not too many, unfortunately; I wish more were interested. > > I'm thanking of generating a GEDCOM of all people in my database and > uploading it to the Internet. I hope someone may be interested. But a > couple of questions arise. > > 1. I don't want the hassle of asking every relative's permission > before I do it. Is this a problem? BK has a feature of naming everyone > under 100 years of age as "Living" or some such. Is this sufficient to avoid hurt feelings? > I think the web sites do something like this automatically, so I may > not need to generate the anonymous GEDCOM. > > 2. I'm pretty lax with my sourcing, and even some of my formal sources > are shown as "SSDI" or "1900 CENSUS" or Knight's Ferry Cemetery Book" > Is this an acceptable way to upload. I don't feel like going back and > doing correctly formatted sources. Also, many of my sources are > contained in the Notes as, "Granny Hull told me this" or "birth year > selected from averaging > 4 census reports" The Notes section also contains a lot of family > gossip, my prejudices, and other things I'd as soon as not publicize. > So I assume BK will let me keep the notes out of the GEDCOM? > > 3. Where to? The new Family Search - Family Tree of the LDS Family > Search website, and Ancestry.com's web site strike me as most > appropriate.Is Rootsweb dead? Should I do one or the other or, > perhaps, both? That could lead to synchronization problems, I expect. > > Bob Kirk > > Remember - Use the Archives at > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > Remember - Use the Archives at > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > -- One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. -- Ronald Reagan Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

What version of BK are you using? If not the latest then use the latest. I believe the latest states who the file is suppose to be connected to. On Jul 2, 2012, at 6:58 PM, Palekaiko <palekaiko@gmail.com> wrote: > I routinely back up all my files to two hard drives. Lately, I've > been getting an error message for two different text files, indicating > that the two files are associated with people who don't exist. I've > checked and the text files do exist, but I can't find the "missing > people" to whom they are supposed to be associated. How do I solve > this dilemma? > > Michael Diamant > Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

RootsWeb is not dead. If you upload there it defaults to age 70 and under and converts them to "Living Jones" but I change it to age 100 since I have several over age 70 living family members. I do not include notes because I have some private info and some that no one would understand. I figure with names, dates and locations they can tell if it a relative of interest and can contact me for more information. Also I have problems with puting my notes in a gedcom, I probably have some non-text info included. Since RootsWeb is owned by Ancestry your info will also end up on Ancestry but is only visable there with a subscription. RootsWeb is free to view. RootsWeb files submitted can be overwritten to update. Joe Weiss On 7/2/2012 3:09 PM, Robert Kirk wrote: > This is somewhat off topic, so skip if uninterested. > > I have a reasonably extensive BK database of some 4600 names, some of whom > are only relatives of relatives and not at all blood kin to me - but they > were fun to track down. I keep the database to myself and have given > extract reports & trees to those relatives who expressed interest. Not too > many, unfortunately; I wish more were interested. > > I'm thanking of generating a GEDCOM of all people in my database and > uploading it to the Internet. I hope someone may be interested. But a > couple of questions arise. > > 1. I don't want the hassle of asking every relative's permission before I > do it. Is this a problem? BK has a feature of naming everyone under 100 > years of age as "Living" or some such. Is this sufficient to avoid hurt > feelings? I think the web sites do something like this automatically, so I > may not need to generate the anonymous GEDCOM. > > 2. I'm pretty lax with my sourcing, and even some of my formal sources are > shown as "SSDI" or "1900 CENSUS" or Knight's Ferry Cemetery Book" Is this > an acceptable way to upload. I don't feel like going back and doing > correctly formatted sources. Also, many of my sources are contained in the > Notes as, "Granny Hull told me this" or "birth year selected from averaging > 4 census reports" The Notes section also contains a lot of family gossip, > my prejudices, and other things I'd as soon as not publicize. So I assume > BK will let me keep the notes out of the GEDCOM? > > 3. Where to? The new Family Search - Family Tree of the LDS Family Search > website, and Ancestry.com's web site strike me as most appropriate.Is > Rootsweb dead? Should I do one or the other or, perhaps, both? That could > lead to synchronization problems, I expect. > > Bob Kirk > > Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >

Rootsweb is still there and FREE and is owned by Ancestry. If you only want non-paying customers of Ancestry NOT to see your data post it there. But if you want the new genealogist and casual lookers to see it, put it on Rootsweb. Mine is on Rootsweb. Jim -----Original Message----- From: bk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Robert Kirk Sent: Monday, July 02, 2012 3:10 PM To: bk@rootsweb.com Subject: [BK] GEDCOM to the Internet This is somewhat off topic, so skip if uninterested. I have a reasonably extensive BK database of some 4600 names, some of whom are only relatives of relatives and not at all blood kin to me - but they were fun to track down. I keep the database to myself and have given extract reports & trees to those relatives who expressed interest. Not too many, unfortunately; I wish more were interested. I'm thanking of generating a GEDCOM of all people in my database and uploading it to the Internet. I hope someone may be interested. But a couple of questions arise. 1. I don't want the hassle of asking every relative's permission before I do it. Is this a problem? BK has a feature of naming everyone under 100 years of age as "Living" or some such. Is this sufficient to avoid hurt feelings? I think the web sites do something like this automatically, so I may not need to generate the anonymous GEDCOM. 2. I'm pretty lax with my sourcing, and even some of my formal sources are shown as "SSDI" or "1900 CENSUS" or Knight's Ferry Cemetery Book" Is this an acceptable way to upload. I don't feel like going back and doing correctly formatted sources. Also, many of my sources are contained in the Notes as, "Granny Hull told me this" or "birth year selected from averaging 4 census reports" The Notes section also contains a lot of family gossip, my prejudices, and other things I'd as soon as not publicize. So I assume BK will let me keep the notes out of the GEDCOM? 3. Where to? The new Family Search - Family Tree of the LDS Family Search website, and Ancestry.com's web site strike me as most appropriate.Is Rootsweb dead? Should I do one or the other or, perhaps, both? That could lead to synchronization problems, I expect. Bob Kirk Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

This is somewhat off topic, so skip if uninterested. I have a reasonably extensive BK database of some 4600 names, some of whom are only relatives of relatives and not at all blood kin to me - but they were fun to track down. I keep the database to myself and have given extract reports & trees to those relatives who expressed interest. Not too many, unfortunately; I wish more were interested. I'm thanking of generating a GEDCOM of all people in my database and uploading it to the Internet. I hope someone may be interested. But a couple of questions arise. 1. I don't want the hassle of asking every relative's permission before I do it. Is this a problem? BK has a feature of naming everyone under 100 years of age as "Living" or some such. Is this sufficient to avoid hurt feelings? I think the web sites do something like this automatically, so I may not need to generate the anonymous GEDCOM. 2. I'm pretty lax with my sourcing, and even some of my formal sources are shown as "SSDI" or "1900 CENSUS" or Knight's Ferry Cemetery Book" Is this an acceptable way to upload. I don't feel like going back and doing correctly formatted sources. Also, many of my sources are contained in the Notes as, "Granny Hull told me this" or "birth year selected from averaging 4 census reports" The Notes section also contains a lot of family gossip, my prejudices, and other things I'd as soon as not publicize. So I assume BK will let me keep the notes out of the GEDCOM? 3. Where to? The new Family Search - Family Tree of the LDS Family Search website, and Ancestry.com's web site strike me as most appropriate.Is Rootsweb dead? Should I do one or the other or, perhaps, both? That could lead to synchronization problems, I expect. Bob Kirk

These notes reminds me of questions I've had for some time. Is there an archive of discussions regarding privacy issues? Or a link? I don't want to rehash it all if that's available. Standard policies that I should be aware of? Surely, genealogists must deal with privacy frequently, especially with respect to dates. I'm an amateur and only have a few hundred names, so far, and have not yet taken the step of making the database available on-line. I've run into relatives who are clearly reluctant to provide *any* information beyond name, rank & serial number, and I know I'd be in trouble if they discovered I published personal information beyond that (either paper or digital). As a result, I've become much more careful than I was when starting this project. For example, now I would not make a data base available on-line anywhere which included significant details for people under age 100, living or not. Perhaps even that's not good enough. How do genealogists deal with this? In my case, I'd sure like to stay on speaking terms with all my relatives. //jack On 7/2/2012 12:46 PM, Jim Dell wrote: > Rootsweb is still there and FREE and is owned by Ancestry. > > If you only want non-paying customers of Ancestry NOT to see your data post > it there. > > But if you want the new genealogist and casual lookers to see it, put it on > Rootsweb. > > Mine is on Rootsweb. > > Jim > > -----Original Message----- > From: bk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of > Robert Kirk > Sent: Monday, July 02, 2012 3:10 PM > To: bk@rootsweb.com > Subject: [BK] GEDCOM to the Internet > > This is somewhat off topic, so skip if uninterested. > > I have a reasonably extensive BK database of some 4600 names, some of whom > are only relatives of relatives and not at all blood kin to me - but they > were fun to track down. I keep the database to myself and have given extract > reports& trees to those relatives who expressed interest. Not too many, > unfortunately; I wish more were interested. > > I'm thanking of generating a GEDCOM of all people in my database and > uploading it to the Internet. I hope someone may be interested. But a > couple of questions arise. > > 1. I don't want the hassle of asking every relative's permission before I do > it. Is this a problem? BK has a feature of naming everyone under 100 years > of age as "Living" or some such. Is this sufficient to avoid hurt feelings? > I think the web sites do something like this automatically, so I may not > need to generate the anonymous GEDCOM. > > 2. I'm pretty lax with my sourcing, and even some of my formal sources are > shown as "SSDI" or "1900 CENSUS" or Knight's Ferry Cemetery Book" Is this an > acceptable way to upload. I don't feel like going back and doing correctly > formatted sources. Also, many of my sources are contained in the Notes as, > "Granny Hull told me this" or "birth year selected from averaging > 4 census reports" The Notes section also contains a lot of family gossip, my > prejudices, and other things I'd as soon as not publicize. So I assume BK > will let me keep the notes out of the GEDCOM? > > 3. Where to? The new Family Search - Family Tree of the LDS Family Search > website, and Ancestry.com's web site strike me as most appropriate.Is > Rootsweb dead? Should I do one or the other or, perhaps, both? That could > lead to synchronization problems, I expect. > > Bob Kirk > > Remember - Use the Archives at > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message > > Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. -- Ronald Reagan

I'm also a fan of rootsweb World Connect data base. I think you will be fine re privacy of living folks there but if you documented any "family secrets" that are within the past 100 years in your notes I suggest you have them not visible. When I go "cousin-searching" I find it much easier to search and contact owners of rootsweb World Connect trees than on Ancestry (yes I have a paid account). On WorldConnect I can directly contact the tree owner on Ancestry I have to go through the ancestry connect service and that's means one more step to get the persons "real" email addy so we can talk. I also like being able to add a note on WConnect trees with a correction/suggestion/new info and others can see it until the tree owner either incorporates the change or decides I'm full of baloney and deletes my comment. On 7/2/2012 12:52 PM, Joe wrote: > RootsWeb is not dead. If you upload there it defaults to age 70 and > under and converts them to "Living Jones" but I change it to age 100 > since I have several over age 70 living family members. I do not > include notes because I have some private info and some that no one > would understand. I figure with names, dates and locations they can tell > if it a relative of interest and can contact me for more information. > Also I have problems with puting my notes in a gedcom, I probably have > some non-text info included. Since RootsWeb is owned by Ancestry your > info will also end up on Ancestry but is only visable there with a > subscription. RootsWeb is free to view. RootsWeb files submitted can be > overwritten to update. > Joe Weiss > > On 7/2/2012 3:09 PM, Robert Kirk wrote: >> This is somewhat off topic, so skip if uninterested. >> >> I have a reasonably extensive BK database of some 4600 names, some of whom >> are only relatives of relatives and not at all blood kin to me - but they >> were fun to track down. I keep the database to myself and have given >> extract reports & trees to those relatives who expressed interest. Not too >> many, unfortunately; I wish more were interested. >> >> I'm thanking of generating a GEDCOM of all people in my database and >> uploading it to the Internet. I hope someone may be interested. But a >> couple of questions arise. >> >> 1. I don't want the hassle of asking every relative's permission before I >> do it. Is this a problem? BK has a feature of naming everyone under 100 >> years of age as "Living" or some such. Is this sufficient to avoid hurt >> feelings? I think the web sites do something like this automatically, so I >> may not need to generate the anonymous GEDCOM. >> >> 2. I'm pretty lax with my sourcing, and even some of my formal sources are >> shown as "SSDI" or "1900 CENSUS" or Knight's Ferry Cemetery Book" Is this >> an acceptable way to upload. I don't feel like going back and doing >> correctly formatted sources. Also, many of my sources are contained in the >> Notes as, "Granny Hull told me this" or "birth year selected from averaging >> 4 census reports" The Notes section also contains a lot of family gossip, >> my prejudices, and other things I'd as soon as not publicize. So I assume >> BK will let me keep the notes out of the GEDCOM? >> >> 3. Where to? The new Family Search - Family Tree of the LDS Family Search >> website, and Ancestry.com's web site strike me as most appropriate.Is >> Rootsweb dead? Should I do one or the other or, perhaps, both? That could >> lead to synchronization problems, I expect. >> >> Bob Kirk >> >> Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> > > > Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I routinely back up all my files to two hard drives. Lately, I've been getting an error message for two different text files, indicating that the two files are associated with people who don't exist. I've checked and the text files do exist, but I can't find the "missing people" to whom they are supposed to be associated. How do I solve this dilemma? Michael Diamant

I'm running BK 6.5.11, registered, on Windows XP.  For years, I've done frequent backups without a problem...  until now.   When choosing to COMPRESS the data files, I get the following BK error message:     zip error=-7 No matching files c:\BK6\*.DT6 Stop BK and stop Windows and restart computer and try again. Or if you have Windows Vista or Win 7, you may need administrator rights for that location. If problems continue, use the COPY and not the COMPRESS option.     I stopped and rebooted twice, but got the same error. I downloaded and reinstalled the full BK program, but got the same error. I stopped and rebooted again, same error.   I then chose to COPY the data files, and that worked.  But the result is more files taking up 3-1/2 times the space.  I use the Backup/Restore function to transfer my BK database between three computers, so I would really rather stay with the zipped method that I've been using.   What may have caused this sudden problem, and how can I fix it?   Rennie Brown West Union, WV     =======================      We're all in this together http://www.doddridgecountyroots.com/ Remember me in the family tree, My name, my days, my strife; Then I'll ride upon the wings of time And live an endless life. ---------------------------------------

Hi Ruth and Otto, With the powerful applications that are available today my desire is to make full use of them and, where possible, to create an integrated system without detracting from the uniqueness of the individual applications. I shy away from applications that try to be all things to all people. This is one of the beauties of BK in that John has remained focussed on providing an exceptional genealogy program. I have tried others but I am, and always have been, dedicated to BK. While this still holds true I see no reason not to take advantage of other applications that are dedicated to their own fields. I use Google Earth because it has its own strengths and by creating the ability to open GE from within BK suits me and provides me with what I need to make genealogy far more useful and fulfilling. For the same reason I use a dedicated Timeline program in conjunction with BK. The timeline that John has provided is excellent as it is focussed directly on an individual and his nearest and dearest. The Timeline program I use allows me to enter a huge range of information which I can compare to an individual's life. For example, when my ancestors came to South Africa in 1820 what agricultural implements and weapons did they have available at the time? By providing this in the Timeline program it gives me an excellent idea about how they lived. Regarding your comment, Ruth about movement patterns, again I don't feel that this should be addressed in BK, making it too large and unwieldy, but, a GIS application would be ideal for this and from this one can generate static maps that can be easily displayed in BK. So horses for courses but at the same time make the maximum use of all the tools at our disposable. Amongst all this a request for John. When working on the details of locality would it be possible to include the ability to open a graphics file as well as the currently available text file? One could then link to an external file giving more detail but one can then also open a jpg or any other graphics file to display a map of the specific town. Happy families, Paddy PS. Ruth, what does OP stand for? -----Original Message----- From: Ruth Wilson Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2012 8:28 AM To: bk@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [BK] BK & Google Earth On 27/06/2012 23:10, Otto Jørgensen wrote: > On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 23:53:25 +0200, Pat Brown <mistyhaven@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> Just thought I would pass this on in case any one else has the same >> idea. I have long wanted to combine BK and Google Earth so that I can >> easily see, and show, places that are linked to individuals. An easy >> way to do this is to open Google Earth and select the place you are >> interested in. Select the altitude you would like displayed. Select >> "Add Placemark". Give it a name. Right click on the placemark and >> "Save" it to a folder on your desktop. Now open BK and go to the >> individual related to the Placemark. Under "Media" select "Add Media >> File" and select the Desktop Icon you have just created. Now when you >> select this item in BK Google Earth will open and will fly directly to >> the Placemark you have created. You can now easily show someone all >> the places related to an individual or family. Hope this helps some >> folk. > >From Norwayh we have thought about mappinbg, and BK as some steps to > that as there are place for maps coordinates under Details of > Location. > > Doubleclick on a location and see more details. > > There are also details that we want to have as a addition > locationlist, telling about those places wehere we have more > information. That is better than have that information as footnotes og > parateses in the text/biography of a person. > > I prefer that we use the location items to add more geographical > information, also as that is allready there (only waiting for John) :) I agree that it's good to keep location data together and being able to add a Google Earth link to the location field would be very useful. However, the OP's idea is more about how an individual moved about rather than linked to one specific place. This can help in identifying or narrowing down likely places to find further information, or the pattern of movement can shed light on their life and times (did they move along the lines of new railways? Did an industry die out in one area and have a boom time elsewhere? Was there a ferry linking coastal areas? etc) Ruth Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

In message <2D26C9AC69984752B77FA56DA11BBA43@Dell4600>, John Steed <brothers_keeper@msn.com> writes: >To Pat Brown > >Thanks for the suggestion about linking a picture to a location. Yes, that does sound like a good idea, for linking to a map (or other image). If you do it, don't forget to allow the external image viewer like you do with Pictures (-: - Thanks, John G. > >OP stands for Original Poster (the person that started the comment or >question) > >John Steed > > [] -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf "There are a great many people in the country today who, through no fault of their own, are sane." - Monty Python's Flying Circus

To Pat Brown Thanks for the suggestion about linking a picture to a location. OP stands for Original Poster (the person that started the comment or question) John Steed ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pat Brown" <mistyhaven@gmail.com> To: <bk@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2012 9:21 AM Subject: Re: [BK] BK & Google Earth Hi Ruth and Otto, With the powerful applications that are available today my desire is to make full use of them and, where possible, to create an integrated system without detracting from the uniqueness of the individual applications. I shy away from applications that try to be all things to all people. This is one of the beauties of BK in that John has remained focussed on providing an exceptional genealogy program. I have tried others but I am, and always have been, dedicated to BK. While this still holds true I see no reason not to take advantage of other applications that are dedicated to their own fields. I use Google Earth because it has its own strengths and by creating the ability to open GE from within BK suits me and provides me with what I need to make genealogy far more useful and fulfilling. For the same reason I use a dedicated Timeline program in conjunction with BK. The timeline that John has provided is excellent as it is focussed directly on an individual and his nearest and dearest. The Timeline program I use allows me to enter a huge range of information which I can compare to an individual's life. For example, when my ancestors came to South Africa in 1820 what agricultural implements and weapons did they have available at the time? By providing this in the Timeline program it gives me an excellent idea about how they lived. Regarding your comment, Ruth about movement patterns, again I don't feel that this should be addressed in BK, making it too large and unwieldy, but, a GIS application would be ideal for this and from this one can generate static maps that can be easily displayed in BK. So horses for courses but at the same time make the maximum use of all the tools at our disposable. Amongst all this a request for John. When working on the details of locality would it be possible to include the ability to open a graphics file as well as the currently available text file? One could then link to an external file giving more detail but one can then also open a jpg or any other graphics file to display a map of the specific town. Happy families, Paddy PS. Ruth, what does OP stand for? -----Original Message----- From: Ruth Wilson Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2012 8:28 AM To: bk@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [BK] BK & Google Earth On 27/06/2012 23:10, Otto Jørgensen wrote: > On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 23:53:25 +0200, Pat Brown <mistyhaven@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> Just thought I would pass this on in case any one else has the same >> idea. I have long wanted to combine BK and Google Earth so that I can >> easily see, and show, places that are linked to individuals. An easy >> way to do this is to open Google Earth and select the place you are >> interested in. Select the altitude you would like displayed. Select >> "Add Placemark". Give it a name. Right click on the placemark and >> "Save" it to a folder on your desktop. Now open BK and go to the >> individual related to the Placemark. Under "Media" select "Add Media >> File" and select the Desktop Icon you have just created. Now when you >> select this item in BK Google Earth will open and will fly directly to >> the Placemark you have created. You can now easily show someone all >> the places related to an individual or family. Hope this helps some >> folk. > >From Norwayh we have thought about mappinbg, and BK as some steps to > that as there are place for maps coordinates under Details of > Location. > > Doubleclick on a location and see more details. > > There are also details that we want to have as a addition > locationlist, telling about those places wehere we have more > information. That is better than have that information as footnotes og > parateses in the text/biography of a person. > > I prefer that we use the location items to add more geographical > information, also as that is allready there (only waiting for John) :) I agree that it's good to keep location data together and being able to add a Google Earth link to the location field would be very useful. However, the OP's idea is more about how an individual moved about rather than linked to one specific place. This can help in identifying or narrowing down likely places to find further information, or the pattern of movement can shed light on their life and times (did they move along the lines of new railways? Did an industry die out in one area and have a boom time elsewhere? Was there a ferry linking coastal areas? etc) Ruth Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Remember - Use the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

On 27/06/2012 23:10, Otto Jørgensen wrote: > On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 23:53:25 +0200, Pat Brown <mistyhaven@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> Just thought I would pass this on in case any one else has the same >> idea. I have long wanted to combine BK and Google Earth so that I can >> easily see, and show, places that are linked to individuals. An easy >> way to do this is to open Google Earth and select the place you are >> interested in. Select the altitude you would like displayed. Select >> "Add Placemark". Give it a name. Right click on the placemark and >> "Save" it to a folder on your desktop. Now open BK and go to the >> individual related to the Placemark. Under "Media" select "Add Media >> File" and select the Desktop Icon you have just created. Now when you >> select this item in BK Google Earth will open and will fly directly to >> the Placemark you have created. You can now easily show someone all >> the places related to an individual or family. Hope this helps some >> folk. > >From Norwayh we have thought about mappinbg, and BK as some steps to > that as there are place for maps coordinates under Details of > Location. > > Doubleclick on a location and see more details. > > There are also details that we want to have as a addition > locationlist, telling about those places wehere we have more > information. That is better than have that information as footnotes og > parateses in the text/biography of a person. > > I prefer that we use the location items to add more geographical > information, also as that is allready there (only waiting for John) :) I agree that it's good to keep location data together and being able to add a Google Earth link to the location field would be very useful. However, the OP's idea is more about how an individual moved about rather than linked to one specific place. This can help in identifying or narrowing down likely places to find further information, or the pattern of movement can shed light on their life and times (did they move along the lines of new railways? Did an industry die out in one area and have a boom time elsewhere? Was there a ferry linking coastal areas? etc) Ruth

On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 10:01:27 -0700, "Ron Coffman" <roncoff@ca.rr.com> wrote: >[BK] has been spammed! It is a job for the List administrator to remove all that spam. Rotsweb have many facilities to general remove users with SPAM and Virus, but for single users it is the job of the list administrator -- Otto Jørgensen http://www.bkwin.info/ All email is checked by NORTON

In message <F3D41664F7914C4BBD1F8B51AE687647@RonsDesktop>, Ron Coffman <roncoff@ca.rr.com> writes: >[BK] has been spammed! Why do you say that? It's possible, of course, but the potential spammer would have had to know about putting "[BK]" in the subject field. I think it's just as likely that someone hit send before they'd typed anything, or something like that. >----- Original Message ----- >From: "D O Styles" <stylesdo@hotmail.com> >To: <rfbonner@hotmail.com>; <collegehillmaryville@gmail.com>; ><gael@hotmail.com>; <anntoday@aol.com>; <pamsander@me.com>; ><hobo@rabbitbrush.com>; <gaiatrio@yahoo.com>; ><cassandra.reecce@stagparkway.com>; <bk@rootsweb.com> >Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 8:21 AM >Subject: [BK] (no subject) > > >> >> http://gourmetservicesinc.com/jjllrt.html?jjbb=udoyffkjff >> Remember - Use the Archives at >> http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in >> the subject and the body of the message >> > > > Remember - Use the Archives at >http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes >in the subject and the body of the message -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf If you are afraid of being lonely, don't try to be right. - Jules Renard, writer (1864-1910)

>I think it's just as likely that someone hit send before they'd typed >anything, or something like that. And they did it twice!! ----- Original Message ----- From: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> To: <bk@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 2:53 PM Subject: Re: [BK] (no subject) > In message <F3D41664F7914C4BBD1F8B51AE687647@RonsDesktop>, Ron Coffman > <roncoff@ca.rr.com> writes: >>[BK] has been spammed! > > Why do you say that? It's possible, of course, but the potential spammer > would have had to know about putting "[BK]" in the subject field. I > think it's just as likely that someone hit send before they'd typed > anything, or something like that. > >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "D O Styles" <stylesdo@hotmail.com> >>To: <rfbonner@hotmail.com>; <collegehillmaryville@gmail.com>; >><gael@hotmail.com>; <anntoday@aol.com>; <pamsander@me.com>; >><hobo@rabbitbrush.com>; <gaiatrio@yahoo.com>; >><cassandra.reecce@stagparkway.com>; <bk@rootsweb.com> >>Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 8:21 AM >>Subject: [BK] (no subject) >> >> >>> >>> http://gourmetservicesinc.com/jjllrt.html?jjbb=udoyffkjff >>> Remember - Use the Archives at >>> http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes >>> in >>> the subject and the body of the message >>> >> >> >> Remember - Use the Archives at >>http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search >>------------------------------- >>To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes >>in the subject and the body of the message > > -- > J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf > > If you are afraid of being lonely, don't try to be right. - Jules Renard, > writer (1864-1910) > Remember - Use the Archives at > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/search > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message >

http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/jjllrt.html?cn=fyvacc