Hi,Once again,David, Re my previous response to you. ( For the benefit of the Group David raised the problem that could be created by contrasting data applying to the same Chase individuual and suggested a panel of experts within the Group be set up to decide which version was the most probable. I responded that I thought that ALL info. should be included with the proviso that ALL data was not 100% guaranteed and it was up to the individual to question its validity.) I have now had time to reflect on this and I have realised that there is a BIG problem with different data for the same individual, especially parents as that would indeed create chaos with the data base. I still feel that ALL info should be included on the Site and maybe the only way to achieve this is initially to have seperate databases with a summary of the main points. I was concerned about your panel of experts idea as I believe that it would increase controversy in as much that someone who firmly believes their data to be correct but is rejected by the panel may take umbrage. There is however considerable merit in a modified version of your idea in that where there are differences ANY one can givb their view as long as they state why they believe one version and not the next. From this would emerge 2 things 1) All Group members could make their own minds up having seen all the various views,these views could be included in the WWW site so that visitors could also contribute if they wish 2) It would establish which lines of research to take to try to get to the truth. In the main it is to be hoped that there are not too amny of such problemsbut there is the classic of the Origin of both William "...of 1630 Winthrop Fleet" and his wife Mary, sometimes refered to as Mary Townley. As a "novice" as you call yourself It would appear that you have a good insight into some of the problems. TO THE REST OF THE GROUP. Any Suggestions? Keith Hume PS I have already received one gedcom with nearly 10,000 names,2,700+ CHASE from a Group member *********************************************************************** At 13:11 13/04/98 -0700, you wrote: >Your plan is excellent. I would like to see it go forward. My >grandmother was a Chase and I identify more with her line than any other >(emotionally). Here are a few thoughts. > >I have family reports back to the two Williams. But, there are >problems. Like mine, many histories are weakly documented for the >oldest generations. My records are well documented for three or four >generations back (about 1850). Older ones are not. Also, my family >historians tended to keep record of only the sibling from whom they >descended, so I show one or two siblings where there were likely five or >ten. Further, most widely used sources have a few, seriious errors. > >So, the hard task will be deciding which datum from two conflicting >family reports is the one to put on the web site. Because people have >relied on published errors and missed the published corrections, we >definitely cannot rely on "the majority opinion." Lots of people cite >the Williams as from the West of England though the data I have seen >suggests they are from the Southeast. Many cite Mary Townley as >William's spouse (apparently in error). Aquila and William families are >mixed and mingled by many. > >As a novice, I suggest this policy: > >1. A panel of experienced Chase genealogists document and agree on >conclusions for the older Chase generations. Cited, verifiable >documentation should be the basis for including, excluding, or leaving >open to question the place in the tree for any Chases beyond (say) 1790. >(Some sites rely on the conclusion of the site maintainer alone.) > >2. "Family records and reports" should be accepted as adequate evidence >only for generations since (say) 1790. > >I also suggest that we make the major sources (documentation or cites) >part of the site. Names and places and dates without source data makes >for a site that no one can well rely upon. Everything may not be there >to start with, but we should not just list names without sources and >figure our job is done. > >Standard formats for submission will also be needed. > >Lets get going and chase our families down (or up). > > >David (Chase, Davis) White >Salem, Oregon US >boda@ix.netcom.com > > > > > > > > > > >k.hume wrote: >> >> All, >> I hope you can endure all this to the end. If in doubt print it and read it >> in bed you could doze off very quickly but I hope not. >> Further to my earlier email of today I would like to get an agreed >> definition and scope for this project. >> IT WILL ALSO BE NECESSARY TO HAVE AT LEAST 2 OTHER VOLUNTEERS TO BE >> PREPARED TO ASSIST AS DEFINED LATER BUT ANY OFFERS OF HELP WILL BE GREATLY >> APPRECIATED >> > >