Hazel, I'm sure it's me that doesn't have the knack for this. We were discussing the name "Junius" that was mentioned in one of the posts a couple of days ago. I hadn't heard the name before and Andy gave me several examples that he knew and one was a Junius CREWS which got me trying to fit him into the db in the right place. I've sent a subsequent note that asks Andy to place Junius' father in more detail because I couldn't figure out which James (s/o Littleberry) he was and by which wife. Maybe I should always leave the original note in the reply? I'm doing it here and it's getting a little long, isn't it? Or maybe I should take the time to pare it down like some of you are doing. I think that's what I'll do. Sorry if we confused you, Hazel. Pat -------- REPLY, Original message follows -------- > Date: Thursday, 22-Jan-98 05:31 PM > From: Hazel \ Internet: ([email protected]) > To: [email protected] (Unlisted Name) \ PRODIGY: (patray) > cc: [email protected] \ Internet: ([email protected]) > Subject: Re: [CREWS-L] Junius > > Pat and Andy, > I think this is a good example of why it would be nice if we would all post to > the list but direct the message to the individual the post applies to. For > example, I for one, am not sure who Andy & Pat are talking about. I must have > missed Andy's post or else he initially wrote privately to Pat .... or > something.....Maybe I have yet to catch on to how this is supposed to work. > Hazel > On Thu, 22 Jan 1998, MRS PATRICIA A RAY wrote: > > Andy, > > Well, there you go! Junius's everywhere! > > I didn't even have a wife for James CREWS and now you say her name is > > Sarah HIGHT? Of course that means I have no children for them, either, > > until Junius, that is. Are there others? And gch, and ggch, etc? You > > guys just keep coming up with more data! I'm in heaven! > > Pat -------- REPLY, End of original message --------