>Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 16:52:52 -0800 (PST) >From: Ctjesters@aol.com >Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 19:51:49 EST >Old-To: NORCAL-L@rootsweb.com >Subject: Anonymity >X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 84 >X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by bl-14.rootsweb.com id QAA19047 >To: NORCAL-L@rootsweb.com >Resent-From: NORCAL-L@rootsweb.com >X-Mailing-List: <NORCAL-L@rootsweb.com> archive/latest/44790 >X-Loop: NORCAL-L@rootsweb.com >Resent-Sender: NORCAL-L-request@rootsweb.com > >I got this from another list and found it very interesting. >**************************************************************** > > > > >Subject:    Living persons' anonymity > > > >Forgive me for posting something not exactly relevant to the list, but > >this is so very important to all of us. People are having their > >identities stolen daily by well-meaning relatives posting private > >information about them on the web. PLEASE be careful and considerate! > >Thanks. > > > >FROM ANCESTRY: > > > ><> > > > >And from Missing Links: > > > >Julie_Case@prodigy.com in Missing Links, Vol. 4, No. 12 writes: > > > ><< Technology enables us to share genealogical information easily and > >quickly via e-mail, mailing lists, chat rooms, bulletin boards, > >Newsgroups, GEDCOMs, CDs, and Web sites, but it has created a monster. > >In our eagerness to obtain and to share information about our families > >we are forgetting that our living family members have a right to > >privacy. We should obtain their permission before sharing any > >information about them with others -- in any format via any means. > > > > One researcher reports, "In just one file that I downloaded . . . I > >found more than 200 names of persons born within the last 70 years . . . > >" > > Another notes, "I was shocked and dismayed to find that someone had > >copied my entire GEDCOM and put it up on their Web site. While I have no > >objection to anyone using my dead ancestors, this person had included > >the living as well, right down to my six-year-old niece." > > > > In preparing a talk for my local genealogical society on this > >subject, I searched a number of home pages. At one I found the names of > >everyone in the family, when and where born, right on down to a > >month-old-grandson -- including the hospital in which he was born. > > > > Some genealogists have written to me claiming it does not matter what > >we put up on the Web since "this information is all public information, > >anyway." When I queried several of them to provide the source of birth > >information posted on their home pages, it turns out in every instance > >that the data were either supplied by a cousin or they obtained it from > >a GEDCOM. In other words, they had not found the information from a > >public source at all. > > > > The following policy is posted at "Don't Mess with the Living, Texas" > ><http://home.sprynet.com/~harrisfarm/warning.htm>: > > "It is the policy of the Texas GenWeb Project to protect the rights > >and privacy of our living relatives. We strongly encourage all involved > >to do their best not to place information on the Internet about anyone > >who is still living, unless you have their express permission to do so." > > > > Among the suggestions for ways to protect living family members are: > > > > -- When requesting information (via e-mail, chat, queries, etc.)   > >do not include personal information on living persons. > > > > -- When responding to requests for information, especially to   > >someone you really do not know, do not provide them with   personal > >information on living persons. They could post it on   the Web or do > >who knows what else with it. > > > > -- Before sharing GEDCOM files with others, remove information on   > >all living persons. Programs such as GEDClean, GEDLiving, and   > >GEDPrivy will do this for you. > > > > -- If you have a genealogy Web site, be sure to remove   > >information on all living persons. (Cyndi's Genealogy Home   Page > >Construction Kit <http://www.cyndislist.com/construc.htm>   has tips > >and links to the GEDCOM utility programs that will   exclude > >information about the living.) > > > > British genealogists are using the "GEN100" logo to signify that > >their Web site respects a cut-off date of 100 years, and to advise that > >information which is less than 100 years old will not be divulged. Many > >Americans use 1920 as the cut-off point, since that is the most recent > >census available to the public. > > > > There is an excellent article by Candace L. Doriott on this subject > >in the recent issue of "Genealogical Computing." (Winter 1999, Vol. 18, > >No. 3). It is entitled 'Competing Values: Privacy Issues in Genealogy." > >Subscription information to this periodical can be found at Ancestry's > >Web site: <http://www.ancestry.com/> > >                        > >                  *   *   *   *   * > >>Written by <Maritoole@AOL.com> Previously > >> published by Julia M. Case and Myra > >> Vanderpool Gormley, CG, Missing Links: A > >> Weekly Newsletter for Genealogists, Vol. 4, > >> No. 12, 19 March 1999. > > >----------------------------------------------- > >>--------------------------------------------- > >>Permission to Reprint aricles from MISSING > >> LINKS is granted unless specifically stated > >> otherwise, PROVIDED: (1) the reprint is used > >> for non-commercial, educational purposes; > >> and (2) a copy of this notice appears at the > >> end of the article: > > > >>Written by <author's name, e-mail address, > >> and URL, if given>. Previously published by > >> Julia M. Case and Myra Vanderpool Gormley, > >> CG, Missing Links: A Weekly Newsletter for > >> Genealogists, Vol. 4, No. 12, 19 March 1999. > >> Please visit the MISSING LINKS Web page at > > > ><http://www.rootsweb.com/~mlnews/index.htm> > > > > > > Carol De Priest <http://members.xoom.com/SandSurfer/home.htm> *** check it out - work in progress ***