Hello, I'm very new to this mailing list and have been watching this topic for the past few days. If nothing has been taken out of context and in the absence of any significant private emails between the parties involved in this conversation, my reaction to the quote from George W. Durman matches that expressed by Paul Barrett below. Taking this a step further, I might add that Paul has presented a very convincing argument in favor of the fellow whose account was closed. Unfortunately, George has (for whatever reason) wielded his considerable power in a manner that has been perceived as being disrespectful. My suggestion would be to take this thing offline at this point because it has degraded to a personal level. I say this assuming there is a third party (perhaps Ira) who could effectively arbitrate the dispute. I hope Paul will reconsider his decision to drop CFT. Best Regards, Tim Nolan North Andover, Massachusetts, USA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul and Barbara Barrett" <paul.barrett@hornton.org.uk> To: <CFT-WIN-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 7:30 AM Subject: RE: [CFTW] questionnaire of internet genealogy users requirement survey > > [quote] > Don't argue with me about this -- don't criticize me, nor try to > second-guess me. > > SUBJECT CLOSED !!!!! > Regards, > George W. Durman > CFT-WIN Mailing List Manager > [unquote > > So, to your unwillingness to entertain open discussion on a topic that is > clearly relevant, you now add a large measure of breathtaking arrogance. > > Ira, I will not be treated in this way by this arrogant idiot. I will leave > this forum forthwith and I will look for an alternative piece of software. > Shame; CFT is a great piece of software - but association with extremists is > not something that stands it in good stead. > > > > At 26-06-05 03:42 PM Sunday, Paul and Barbara Barrett wrote: > *********START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT********* > > >I am sorry but once again I have to take issue with you. > > > >You say this use of the mailing constitutes spam. Spam is defined as > >unsolicited bulk eMail and by subscribing to your list, each and > >everyone of > >us has signed up for bulk, unsolicited eMail. Tacitly we have > >agreed to be > >spammed. OK, we signed up to a genealogy mailing list so our > >expectation is > >that the messages we receive should relate to that topic, and > >anything that > >is off topic should be regarded as spam. But the mail we received DID > >relate to that topic so maybe we should only consider it spam if it had a > >commercial aim. But it was not an attempt to sell us anything; it was an > >academic enquiry. Spam also typically originates from spoofed addresses - > >this one was from a genuine address. Let us just remember this was a > >genuine enquiry from a student doing research into genealogy tools. > >Perfectly on topic as far as I can see. I think that if we were to award > >marks for 'spam-ness' then the originator at worst scores 5%, due to the > >poor way the request was initially posted. > > > >The responses I saw from the other members of the mailing list were > >enquiries about the status of the enquirer or positive replies. The > >credentials of the originator were easy to establish and I did > >so. I do not > >recall seeing much, if any, complaint. > > > >So let's now consider the mailing list manager's response. The originator > >has been forcibly unsubscribed from the mailing list. I believe that > >response is disproportionate. It disappoints me that someone's > >educational > >studies can be hampered by censorship. An alternative name for a mailing > >list manager is 'moderator,' a word which has an obvious root. Moderation > >seems to have been in short supply in this case. > > > >Is it right to say, you can do what you wish but I disagree with you > >all and > >so as manager of the list I will enforce MY opinion by forcing the > >subscriber off the forum. > > > >If that is the kind of forum you want to create, fine, but then > >you'd better > >remove me too, because it's not the kind of behaviour I want to be > >associated with. > > > >Regards > > > > > > > >Paul Barrett > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: CFT-WIN List Manager [mailto:GeorgeWDurman@comcast.net] > >Sent: 25 June 2005 09:00 > >To: CFT-WIN-L@rootsweb.com > >Subject: Re: [CFTW] questionnaire of internet genealogy users > >requirement survey > > > > > >Folks, you can do as you wish, but I caution you to NOT respond to > >this type of request. > > > >First of all, this person has made a list of Mailing Lists and has > >probably sent his request to each List, after first subscribing to > >the Lists. These Mailing Lists at Rootsweb were not intended for > >such purposes. (It's called SPAMMING!) > > > >Regards, > >George W. Durman > >CFT-WIN Mailing List Manager > > > >At 13-06-05 11:41 AM Monday, Juan Du wrote: > >*********START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT********* > > >Juan Du > > > > > >C/O Jeff Jones > > > > > >IMC, WMG > > > > > >University of Warwick > > > > > >CV4 7AL > > > > > >jdujojo@yahoo.co.uk > > > > > >Dear user: > > > > > >As part of my Masters degree in Electronic Business Management at > > >Warwick University I am undertaking a study of the use of the > > >internet for genealogical purposes. The purpose of this study is to > > >identify the way in which genealogical internet sites make money and > > >to understand the customer base. > > > > > >To facilitate this study you are invited to participate in an email > > >survey questionnaire which is designed to investigate the user > > >requirements for internet genealogy such as searching for ancestor > > >history data, finding people, creating your family website and > > >designing a family tree. In this survey, there are 20 questions and > > >it will take approximately 10 minutes to complete. > > > > > >Your participation in this survey is voluntary but would be > > >appreciated. If you take part and provide a contact email address a > > >copy of the analysis of the survey will be sent to you upon > > >completion. If at any time you feel uncomfortable answering any of > > >the questions then please just ignore it and carry on with the next > > >question. > > >(snip) > >**********END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT*********** > > > > > >==== CFT-WIN Mailing List ==== > >You can contact the List Manager at: > >CFT-WIN-admin@rootsweb.com > > > > > > > > > > > >==== CFT-WIN Mailing List ==== > >To unsubscribe from CFT-WIN, send an e-mail message to: > > CFT-WIN-L-request@rootsweb.com (for individual messages) > > CFT-WIN-D-request@rootsweb.com (for Digest mode) > >Subject: unsubscribe > >In the body include only one word: unsubscribe > >(Turn OFF your signature file when sending this command) > **********END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT*********** > > > ==== CFT-WIN Mailing List ==== > To unsubscribe from CFT-WIN, send an e-mail message to: > CFT-WIN-L-request@rootsweb.com (for individual messages) > CFT-WIN-D-request@rootsweb.com (for Digest mode) > Subject: unsubscribe > In the body include only one word: unsubscribe > (Turn OFF your signature file when sending this command) > > > > > > ==== CFT-WIN Mailing List ==== > To unsubscribe from CFT-WIN, send an e-mail message to: > CFT-WIN-L-request@rootsweb.com (for individual messages) > CFT-WIN-D-request@rootsweb.com (for Digest mode) > Subject: unsubscribe > In the body include only one word: unsubscribe > (Turn OFF your signature file when sending this command) >

Concerning the survey, I will go ahead and add my (hopefully last) comment. I do not have strong feelings one way or the other about this controversy. However, I will tell you all that George Durman, who manages this list, knows a lot more concerning the Rootsweb rules than I do (and likely most of the rest on this list). I can also tell you that he does not get paid for this, but has freely offered his time to "me" most of all - since it is my software we are dealing with - and I do make money on it (not a lot - but some) - and I have never paid George a dime for his help. I can also tell you that I do not pay Rootsweb for this service either. And if they have rules then we ought to abide by them. I very much appreciate all the help George has given with the list. And I appreciate all who use CFT - whether or not you agree with this stance. Thanks for your support and thanks for letting this controversy drop. Ira ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- Mr. Ira J. Lund Cumberland Family Software www.cf-software.com