I have never heard of this site. Can you tell me more? Does anyone else here use this site? On Aug 31, 2009, Colleen Andrews <[email protected]> wrote: This may be true; I don't know; but if it is, there are companies that do it much better than Ancestry.com/Rootsweb does....I also use FindMyPast.com, a UK site with censuses & other information, & the indexing is much better. In fact, if I can't find someone on a UK census on Ancestry, I try FindMyPast & invariably there they are. The UK 1911 & 1901 censuses on Public Record Office websites are also much better indexed than Ancestry. The fact there is double indexing of the same records with seemingly no communication between the systems or "indexers" is a bit ridiculous as well. I'm not sure Ancestry even tried to find out if they could have all or some of their records indexed by volunteers...I don't remember seeing/hearing any calls for volunteers. In the past I voluntarily helped to index UK civil registration indexes for FreeBMD, a Rootsweb site. The indexing quality of that site is also much better than Ancestry. It's as if Ancestry was rushing to "beat the competition" & finish indexing at any cost. FindMyPast, on the other hand, will upload a database before it's fully indexed, but warn you it's not yet indexed & list which sections (or counties) are finished, & then send you updates on its progress as well as notify you when indexing is complete. Another site where Canadian censuses can be accessed, for free, with much better indexing, is AutomatedGenealogy.com I have issues with using 3rd world labour for Canadian/North American companies. Of course no one's forcing them to do it, other than poverty, that is. Of course they're more than happy to do it--it's probably more money than they could make in their own country. But that's not the point. We're not paying them fair wages according to North American standards, or let's face it, we wouldn't be using them. And that's exploitation. I just don't believe Ancestry/Rootsweb can't afford to pay Canada's minimum wage for data entry; I don't believe it's a matter of can they afford it; they just don't want to. If it were really about raising the standard of living in 3rd world countries & creating jobs, we'd be paying them minimum wage. It's never about that; it's about cheap labour & more profit for North America. I have the same issues with the current "trend" for Filipino nannies. Of course they're more than happy to work for crappy money in addition to room & board here, since they eventually get Canadian citizenship out of it--but it's effectively holding them hostage. We take advantage of the fact they're desperate enough to do so much for so little, & worse we're doing it in our own country, as opposed to a factory in the 3rd world. If we were really concerned with helping them, we'd be paying them Canadian minimum wage by the hour. But then of course if we were doing that, we may as well be hiring North American nannies (!). Silly us. In my opinion, if you're working for a Canadian company/person, whether in Canada or elsewhere, you should be paid according to Canadian standards. Anything else is exploitation. Good for Drouin for setting standards & for taking on Ancestry over the quality of their indexing. BTW, what UK census year had its index withdrawn? As far as I know, they're all available either on Ancestry or FindMyPast, or both, from 1841 to 1911. I personally don't pay for my access to Ancestry, since I find the fees far too steep, especially considering the quality of the indexing. I use a cousin's user ID/password for free; next year we are considering splitting the cost of a membership, perhaps with other people. For UK records, it's much cheaper to use FindMyPast on a pay-per-use basis. 2009/8/31 Malcolm Moody <[1][email protected]> > Virtually all the large commercial genealogy data companies have > been > using "off-shore" agencies for indexing for many years now. Even the > British Government sent out one of their census "years" for indexing > in (I believe) India. It was such a disaster they had to withdraw it > shortly after it's initial release. > > You really cannot blame these companies. They are not forcing > anyone > in the, so called, 3rd World to carry out this work. Far from it, > there are locally owned agencies in these countries actively marketing > cut-price transcription, indexing, and data translation services at > rates which are a fraction of what it would cost to do in the (?) 1st > World. From everything I've seen the people doing the work are only > too happy to be employed and they are being at least fairly (if not > well) paid for their efforts - by their local standards. In an ideal > World this would be an perfect match of supply and demand. > Unfortunately this is NOT an ideal World and the lack of an > "appropriate mother tongue" background has turned out to be major > problem in terms of the fidelity of the transcription and indexing work. > > Well, to be more precise it should have turned out to be a major > problem but to (I'm sure) the surprise of the companies who published > these highly inaccurate indexes, they were wildly successful and while > there were many complaints their customers kept on paying the fees to > access them, and it is in it's financial balance sheet that a company > judges it's success and failure. > > In this case (as I understand it) the owners of the Drouin > collection > actually set standards for the transcription and it is the failure to > meet these standards which is at the route of the legal action, again, > not a refusal by the genealogical public to support such a flawed > service. I find it interesting that the only other case I know of > where a flawed transcription was withdrawn was the one published by > the British Government. That is an organization which judged its > success or failure by the complaints of the users and not by the > bottom line of the balance sheet. > > I suggest that those of you who wish to express dissatisfaction with > the way in which some companies provide genealogical services do so by > not supporting them. Otherwise you will continue to receive the > cheapest possible service simply because it makes the genealogical > data service provider the best profit. > > Malcolm > > Archive CD Books Canada Inc. > President: Malcolm Moody > PO Box 11 > Manotick > Ontario, K4M 1A2 > Canada. > (613) 692-2667 > WEB SITE: [2]http://www.ArchiveCDBooks.ca <[3]http://www.archivecdbooks.ca/> > > On 30 Aug, 2009, at 1:30 PM, [4][email protected] wrote: >the message References 1. mailto:[email protected] 2. http://www.ArchiveCDBooks.ca/ 3. http://www.archivecdbooks.ca/ 4. mailto:[email protected]

With regard to Findmypast, I use it almost daily to trace and confirm data in 19th century English records. It is run by the same people as the English 1911 census site and Scotlands people. Their records are far easier to research than Ancestry and far better with regard to census returns and civil registration. They have scanned images of the actual census returns and ships passenger lists. They also have a selection of military, parish and immigration record indexes which I have used with some success. If you use this service along with FreeBMD, the online parish clerks and other free sites, the amount of information that you can accumulate is substantial enough to create a reliable family outline from the 20th century back the the end of the 18th. Richard Hirst, St Catharines, Ontario ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 5:31 PM Subject: [CAN-ONT-SIMCOE] FindMyPast.com > > I have never heard of this site. Can you tell me more? Does anyone > else > here use this site? > > On Aug 31, 2009, Colleen Andrews <[email protected]> wrote: > > This may be true; I don't know; but if it is, there are companies that > do > it > much better than Ancestry.com/Rootsweb does....I also use > FindMyPast.com, > a > UK site with censuses & other information, & the indexing is much > better. > In fact, if I can't find someone on a UK census on Ancestry, I try > FindMyPast & invariably there they are. The UK 1911 & 1901 censuses on > Public Record Office websites are also much better indexed than > Ancestry. > The fact there is double indexing of the same records with seemingly > no > communication between the systems or "indexers" is a bit ridiculous as > well. > I'm not sure Ancestry even tried to find out if they could have all or > some > of their records indexed by volunteers...I don't remember > seeing/hearing > any > calls for volunteers. In the past I voluntarily helped to index UK > civil > registration indexes for FreeBMD, a Rootsweb site. The indexing > quality of > that site is also much better than Ancestry. It's as if Ancestry was > rushing to "beat the competition" & finish indexing at any cost. > FindMyPast, > on the other hand, will upload a database before it's fully indexed, > but > warn you it's not yet indexed & list which sections (or counties) are > finished, & then send you updates on its progress as well as notify > you > when > indexing is complete. > Another site where Canadian censuses can be accessed, for free, with > much > better indexing, is AutomatedGenealogy.com > I have issues with using 3rd world labour for Canadian/North American > companies. Of course no one's forcing them to do it, other than > poverty, > that is. Of course they're more than happy to do it--it's probably > more > money than they could make in their own country. But that's not the > point. > We're not paying them fair wages according to North American > standards, or > let's face it, we wouldn't be using them. And that's exploitation. I > just > don't believe Ancestry/Rootsweb can't afford to pay Canada's minimum > wage > for data entry; I don't believe it's a matter of can they afford it; > they > just don't want to. If it were really about raising the standard of > living > in 3rd world countries & creating jobs, we'd be paying them minimum > wage. > It's never about that; it's about cheap labour & more profit for North > America. > I have the same issues with the current "trend" for Filipino nannies. > Of > course they're more than happy to work for crappy money in addition to > room > & board here, since they eventually get Canadian citizenship out of > it--but > it's effectively holding them hostage. We take advantage of the fact > they're > desperate enough to do so much for so little, & worse we're doing it > in > our > own country, as opposed to a factory in the 3rd world. If we were > really > concerned with helping them, we'd be paying them Canadian minimum wage > by > the hour. But then of course if we were doing that, we may as well be > hiring > North American nannies (!). Silly us. In my opinion, if you're working > for > a > Canadian company/person, whether in Canada or elsewhere, you should be > paid > according to Canadian standards. Anything else is exploitation. > Good for Drouin for setting standards & for taking on Ancestry over > the > quality of their indexing. BTW, what UK census year had its index > withdrawn? > As far as I know, they're all available either on Ancestry or > FindMyPast, > or > both, from 1841 to 1911. > I personally don't pay for my access to Ancestry, since I find the > fees > far > too steep, especially considering the quality of the indexing. I use a > cousin's user ID/password for free; next year we are considering > splitting > the cost of a membership, perhaps with other people. For UK records, > it's > much cheaper to use FindMyPast on a pay-per-use basis. > 2009/8/31 Malcolm Moody <[1][email protected]> > > Virtually all the large commercial genealogy data companies have > > been > > using "off-shore" agencies for indexing for many years now. Even the > > British Government sent out one of their census "years" for indexing > > in (I believe) India. It was such a disaster they had to withdraw it > > shortly after it's initial release. > > > > You really cannot blame these companies. They are not forcing > > anyone > > in the, so called, 3rd World to carry out this work. Far from it, > > there are locally owned agencies in these countries actively > marketing > > cut-price transcription, indexing, and data translation services at > > rates which are a fraction of what it would cost to do in the (?) > 1st > > World. From everything I've seen the people doing the work are only > > too happy to be employed and they are being at least fairly (if not > > well) paid for their efforts - by their local standards. In an ideal > > World this would be an perfect match of supply and demand. > > Unfortunately this is NOT an ideal World and the lack of an > > "appropriate mother tongue" background has turned out to be major > > problem in terms of the fidelity of the transcription and indexing > work. > > > > Well, to be more precise it should have turned out to be a major > > problem but to (I'm sure) the surprise of the companies who > published > > these highly inaccurate indexes, they were wildly successful and > while > > there were many complaints their customers kept on paying the fees > to > > access them, and it is in it's financial balance sheet that a > company > > judges it's success and failure. > > > > In this case (as I understand it) the owners of the Drouin > > collection > > actually set standards for the transcription and it is the failure > to > > meet these standards which is at the route of the legal action, > again, > > not a refusal by the genealogical public to support such a flawed > > service. I find it interesting that the only other case I know of > > where a flawed transcription was withdrawn was the one published by > > the British Government. That is an organization which judged its > > success or failure by the complaints of the users and not by the > > bottom line of the balance sheet. > > > > I suggest that those of you who wish to express dissatisfaction with > > the way in which some companies provide genealogical services do so > by > > not supporting them. Otherwise you will continue to receive the > > cheapest possible service simply because it makes the genealogical > > data service provider the best profit. > > > > Malcolm > > > > Archive CD Books Canada Inc. > > President: Malcolm Moody > > PO Box 11 > > Manotick > > Ontario, K4M 1A2 > > Canada. > > (613) 692-2667 > > WEB SITE: [2]http://www.ArchiveCDBooks.ca > <[3]http://www.archivecdbooks.ca/> > > > > On 30 Aug, 2009, at 1:30 PM, [4][email protected] > wrote: > >the message > > References > > 1. mailto:[email protected] > 2. http://www.ArchiveCDBooks.ca/ > 3. http://www.archivecdbooks.ca/ > 4. mailto:[email protected] > ***************** > Ten People All Genealogists Should Follow On Twitter: http://tr.im/hBAy > > Simcoe Co. GenWeb at http://www.waynecook.com/simcoe.shtml > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >