"so that we can contact a poster and inform them on the proper way to post data, etc." For what it's worth I have been here and done that with this poster. It didn't do any good. I just keep removing all those posts that violate the board rules. J. Asche On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Kathie Harrison <harrison28@gmail.com> wrote: > Do any of the rest of you get posts from KENNELLYMARKA on your boards > that list dozens of names from cemetery transcripts but fail to list > the SURNAME for the board posted to and also not identifying the > state, county or cemetery name? Not only that but there is NO way to > contact this person to tell them that they need to post on the surname > only or move it to the cemetery board for the state and to actually > include that info in the post. So this message was deleted as OFF > TOPIC and I could not move it as it had no area to qualify moving it > to another board. I tell ya, it is beyond annoying when people do this > -- thinking they are being helpful when it is a colossal waste of > time. This is not the first time they have done this and they have > posted to over 5,000 boards. > > Also it is high time that Ancestry require the contact info be > available to ALL ADMINS so that we can contact a poster and inform > them on the proper way to post data, etc. With that said, Merry > Christmas to all except Bah Humbug to such board posts. > > -- > -- > Take care, ~Kathie Harrison > Ancestral Whispers > http://whispers.ancestralwhispers.com/ >

Thanks Joan and I will continue to do that also. Merry Christmas! On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 4:23 PM, JLA <jasche45133@gmail.com> wrote: > "so that we can contact a poster and inform them on the proper way to > post data, etc." > > For what it's worth I have been here and done that with this poster. > It didn't do any good.  I just keep removing all those posts that > violate the board rules. > > J. Asche > -- -- Take care, ~Kathie Harrison Ancestral Whispers http://whispers.ancestralwhispers.com/

Do any of the rest of you get posts from KENNELLYMARKA on your boards that list dozens of names from cemetery transcripts but fail to list the SURNAME for the board posted to and also not identifying the state, county or cemetery name? Not only that but there is NO way to contact this person to tell them that they need to post on the surname only or move it to the cemetery board for the state and to actually include that info in the post. So this message was deleted as OFF TOPIC and I could not move it as it had no area to qualify moving it to another board. I tell ya, it is beyond annoying when people do this -- thinking they are being helpful when it is a colossal waste of time. This is not the first time they have done this and they have posted to over 5,000 boards. Also it is high time that Ancestry require the contact info be available to ALL ADMINS so that we can contact a poster and inform them on the proper way to post data, etc. With that said, Merry Christmas to all except Bah Humbug to such board posts. -- -- Take care, ~Kathie Harrison Ancestral Whispers http://whispers.ancestralwhispers.com/

ID rozorwin $50000 IN YOUR PAYPAL ACCOUNT as seen on Oprah! READ THE MESSAGE! -- 12/17/2009 Has hit these boards so far: List Messages By: Board | Date Viewing 1 - 22 of 22 Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Bedfordshire > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Berkshire > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Buckinghamshire > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Cambridgeshire > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Cheshire > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Cornwall > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Cumberland > Cumbria Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Cumberland > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Derbyshire > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Derbyshire > Matlock Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Devon > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Dorset > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > London > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > London > London Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Norfolk > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Northamptonshire > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Oxfordshire > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Sussex > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Yorkshire > Yorkshire - East Riding > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Yorkshire > Yorkshire - North Riding > General Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Yorkshire > Yorkshire - West Riding > General Surnames > Moneymaker

Thanks for the heads-up. Got the fool deleted from my board. Nan On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Lynne <rwlist.admin@verizon.net> wrote: > ID rozorwin > > $50000 IN YOUR PAYPAL ACCOUNT as seen on Oprah! READ THE MESSAGE! -- > 12/17/2009 > > Has hit these boards so far: > > List Messages By: Board | Date Viewing 1 - 22 of 22 > > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Bedfordshire > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Berkshire > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Buckinghamshire > > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Cambridgeshire > > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Cheshire > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Cornwall > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Cumberland > Cumbria > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Cumberland > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Derbyshire > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Derbyshire > Matlock > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Devon > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Dorset > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > London > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > London > London > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Norfolk > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Northamptonshire > > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Oxfordshire > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Sussex > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Yorkshire > > Yorkshire - East Riding > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Yorkshire > > Yorkshire - North Riding > General > Localities > United Kingdom and Ireland > England > Yorkshire > > Yorkshire - West Riding > General > Surnames > Moneymaker > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BOARDS-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I would immediately delete it when I became aware of it. I don't think it is appropriate. IMHO, Jim -----Original Message----- From: boards-admins-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:boards-admins-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Tribehunter@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 2:07 PM To: BOARDS-ADMINS@rootsweb.com Subject: [BAd] Should these be allowed?

Marilyn- It is definitely spam and not appropriate for ANY of our genealogy message boards. It breaks board posting rules in a variety of ways: 1) not genealogy, 2)possible scam, 3) cross-posted, 4) not specifically relevant to the board it is posted on (only the locality has been changed to attempt to make it relevant). Joan In a message dated 12/15/2009 2:07:45 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, Tribehunter@aol.com writes: There was a message posted on my BUTLER surname board that I'm not sure belongs there. http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.butler/8238/mb.ashx If you click on the "View Posts" link, this person has posted similar messages on other boards. Could this be a scam? It's the first time I've ever seen any post looking for cancer survivors to make claims against the US government. See this one: _http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.northam.usa.states.hawaii.unknown/181 3/mb.ashx_ (http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.northam.usa.states.hawaii.unknown/181 3/mb.ashx) Opinions anyone? Thanks, Marilyn

There was a message posted on my BUTLER surname board that I'm not sure belongs there. http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.butler/8238/mb.ashx If you click on the "View Posts" link, this person has posted similar messages on other boards. Could this be a scam? It's the first time I've ever seen any post looking for cancer survivors to make claims against the US government. See this one: _http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.northam.usa.states.hawaii.unknown/181 3/mb.ashx_ (http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.northam.usa.states.hawaii.unknown/1813/mb.ashx) Opinions anyone? Thanks, Marilyn

At 2:06 PM -0500 12/15/09, Tribehunter@aol.com wrote: >There was a message posted on my BUTLER surname board that I'm not sure  >belongs there. > >http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.butler/8238/mb.ashx <snip> If they were on my boards, I'd be trashing them on the double-quick, but that's just me. Slán, Mo! -- <http://xri.net/=mobang>

At 6:03 PM -0500 11/19/09, Lynne wrote: >Good idea! Indeed! Thanks. Slán, Mo! -- <http://xri.net/=mobang>

An c e s t r a l Bks is at it again: 118 posts so far and they know it's a holiday for RW personnel. JulieG1231 Surnames > Stoney Surnames > Stong Surnames > Stoops Surnames > Storer Surnames > Stouffer Surnames > Stout Surnames > Stover Surnames > Stowell Surnames > Stranahan Surnames > Strassburger Surnames > Street Surnames > Strickland Surnames > Strickler Surnames > Strobridge Surnames > Stuart Surnames > Stubbs Surnames > Stuckey Surnames > Styles Surnames > Sullivan Surnames > Sumner . . . . So far, s/he has made it up to Surnames > Torrey

Of course, they're betting no staff on hand because of the holiday. :-( Nan On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Lynne <rwlist.admin@verizon.net> wrote: > An c e s t r a l Bks is at it again: 118 posts so far and they know > it's a holiday for RW personnel. > > JulieG1231 > > Surnames > Stoney > Surnames > Stong > Surnames > Stoops > Surnames > Storer > Surnames > Stouffer > Surnames > Stout > Surnames > Stover > Surnames > Stowell > Surnames > Stranahan > Surnames > Strassburger > Surnames > Street > Surnames > Strickland > Surnames > Strickler > Surnames > Strobridge > Surnames > Stuart > Surnames > Stubbs > Surnames > Stuckey > Surnames > Styles > Surnames > Sullivan > Surnames > Sumner . . . . > > So far, s/he has made it up to Surnames > Torrey > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BOARDS-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Thank you Joan! I knew there would be a sensible answer that was avoiding me in the fog known as my brain. :-) Wendy ----- Original Message ----- *From:* JYoung6180@aol.com *To:* boards-admins@rootsweb.com *Sent:* 11/22/2009 6:41:37 PM +1300 *Subject:* [BAd] help with objection please > Do what I do on these and reject the objections. The only people who would > legitimately have a right to complain about their privacy being violated > are the people involved. The objector isn't saying he's included in the obit. > > Joan

Yeh, check the Board Administrators board. http://boards.rootsweb.com/thread.aspx?mv=tree&m=5254&p=topics.rw.admin.badmin --- On Sun, 11/22/09, Kaesemein@aol.com <Kaesemein@aol.com> wrote: > From: Kaesemein@aol.com <Kaesemein@aol.com> > Subject: Re: [BAd] help with objection please > To: boards-admins@rootsweb.com > Date: Sunday, November 22, 2009, 7:51 AM > > I've received several of these also over the past > week.  I think  somebody > must have too much time on their hands so they're playing > policeman on  the > boards.  > > I've rejected them all because, as Joan said, the > information is already in > the newspapers and on newspaper web sites. > > Marilyn > > ------------original message-------------- > In a message dated 11/22/2009 12:06:51 A.M. Eastern > Standard Time,  > wendy.howard@gmail.com > writes: > > I've had  an objection  to > > http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.aulenbacher/66/mb.ashx > and > http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.aulenbacher/62/mb.ashx > > with  the comment "include identifiable information > about living people > without  their direct consent" > > These posts are transcriptions of newspaper  > obituaries. > > Do you agree?  Part of me does, but another part > sees  that this are > copies of things that have appeared in newspapers and  > therefore already > out in the public arena. > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BOARDS-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the > subject and the body of the message >

I've had an objection to http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.aulenbacher/66/mb.ashx and http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.aulenbacher/62/mb.ashx with the comment "include identifiable information about living people without their direct consent" These posts are transcriptions of newspaper obituaries. Do you agree? Part of me does, but another part sees that this are copies of things that have appeared in newspapers and therefore already out in the public arena. Your feedback, please. :-) Kind Regards, Wendy

I agree that the reports should be rejected, but not because the information is already in the newspapers and on web sites. Just because something has been posted on another web site (like someone's name, address, and phone number) doesn't necessarily mean it's okay to post that info on the boards. The way I see it is the reports should be rejected because obituaries are published at the direction or with the permission of families, therefore consent to publish the names of the living has already been given. by those families. Lynne Kaesemein@aol.com wrote: > >I've received several of these also over the past week. I think somebody >must have too much time on their hands so they're playing policeman on the >boards. > >I've rejected them all because, as Joan said, the information is already in > the newspapers and on newspaper web sites. > >Marilyn >

I've received several of these also over the past week. I think somebody must have too much time on their hands so they're playing policeman on the boards. I've rejected them all because, as Joan said, the information is already in the newspapers and on newspaper web sites. Marilyn ------------original message-------------- In a message dated 11/22/2009 12:06:51 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, wendy.howard@gmail.com writes: I've had an objection to http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.aulenbacher/66/mb.ashx and http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.aulenbacher/62/mb.ashx with the comment "include identifiable information about living people without their direct consent" These posts are transcriptions of newspaper obituaries. Do you agree? Part of me does, but another part sees that this are copies of things that have appeared in newspapers and therefore already out in the public arena.

Judy- And that is precisely why I said what I did...the information is already out there and presumably the people didn't mind. If they DO--let THEM complain. The same goes for the copyright issue. If the newspaper has a problem (which is questionable for most obits) with the copyright status--let them object. The only one who can really complain about copyright infringement is the copyright holder. Joan In a message dated 11/22/2009 3:06:24 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, cageycat@gmail.com writes: I read Joan's answer which is excellent. But you are also right. The info is already out in the public. Copyright-wise, the newspaper ~~could~~ object to a 2005 copied item--BUT many newspapers shrug and don't care if obits are clipped for genealogy.

Wendy, I read Joan's answer which is excellent. But you are also right. The info is already out in the public. Copyright-wise, the newspaper ~~could~~ object to a 2005 copied item--BUT many newspapers shrug and don't care if obits are clipped for genealogy. People in other venues have also raised the issue of who "owns" the obit, especially if a family member wrote it. Articles written on this subject say that experts in copyright law side with the newspaper as the publisher. To ME, it seems people always have a bone to pick about ~~something~~. Makes me wonder ...they must not have any personal or life problems to attend to, IMO, which is certainly rare for any person today. LOL Judy On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 12:06 AM, Wendy Howard <wendy.howard@gmail.com>wrote: > > These posts are transcriptions of newspaper obituaries. > > ...another part sees that this are copies of things that have appeared in > newspapers and therefore already out in the public arena. > >

Do what I do on these and reject the objections. The only people who would legitimately have a right to complain about their privacy being violated are the people involved. The objector isn't saying he's included in the obit. Joan In a message dated 11/22/2009 12:06:55 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, wendy.howard@gmail.com writes: I've had an objection to http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.aulenbacher/66/mb.ashx and http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.aulenbacher/62/mb.ashx with the comment "include identifiable information about living people without their direct consent" These posts are transcriptions of newspaper obituaries. Do you agree? Part of me does, but another part sees that this are copies of things that have appeared in newspapers and therefore already out in the public arena. Your feedback, please. :-) Kind Regards, Wendy ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BOARDS-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message