On 18 Mar 2010 at 18:41, Chris Jefferies wrote: > I was just going to say the same thing. I don't like this obsession > about freedom of information and the right to know information which > was not intended to be made public until after the persons death. I > think the 100 year rule for the census is good thing. The majority of > the people in this 1939 "census" will be dead but anyone over 70 will > be listed and they have a right to privacy. > Many of us would argue equally that an obsession with secrecy is unhealthy. And bureaucrats in the UK have a very long and dishonourable tradition of being obsessed with secrecy, which is not at all a good thing for democracy. Have you never seen "Yes Minister" and "Yes Prime Minister", those wonderful TV series that highlighted the machinations of the Sir Humphreys of this world? I have already given the list details of a case in my own family where my parents and my father's siblings conspired to keep from me for many years the knowledge that I had a half-sister, whom I was prevented from knowing. We only met and got to know each other when we were both in middle age and I still sometimes get angry when I think of all the years we wasted when we could have been friends and getting to know one another. As a matter of interest, you may care to know that the censuses up to 1911 NEVER had a 100-year closure rule imposed on them and some of us have argued that they could have been released much earlier. Thanks to my friend Guy Etchells, who challenged The National Archives with a Freedom of Information appeal, we were able to get it released last year two years early. It's Guy who is also behind the move to get the 1939 national registration released. I am, frankly, always amazed when I see family historian arguing in favour of censorship! We should be the very last persons to impose censorship, since family history is all about the TRUTH and honesty in relationships. We should tell it like it is, warts and all, and not get caught up in privacy paranoia. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE

Roy Stockdill wrote: > I am, frankly, always amazed when I see family historian arguing in favour of > censorship! We should be the very last persons to impose censorship, since family > history is all about the TRUTH and honesty in relationships. We should tell it like it is, > warts and all, and not get caught up in privacy paranoia. I think your views on privacy and respect are well known. If they aren't then I'd suggest the curious search the archives of GenBrit to satisfy themselves. I also think you'll be in the minority with your views on this list <G> If this discussion is to continue, please keep it calm folks otherwise I will use the fire extinguisher. I don't really want to have a lot of researchers dripping all over the place though, especially as it isn't very warm tonight. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk