Well, we do have something in common. <grin> My grandfather was Andrew Jackson ROBINSON, hence he picked up the nickname, "Cap'n Jack." With that LeGrande ancestry, you are probably related to the ROBERT family of French Santee, Berkeley County, SC in some way. Is that correct? I know some of the CAMPBELLS bounced out of the Bertie, Edgecombe area into SC where they would have come into contact with the LeGRAND bunch who were originally from Normandy, FRANCE, according to my notes. Sarah COX who married Thomas CAMPBELL (ABT 1750-BEF 1786), first, and Josiah DANIEL (AFT 1736-1825 of Beaufort District, SC, second, was one of these CAMPBELL links that I know about. John R. Clarke Thomasville, GA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack V Butler" <JackVButler@comcast.net> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 9:27 PM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > I, on the other hand, have never used the name John - much to the dismay > of > my third grade teacher, who insisted that Jack was a nickname for John. > I, > however, was named after my great grandfather, Jackson LeGrand Campbell - > no > John in there. > > Jack > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 9:07 PM > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > >> Bill, >> It was not Jack that asked you, it was me but Jack and John are often >> the same persons and I have used the name, Jack, all too many times, too. >> <grin> >> It is mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and it is inherited by all children > from >> their mother and is passed from mother to all of her offspring's. If you >> have two unbroken female lines back to this DANIEL family , then you can > use >> the mtDNA test even if the person at the end of each line is a male. >> My mitochondrial DNA is the same as that of Elizabeth HERRING, my 4th >> GGM, wife of Richard RICKS, Sr (ABt 1780-1847) of Elizabeth Parish, >> Edgecombe County, NC and later, Emanuel County, GA. >> This unbroken line is. Me, Alyse ROBINSON, Sarah Elizabeth > TOMLINSON, >> Arlia Ann Barbara DAME, Sarah Ann THIGPEN, Barbara RICKS, Elizabeth > HERRING >> who was the d/o an Abraham HERRING and I do not know who his wife was. > You >> may have something similar which will allow you to do mtDNA testing. >> >> John R. Clarke >> Thomasville, GA >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 3:06 PM >> Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >> > Jack, >> > If I could find a male descendant of Benjamin Daniel and Margaret >> > Brown, >> > who >> > are my earliest fully documented ancestors (Benjamin being the >> > purported >> > son >> > of William Daniel and Mary Snead) I would certainly do my best to have > him >> > submit his DNA. So far, however I have not managed to find him. >> > >> > I have had my DNA analyzed, but of course that will only help with the >> > Brewer line. The other DNA analysis (I won't even attempt to spell it, >> > but >> > the DNA inherited from mothers) also won't help with the Daniel line >> > because >> > my last Daniel ancestor was Virginia W. Daniel, daughter of William A. >> > Daniel and Mary E. Cooper...so we shoot off into the Cooper line and > from >> > there into the Burton line, which is as far as I can go with that. >> > >> > But...we continue searching..... >> > Bill >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> >> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 9:39 PM >> > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> > >> > >> >> RE: " I followed my surname back all the way to England in the 15th >> > Century >> >> based on DAR >> >> information from the 1930's...before I discovered that the two ladies >> >> that >> >> had joined the DAR and whose information I was taking on faith had >> >> fabricated the entire line! And books are still being written using >> >> their >> >> information, even though the DAR itself has disowned it." >> >> >> >> >> >> Ain't that the truth. Now you know why so much of what we see today >> >> makes >> >> no sense, whatsoever. However, I think we will get to the bottom of >> >> it >> > with >> >> the primary source records that are out there, these days, and those >> >> which >> >> will be coming online in the future, especially when combined with DNA >> >> analysis. I also think there will be some major surprises along the > way, >> >> too. >> >> >> >> BTW, has your line been DNA tested, yet. Since the Bill BREWER line >> >> is >> > one >> >> of the most mysterious DANIEL lines around, I think it would behoove > you >> > to >> >> have someone from this DANIEL line tested, if you have not do so, >> >> already. >> >> >> >> The test for my DANIEL line went in, today, so I should know something > on >> > my >> >> line within about six weeks..... >> >> >> >> John R. Clarke >> >> Thomasville, GA >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> >> >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> >> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 12:03 AM >> >> Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >> >> >> >> > Ruth, >> >> > You should have asked that Center's librarian to see the Center's >> >> > Strict >> >> > Copyright policy. For the last several years (never mind how many >> >> > is >> >> > "several"...just consider it to be more than I'd like to admit) I > have >> >> > visited Salt Lake City twice a year, spending a week going through >> >> > films >> >> > and >> >> > making prints. In between visits to Salt Lake City, I have gone to > the >> >> > local Center in West Los Angeles, ordered films from Salt Lake City, >> >> > and >> >> > have made many copies. Never has anyone told me there was a limit >> >> > on >> > the >> >> > copies I could make...and I have been there often enough that >> >> > several >> >> > of >> >> > the >> >> > volunteers know me by name. Actually, there is no copyright on > public >> >> > records. I think you were the victim of an over-zealous local >> > librarian. >> >> > >> >> > One thing I will agree with Jack on...there is nothing that can > compare >> > to >> >> > the thrill of going down and prowling through some dusty records in >> >> > some >> >> > dirty basement of an obscure courthouse...and finding a gem! But, > the >> >> > problem with that is that you don't always know which obscure >> >> > courthouse >> >> > and >> >> > which dirty basement, or which dusty record is going to give you >> >> > that >> >> > payoff. You still can't trust the information on the LDS films >> >> > implicitly, >> >> > but they will guide you to the proper places to find the original >> > records, >> >> > and that's what we're looking for. >> >> > >> >> > As for cobbled up records, yes, there are a lot of cobbled up > records. >> >> > But >> >> > they existed long before Ancestry.com came on the scene. I followed > my >> >> > surname back all the way to England in the 15th Century based on DAR >> >> > information from the 1930's...before I discovered that the two >> >> > ladies >> > that >> >> > had joined the DAR and whose information I was taking on faith had >> >> > fabricated the entire line! And books are still being written using >> > their >> >> > information, even though the DAR itself has disowned it. >> >> > >> >> > There is junk out there. There is junk on the commercial services, > and >> >> > there is junk on the "free" services (here free is in quotes >> >> > because >> >> > my >> >> > time is valuable, junk costs time). Only the original source >> >> > records >> > are >> >> > absolute proof (and even those could have been falsified). It > doesn't >> >> > matter if you use the commercial services or the "free" services, >> >> > you >> >> > still >> >> > have to verify the data...and if your families get cobbled up, it is >> >> > always >> >> > you who cobbled them. >> >> > >> >> > I know, I said I wasn't going to comment further on this > subject...see, >> >> > even >> >> > I can't be relied upon. >> >> > Bill >> >> > And this, I promise, is my last comment on the subject. >> >> > >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> >> > From: "Ruth Newlan" <ruthann@saw.net> >> >> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> >> > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 6:59 PM >> >> > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> Jack: >> >> >> >> >> >> There is something to John's statement. I've used the LSD Films >> >> > extensively >> >> >> over the last few years to research Monroe Co., AL court records. >> > After >> >> >> ordering a number of films and taking a great number of prints off > the >> >> >> films - I was reminded by the center's Librarian of the Family > History >> >> >> Center's Strict Copyright policy. They feel that when they have >> >> >> filmed >> >> >> records that they own the copyright on them. And, likewise you will >> >> >> not >> >> > find >> >> >> the same records recorded in any type of media in the AL State >> > Archives. >> >> >> >> >> >> Yes, the original records are still in the basement of the old > Monroe >> >> >> Courthouse - now Heritage Museum. And, by asking the right person, > I >> >> >> understand that folks can still go down and prowl through the dusty >> >> > records >> >> >> in a dirty basement. It appears that the State of AL upholds the > LSD >> >> >> copyright. >> >> >> >> >> >> As you know, I love sharing what I have on my families lines and do > it >> >> >> freely (and that's the key word - FREELY). I've spent a good dime > on >> > my >> >> >> research as many of you have. And, anyone with a little ambition > will >> >> > know >> >> >> all that I know by reading on the Internet - I post to lists very >> > often. >> >> >> >> >> >> And, talk about some cobbeled up histories that will be the >> >> >> results! >> > If >> >> > my >> >> >> families get cobbled up - I'd rather have done it myself ;>) >> >> >> Just my two cents - Ruth in Portland, OR >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> >> From: "Jack V Butler" <JackVButler@comcast.net> >> >> >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> >> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 7:07 PM >> >> >> Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > One entity controlling all of the genealogical information? Are > you >> >> >> > tripping, John? The information is still out there, in the State >> >> >> Archives, >> >> >> > the Courthouses, in the Churches, the City Halls. Believe me, I >> >> >> > have >> >> > gone >> >> >> > and found it there. Been to the National Archives, too. All of >> >> >> > that >> >> > cost >> >> >> > me a whole lot of money in travel, lodging and meals on the >> >> >> > road - >> > and >> >> >> most >> >> >> > of it was fishing trips, going to where I THOUGHT that I might > find >> > my >> >> >> > ancestors records. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Now, I pay a little money and sit in the convenience of my own > home, >> > in >> >> > a >> >> >> > comfortable chair, with my shoes off, while I look at scans of >> > original >> >> >> > census records at 10:00 p.m. at night. In short, I pay for the >> >> >> convenience >> >> >> > of easy multiple searches and of ease of delivery. I don't HAVE > to >> > go >> >> > to >> >> >> > these sources, I could go back and do it the old way - indeed, I >> > often >> >> > do. >> >> >> > But now I almost always have much better leads when I go to a >> >> >> > courthouse >> >> >> > because I have often found a transcript or original record to > point >> > me >> >> > in >> >> >> > the right direction. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against free resources - I >> >> >> > have >> >> >> > volunteered to digitize records for several county sites and will >> >> > probably >> >> >> > do so again. But I certainly don't begrudge the fees that I pay > to >> > the >> >> >> > folks who went to the trouble to collect into a single location >> >> >> > large >> >> >> > quantities of the kind of records that I want to see. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Nobody is forced to use the subscription services - but I cannot >> >> >> > imagine >> >> >> why >> >> >> > they wouldn't. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Jack Butler >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> >> >> > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> >> >> >> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> >> >> > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 9:46 PM >> >> >> > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > Bill, >> >> >> > > I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical >> >> >> > > information >> >> >> > belongs >> >> >> > > to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do > not >> >> > think >> >> >> > you >> >> >> > > have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a > professional >> >> >> > > genealogist, have you? >> >> >> > > Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some >> >> >> > > person >> >> >> > > to >> >> >> > > do >> >> >> > this >> >> >> > > work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as >> >> >> > > the >> > end >> >> >> > results >> >> >> > > of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the > process, >> >> >> persons >> >> >> > > that I never would have known, otherwise. >> >> >> > > As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates > to >> > the >> >> >> > > genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with >> >> >> > > that >> >> > and >> >> >> > not >> >> >> > > just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance >> >> > companies, >> >> >> >> >> >> > > etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a >> >> >> > > lot >> >> >> > > of >> >> >> > > information about you and your family strictly from the history > of >> >> > your >> >> >> > > family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, > etc. >> >> >> > Normally, >> >> >> > > this information is pretty well protected because these >> >> >> > > entities >> >> >> > > do >> >> > not >> >> >> > know >> >> >> > > your family history but put it all in one location and watch > out. >> >> >> > > Let >> >> >> > them >> >> >> > > get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. >> >> >> > > Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, > using >> > tax >> >> >> > exempt >> >> >> > > NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their >> > overall >> >> >> > wealth >> >> >> > > through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes > on >> >> >> > > any >> >> >> of >> >> >> > > it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the >> >> > richest >> >> >> of >> >> >> > > any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws > to >> >> > their >> >> >> > > benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot > smarter >> >> > than >> >> >> > the >> >> >> > > rest of us in this regard. >> >> >> > > I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business >> > until >> >> >> > > I >> >> >> was >> >> >> > > in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few > years >> >> >> > > ago >> >> >> and >> >> >> > > read in their local paper an investigative report done one of >> >> >> > > their >> >> >> staff >> >> >> > > writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I >> > never >> >> >> > > associated any organized religion with this type of business. I >> > also >> >> >> > assume >> >> >> > > you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one >> >> >> > > time. >> >> >> > > In this country we have laws to protect each of our > individual >> >> >> > religious >> >> >> > > beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe >> >> >> > > some, >> > but >> >> > to >> >> >> > have >> >> >> > > one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical >> >> >> > information >> >> >> > > of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government >> > will >> >> >> > sooner >> >> >> > > or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. >> >> >> > > It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as >> >> >> > > they >> >> > are >> >> >> > and >> >> >> > > have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of > these >> >> >> > historical >> >> >> > > facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put >> > "historical >> >> >> > facts" >> >> >> > > and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the >> >> >> > > case >> > with >> >> >> any >> >> >> > > GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a > religious >> >> >> > umbrella, >> >> >> > > then you have created the situation where your family > information >> > can >> >> > be >> >> >> > > sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that >> > family >> >> >> > > information....... >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > John R. Clarke >> >> >> > > Thomasville, GA >> >> >> > > ----- Original Message ----- >> >> >> > > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> >> >> >> > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> >> >> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM >> >> >> > > Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > > This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, >> > Ancestry.com >> >> >> > > > collects information, which they then turn around and sell. >> >> >> > > > What >> >> >> > > > do >> >> >> you >> >> >> > > > expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that >> > matter, >> >> >> would >> >> >> > > > do your research for you for free? What do you think >> > professional >> >> >> > > > genealogists have been doing for years? They have been >> > collecting >> >> >> > > > information and selling it to you. >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > Personally, I have submitted my information to World >> >> >> > > > Connects. >> >> >> > > > I >> >> > sent >> >> >> > it >> >> >> > > > prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued > to >> >> > update >> >> >> > it >> >> >> > > > since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited >> >> >> > > > immensely >> >> >> > > > by >> >> >> > > > so >> >> >> > doing >> >> >> > > > in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many > new >> >> >> friends >> >> >> > > > and relatives researching the same line. My research has >> > expanded >> >> > by >> >> >> > > > leaps and bounds. >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why > Ancestry >> >> >> > > > took >> >> >> > over >> >> >> > > > Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported > Rootsweb >> >> >> > strongly >> >> >> > > > enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It >> > depended >> >> > on >> >> >> > our >> >> >> > > > contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but > not >> >> >> enough >> >> >> > of >> >> >> > > > us supported them monetarily. >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, >> >> >> > > > Family >> >> >> > Tree >> >> >> > > > Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? >> > There >> >> > are >> >> >> > > > many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have >> >> >> > > > never >> >> >> forced >> >> >> > > > anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want > to >> >> > share >> >> >> > your >> >> >> > > > "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will >> >> >> > > > continue >> >> >> > > > to >> >> >> > > > do >> >> >> so. >> >> >> > > > We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the >> > biggest >> >> >> > owners >> >> >> > > > of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now > that >> >> >> > > > I >> >> > have >> >> >> > > > been told, my next question is...so what? What does that >> >> >> > > > have >> >> >> > > > to >> >> >> > > > do >> >> >> > with >> >> >> > > > anything? >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we >> > each >> >> > had >> >> >> > to >> >> >> > > > travel to the countless archives scattered around the country >> > (not >> >> > to >> >> >> > > > mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a >> >> > resounding >> >> >> > > > "NO!" >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > Bill >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> >> > > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> >> >> > > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> >> >> > > > Mail Mode: >> >> >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> >> >> > > > or- >> >> >> > > > Digest Mode: >> >> >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> >> > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> >> >> > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> >> >> > > Mail Mode: >> >> >> > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> >> >> > > or- >> >> >> > > Digest Mode: >> >> >> > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> >> > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List >> > Archives >> >> >> at: >> >> >> > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> >> IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List >> >> >> Archives >> >> > at: >> >> >> http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> > Don't forget to change the Subject line of your message when you > change >> >> > the subject of a reply message. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> DO NOT FORGET: This is a Genealogical Mailing List and the posting of >> > messages that do not relate to the DANIEL Family, its collateral > families >> > or >> > those of a historical nature relating to genealogical research -- are > not >> > allowed on this list. >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives >> > at: >> > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >> > >> >> >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> Mail Mode: >> mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> or- >> Digest Mode: >> mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives > at: > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL > >

Bill, What you would need is a sister of Virginia or a sister of her mother in an unbroken line down to some other person to prove your descent from this DANIEL line. Virginia would have the same mtDNA as her mother and any siblings but since a male sibling would not pass it on, that is not the way to go. The way to go is an unbroken line from either Virginia to her daughter, to her daughter's daughter and so forth. Then you need another unbroken female line back to another one of Virginia's female siblings, unbroken all the way down through females, as before, which will give you something to compare against. If your mtDNA matches this other line, then you have a match all the way back to Virginia's father. Does this make sense? This mtDNA test is a little different than the normal Y-DNA test we use for males and I do not know what it costs or entails. Ask Kevin. However, the first thing you need is a candidate for the other line, which may or may not be difficult to prove. John R. Clarke Thomasville, GA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 9:51 PM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > John, > Anyhow, yes I know how mitochondrial DNA works (just couldn't spell it). > But...ummm...let's see...my mother, Margaret Haigh...her mother, Carrie > Weyer....her mother Virginia Daniel...her father, William A. Daniel...Now, > what would that prove, since my descent from William A. Daniel, and from > his > grandfather, is very well documented? Would that still connect us to > Daniels further back, even if William A.'s mother was not a Daniel? > Bill > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 6:07 PM > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > >> Bill, >> It was not Jack that asked you, it was me but Jack and John are often >> the same persons and I have used the name, Jack, all too many times, too. >> <grin> >> It is mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and it is inherited by all children > from >> their mother and is passed from mother to all of her offspring's. If you >> have two unbroken female lines back to this DANIEL family , then you can > use >> the mtDNA test even if the person at the end of each line is a male. >> My mitochondrial DNA is the same as that of Elizabeth HERRING, my 4th >> GGM, wife of Richard RICKS, Sr (ABt 1780-1847) of Elizabeth Parish, >> Edgecombe County, NC and later, Emanuel County, GA. >> This unbroken line is. Me, Alyse ROBINSON, Sarah Elizabeth > TOMLINSON, >> Arlia Ann Barbara DAME, Sarah Ann THIGPEN, Barbara RICKS, Elizabeth > HERRING >> who was the d/o an Abraham HERRING and I do not know who his wife was. > You >> may have something similar which will allow you to do mtDNA testing. >> >> John R. Clarke >> Thomasville, GA >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 3:06 PM >> Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >> > Jack, >> > If I could find a male descendant of Benjamin Daniel and Margaret >> > Brown, >> > who >> > are my earliest fully documented ancestors (Benjamin being the >> > purported >> > son >> > of William Daniel and Mary Snead) I would certainly do my best to have > him >> > submit his DNA. So far, however I have not managed to find him. >> > >> > I have had my DNA analyzed, but of course that will only help with the >> > Brewer line. The other DNA analysis (I won't even attempt to spell it, >> > but >> > the DNA inherited from mothers) also won't help with the Daniel line >> > because >> > my last Daniel ancestor was Virginia W. Daniel, daughter of William A. >> > Daniel and Mary E. Cooper...so we shoot off into the Cooper line and > from >> > there into the Burton line, which is as far as I can go with that. >> > >> > But...we continue searching..... >> > Bill >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> >> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 9:39 PM >> > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> > >> > >> >> RE: " I followed my surname back all the way to England in the 15th >> > Century >> >> based on DAR >> >> information from the 1930's...before I discovered that the two ladies >> >> that >> >> had joined the DAR and whose information I was taking on faith had >> >> fabricated the entire line! And books are still being written using >> >> their >> >> information, even though the DAR itself has disowned it." >> >> >> >> >> >> Ain't that the truth. Now you know why so much of what we see today >> >> makes >> >> no sense, whatsoever. However, I think we will get to the bottom of >> >> it >> > with >> >> the primary source records that are out there, these days, and those >> >> which >> >> will be coming online in the future, especially when combined with DNA >> >> analysis. I also think there will be some major surprises along the > way, >> >> too. >> >> >> >> BTW, has your line been DNA tested, yet. Since the Bill BREWER line >> >> is >> > one >> >> of the most mysterious DANIEL lines around, I think it would behoove > you >> > to >> >> have someone from this DANIEL line tested, if you have not do so, >> >> already. >> >> >> >> The test for my DANIEL line went in, today, so I should know something > on >> > my >> >> line within about six weeks..... >> >> >> >> John R. Clarke >> >> Thomasville, GA >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> >> >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> >> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 12:03 AM >> >> Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >> >> >> >> > Ruth, >> >> > You should have asked that Center's librarian to see the Center's >> >> > Strict >> >> > Copyright policy. For the last several years (never mind how many >> >> > is >> >> > "several"...just consider it to be more than I'd like to admit) I > have >> >> > visited Salt Lake City twice a year, spending a week going through >> >> > films >> >> > and >> >> > making prints. In between visits to Salt Lake City, I have gone to > the >> >> > local Center in West Los Angeles, ordered films from Salt Lake City, >> >> > and >> >> > have made many copies. Never has anyone told me there was a limit >> >> > on >> > the >> >> > copies I could make...and I have been there often enough that >> >> > several >> >> > of >> >> > the >> >> > volunteers know me by name. Actually, there is no copyright on > public >> >> > records. I think you were the victim of an over-zealous local >> > librarian. >> >> > >> >> > One thing I will agree with Jack on...there is nothing that can > compare >> > to >> >> > the thrill of going down and prowling through some dusty records in >> >> > some >> >> > dirty basement of an obscure courthouse...and finding a gem! But, > the >> >> > problem with that is that you don't always know which obscure >> >> > courthouse >> >> > and >> >> > which dirty basement, or which dusty record is going to give you >> >> > that >> >> > payoff. You still can't trust the information on the LDS films >> >> > implicitly, >> >> > but they will guide you to the proper places to find the original >> > records, >> >> > and that's what we're looking for. >> >> > >> >> > As for cobbled up records, yes, there are a lot of cobbled up > records. >> >> > But >> >> > they existed long before Ancestry.com came on the scene. I followed > my >> >> > surname back all the way to England in the 15th Century based on DAR >> >> > information from the 1930's...before I discovered that the two >> >> > ladies >> > that >> >> > had joined the DAR and whose information I was taking on faith had >> >> > fabricated the entire line! And books are still being written using >> > their >> >> > information, even though the DAR itself has disowned it. >> >> > >> >> > There is junk out there. There is junk on the commercial services, > and >> >> > there is junk on the "free" services (here free is in quotes >> >> > because >> >> > my >> >> > time is valuable, junk costs time). Only the original source >> >> > records >> > are >> >> > absolute proof (and even those could have been falsified). It > doesn't >> >> > matter if you use the commercial services or the "free" services, >> >> > you >> >> > still >> >> > have to verify the data...and if your families get cobbled up, it is >> >> > always >> >> > you who cobbled them. >> >> > >> >> > I know, I said I wasn't going to comment further on this > subject...see, >> >> > even >> >> > I can't be relied upon. >> >> > Bill >> >> > And this, I promise, is my last comment on the subject. >> >> > >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> >> > From: "Ruth Newlan" <ruthann@saw.net> >> >> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> >> > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 6:59 PM >> >> > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> Jack: >> >> >> >> >> >> There is something to John's statement. I've used the LSD Films >> >> > extensively >> >> >> over the last few years to research Monroe Co., AL court records. >> > After >> >> >> ordering a number of films and taking a great number of prints off > the >> >> >> films - I was reminded by the center's Librarian of the Family > History >> >> >> Center's Strict Copyright policy. They feel that when they have >> >> >> filmed >> >> >> records that they own the copyright on them. And, likewise you will >> >> >> not >> >> > find >> >> >> the same records recorded in any type of media in the AL State >> > Archives. >> >> >> >> >> >> Yes, the original records are still in the basement of the old > Monroe >> >> >> Courthouse - now Heritage Museum. And, by asking the right person, > I >> >> >> understand that folks can still go down and prowl through the dusty >> >> > records >> >> >> in a dirty basement. It appears that the State of AL upholds the > LSD >> >> >> copyright. >> >> >> >> >> >> As you know, I love sharing what I have on my families lines and do > it >> >> >> freely (and that's the key word - FREELY). I've spent a good dime > on >> > my >> >> >> research as many of you have. And, anyone with a little ambition > will >> >> > know >> >> >> all that I know by reading on the Internet - I post to lists very >> > often. >> >> >> >> >> >> And, talk about some cobbeled up histories that will be the >> >> >> results! >> > If >> >> > my >> >> >> families get cobbled up - I'd rather have done it myself ;>) >> >> >> Just my two cents - Ruth in Portland, OR >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> >> From: "Jack V Butler" <JackVButler@comcast.net> >> >> >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> >> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 7:07 PM >> >> >> Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > One entity controlling all of the genealogical information? Are > you >> >> >> > tripping, John? The information is still out there, in the State >> >> >> Archives, >> >> >> > the Courthouses, in the Churches, the City Halls. Believe me, I >> >> >> > have >> >> > gone >> >> >> > and found it there. Been to the National Archives, too. All of >> >> >> > that >> >> > cost >> >> >> > me a whole lot of money in travel, lodging and meals on the >> >> >> > road - >> > and >> >> >> most >> >> >> > of it was fishing trips, going to where I THOUGHT that I might > find >> > my >> >> >> > ancestors records. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Now, I pay a little money and sit in the convenience of my own > home, >> > in >> >> > a >> >> >> > comfortable chair, with my shoes off, while I look at scans of >> > original >> >> >> > census records at 10:00 p.m. at night. In short, I pay for the >> >> >> convenience >> >> >> > of easy multiple searches and of ease of delivery. I don't HAVE > to >> > go >> >> > to >> >> >> > these sources, I could go back and do it the old way - indeed, I >> > often >> >> > do. >> >> >> > But now I almost always have much better leads when I go to a >> >> >> > courthouse >> >> >> > because I have often found a transcript or original record to > point >> > me >> >> > in >> >> >> > the right direction. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against free resources - I >> >> >> > have >> >> >> > volunteered to digitize records for several county sites and will >> >> > probably >> >> >> > do so again. But I certainly don't begrudge the fees that I pay > to >> > the >> >> >> > folks who went to the trouble to collect into a single location >> >> >> > large >> >> >> > quantities of the kind of records that I want to see. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Nobody is forced to use the subscription services - but I cannot >> >> >> > imagine >> >> >> why >> >> >> > they wouldn't. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Jack Butler >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> >> >> > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> >> >> >> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> >> >> > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 9:46 PM >> >> >> > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > Bill, >> >> >> > > I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical >> >> >> > > information >> >> >> > belongs >> >> >> > > to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do > not >> >> > think >> >> >> > you >> >> >> > > have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a > professional >> >> >> > > genealogist, have you? >> >> >> > > Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some >> >> >> > > person >> >> >> > > to >> >> >> > > do >> >> >> > this >> >> >> > > work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as >> >> >> > > the >> > end >> >> >> > results >> >> >> > > of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the > process, >> >> >> persons >> >> >> > > that I never would have known, otherwise. >> >> >> > > As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates > to >> > the >> >> >> > > genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with >> >> >> > > that >> >> > and >> >> >> > not >> >> >> > > just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance >> >> > companies, >> >> >> >> >> >> > > etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a >> >> >> > > lot >> >> >> > > of >> >> >> > > information about you and your family strictly from the history > of >> >> > your >> >> >> > > family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, > etc. >> >> >> > Normally, >> >> >> > > this information is pretty well protected because these >> >> >> > > entities >> >> >> > > do >> >> > not >> >> >> > know >> >> >> > > your family history but put it all in one location and watch > out. >> >> >> > > Let >> >> >> > them >> >> >> > > get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. >> >> >> > > Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, > using >> > tax >> >> >> > exempt >> >> >> > > NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their >> > overall >> >> >> > wealth >> >> >> > > through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes > on >> >> >> > > any >> >> >> of >> >> >> > > it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the >> >> > richest >> >> >> of >> >> >> > > any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws > to >> >> > their >> >> >> > > benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot > smarter >> >> > than >> >> >> > the >> >> >> > > rest of us in this regard. >> >> >> > > I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business >> > until >> >> >> > > I >> >> >> was >> >> >> > > in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few > years >> >> >> > > ago >> >> >> and >> >> >> > > read in their local paper an investigative report done one of >> >> >> > > their >> >> >> staff >> >> >> > > writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I >> > never >> >> >> > > associated any organized religion with this type of business. I >> > also >> >> >> > assume >> >> >> > > you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one >> >> >> > > time. >> >> >> > > In this country we have laws to protect each of our > individual >> >> >> > religious >> >> >> > > beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe >> >> >> > > some, >> > but >> >> > to >> >> >> > have >> >> >> > > one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical >> >> >> > information >> >> >> > > of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government >> > will >> >> >> > sooner >> >> >> > > or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. >> >> >> > > It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as >> >> >> > > they >> >> > are >> >> >> > and >> >> >> > > have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of > these >> >> >> > historical >> >> >> > > facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put >> > "historical >> >> >> > facts" >> >> >> > > and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the >> >> >> > > case >> > with >> >> >> any >> >> >> > > GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a > religious >> >> >> > umbrella, >> >> >> > > then you have created the situation where your family > information >> > can >> >> > be >> >> >> > > sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that >> > family >> >> >> > > information....... >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > John R. Clarke >> >> >> > > Thomasville, GA >> >> >> > > ----- Original Message ----- >> >> >> > > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> >> >> >> > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> >> >> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM >> >> >> > > Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > > This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, >> > Ancestry.com >> >> >> > > > collects information, which they then turn around and sell. >> >> >> > > > What >> >> >> > > > do >> >> >> you >> >> >> > > > expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that >> > matter, >> >> >> would >> >> >> > > > do your research for you for free? What do you think >> > professional >> >> >> > > > genealogists have been doing for years? They have been >> > collecting >> >> >> > > > information and selling it to you. >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > Personally, I have submitted my information to World >> >> >> > > > Connects. >> >> >> > > > I >> >> > sent >> >> >> > it >> >> >> > > > prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued > to >> >> > update >> >> >> > it >> >> >> > > > since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited >> >> >> > > > immensely >> >> >> > > > by >> >> >> > > > so >> >> >> > doing >> >> >> > > > in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many > new >> >> >> friends >> >> >> > > > and relatives researching the same line. My research has >> > expanded >> >> > by >> >> >> > > > leaps and bounds. >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why > Ancestry >> >> >> > > > took >> >> >> > over >> >> >> > > > Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported > Rootsweb >> >> >> > strongly >> >> >> > > > enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It >> > depended >> >> > on >> >> >> > our >> >> >> > > > contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but > not >> >> >> enough >> >> >> > of >> >> >> > > > us supported them monetarily. >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, >> >> >> > > > Family >> >> >> > Tree >> >> >> > > > Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? >> > There >> >> > are >> >> >> > > > many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have >> >> >> > > > never >> >> >> forced >> >> >> > > > anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want > to >> >> > share >> >> >> > your >> >> >> > > > "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will >> >> >> > > > continue >> >> >> > > > to >> >> >> > > > do >> >> >> so. >> >> >> > > > We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the >> > biggest >> >> >> > owners >> >> >> > > > of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now > that >> >> >> > > > I >> >> > have >> >> >> > > > been told, my next question is...so what? What does that >> >> >> > > > have >> >> >> > > > to >> >> >> > > > do >> >> >> > with >> >> >> > > > anything? >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we >> > each >> >> > had >> >> >> > to >> >> >> > > > travel to the countless archives scattered around the country >> > (not >> >> > to >> >> >> > > > mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a >> >> > resounding >> >> >> > > > "NO!" >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > Bill >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> >> > > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> >> >> > > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> >> >> > > > Mail Mode: >> >> >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> >> >> > > > or- >> >> >> > > > Digest Mode: >> >> >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> >> > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> >> >> > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> >> >> > > Mail Mode: >> >> >> > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> >> >> > > or- >> >> >> > > Digest Mode: >> >> >> > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> >> > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List >> > Archives >> >> >> at: >> >> >> > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> >> IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List >> >> >> Archives >> >> > at: >> >> >> http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> > Don't forget to change the Subject line of your message when you > change >> >> > the subject of a reply message. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> DO NOT FORGET: This is a Genealogical Mailing List and the posting of >> > messages that do not relate to the DANIEL Family, its collateral > families >> > or >> > those of a historical nature relating to genealogical research -- are > not >> > allowed on this list. >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives >> > at: >> > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >> > >> >> >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> Mail Mode: >> mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> or- >> Digest Mode: >> mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> >> > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > Mail Mode: > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > or- > Digest Mode: > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > >

I, on the other hand, have never used the name John - much to the dismay of my third grade teacher, who insisted that Jack was a nickname for John. I, however, was named after my great grandfather, Jackson LeGrand Campbell - no John in there. Jack ----- Original Message ----- From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 9:07 PM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > Bill, > It was not Jack that asked you, it was me but Jack and John are often > the same persons and I have used the name, Jack, all too many times, too. > <grin> > It is mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and it is inherited by all children from > their mother and is passed from mother to all of her offspring's. If you > have two unbroken female lines back to this DANIEL family , then you can use > the mtDNA test even if the person at the end of each line is a male. > My mitochondrial DNA is the same as that of Elizabeth HERRING, my 4th > GGM, wife of Richard RICKS, Sr (ABt 1780-1847) of Elizabeth Parish, > Edgecombe County, NC and later, Emanuel County, GA. > This unbroken line is. Me, Alyse ROBINSON, Sarah Elizabeth TOMLINSON, > Arlia Ann Barbara DAME, Sarah Ann THIGPEN, Barbara RICKS, Elizabeth HERRING > who was the d/o an Abraham HERRING and I do not know who his wife was. You > may have something similar which will allow you to do mtDNA testing. > > John R. Clarke > Thomasville, GA > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 3:06 PM > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > > > Jack, > > If I could find a male descendant of Benjamin Daniel and Margaret Brown, > > who > > are my earliest fully documented ancestors (Benjamin being the purported > > son > > of William Daniel and Mary Snead) I would certainly do my best to have him > > submit his DNA. So far, however I have not managed to find him. > > > > I have had my DNA analyzed, but of course that will only help with the > > Brewer line. The other DNA analysis (I won't even attempt to spell it, > > but > > the DNA inherited from mothers) also won't help with the Daniel line > > because > > my last Daniel ancestor was Virginia W. Daniel, daughter of William A. > > Daniel and Mary E. Cooper...so we shoot off into the Cooper line and from > > there into the Burton line, which is as far as I can go with that. > > > > But...we continue searching..... > > Bill > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 9:39 PM > > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > > > > >> RE: " I followed my surname back all the way to England in the 15th > > Century > >> based on DAR > >> information from the 1930's...before I discovered that the two ladies > >> that > >> had joined the DAR and whose information I was taking on faith had > >> fabricated the entire line! And books are still being written using > >> their > >> information, even though the DAR itself has disowned it." > >> > >> > >> Ain't that the truth. Now you know why so much of what we see today > >> makes > >> no sense, whatsoever. However, I think we will get to the bottom of it > > with > >> the primary source records that are out there, these days, and those > >> which > >> will be coming online in the future, especially when combined with DNA > >> analysis. I also think there will be some major surprises along the way, > >> too. > >> > >> BTW, has your line been DNA tested, yet. Since the Bill BREWER line is > > one > >> of the most mysterious DANIEL lines around, I think it would behoove you > > to > >> have someone from this DANIEL line tested, if you have not do so, > >> already. > >> > >> The test for my DANIEL line went in, today, so I should know something on > > my > >> line within about six weeks..... > >> > >> John R. Clarke > >> Thomasville, GA > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> > >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > >> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 12:03 AM > >> Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > >> > >> > >> > Ruth, > >> > You should have asked that Center's librarian to see the Center's > >> > Strict > >> > Copyright policy. For the last several years (never mind how many is > >> > "several"...just consider it to be more than I'd like to admit) I have > >> > visited Salt Lake City twice a year, spending a week going through > >> > films > >> > and > >> > making prints. In between visits to Salt Lake City, I have gone to the > >> > local Center in West Los Angeles, ordered films from Salt Lake City, > >> > and > >> > have made many copies. Never has anyone told me there was a limit on > > the > >> > copies I could make...and I have been there often enough that several > >> > of > >> > the > >> > volunteers know me by name. Actually, there is no copyright on public > >> > records. I think you were the victim of an over-zealous local > > librarian. > >> > > >> > One thing I will agree with Jack on...there is nothing that can compare > > to > >> > the thrill of going down and prowling through some dusty records in > >> > some > >> > dirty basement of an obscure courthouse...and finding a gem! But, the > >> > problem with that is that you don't always know which obscure > >> > courthouse > >> > and > >> > which dirty basement, or which dusty record is going to give you that > >> > payoff. You still can't trust the information on the LDS films > >> > implicitly, > >> > but they will guide you to the proper places to find the original > > records, > >> > and that's what we're looking for. > >> > > >> > As for cobbled up records, yes, there are a lot of cobbled up records. > >> > But > >> > they existed long before Ancestry.com came on the scene. I followed my > >> > surname back all the way to England in the 15th Century based on DAR > >> > information from the 1930's...before I discovered that the two ladies > > that > >> > had joined the DAR and whose information I was taking on faith had > >> > fabricated the entire line! And books are still being written using > > their > >> > information, even though the DAR itself has disowned it. > >> > > >> > There is junk out there. There is junk on the commercial services, and > >> > there is junk on the "free" services (here free is in quotes because > >> > my > >> > time is valuable, junk costs time). Only the original source records > > are > >> > absolute proof (and even those could have been falsified). It doesn't > >> > matter if you use the commercial services or the "free" services, you > >> > still > >> > have to verify the data...and if your families get cobbled up, it is > >> > always > >> > you who cobbled them. > >> > > >> > I know, I said I wasn't going to comment further on this subject...see, > >> > even > >> > I can't be relied upon. > >> > Bill > >> > And this, I promise, is my last comment on the subject. > >> > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> > From: "Ruth Newlan" <ruthann@saw.net> > >> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > >> > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 6:59 PM > >> > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > >> > > >> > > >> >> Jack: > >> >> > >> >> There is something to John's statement. I've used the LSD Films > >> > extensively > >> >> over the last few years to research Monroe Co., AL court records. > > After > >> >> ordering a number of films and taking a great number of prints off the > >> >> films - I was reminded by the center's Librarian of the Family History > >> >> Center's Strict Copyright policy. They feel that when they have > >> >> filmed > >> >> records that they own the copyright on them. And, likewise you will > >> >> not > >> > find > >> >> the same records recorded in any type of media in the AL State > > Archives. > >> >> > >> >> Yes, the original records are still in the basement of the old Monroe > >> >> Courthouse - now Heritage Museum. And, by asking the right person, I > >> >> understand that folks can still go down and prowl through the dusty > >> > records > >> >> in a dirty basement. It appears that the State of AL upholds the LSD > >> >> copyright. > >> >> > >> >> As you know, I love sharing what I have on my families lines and do it > >> >> freely (and that's the key word - FREELY). I've spent a good dime on > > my > >> >> research as many of you have. And, anyone with a little ambition will > >> > know > >> >> all that I know by reading on the Internet - I post to lists very > > often. > >> >> > >> >> And, talk about some cobbeled up histories that will be the results! > > If > >> > my > >> >> families get cobbled up - I'd rather have done it myself ;>) > >> >> Just my two cents - Ruth in Portland, OR > >> >> > >> >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> From: "Jack V Butler" <JackVButler@comcast.net> > >> >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > >> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 7:07 PM > >> >> Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > One entity controlling all of the genealogical information? Are you > >> >> > tripping, John? The information is still out there, in the State > >> >> Archives, > >> >> > the Courthouses, in the Churches, the City Halls. Believe me, I > >> >> > have > >> > gone > >> >> > and found it there. Been to the National Archives, too. All of > >> >> > that > >> > cost > >> >> > me a whole lot of money in travel, lodging and meals on the road - > > and > >> >> most > >> >> > of it was fishing trips, going to where I THOUGHT that I might find > > my > >> >> > ancestors records. > >> >> > > >> >> > Now, I pay a little money and sit in the convenience of my own home, > > in > >> > a > >> >> > comfortable chair, with my shoes off, while I look at scans of > > original > >> >> > census records at 10:00 p.m. at night. In short, I pay for the > >> >> convenience > >> >> > of easy multiple searches and of ease of delivery. I don't HAVE to > > go > >> > to > >> >> > these sources, I could go back and do it the old way - indeed, I > > often > >> > do. > >> >> > But now I almost always have much better leads when I go to a > >> >> > courthouse > >> >> > because I have often found a transcript or original record to point > > me > >> > in > >> >> > the right direction. > >> >> > > >> >> > Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against free resources - I have > >> >> > volunteered to digitize records for several county sites and will > >> > probably > >> >> > do so again. But I certainly don't begrudge the fees that I pay to > > the > >> >> > folks who went to the trouble to collect into a single location > >> >> > large > >> >> > quantities of the kind of records that I want to see. > >> >> > > >> >> > Nobody is forced to use the subscription services - but I cannot > >> >> > imagine > >> >> why > >> >> > they wouldn't. > >> >> > > >> >> > Jack Butler > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> > >> >> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > >> >> > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 9:46 PM > >> >> > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > Bill, > >> >> > > I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical > >> >> > > information > >> >> > belongs > >> >> > > to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do not > >> > think > >> >> > you > >> >> > > have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a professional > >> >> > > genealogist, have you? > >> >> > > Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some person > >> >> > > to > >> >> > > do > >> >> > this > >> >> > > work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as the > > end > >> >> > results > >> >> > > of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the process, > >> >> persons > >> >> > > that I never would have known, otherwise. > >> >> > > As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates to > > the > >> >> > > genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with > >> >> > > that > >> > and > >> >> > not > >> >> > > just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance > >> > companies, > >> >> > >> >> > > etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a lot > >> >> > > of > >> >> > > information about you and your family strictly from the history of > >> > your > >> >> > > family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, etc. > >> >> > Normally, > >> >> > > this information is pretty well protected because these entities > >> >> > > do > >> > not > >> >> > know > >> >> > > your family history but put it all in one location and watch out. > >> >> > > Let > >> >> > them > >> >> > > get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. > >> >> > > Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, using > > tax > >> >> > exempt > >> >> > > NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their > > overall > >> >> > wealth > >> >> > > through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes on > >> >> > > any > >> >> of > >> >> > > it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the > >> > richest > >> >> of > >> >> > > any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws to > >> > their > >> >> > > benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot smarter > >> > than > >> >> > the > >> >> > > rest of us in this regard. > >> >> > > I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business > > until > >> >> > > I > >> >> was > >> >> > > in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few years > >> >> > > ago > >> >> and > >> >> > > read in their local paper an investigative report done one of > >> >> > > their > >> >> staff > >> >> > > writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I > > never > >> >> > > associated any organized religion with this type of business. I > > also > >> >> > assume > >> >> > > you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one > >> >> > > time. > >> >> > > In this country we have laws to protect each of our individual > >> >> > religious > >> >> > > beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe some, > > but > >> > to > >> >> > have > >> >> > > one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical > >> >> > information > >> >> > > of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government > > will > >> >> > sooner > >> >> > > or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. > >> >> > > It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as > >> >> > > they > >> > are > >> >> > and > >> >> > > have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of these > >> >> > historical > >> >> > > facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put > > "historical > >> >> > facts" > >> >> > > and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the case > > with > >> >> any > >> >> > > GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a religious > >> >> > umbrella, > >> >> > > then you have created the situation where your family information > > can > >> > be > >> >> > > sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that > > family > >> >> > > information....... > >> >> > > > >> >> > > John R. Clarke > >> >> > > Thomasville, GA > >> >> > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> > > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> > >> >> > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > >> >> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM > >> >> > > Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, > > Ancestry.com > >> >> > > > collects information, which they then turn around and sell. > >> >> > > > What > >> >> > > > do > >> >> you > >> >> > > > expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that > > matter, > >> >> would > >> >> > > > do your research for you for free? What do you think > > professional > >> >> > > > genealogists have been doing for years? They have been > > collecting > >> >> > > > information and selling it to you. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Personally, I have submitted my information to World Connects. > >> >> > > > I > >> > sent > >> >> > it > >> >> > > > prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued to > >> > update > >> >> > it > >> >> > > > since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited immensely > >> >> > > > by > >> >> > > > so > >> >> > doing > >> >> > > > in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many new > >> >> friends > >> >> > > > and relatives researching the same line. My research has > > expanded > >> > by > >> >> > > > leaps and bounds. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why Ancestry > >> >> > > > took > >> >> > over > >> >> > > > Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported Rootsweb > >> >> > strongly > >> >> > > > enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It > > depended > >> > on > >> >> > our > >> >> > > > contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but not > >> >> enough > >> >> > of > >> >> > > > us supported them monetarily. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, > >> >> > > > Family > >> >> > Tree > >> >> > > > Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? > > There > >> > are > >> >> > > > many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have > >> >> > > > never > >> >> forced > >> >> > > > anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want to > >> > share > >> >> > your > >> >> > > > "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will continue > >> >> > > > to > >> >> > > > do > >> >> so. > >> >> > > > We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the > > biggest > >> >> > owners > >> >> > > > of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now that > >> >> > > > I > >> > have > >> >> > > > been told, my next question is...so what? What does that have > >> >> > > > to > >> >> > > > do > >> >> > with > >> >> > > > anything? > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we > > each > >> > had > >> >> > to > >> >> > > > travel to the countless archives scattered around the country > > (not > >> > to > >> >> > > > mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a > >> > resounding > >> >> > > > "NO!" > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Bill > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> >> > > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > >> >> > > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > >> >> > > > Mail Mode: > >> >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > >> >> > > > or- > >> >> > > > Digest Mode: > >> >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> >> > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > >> >> > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > >> >> > > Mail Mode: > >> >> > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > >> >> > > or- > >> >> > > Digest Mode: > >> >> > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> >> > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List > > Archives > >> >> at: > >> >> > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> >> IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List > >> >> Archives > >> > at: > >> >> http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> > Don't forget to change the Subject line of your message when you change > >> > the subject of a reply message. > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> DO NOT FORGET: This is a Genealogical Mailing List and the posting of > > messages that do not relate to the DANIEL Family, its collateral families > > or > > those of a historical nature relating to genealogical research -- are not > > allowed on this list. > >> > >> > > > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives > > at: > > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > Mail Mode: > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > or- > Digest Mode: > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >

Bill, It was not Jack that asked you, it was me but Jack and John are often the same persons and I have used the name, Jack, all too many times, too. <grin> It is mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and it is inherited by all children from their mother and is passed from mother to all of her offspring's. If you have two unbroken female lines back to this DANIEL family , then you can use the mtDNA test even if the person at the end of each line is a male. My mitochondrial DNA is the same as that of Elizabeth HERRING, my 4th GGM, wife of Richard RICKS, Sr (ABt 1780-1847) of Elizabeth Parish, Edgecombe County, NC and later, Emanuel County, GA. This unbroken line is. Me, Alyse ROBINSON, Sarah Elizabeth TOMLINSON, Arlia Ann Barbara DAME, Sarah Ann THIGPEN, Barbara RICKS, Elizabeth HERRING who was the d/o an Abraham HERRING and I do not know who his wife was. You may have something similar which will allow you to do mtDNA testing. John R. Clarke Thomasville, GA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 3:06 PM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > Jack, > If I could find a male descendant of Benjamin Daniel and Margaret Brown, > who > are my earliest fully documented ancestors (Benjamin being the purported > son > of William Daniel and Mary Snead) I would certainly do my best to have him > submit his DNA. So far, however I have not managed to find him. > > I have had my DNA analyzed, but of course that will only help with the > Brewer line. The other DNA analysis (I won't even attempt to spell it, > but > the DNA inherited from mothers) also won't help with the Daniel line > because > my last Daniel ancestor was Virginia W. Daniel, daughter of William A. > Daniel and Mary E. Cooper...so we shoot off into the Cooper line and from > there into the Burton line, which is as far as I can go with that. > > But...we continue searching..... > Bill > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 9:39 PM > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > >> RE: " I followed my surname back all the way to England in the 15th > Century >> based on DAR >> information from the 1930's...before I discovered that the two ladies >> that >> had joined the DAR and whose information I was taking on faith had >> fabricated the entire line! And books are still being written using >> their >> information, even though the DAR itself has disowned it." >> >> >> Ain't that the truth. Now you know why so much of what we see today >> makes >> no sense, whatsoever. However, I think we will get to the bottom of it > with >> the primary source records that are out there, these days, and those >> which >> will be coming online in the future, especially when combined with DNA >> analysis. I also think there will be some major surprises along the way, >> too. >> >> BTW, has your line been DNA tested, yet. Since the Bill BREWER line is > one >> of the most mysterious DANIEL lines around, I think it would behoove you > to >> have someone from this DANIEL line tested, if you have not do so, >> already. >> >> The test for my DANIEL line went in, today, so I should know something on > my >> line within about six weeks..... >> >> John R. Clarke >> Thomasville, GA >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 12:03 AM >> Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >> > Ruth, >> > You should have asked that Center's librarian to see the Center's >> > Strict >> > Copyright policy. For the last several years (never mind how many is >> > "several"...just consider it to be more than I'd like to admit) I have >> > visited Salt Lake City twice a year, spending a week going through >> > films >> > and >> > making prints. In between visits to Salt Lake City, I have gone to the >> > local Center in West Los Angeles, ordered films from Salt Lake City, >> > and >> > have made many copies. Never has anyone told me there was a limit on > the >> > copies I could make...and I have been there often enough that several >> > of >> > the >> > volunteers know me by name. Actually, there is no copyright on public >> > records. I think you were the victim of an over-zealous local > librarian. >> > >> > One thing I will agree with Jack on...there is nothing that can compare > to >> > the thrill of going down and prowling through some dusty records in >> > some >> > dirty basement of an obscure courthouse...and finding a gem! But, the >> > problem with that is that you don't always know which obscure >> > courthouse >> > and >> > which dirty basement, or which dusty record is going to give you that >> > payoff. You still can't trust the information on the LDS films >> > implicitly, >> > but they will guide you to the proper places to find the original > records, >> > and that's what we're looking for. >> > >> > As for cobbled up records, yes, there are a lot of cobbled up records. >> > But >> > they existed long before Ancestry.com came on the scene. I followed my >> > surname back all the way to England in the 15th Century based on DAR >> > information from the 1930's...before I discovered that the two ladies > that >> > had joined the DAR and whose information I was taking on faith had >> > fabricated the entire line! And books are still being written using > their >> > information, even though the DAR itself has disowned it. >> > >> > There is junk out there. There is junk on the commercial services, and >> > there is junk on the "free" services (here free is in quotes because >> > my >> > time is valuable, junk costs time). Only the original source records > are >> > absolute proof (and even those could have been falsified). It doesn't >> > matter if you use the commercial services or the "free" services, you >> > still >> > have to verify the data...and if your families get cobbled up, it is >> > always >> > you who cobbled them. >> > >> > I know, I said I wasn't going to comment further on this subject...see, >> > even >> > I can't be relied upon. >> > Bill >> > And this, I promise, is my last comment on the subject. >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Ruth Newlan" <ruthann@saw.net> >> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 6:59 PM >> > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> > >> > >> >> Jack: >> >> >> >> There is something to John's statement. I've used the LSD Films >> > extensively >> >> over the last few years to research Monroe Co., AL court records. > After >> >> ordering a number of films and taking a great number of prints off the >> >> films - I was reminded by the center's Librarian of the Family History >> >> Center's Strict Copyright policy. They feel that when they have >> >> filmed >> >> records that they own the copyright on them. And, likewise you will >> >> not >> > find >> >> the same records recorded in any type of media in the AL State > Archives. >> >> >> >> Yes, the original records are still in the basement of the old Monroe >> >> Courthouse - now Heritage Museum. And, by asking the right person, I >> >> understand that folks can still go down and prowl through the dusty >> > records >> >> in a dirty basement. It appears that the State of AL upholds the LSD >> >> copyright. >> >> >> >> As you know, I love sharing what I have on my families lines and do it >> >> freely (and that's the key word - FREELY). I've spent a good dime on > my >> >> research as many of you have. And, anyone with a little ambition will >> > know >> >> all that I know by reading on the Internet - I post to lists very > often. >> >> >> >> And, talk about some cobbeled up histories that will be the results! > If >> > my >> >> families get cobbled up - I'd rather have done it myself ;>) >> >> Just my two cents - Ruth in Portland, OR >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: "Jack V Butler" <JackVButler@comcast.net> >> >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 7:07 PM >> >> Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >> >> >> >> > One entity controlling all of the genealogical information? Are you >> >> > tripping, John? The information is still out there, in the State >> >> Archives, >> >> > the Courthouses, in the Churches, the City Halls. Believe me, I >> >> > have >> > gone >> >> > and found it there. Been to the National Archives, too. All of >> >> > that >> > cost >> >> > me a whole lot of money in travel, lodging and meals on the road - > and >> >> most >> >> > of it was fishing trips, going to where I THOUGHT that I might find > my >> >> > ancestors records. >> >> > >> >> > Now, I pay a little money and sit in the convenience of my own home, > in >> > a >> >> > comfortable chair, with my shoes off, while I look at scans of > original >> >> > census records at 10:00 p.m. at night. In short, I pay for the >> >> convenience >> >> > of easy multiple searches and of ease of delivery. I don't HAVE to > go >> > to >> >> > these sources, I could go back and do it the old way - indeed, I > often >> > do. >> >> > But now I almost always have much better leads when I go to a >> >> > courthouse >> >> > because I have often found a transcript or original record to point > me >> > in >> >> > the right direction. >> >> > >> >> > Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against free resources - I have >> >> > volunteered to digitize records for several county sites and will >> > probably >> >> > do so again. But I certainly don't begrudge the fees that I pay to > the >> >> > folks who went to the trouble to collect into a single location >> >> > large >> >> > quantities of the kind of records that I want to see. >> >> > >> >> > Nobody is forced to use the subscription services - but I cannot >> >> > imagine >> >> why >> >> > they wouldn't. >> >> > >> >> > Jack Butler >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> >> > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> >> >> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> >> > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 9:46 PM >> >> > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > Bill, >> >> > > I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical >> >> > > information >> >> > belongs >> >> > > to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do not >> > think >> >> > you >> >> > > have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a professional >> >> > > genealogist, have you? >> >> > > Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some person >> >> > > to >> >> > > do >> >> > this >> >> > > work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as the > end >> >> > results >> >> > > of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the process, >> >> persons >> >> > > that I never would have known, otherwise. >> >> > > As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates to > the >> >> > > genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with >> >> > > that >> > and >> >> > not >> >> > > just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance >> > companies, >> >> >> >> > > etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a lot >> >> > > of >> >> > > information about you and your family strictly from the history of >> > your >> >> > > family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, etc. >> >> > Normally, >> >> > > this information is pretty well protected because these entities >> >> > > do >> > not >> >> > know >> >> > > your family history but put it all in one location and watch out. >> >> > > Let >> >> > them >> >> > > get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. >> >> > > Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, using > tax >> >> > exempt >> >> > > NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their > overall >> >> > wealth >> >> > > through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes on >> >> > > any >> >> of >> >> > > it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the >> > richest >> >> of >> >> > > any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws to >> > their >> >> > > benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot smarter >> > than >> >> > the >> >> > > rest of us in this regard. >> >> > > I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business > until >> >> > > I >> >> was >> >> > > in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few years >> >> > > ago >> >> and >> >> > > read in their local paper an investigative report done one of >> >> > > their >> >> staff >> >> > > writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I > never >> >> > > associated any organized religion with this type of business. I > also >> >> > assume >> >> > > you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one >> >> > > time. >> >> > > In this country we have laws to protect each of our individual >> >> > religious >> >> > > beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe some, > but >> > to >> >> > have >> >> > > one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical >> >> > information >> >> > > of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government > will >> >> > sooner >> >> > > or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. >> >> > > It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as >> >> > > they >> > are >> >> > and >> >> > > have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of these >> >> > historical >> >> > > facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put > "historical >> >> > facts" >> >> > > and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the case > with >> >> any >> >> > > GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a religious >> >> > umbrella, >> >> > > then you have created the situation where your family information > can >> > be >> >> > > sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that > family >> >> > > information....... >> >> > > >> >> > > John R. Clarke >> >> > > Thomasville, GA >> >> > > ----- Original Message ----- >> >> > > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> >> >> > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> >> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM >> >> > > Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > > This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, > Ancestry.com >> >> > > > collects information, which they then turn around and sell. >> >> > > > What >> >> > > > do >> >> you >> >> > > > expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that > matter, >> >> would >> >> > > > do your research for you for free? What do you think > professional >> >> > > > genealogists have been doing for years? They have been > collecting >> >> > > > information and selling it to you. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Personally, I have submitted my information to World Connects. >> >> > > > I >> > sent >> >> > it >> >> > > > prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued to >> > update >> >> > it >> >> > > > since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited immensely >> >> > > > by >> >> > > > so >> >> > doing >> >> > > > in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many new >> >> friends >> >> > > > and relatives researching the same line. My research has > expanded >> > by >> >> > > > leaps and bounds. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why Ancestry >> >> > > > took >> >> > over >> >> > > > Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported Rootsweb >> >> > strongly >> >> > > > enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It > depended >> > on >> >> > our >> >> > > > contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but not >> >> enough >> >> > of >> >> > > > us supported them monetarily. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, >> >> > > > Family >> >> > Tree >> >> > > > Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? > There >> > are >> >> > > > many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have >> >> > > > never >> >> forced >> >> > > > anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want to >> > share >> >> > your >> >> > > > "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will continue >> >> > > > to >> >> > > > do >> >> so. >> >> > > > We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the > biggest >> >> > owners >> >> > > > of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now that >> >> > > > I >> > have >> >> > > > been told, my next question is...so what? What does that have >> >> > > > to >> >> > > > do >> >> > with >> >> > > > anything? >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we > each >> > had >> >> > to >> >> > > > travel to the countless archives scattered around the country > (not >> > to >> >> > > > mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a >> > resounding >> >> > > > "NO!" >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Bill >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> > > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> >> > > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> >> > > > Mail Mode: >> >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> >> > > > or- >> >> > > > Digest Mode: >> >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> >> > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> >> > > Mail Mode: >> >> > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> >> > > or- >> >> > > Digest Mode: >> >> > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List > Archives >> >> at: >> >> > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> >> IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List >> >> Archives >> > at: >> >> http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> > Don't forget to change the Subject line of your message when you change >> > the subject of a reply message. >> > >> > >> >> >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> DO NOT FORGET: This is a Genealogical Mailing List and the posting of > messages that do not relate to the DANIEL Family, its collateral families > or > those of a historical nature relating to genealogical research -- are not > allowed on this list. >> >> > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives > at: > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >

John, Anyhow, yes I know how mitochondrial DNA works (just couldn't spell it). But...ummm...let's see...my mother, Margaret Haigh...her mother, Carrie Weyer....her mother Virginia Daniel...her father, William A. Daniel...Now, what would that prove, since my descent from William A. Daniel, and from his grandfather, is very well documented? Would that still connect us to Daniels further back, even if William A.'s mother was not a Daniel? Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 6:07 PM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > Bill, > It was not Jack that asked you, it was me but Jack and John are often > the same persons and I have used the name, Jack, all too many times, too. > <grin> > It is mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and it is inherited by all children from > their mother and is passed from mother to all of her offspring's. If you > have two unbroken female lines back to this DANIEL family , then you can use > the mtDNA test even if the person at the end of each line is a male. > My mitochondrial DNA is the same as that of Elizabeth HERRING, my 4th > GGM, wife of Richard RICKS, Sr (ABt 1780-1847) of Elizabeth Parish, > Edgecombe County, NC and later, Emanuel County, GA. > This unbroken line is. Me, Alyse ROBINSON, Sarah Elizabeth TOMLINSON, > Arlia Ann Barbara DAME, Sarah Ann THIGPEN, Barbara RICKS, Elizabeth HERRING > who was the d/o an Abraham HERRING and I do not know who his wife was. You > may have something similar which will allow you to do mtDNA testing. > > John R. Clarke > Thomasville, GA > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 3:06 PM > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > > > Jack, > > If I could find a male descendant of Benjamin Daniel and Margaret Brown, > > who > > are my earliest fully documented ancestors (Benjamin being the purported > > son > > of William Daniel and Mary Snead) I would certainly do my best to have him > > submit his DNA. So far, however I have not managed to find him. > > > > I have had my DNA analyzed, but of course that will only help with the > > Brewer line. The other DNA analysis (I won't even attempt to spell it, > > but > > the DNA inherited from mothers) also won't help with the Daniel line > > because > > my last Daniel ancestor was Virginia W. Daniel, daughter of William A. > > Daniel and Mary E. Cooper...so we shoot off into the Cooper line and from > > there into the Burton line, which is as far as I can go with that. > > > > But...we continue searching..... > > Bill > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 9:39 PM > > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > > > > >> RE: " I followed my surname back all the way to England in the 15th > > Century > >> based on DAR > >> information from the 1930's...before I discovered that the two ladies > >> that > >> had joined the DAR and whose information I was taking on faith had > >> fabricated the entire line! And books are still being written using > >> their > >> information, even though the DAR itself has disowned it." > >> > >> > >> Ain't that the truth. Now you know why so much of what we see today > >> makes > >> no sense, whatsoever. However, I think we will get to the bottom of it > > with > >> the primary source records that are out there, these days, and those > >> which > >> will be coming online in the future, especially when combined with DNA > >> analysis. I also think there will be some major surprises along the way, > >> too. > >> > >> BTW, has your line been DNA tested, yet. Since the Bill BREWER line is > > one > >> of the most mysterious DANIEL lines around, I think it would behoove you > > to > >> have someone from this DANIEL line tested, if you have not do so, > >> already. > >> > >> The test for my DANIEL line went in, today, so I should know something on > > my > >> line within about six weeks..... > >> > >> John R. Clarke > >> Thomasville, GA > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> > >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > >> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 12:03 AM > >> Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > >> > >> > >> > Ruth, > >> > You should have asked that Center's librarian to see the Center's > >> > Strict > >> > Copyright policy. For the last several years (never mind how many is > >> > "several"...just consider it to be more than I'd like to admit) I have > >> > visited Salt Lake City twice a year, spending a week going through > >> > films > >> > and > >> > making prints. In between visits to Salt Lake City, I have gone to the > >> > local Center in West Los Angeles, ordered films from Salt Lake City, > >> > and > >> > have made many copies. Never has anyone told me there was a limit on > > the > >> > copies I could make...and I have been there often enough that several > >> > of > >> > the > >> > volunteers know me by name. Actually, there is no copyright on public > >> > records. I think you were the victim of an over-zealous local > > librarian. > >> > > >> > One thing I will agree with Jack on...there is nothing that can compare > > to > >> > the thrill of going down and prowling through some dusty records in > >> > some > >> > dirty basement of an obscure courthouse...and finding a gem! But, the > >> > problem with that is that you don't always know which obscure > >> > courthouse > >> > and > >> > which dirty basement, or which dusty record is going to give you that > >> > payoff. You still can't trust the information on the LDS films > >> > implicitly, > >> > but they will guide you to the proper places to find the original > > records, > >> > and that's what we're looking for. > >> > > >> > As for cobbled up records, yes, there are a lot of cobbled up records. > >> > But > >> > they existed long before Ancestry.com came on the scene. I followed my > >> > surname back all the way to England in the 15th Century based on DAR > >> > information from the 1930's...before I discovered that the two ladies > > that > >> > had joined the DAR and whose information I was taking on faith had > >> > fabricated the entire line! And books are still being written using > > their > >> > information, even though the DAR itself has disowned it. > >> > > >> > There is junk out there. There is junk on the commercial services, and > >> > there is junk on the "free" services (here free is in quotes because > >> > my > >> > time is valuable, junk costs time). Only the original source records > > are > >> > absolute proof (and even those could have been falsified). It doesn't > >> > matter if you use the commercial services or the "free" services, you > >> > still > >> > have to verify the data...and if your families get cobbled up, it is > >> > always > >> > you who cobbled them. > >> > > >> > I know, I said I wasn't going to comment further on this subject...see, > >> > even > >> > I can't be relied upon. > >> > Bill > >> > And this, I promise, is my last comment on the subject. > >> > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> > From: "Ruth Newlan" <ruthann@saw.net> > >> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > >> > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 6:59 PM > >> > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > >> > > >> > > >> >> Jack: > >> >> > >> >> There is something to John's statement. I've used the LSD Films > >> > extensively > >> >> over the last few years to research Monroe Co., AL court records. > > After > >> >> ordering a number of films and taking a great number of prints off the > >> >> films - I was reminded by the center's Librarian of the Family History > >> >> Center's Strict Copyright policy. They feel that when they have > >> >> filmed > >> >> records that they own the copyright on them. And, likewise you will > >> >> not > >> > find > >> >> the same records recorded in any type of media in the AL State > > Archives. > >> >> > >> >> Yes, the original records are still in the basement of the old Monroe > >> >> Courthouse - now Heritage Museum. And, by asking the right person, I > >> >> understand that folks can still go down and prowl through the dusty > >> > records > >> >> in a dirty basement. It appears that the State of AL upholds the LSD > >> >> copyright. > >> >> > >> >> As you know, I love sharing what I have on my families lines and do it > >> >> freely (and that's the key word - FREELY). I've spent a good dime on > > my > >> >> research as many of you have. And, anyone with a little ambition will > >> > know > >> >> all that I know by reading on the Internet - I post to lists very > > often. > >> >> > >> >> And, talk about some cobbeled up histories that will be the results! > > If > >> > my > >> >> families get cobbled up - I'd rather have done it myself ;>) > >> >> Just my two cents - Ruth in Portland, OR > >> >> > >> >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> From: "Jack V Butler" <JackVButler@comcast.net> > >> >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > >> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 7:07 PM > >> >> Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > One entity controlling all of the genealogical information? Are you > >> >> > tripping, John? The information is still out there, in the State > >> >> Archives, > >> >> > the Courthouses, in the Churches, the City Halls. Believe me, I > >> >> > have > >> > gone > >> >> > and found it there. Been to the National Archives, too. All of > >> >> > that > >> > cost > >> >> > me a whole lot of money in travel, lodging and meals on the road - > > and > >> >> most > >> >> > of it was fishing trips, going to where I THOUGHT that I might find > > my > >> >> > ancestors records. > >> >> > > >> >> > Now, I pay a little money and sit in the convenience of my own home, > > in > >> > a > >> >> > comfortable chair, with my shoes off, while I look at scans of > > original > >> >> > census records at 10:00 p.m. at night. In short, I pay for the > >> >> convenience > >> >> > of easy multiple searches and of ease of delivery. I don't HAVE to > > go > >> > to > >> >> > these sources, I could go back and do it the old way - indeed, I > > often > >> > do. > >> >> > But now I almost always have much better leads when I go to a > >> >> > courthouse > >> >> > because I have often found a transcript or original record to point > > me > >> > in > >> >> > the right direction. > >> >> > > >> >> > Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against free resources - I have > >> >> > volunteered to digitize records for several county sites and will > >> > probably > >> >> > do so again. But I certainly don't begrudge the fees that I pay to > > the > >> >> > folks who went to the trouble to collect into a single location > >> >> > large > >> >> > quantities of the kind of records that I want to see. > >> >> > > >> >> > Nobody is forced to use the subscription services - but I cannot > >> >> > imagine > >> >> why > >> >> > they wouldn't. > >> >> > > >> >> > Jack Butler > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> > >> >> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > >> >> > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 9:46 PM > >> >> > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > Bill, > >> >> > > I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical > >> >> > > information > >> >> > belongs > >> >> > > to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do not > >> > think > >> >> > you > >> >> > > have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a professional > >> >> > > genealogist, have you? > >> >> > > Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some person > >> >> > > to > >> >> > > do > >> >> > this > >> >> > > work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as the > > end > >> >> > results > >> >> > > of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the process, > >> >> persons > >> >> > > that I never would have known, otherwise. > >> >> > > As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates to > > the > >> >> > > genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with > >> >> > > that > >> > and > >> >> > not > >> >> > > just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance > >> > companies, > >> >> > >> >> > > etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a lot > >> >> > > of > >> >> > > information about you and your family strictly from the history of > >> > your > >> >> > > family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, etc. > >> >> > Normally, > >> >> > > this information is pretty well protected because these entities > >> >> > > do > >> > not > >> >> > know > >> >> > > your family history but put it all in one location and watch out. > >> >> > > Let > >> >> > them > >> >> > > get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. > >> >> > > Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, using > > tax > >> >> > exempt > >> >> > > NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their > > overall > >> >> > wealth > >> >> > > through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes on > >> >> > > any > >> >> of > >> >> > > it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the > >> > richest > >> >> of > >> >> > > any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws to > >> > their > >> >> > > benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot smarter > >> > than > >> >> > the > >> >> > > rest of us in this regard. > >> >> > > I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business > > until > >> >> > > I > >> >> was > >> >> > > in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few years > >> >> > > ago > >> >> and > >> >> > > read in their local paper an investigative report done one of > >> >> > > their > >> >> staff > >> >> > > writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I > > never > >> >> > > associated any organized religion with this type of business. I > > also > >> >> > assume > >> >> > > you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one > >> >> > > time. > >> >> > > In this country we have laws to protect each of our individual > >> >> > religious > >> >> > > beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe some, > > but > >> > to > >> >> > have > >> >> > > one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical > >> >> > information > >> >> > > of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government > > will > >> >> > sooner > >> >> > > or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. > >> >> > > It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as > >> >> > > they > >> > are > >> >> > and > >> >> > > have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of these > >> >> > historical > >> >> > > facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put > > "historical > >> >> > facts" > >> >> > > and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the case > > with > >> >> any > >> >> > > GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a religious > >> >> > umbrella, > >> >> > > then you have created the situation where your family information > > can > >> > be > >> >> > > sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that > > family > >> >> > > information....... > >> >> > > > >> >> > > John R. Clarke > >> >> > > Thomasville, GA > >> >> > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> >> > > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> > >> >> > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > >> >> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM > >> >> > > Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, > > Ancestry.com > >> >> > > > collects information, which they then turn around and sell. > >> >> > > > What > >> >> > > > do > >> >> you > >> >> > > > expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that > > matter, > >> >> would > >> >> > > > do your research for you for free? What do you think > > professional > >> >> > > > genealogists have been doing for years? They have been > > collecting > >> >> > > > information and selling it to you. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Personally, I have submitted my information to World Connects. > >> >> > > > I > >> > sent > >> >> > it > >> >> > > > prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued to > >> > update > >> >> > it > >> >> > > > since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited immensely > >> >> > > > by > >> >> > > > so > >> >> > doing > >> >> > > > in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many new > >> >> friends > >> >> > > > and relatives researching the same line. My research has > > expanded > >> > by > >> >> > > > leaps and bounds. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why Ancestry > >> >> > > > took > >> >> > over > >> >> > > > Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported Rootsweb > >> >> > strongly > >> >> > > > enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It > > depended > >> > on > >> >> > our > >> >> > > > contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but not > >> >> enough > >> >> > of > >> >> > > > us supported them monetarily. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, > >> >> > > > Family > >> >> > Tree > >> >> > > > Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? > > There > >> > are > >> >> > > > many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have > >> >> > > > never > >> >> forced > >> >> > > > anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want to > >> > share > >> >> > your > >> >> > > > "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will continue > >> >> > > > to > >> >> > > > do > >> >> so. > >> >> > > > We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the > > biggest > >> >> > owners > >> >> > > > of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now that > >> >> > > > I > >> > have > >> >> > > > been told, my next question is...so what? What does that have > >> >> > > > to > >> >> > > > do > >> >> > with > >> >> > > > anything? > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we > > each > >> > had > >> >> > to > >> >> > > > travel to the countless archives scattered around the country > > (not > >> > to > >> >> > > > mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a > >> > resounding > >> >> > > > "NO!" > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Bill > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> >> > > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > >> >> > > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > >> >> > > > Mail Mode: > >> >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > >> >> > > > or- > >> >> > > > Digest Mode: > >> >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> >> > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > >> >> > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > >> >> > > Mail Mode: > >> >> > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > >> >> > > or- > >> >> > > Digest Mode: > >> >> > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> >> > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List > > Archives > >> >> at: > >> >> > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> >> IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List > >> >> Archives > >> > at: > >> >> http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> > Don't forget to change the Subject line of your message when you change > >> > the subject of a reply message. > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> DO NOT FORGET: This is a Genealogical Mailing List and the posting of > > messages that do not relate to the DANIEL Family, its collateral families > > or > > those of a historical nature relating to genealogical research -- are not > > allowed on this list. > >> > >> > > > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives > > at: > > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > Mail Mode: > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > or- > Digest Mode: > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > >

Sorry about the "Jack"...I did that earlier too, in my reply I think to Ruth...sorry. But, as I said...even I'm not perfect (smile), just ask my wife. Bill Oh...and Jack...sorry about confusing you with John. Seems like I must have made friends all around! This thing is getting too lone, so I'm deleting the previous messages.

Good Afternoon, I found some interesting information about a person in Oglethorpe County, GA referred to as Chess DANIEL. I also found mention of a James Chesley DANIEL who attended school at Meson's School in Oglethorpe County, GA some 40 years later (1893). Does anyone know these folks? I also wonder if this BIGGS family is related to the Joseph BIGGS family of Martin County, NC. The ANDREWS and BIGGS family were collateral in Martin County, NC - Rev. Joseph BIGGS, Jr. (1766-1844) married Chloe DANIEL (1779-1845), d/o William DANIEL and Pricilla ANDREWS of Martin County, NC. The BIGGS lived in Williamston, Martin County, NC. Joseph and Chloe's son was the Hon, Asa BIGGS, Esq. (1811-1878) US Congressman from that area of NC. The RANDLES mentioned are tied to many of the same families we know so well from the Hancock, Wilkes, Oglethorpe and Greene County, GA areas, including the COOPERS, COFFES, COLQUITS, GRAVES, COLEMANS, LAMARS, ASBURYS, GARTELLES, LEDBETTERS, BARRETTS, LONGS, DANIELS, ROBINSONS, SANFORDS, HENDRICKS, RIVES, HARTS and MOORES and their collaterals.... The following is a quote from the reminisces of Uncle Joe Baughn About Schools in Oglethorpe County, GA as published in the Oglethorpe Echo ~ 12 January 1917 <<< In 1846 there were two Randall brothers who taught school in the county, Ed at Indian Creek and Jim down in Goosepond, and they were giants in the line of Nero Pedagogues. My friend B. V. Rains, deceased, always championed the cause of Ed and our friend Thos. D. Biggs of Jim, all knowing whereof we spake. After a year's work, in January 1850, I started to that noble Christian gentleman, Thos. Brittain Moss, who was far beyond the age as an instructor. He it was who taught me how to write 37½ under 100 and substract it. He taught at Meson Academy in 1849 and continued until 1889. Most of those of his pupils who went to him in '50 and '51 have gone to the silent beyond. Those left to call his memory blessed are Capt. T. H. Dozier, of Athens; Col. W. H. Sims (Tobe as we knew him) now of Birmingham, Ala; Thomas D. Biggs, of Wilkes county; Capt. H. W. Johnson, of Crawford; Chess Daniel, of near Crawford and possible Choang T. Boggs, of Arkansas. There may be some others besides myself but it is rather difficult to remember the exact time. Rev. Brittain Sanders, a superanuated Methodist minister living at Stone Mountain, was my schoolmate some of the earlier years. >>> John R. Clarke Thomasville, GA

Jack, If I could find a male descendant of Benjamin Daniel and Margaret Brown, who are my earliest fully documented ancestors (Benjamin being the purported son of William Daniel and Mary Snead) I would certainly do my best to have him submit his DNA. So far, however I have not managed to find him. I have had my DNA analyzed, but of course that will only help with the Brewer line. The other DNA analysis (I won't even attempt to spell it, but the DNA inherited from mothers) also won't help with the Daniel line because my last Daniel ancestor was Virginia W. Daniel, daughter of William A. Daniel and Mary E. Cooper...so we shoot off into the Cooper line and from there into the Burton line, which is as far as I can go with that. But...we continue searching..... Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 9:39 PM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > RE: " I followed my surname back all the way to England in the 15th Century > based on DAR > information from the 1930's...before I discovered that the two ladies that > had joined the DAR and whose information I was taking on faith had > fabricated the entire line! And books are still being written using their > information, even though the DAR itself has disowned it." > > > Ain't that the truth. Now you know why so much of what we see today makes > no sense, whatsoever. However, I think we will get to the bottom of it with > the primary source records that are out there, these days, and those which > will be coming online in the future, especially when combined with DNA > analysis. I also think there will be some major surprises along the way, > too. > > BTW, has your line been DNA tested, yet. Since the Bill BREWER line is one > of the most mysterious DANIEL lines around, I think it would behoove you to > have someone from this DANIEL line tested, if you have not do so, already. > > The test for my DANIEL line went in, today, so I should know something on my > line within about six weeks..... > > John R. Clarke > Thomasville, GA > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 12:03 AM > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > > > Ruth, > > You should have asked that Center's librarian to see the Center's Strict > > Copyright policy. For the last several years (never mind how many is > > "several"...just consider it to be more than I'd like to admit) I have > > visited Salt Lake City twice a year, spending a week going through films > > and > > making prints. In between visits to Salt Lake City, I have gone to the > > local Center in West Los Angeles, ordered films from Salt Lake City, and > > have made many copies. Never has anyone told me there was a limit on the > > copies I could make...and I have been there often enough that several of > > the > > volunteers know me by name. Actually, there is no copyright on public > > records. I think you were the victim of an over-zealous local librarian. > > > > One thing I will agree with Jack on...there is nothing that can compare to > > the thrill of going down and prowling through some dusty records in some > > dirty basement of an obscure courthouse...and finding a gem! But, the > > problem with that is that you don't always know which obscure courthouse > > and > > which dirty basement, or which dusty record is going to give you that > > payoff. You still can't trust the information on the LDS films > > implicitly, > > but they will guide you to the proper places to find the original records, > > and that's what we're looking for. > > > > As for cobbled up records, yes, there are a lot of cobbled up records. > > But > > they existed long before Ancestry.com came on the scene. I followed my > > surname back all the way to England in the 15th Century based on DAR > > information from the 1930's...before I discovered that the two ladies that > > had joined the DAR and whose information I was taking on faith had > > fabricated the entire line! And books are still being written using their > > information, even though the DAR itself has disowned it. > > > > There is junk out there. There is junk on the commercial services, and > > there is junk on the "free" services (here free is in quotes because my > > time is valuable, junk costs time). Only the original source records are > > absolute proof (and even those could have been falsified). It doesn't > > matter if you use the commercial services or the "free" services, you > > still > > have to verify the data...and if your families get cobbled up, it is > > always > > you who cobbled them. > > > > I know, I said I wasn't going to comment further on this subject...see, > > even > > I can't be relied upon. > > Bill > > And this, I promise, is my last comment on the subject. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Ruth Newlan" <ruthann@saw.net> > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 6:59 PM > > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > > > > >> Jack: > >> > >> There is something to John's statement. I've used the LSD Films > > extensively > >> over the last few years to research Monroe Co., AL court records. After > >> ordering a number of films and taking a great number of prints off the > >> films - I was reminded by the center's Librarian of the Family History > >> Center's Strict Copyright policy. They feel that when they have filmed > >> records that they own the copyright on them. And, likewise you will not > > find > >> the same records recorded in any type of media in the AL State Archives. > >> > >> Yes, the original records are still in the basement of the old Monroe > >> Courthouse - now Heritage Museum. And, by asking the right person, I > >> understand that folks can still go down and prowl through the dusty > > records > >> in a dirty basement. It appears that the State of AL upholds the LSD > >> copyright. > >> > >> As you know, I love sharing what I have on my families lines and do it > >> freely (and that's the key word - FREELY). I've spent a good dime on my > >> research as many of you have. And, anyone with a little ambition will > > know > >> all that I know by reading on the Internet - I post to lists very often. > >> > >> And, talk about some cobbeled up histories that will be the results! If > > my > >> families get cobbled up - I'd rather have done it myself ;>) > >> Just my two cents - Ruth in Portland, OR > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Jack V Butler" <JackVButler@comcast.net> > >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > >> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 7:07 PM > >> Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > >> > >> > >> > One entity controlling all of the genealogical information? Are you > >> > tripping, John? The information is still out there, in the State > >> Archives, > >> > the Courthouses, in the Churches, the City Halls. Believe me, I have > > gone > >> > and found it there. Been to the National Archives, too. All of that > > cost > >> > me a whole lot of money in travel, lodging and meals on the road - and > >> most > >> > of it was fishing trips, going to where I THOUGHT that I might find my > >> > ancestors records. > >> > > >> > Now, I pay a little money and sit in the convenience of my own home, in > > a > >> > comfortable chair, with my shoes off, while I look at scans of original > >> > census records at 10:00 p.m. at night. In short, I pay for the > >> convenience > >> > of easy multiple searches and of ease of delivery. I don't HAVE to go > > to > >> > these sources, I could go back and do it the old way - indeed, I often > > do. > >> > But now I almost always have much better leads when I go to a > >> > courthouse > >> > because I have often found a transcript or original record to point me > > in > >> > the right direction. > >> > > >> > Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against free resources - I have > >> > volunteered to digitize records for several county sites and will > > probably > >> > do so again. But I certainly don't begrudge the fees that I pay to the > >> > folks who went to the trouble to collect into a single location large > >> > quantities of the kind of records that I want to see. > >> > > >> > Nobody is forced to use the subscription services - but I cannot > >> > imagine > >> why > >> > they wouldn't. > >> > > >> > Jack Butler > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > >> > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> > >> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > >> > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 9:46 PM > >> > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > >> > > >> > > >> > > Bill, > >> > > I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical information > >> > belongs > >> > > to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do not > > think > >> > you > >> > > have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a professional > >> > > genealogist, have you? > >> > > Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some person to > >> > > do > >> > this > >> > > work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as the end > >> > results > >> > > of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the process, > >> persons > >> > > that I never would have known, otherwise. > >> > > As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates to the > >> > > genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with that > > and > >> > not > >> > > just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance > > companies, > >> > >> > > etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a lot of > >> > > information about you and your family strictly from the history of > > your > >> > > family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, etc. > >> > Normally, > >> > > this information is pretty well protected because these entities do > > not > >> > know > >> > > your family history but put it all in one location and watch out. > >> > > Let > >> > them > >> > > get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. > >> > > Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, using tax > >> > exempt > >> > > NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their overall > >> > wealth > >> > > through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes on > >> > > any > >> of > >> > > it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the > > richest > >> of > >> > > any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws to > > their > >> > > benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot smarter > > than > >> > the > >> > > rest of us in this regard. > >> > > I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business until > >> > > I > >> was > >> > > in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few years > >> > > ago > >> and > >> > > read in their local paper an investigative report done one of their > >> staff > >> > > writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I never > >> > > associated any organized religion with this type of business. I also > >> > assume > >> > > you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one time. > >> > > In this country we have laws to protect each of our individual > >> > religious > >> > > beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe some, but > > to > >> > have > >> > > one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical > >> > information > >> > > of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government will > >> > sooner > >> > > or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. > >> > > It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as they > > are > >> > and > >> > > have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of these > >> > historical > >> > > facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put "historical > >> > facts" > >> > > and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the case with > >> any > >> > > GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a religious > >> > umbrella, > >> > > then you have created the situation where your family information can > > be > >> > > sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that family > >> > > information....... > >> > > > >> > > John R. Clarke > >> > > Thomasville, GA > >> > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> > > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> > >> > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > >> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM > >> > > Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, Ancestry.com > >> > > > collects information, which they then turn around and sell. What > >> > > > do > >> you > >> > > > expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that matter, > >> would > >> > > > do your research for you for free? What do you think professional > >> > > > genealogists have been doing for years? They have been collecting > >> > > > information and selling it to you. > >> > > > > >> > > > Personally, I have submitted my information to World Connects. I > > sent > >> > it > >> > > > prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued to > > update > >> > it > >> > > > since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited immensely by > >> > > > so > >> > doing > >> > > > in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many new > >> friends > >> > > > and relatives researching the same line. My research has expanded > > by > >> > > > leaps and bounds. > >> > > > > >> > > > While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why Ancestry > >> > > > took > >> > over > >> > > > Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported Rootsweb > >> > strongly > >> > > > enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It depended > > on > >> > our > >> > > > contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but not > >> enough > >> > of > >> > > > us supported them monetarily. > >> > > > > >> > > > As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, > >> > > > Family > >> > Tree > >> > > > Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? There > > are > >> > > > many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have never > >> forced > >> > > > anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want to > > share > >> > your > >> > > > "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will continue to > >> > > > do > >> so. > >> > > > We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. > >> > > > > >> > > > Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the biggest > >> > owners > >> > > > of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now that I > > have > >> > > > been told, my next question is...so what? What does that have to > >> > > > do > >> > with > >> > > > anything? > >> > > > > >> > > > Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we each > > had > >> > to > >> > > > travel to the countless archives scattered around the country (not > > to > >> > > > mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a > > resounding > >> > > > "NO!" > >> > > > > >> > > > Bill > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> > > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > >> > > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > >> > > > Mail Mode: > >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > >> > > > or- > >> > > > Digest Mode: > >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > >> > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > >> > > Mail Mode: > >> > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > >> > > or- > >> > > Digest Mode: > >> > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives > >> at: > >> > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL > >> > > >> > >> > >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > >> IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives > > at: > >> http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL > >> > >> > > > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > > Don't forget to change the Subject line of your message when you change > > the subject of a reply message. > > > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > DO NOT FORGET: This is a Genealogical Mailing List and the posting of messages that do not relate to the DANIEL Family, its collateral families or those of a historical nature relating to genealogical research -- are not allowed on this list. > >

RE: " I followed my surname back all the way to England in the 15th Century based on DAR information from the 1930's...before I discovered that the two ladies that had joined the DAR and whose information I was taking on faith had fabricated the entire line! And books are still being written using their information, even though the DAR itself has disowned it." Ain't that the truth. Now you know why so much of what we see today makes no sense, whatsoever. However, I think we will get to the bottom of it with the primary source records that are out there, these days, and those which will be coming online in the future, especially when combined with DNA analysis. I also think there will be some major surprises along the way, too. BTW, has your line been DNA tested, yet. Since the Bill BREWER line is one of the most mysterious DANIEL lines around, I think it would behoove you to have someone from this DANIEL line tested, if you have not do so, already. The test for my DANIEL line went in, today, so I should know something on my line within about six weeks..... John R. Clarke Thomasville, GA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 12:03 AM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > Ruth, > You should have asked that Center's librarian to see the Center's Strict > Copyright policy. For the last several years (never mind how many is > "several"...just consider it to be more than I'd like to admit) I have > visited Salt Lake City twice a year, spending a week going through films > and > making prints. In between visits to Salt Lake City, I have gone to the > local Center in West Los Angeles, ordered films from Salt Lake City, and > have made many copies. Never has anyone told me there was a limit on the > copies I could make...and I have been there often enough that several of > the > volunteers know me by name. Actually, there is no copyright on public > records. I think you were the victim of an over-zealous local librarian. > > One thing I will agree with Jack on...there is nothing that can compare to > the thrill of going down and prowling through some dusty records in some > dirty basement of an obscure courthouse...and finding a gem! But, the > problem with that is that you don't always know which obscure courthouse > and > which dirty basement, or which dusty record is going to give you that > payoff. You still can't trust the information on the LDS films > implicitly, > but they will guide you to the proper places to find the original records, > and that's what we're looking for. > > As for cobbled up records, yes, there are a lot of cobbled up records. > But > they existed long before Ancestry.com came on the scene. I followed my > surname back all the way to England in the 15th Century based on DAR > information from the 1930's...before I discovered that the two ladies that > had joined the DAR and whose information I was taking on faith had > fabricated the entire line! And books are still being written using their > information, even though the DAR itself has disowned it. > > There is junk out there. There is junk on the commercial services, and > there is junk on the "free" services (here free is in quotes because my > time is valuable, junk costs time). Only the original source records are > absolute proof (and even those could have been falsified). It doesn't > matter if you use the commercial services or the "free" services, you > still > have to verify the data...and if your families get cobbled up, it is > always > you who cobbled them. > > I know, I said I wasn't going to comment further on this subject...see, > even > I can't be relied upon. > Bill > And this, I promise, is my last comment on the subject. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ruth Newlan" <ruthann@saw.net> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 6:59 PM > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > >> Jack: >> >> There is something to John's statement. I've used the LSD Films > extensively >> over the last few years to research Monroe Co., AL court records. After >> ordering a number of films and taking a great number of prints off the >> films - I was reminded by the center's Librarian of the Family History >> Center's Strict Copyright policy. They feel that when they have filmed >> records that they own the copyright on them. And, likewise you will not > find >> the same records recorded in any type of media in the AL State Archives. >> >> Yes, the original records are still in the basement of the old Monroe >> Courthouse - now Heritage Museum. And, by asking the right person, I >> understand that folks can still go down and prowl through the dusty > records >> in a dirty basement. It appears that the State of AL upholds the LSD >> copyright. >> >> As you know, I love sharing what I have on my families lines and do it >> freely (and that's the key word - FREELY). I've spent a good dime on my >> research as many of you have. And, anyone with a little ambition will > know >> all that I know by reading on the Internet - I post to lists very often. >> >> And, talk about some cobbeled up histories that will be the results! If > my >> families get cobbled up - I'd rather have done it myself ;>) >> Just my two cents - Ruth in Portland, OR >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Jack V Butler" <JackVButler@comcast.net> >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 7:07 PM >> Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >> > One entity controlling all of the genealogical information? Are you >> > tripping, John? The information is still out there, in the State >> Archives, >> > the Courthouses, in the Churches, the City Halls. Believe me, I have > gone >> > and found it there. Been to the National Archives, too. All of that > cost >> > me a whole lot of money in travel, lodging and meals on the road - and >> most >> > of it was fishing trips, going to where I THOUGHT that I might find my >> > ancestors records. >> > >> > Now, I pay a little money and sit in the convenience of my own home, in > a >> > comfortable chair, with my shoes off, while I look at scans of original >> > census records at 10:00 p.m. at night. In short, I pay for the >> convenience >> > of easy multiple searches and of ease of delivery. I don't HAVE to go > to >> > these sources, I could go back and do it the old way - indeed, I often > do. >> > But now I almost always have much better leads when I go to a >> > courthouse >> > because I have often found a transcript or original record to point me > in >> > the right direction. >> > >> > Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against free resources - I have >> > volunteered to digitize records for several county sites and will > probably >> > do so again. But I certainly don't begrudge the fees that I pay to the >> > folks who went to the trouble to collect into a single location large >> > quantities of the kind of records that I want to see. >> > >> > Nobody is forced to use the subscription services - but I cannot >> > imagine >> why >> > they wouldn't. >> > >> > Jack Butler >> > >> > >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> >> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 9:46 PM >> > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> > >> > >> > > Bill, >> > > I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical information >> > belongs >> > > to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do not > think >> > you >> > > have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a professional >> > > genealogist, have you? >> > > Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some person to >> > > do >> > this >> > > work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as the end >> > results >> > > of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the process, >> persons >> > > that I never would have known, otherwise. >> > > As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates to the >> > > genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with that > and >> > not >> > > just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance > companies, >> >> > > etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a lot of >> > > information about you and your family strictly from the history of > your >> > > family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, etc. >> > Normally, >> > > this information is pretty well protected because these entities do > not >> > know >> > > your family history but put it all in one location and watch out. >> > > Let >> > them >> > > get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. >> > > Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, using tax >> > exempt >> > > NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their overall >> > wealth >> > > through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes on >> > > any >> of >> > > it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the > richest >> of >> > > any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws to > their >> > > benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot smarter > than >> > the >> > > rest of us in this regard. >> > > I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business until >> > > I >> was >> > > in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few years >> > > ago >> and >> > > read in their local paper an investigative report done one of their >> staff >> > > writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I never >> > > associated any organized religion with this type of business. I also >> > assume >> > > you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one time. >> > > In this country we have laws to protect each of our individual >> > religious >> > > beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe some, but > to >> > have >> > > one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical >> > information >> > > of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government will >> > sooner >> > > or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. >> > > It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as they > are >> > and >> > > have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of these >> > historical >> > > facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put "historical >> > facts" >> > > and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the case with >> any >> > > GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a religious >> > umbrella, >> > > then you have created the situation where your family information can > be >> > > sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that family >> > > information....... >> > > >> > > John R. Clarke >> > > Thomasville, GA >> > > ----- Original Message ----- >> > > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> >> > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM >> > > Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> > > >> > > >> > > > This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, Ancestry.com >> > > > collects information, which they then turn around and sell. What >> > > > do >> you >> > > > expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that matter, >> would >> > > > do your research for you for free? What do you think professional >> > > > genealogists have been doing for years? They have been collecting >> > > > information and selling it to you. >> > > > >> > > > Personally, I have submitted my information to World Connects. I > sent >> > it >> > > > prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued to > update >> > it >> > > > since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited immensely by >> > > > so >> > doing >> > > > in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many new >> friends >> > > > and relatives researching the same line. My research has expanded > by >> > > > leaps and bounds. >> > > > >> > > > While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why Ancestry >> > > > took >> > over >> > > > Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported Rootsweb >> > strongly >> > > > enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It depended > on >> > our >> > > > contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but not >> enough >> > of >> > > > us supported them monetarily. >> > > > >> > > > As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, >> > > > Family >> > Tree >> > > > Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? There > are >> > > > many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have never >> forced >> > > > anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want to > share >> > your >> > > > "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will continue to >> > > > do >> so. >> > > > We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. >> > > > >> > > > Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the biggest >> > owners >> > > > of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now that I > have >> > > > been told, my next question is...so what? What does that have to >> > > > do >> > with >> > > > anything? >> > > > >> > > > Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we each > had >> > to >> > > > travel to the countless archives scattered around the country (not > to >> > > > mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a > resounding >> > > > "NO!" >> > > > >> > > > Bill >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> > > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> > > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> > > > Mail Mode: >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> > > > or- >> > > > Digest Mode: >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> > > Mail Mode: >> > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> > > or- >> > > Digest Mode: >> > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> > > >> > >> > >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives >> at: >> > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >> > >> >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives > at: >> http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >> >> > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > Don't forget to change the Subject line of your message when you change > the subject of a reply message. > >

Jack, I think you read my message wrong. I am not in the least bit paranoid at what MyFamily has done. However, I think something needs to be done in a court of law about what they have done. Not so much because of their purported copyright of our family information but because of their violation of monopoly statues and their protection of our family information -- privacy issues. I also do not know where anyone gets the idea they hold copyrights to public information. They do not. They may hold copyrights to how they laid out this information in their published material but they do not hold copyrights to any public information. That, is non-copyrightable. The key to copyright infringement is 17 CFR 502 but there are two words which are the kickers -- for "gain or profit" and never forget those two words. However, even that is un-enforceable unless you are willing to put 25K, at a minimum, up front, to even begin proceedings for copyright infringement. As the AAJ of the US told me -- it is a civil matter and not a criminal matter. This all began in 1999 when an NPO stole 56 million bytes of copyrighted information from me and Eric HOLDER, then the AAJ of the US would do nothing about it, even though it was clearly evident they stole it for gain and profit, which should have fallen under the criminal states, 18 CFR 502. So, if anyone ever mentions the word, copyright, around you, tell them it is not worth the paper it is written on. My fear is not what MyFamily and its subordinate companies will do with this information. My fear is what others may be able to do with it. This is why safeguards need to be implemented by MyFamily to protect the privacy of such information from its commercial use by others. You, Jack BUTLER, whether you believe it or not, are the sum total of all of your ancestors and if someone else know them, they have a pretty good idea about you. We are not a complete product of our environment, as sociologists just love to state. Yes, our environment may ameliorate certain family tendencies and it may aggravate others but overall, we are very much like our parents, good or bad, whichever the case may be. My family trait is in PO'ing certain people and this is a family trait of long standing, which is why there are lots of attorneys and journalist in my bunch. I also guess this trait evolved from generations of leading the pack instead of following it. That's the one thing I have noticed when leading the pack, there always seem to be those who like to snap at your heels along the way. <grin> John R. Clarke Thomasville, GA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack V Butler" <JackVButler@comcast.net> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 10:47 PM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > Er....so what? I don't get the point. You can own the copyright to a > certain presentation - If I collected all of the same records and > published > them in a book, I would own the copyright to the book . You could not > make > wholesale copies of my collected work without my permission. > > But I would not, in any way, own the records or the data that was found in > them - just my own personal work in collecting, formatting, and publishing > them. You are apparently annoyed that the LDS went to the trouble to > microfilm great volumes of state and county records when the State itself > was unwilling to perform the task. Speak to your government about that. > > The Mormons chase genealogy because it fits into their religion - and all > amateur genealogists have benefited from that fact because they share that > information at a very small cost. I don't give a hoot about their - or > anyone else's - religion, since I find them all to be pretty much equally > silly. But I am happy to make use of the records that they have > collected. > Fortunately, I have never even been asked about my voluminous copies. > > As for John's paranoia about the LDS collecting all of our personal family > history information - well, if it is more than two generations back, it > almost certainly isn't our personal info - it probably belongs to a lot of > people. And why should I care if they find out who my great great > grandfather was? They going to use it in magic spells or something? > > If Alabama chooses not to make such records available, why don't you get > the > genealogists there together (we are a formidable group when massed > together) > and ask them to do so. The Florida State Archives makes many such records > available - including some from neighboring states. > > Like I said, guys, the records are still out there waiting for you - in > those dusty courthouse basements and other archives (and if you think > Monroe > County's courthouse basement is dirty, try Dale or Geneva, where the > county > records have been flooded out multiple times). No one will force you to > use > those made available in more convenient format - but I think that you are > silly not to. And that is pretty much all that I have to say on this > subject - I am not interested in trying to talk anyone into taking > advantage > of easily used resources. > > Jack > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ruth Newlan" <ruthann@saw.net> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 9:59 PM > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > >> Jack: >> >> There is something to John's statement. I've used the LSD Films > extensively >> over the last few years to research Monroe Co., AL court records. After >> ordering a number of films and taking a great number of prints off the >> films - I was reminded by the center's Librarian of the Family History >> Center's Strict Copyright policy. They feel that when they have filmed >> records that they own the copyright on them. And, likewise you will not > find >> the same records recorded in any type of media in the AL State Archives. >> >> Yes, the original records are still in the basement of the old Monroe >> Courthouse - now Heritage Museum. And, by asking the right person, I >> understand that folks can still go down and prowl through the dusty > records >> in a dirty basement. It appears that the State of AL upholds the LSD >> copyright. >> >> As you know, I love sharing what I have on my families lines and do it >> freely (and that's the key word - FREELY). I've spent a good dime on my >> research as many of you have. And, anyone with a little ambition will > know >> all that I know by reading on the Internet - I post to lists very often. >> >> And, talk about some cobbeled up histories that will be the results! If > my >> families get cobbled up - I'd rather have done it myself ;>) >> Just my two cents - Ruth in Portland, OR >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Jack V Butler" <JackVButler@comcast.net> >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 7:07 PM >> Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >> > One entity controlling all of the genealogical information? Are you >> > tripping, John? The information is still out there, in the State >> Archives, >> > the Courthouses, in the Churches, the City Halls. Believe me, I have > gone >> > and found it there. Been to the National Archives, too. All of that > cost >> > me a whole lot of money in travel, lodging and meals on the road - and >> most >> > of it was fishing trips, going to where I THOUGHT that I might find my >> > ancestors records. >> > >> > Now, I pay a little money and sit in the convenience of my own home, in > a >> > comfortable chair, with my shoes off, while I look at scans of original >> > census records at 10:00 p.m. at night. In short, I pay for the >> convenience >> > of easy multiple searches and of ease of delivery. I don't HAVE to go > to >> > these sources, I could go back and do it the old way - indeed, I often > do. >> > But now I almost always have much better leads when I go to a >> > courthouse >> > because I have often found a transcript or original record to point me > in >> > the right direction. >> > >> > Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against free resources - I have >> > volunteered to digitize records for several county sites and will > probably >> > do so again. But I certainly don't begrudge the fees that I pay to the >> > folks who went to the trouble to collect into a single location large >> > quantities of the kind of records that I want to see. >> > >> > Nobody is forced to use the subscription services - but I cannot >> > imagine >> why >> > they wouldn't. >> > >> > Jack Butler >> > >> > >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> >> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 9:46 PM >> > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> > >> > >> > > Bill, >> > > I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical information >> > belongs >> > > to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do not > think >> > you >> > > have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a professional >> > > genealogist, have you? >> > > Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some person to >> > > do >> > this >> > > work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as the end >> > results >> > > of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the process, >> persons >> > > that I never would have known, otherwise. >> > > As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates to the >> > > genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with that > and >> > not >> > > just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance > companies, >> >> > > etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a lot of >> > > information about you and your family strictly from the history of > your >> > > family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, etc. >> > Normally, >> > > this information is pretty well protected because these entities do > not >> > know >> > > your family history but put it all in one location and watch out. >> > > Let >> > them >> > > get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. >> > > Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, using tax >> > exempt >> > > NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their overall >> > wealth >> > > through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes on >> > > any >> of >> > > it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the > richest >> of >> > > any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws to > their >> > > benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot smarter > than >> > the >> > > rest of us in this regard. >> > > I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business until >> > > I >> was >> > > in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few years >> > > ago >> and >> > > read in their local paper an investigative report done one of their >> staff >> > > writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I never >> > > associated any organized religion with this type of business. I also >> > assume >> > > you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one time. >> > > In this country we have laws to protect each of our individual >> > religious >> > > beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe some, but > to >> > have >> > > one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical >> > information >> > > of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government will >> > sooner >> > > or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. >> > > It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as they > are >> > and >> > > have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of these >> > historical >> > > facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put "historical >> > facts" >> > > and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the case with >> any >> > > GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a religious >> > umbrella, >> > > then you have created the situation where your family information can > be >> > > sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that family >> > > information....... >> > > >> > > John R. Clarke >> > > Thomasville, GA >> > > ----- Original Message ----- >> > > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> >> > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM >> > > Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> > > >> > > >> > > > This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, Ancestry.com >> > > > collects information, which they then turn around and sell. What >> > > > do >> you >> > > > expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that matter, >> would >> > > > do your research for you for free? What do you think professional >> > > > genealogists have been doing for years? They have been collecting >> > > > information and selling it to you. >> > > > >> > > > Personally, I have submitted my information to World Connects. I > sent >> > it >> > > > prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued to > update >> > it >> > > > since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited immensely by >> > > > so >> > doing >> > > > in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many new >> friends >> > > > and relatives researching the same line. My research has expanded > by >> > > > leaps and bounds. >> > > > >> > > > While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why Ancestry >> > > > took >> > over >> > > > Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported Rootsweb >> > strongly >> > > > enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It depended > on >> > our >> > > > contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but not >> enough >> > of >> > > > us supported them monetarily. >> > > > >> > > > As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, >> > > > Family >> > Tree >> > > > Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? There > are >> > > > many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have never >> forced >> > > > anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want to > share >> > your >> > > > "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will continue to >> > > > do >> so. >> > > > We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. >> > > > >> > > > Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the biggest >> > owners >> > > > of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now that I > have >> > > > been told, my next question is...so what? What does that have to >> > > > do >> > with >> > > > anything? >> > > > >> > > > Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we each > had >> > to >> > > > travel to the countless archives scattered around the country (not > to >> > > > mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a > resounding >> > > > "NO!" >> > > > >> > > > Bill >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> > > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> > > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> > > > Mail Mode: >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> > > > or- >> > > > Digest Mode: >> > > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> > > Mail Mode: >> > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> > > or- >> > > Digest Mode: >> > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> > > >> > >> > >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives >> at: >> > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >> > >> >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives > at: >> http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >> > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > If you are have any problems receiving the DANIEL List, would like to > change your subscription method or email address or you have a suggestion > you think would improve the operation of the DANIEL list -- feel free to > contact me at any time - My email address is JClarke@rose.net >

Er....so what? I don't get the point. You can own the copyright to a certain presentation - If I collected all of the same records and published them in a book, I would own the copyright to the book . You could not make wholesale copies of my collected work without my permission. But I would not, in any way, own the records or the data that was found in them - just my own personal work in collecting, formatting, and publishing them. You are apparently annoyed that the LDS went to the trouble to microfilm great volumes of state and county records when the State itself was unwilling to perform the task. Speak to your government about that. The Mormons chase genealogy because it fits into their religion - and all amateur genealogists have benefited from that fact because they share that information at a very small cost. I don't give a hoot about their - or anyone else's - religion, since I find them all to be pretty much equally silly. But I am happy to make use of the records that they have collected. Fortunately, I have never even been asked about my voluminous copies. As for John's paranoia about the LDS collecting all of our personal family history information - well, if it is more than two generations back, it almost certainly isn't our personal info - it probably belongs to a lot of people. And why should I care if they find out who my great great grandfather was? They going to use it in magic spells or something? If Alabama chooses not to make such records available, why don't you get the genealogists there together (we are a formidable group when massed together) and ask them to do so. The Florida State Archives makes many such records available - including some from neighboring states. Like I said, guys, the records are still out there waiting for you - in those dusty courthouse basements and other archives (and if you think Monroe County's courthouse basement is dirty, try Dale or Geneva, where the county records have been flooded out multiple times). No one will force you to use those made available in more convenient format - but I think that you are silly not to. And that is pretty much all that I have to say on this subject - I am not interested in trying to talk anyone into taking advantage of easily used resources. Jack ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ruth Newlan" <ruthann@saw.net> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 9:59 PM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > Jack: > > There is something to John's statement. I've used the LSD Films extensively > over the last few years to research Monroe Co., AL court records. After > ordering a number of films and taking a great number of prints off the > films - I was reminded by the center's Librarian of the Family History > Center's Strict Copyright policy. They feel that when they have filmed > records that they own the copyright on them. And, likewise you will not find > the same records recorded in any type of media in the AL State Archives. > > Yes, the original records are still in the basement of the old Monroe > Courthouse - now Heritage Museum. And, by asking the right person, I > understand that folks can still go down and prowl through the dusty records > in a dirty basement. It appears that the State of AL upholds the LSD > copyright. > > As you know, I love sharing what I have on my families lines and do it > freely (and that's the key word - FREELY). I've spent a good dime on my > research as many of you have. And, anyone with a little ambition will know > all that I know by reading on the Internet - I post to lists very often. > > And, talk about some cobbeled up histories that will be the results! If my > families get cobbled up - I'd rather have done it myself ;>) > Just my two cents - Ruth in Portland, OR > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jack V Butler" <JackVButler@comcast.net> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 7:07 PM > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > > > One entity controlling all of the genealogical information? Are you > > tripping, John? The information is still out there, in the State > Archives, > > the Courthouses, in the Churches, the City Halls. Believe me, I have gone > > and found it there. Been to the National Archives, too. All of that cost > > me a whole lot of money in travel, lodging and meals on the road - and > most > > of it was fishing trips, going to where I THOUGHT that I might find my > > ancestors records. > > > > Now, I pay a little money and sit in the convenience of my own home, in a > > comfortable chair, with my shoes off, while I look at scans of original > > census records at 10:00 p.m. at night. In short, I pay for the > convenience > > of easy multiple searches and of ease of delivery. I don't HAVE to go to > > these sources, I could go back and do it the old way - indeed, I often do. > > But now I almost always have much better leads when I go to a courthouse > > because I have often found a transcript or original record to point me in > > the right direction. > > > > Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against free resources - I have > > volunteered to digitize records for several county sites and will probably > > do so again. But I certainly don't begrudge the fees that I pay to the > > folks who went to the trouble to collect into a single location large > > quantities of the kind of records that I want to see. > > > > Nobody is forced to use the subscription services - but I cannot imagine > why > > they wouldn't. > > > > Jack Butler > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 9:46 PM > > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > > > > > > Bill, > > > I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical information > > belongs > > > to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do not think > > you > > > have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a professional > > > genealogist, have you? > > > Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some person to do > > this > > > work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as the end > > results > > > of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the process, > persons > > > that I never would have known, otherwise. > > > As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates to the > > > genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with that and > > not > > > just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance companies, > > > > etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a lot of > > > information about you and your family strictly from the history of your > > > family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, etc. > > Normally, > > > this information is pretty well protected because these entities do not > > know > > > your family history but put it all in one location and watch out. Let > > them > > > get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. > > > Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, using tax > > exempt > > > NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their overall > > wealth > > > through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes on any > of > > > it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the richest > of > > > any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws to their > > > benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot smarter than > > the > > > rest of us in this regard. > > > I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business until I > was > > > in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few years ago > and > > > read in their local paper an investigative report done one of their > staff > > > writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I never > > > associated any organized religion with this type of business. I also > > assume > > > you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one time. > > > In this country we have laws to protect each of our individual > > religious > > > beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe some, but to > > have > > > one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical > > information > > > of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government will > > sooner > > > or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. > > > It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as they are > > and > > > have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of these > > historical > > > facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put "historical > > facts" > > > and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the case with > any > > > GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a religious > > umbrella, > > > then you have created the situation where your family information can be > > > sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that family > > > information....... > > > > > > John R. Clarke > > > Thomasville, GA > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> > > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM > > > Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > > > > > > > > > This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, Ancestry.com > > > > collects information, which they then turn around and sell. What do > you > > > > expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that matter, > would > > > > do your research for you for free? What do you think professional > > > > genealogists have been doing for years? They have been collecting > > > > information and selling it to you. > > > > > > > > Personally, I have submitted my information to World Connects. I sent > > it > > > > prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued to update > > it > > > > since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited immensely by so > > doing > > > > in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many new > friends > > > > and relatives researching the same line. My research has expanded by > > > > leaps and bounds. > > > > > > > > While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why Ancestry took > > over > > > > Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported Rootsweb > > strongly > > > > enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It depended on > > our > > > > contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but not > enough > > of > > > > us supported them monetarily. > > > > > > > > As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, Family > > Tree > > > > Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? There are > > > > many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have never > forced > > > > anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want to share > > your > > > > "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will continue to do > so. > > > > We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. > > > > > > > > Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the biggest > > owners > > > > of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now that I have > > > > been told, my next question is...so what? What does that have to do > > with > > > > anything? > > > > > > > > Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we each had > > to > > > > travel to the countless archives scattered around the country (not to > > > > mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a resounding > > > > "NO!" > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > > > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > > > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > > > > Mail Mode: > > > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > > > > or- > > > > Digest Mode: > > > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > > > Mail Mode: > > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > > > or- > > > Digest Mode: > > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > > > > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives > at: > > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives at: > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >

Ruth, You should have asked that Center's librarian to see the Center's Strict Copyright policy. For the last several years (never mind how many is "several"...just consider it to be more than I'd like to admit) I have visited Salt Lake City twice a year, spending a week going through films and making prints. In between visits to Salt Lake City, I have gone to the local Center in West Los Angeles, ordered films from Salt Lake City, and have made many copies. Never has anyone told me there was a limit on the copies I could make...and I have been there often enough that several of the volunteers know me by name. Actually, there is no copyright on public records. I think you were the victim of an over-zealous local librarian. One thing I will agree with Jack on...there is nothing that can compare to the thrill of going down and prowling through some dusty records in some dirty basement of an obscure courthouse...and finding a gem! But, the problem with that is that you don't always know which obscure courthouse and which dirty basement, or which dusty record is going to give you that payoff. You still can't trust the information on the LDS films implicitly, but they will guide you to the proper places to find the original records, and that's what we're looking for. As for cobbled up records, yes, there are a lot of cobbled up records. But they existed long before Ancestry.com came on the scene. I followed my surname back all the way to England in the 15th Century based on DAR information from the 1930's...before I discovered that the two ladies that had joined the DAR and whose information I was taking on faith had fabricated the entire line! And books are still being written using their information, even though the DAR itself has disowned it. There is junk out there. There is junk on the commercial services, and there is junk on the "free" services (here free is in quotes because my time is valuable, junk costs time). Only the original source records are absolute proof (and even those could have been falsified). It doesn't matter if you use the commercial services or the "free" services, you still have to verify the data...and if your families get cobbled up, it is always you who cobbled them. I know, I said I wasn't going to comment further on this subject...see, even I can't be relied upon. Bill And this, I promise, is my last comment on the subject. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ruth Newlan" <ruthann@saw.net> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 6:59 PM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > Jack: > > There is something to John's statement. I've used the LSD Films extensively > over the last few years to research Monroe Co., AL court records. After > ordering a number of films and taking a great number of prints off the > films - I was reminded by the center's Librarian of the Family History > Center's Strict Copyright policy. They feel that when they have filmed > records that they own the copyright on them. And, likewise you will not find > the same records recorded in any type of media in the AL State Archives. > > Yes, the original records are still in the basement of the old Monroe > Courthouse - now Heritage Museum. And, by asking the right person, I > understand that folks can still go down and prowl through the dusty records > in a dirty basement. It appears that the State of AL upholds the LSD > copyright. > > As you know, I love sharing what I have on my families lines and do it > freely (and that's the key word - FREELY). I've spent a good dime on my > research as many of you have. And, anyone with a little ambition will know > all that I know by reading on the Internet - I post to lists very often. > > And, talk about some cobbeled up histories that will be the results! If my > families get cobbled up - I'd rather have done it myself ;>) > Just my two cents - Ruth in Portland, OR > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jack V Butler" <JackVButler@comcast.net> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 7:07 PM > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > > > One entity controlling all of the genealogical information? Are you > > tripping, John? The information is still out there, in the State > Archives, > > the Courthouses, in the Churches, the City Halls. Believe me, I have gone > > and found it there. Been to the National Archives, too. All of that cost > > me a whole lot of money in travel, lodging and meals on the road - and > most > > of it was fishing trips, going to where I THOUGHT that I might find my > > ancestors records. > > > > Now, I pay a little money and sit in the convenience of my own home, in a > > comfortable chair, with my shoes off, while I look at scans of original > > census records at 10:00 p.m. at night. In short, I pay for the > convenience > > of easy multiple searches and of ease of delivery. I don't HAVE to go to > > these sources, I could go back and do it the old way - indeed, I often do. > > But now I almost always have much better leads when I go to a courthouse > > because I have often found a transcript or original record to point me in > > the right direction. > > > > Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against free resources - I have > > volunteered to digitize records for several county sites and will probably > > do so again. But I certainly don't begrudge the fees that I pay to the > > folks who went to the trouble to collect into a single location large > > quantities of the kind of records that I want to see. > > > > Nobody is forced to use the subscription services - but I cannot imagine > why > > they wouldn't. > > > > Jack Butler > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 9:46 PM > > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > > > > > > Bill, > > > I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical information > > belongs > > > to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do not think > > you > > > have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a professional > > > genealogist, have you? > > > Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some person to do > > this > > > work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as the end > > results > > > of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the process, > persons > > > that I never would have known, otherwise. > > > As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates to the > > > genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with that and > > not > > > just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance companies, > > > > etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a lot of > > > information about you and your family strictly from the history of your > > > family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, etc. > > Normally, > > > this information is pretty well protected because these entities do not > > know > > > your family history but put it all in one location and watch out. Let > > them > > > get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. > > > Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, using tax > > exempt > > > NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their overall > > wealth > > > through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes on any > of > > > it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the richest > of > > > any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws to their > > > benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot smarter than > > the > > > rest of us in this regard. > > > I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business until I > was > > > in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few years ago > and > > > read in their local paper an investigative report done one of their > staff > > > writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I never > > > associated any organized religion with this type of business. I also > > assume > > > you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one time. > > > In this country we have laws to protect each of our individual > > religious > > > beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe some, but to > > have > > > one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical > > information > > > of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government will > > sooner > > > or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. > > > It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as they are > > and > > > have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of these > > historical > > > facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put "historical > > facts" > > > and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the case with > any > > > GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a religious > > umbrella, > > > then you have created the situation where your family information can be > > > sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that family > > > information....... > > > > > > John R. Clarke > > > Thomasville, GA > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> > > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM > > > Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > > > > > > > > > This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, Ancestry.com > > > > collects information, which they then turn around and sell. What do > you > > > > expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that matter, > would > > > > do your research for you for free? What do you think professional > > > > genealogists have been doing for years? They have been collecting > > > > information and selling it to you. > > > > > > > > Personally, I have submitted my information to World Connects. I sent > > it > > > > prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued to update > > it > > > > since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited immensely by so > > doing > > > > in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many new > friends > > > > and relatives researching the same line. My research has expanded by > > > > leaps and bounds. > > > > > > > > While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why Ancestry took > > over > > > > Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported Rootsweb > > strongly > > > > enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It depended on > > our > > > > contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but not > enough > > of > > > > us supported them monetarily. > > > > > > > > As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, Family > > Tree > > > > Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? There are > > > > many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have never > forced > > > > anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want to share > > your > > > > "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will continue to do > so. > > > > We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. > > > > > > > > Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the biggest > > owners > > > > of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now that I have > > > > been told, my next question is...so what? What does that have to do > > with > > > > anything? > > > > > > > > Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we each had > > to > > > > travel to the countless archives scattered around the country (not to > > > > mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a resounding > > > > "NO!" > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > > > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > > > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > > > > Mail Mode: > > > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > > > > or- > > > > Digest Mode: > > > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > > > Mail Mode: > > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > > > or- > > > Digest Mode: > > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > > > > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives > at: > > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives at: > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL > >

Don, I started subscribing to Ancestry when it was $20 something a year and now it was a $100 and something the last time I heard. You will be very surprised how much stuff is actually on the Internet, these days. I installed the Google tool bar on my browser and I have been amazed how much stuff I have found in recent months. I have really been beating the keywords "Robert Daniel Mary Swain Martin NC" to death, recently, any you will be surprised at the primary source information I have found. Today, I bumped into the LANE and REDDICK families in Perquimans County, North Carolina and I think this is the same bunch that ends up in Greene and Wayne County, NC, later. John R. Clarke Thomasville, GA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Wright" <sherido1@pacbell.net> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 4:34 PM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > On 5/4/04 6:46 PM, "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> wrote: > >> Bill, >> I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical information belongs >> to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do not think >> you >> have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a professional >> genealogist, have you? >> Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some person to do this >> work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as the end >> results >> of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the process, persons >> that I never would have known, otherwise. >> As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates to the >> genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with that and >> not >> just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance companies, >> etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a lot of >> information about you and your family strictly from the history of your >> family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, etc. >> Normally, >> this information is pretty well protected because these entities do not >> know >> your family history but put it all in one location and watch out. Let >> them >> get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. >> Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, using tax >> exempt >> NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their overall >> wealth >> through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes on any of >> it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the richest >> of >> any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws to their >> benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot smarter than >> the >> rest of us in this regard. >> I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business until I was >> in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few years ago >> and >> read in their local paper an investigative report done one of their staff >> writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I never >> associated any organized religion with this type of business. I also >> assume >> you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one time. >> In this country we have laws to protect each of our individual >> religious >> beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe some, but to >> have >> one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical >> information >> of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government will >> sooner >> or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. >> It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as they are and >> have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of these >> historical >> facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put "historical >> facts" >> and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the case with any >> GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a religious >> umbrella, >> then you have created the situation where your family information can be >> sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that family >> information....... >> >> John R. Clarke >> Thomasville, GA >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM >> Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >>> This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, Ancestry.com >>> collects information, which they then turn around and sell. What do you >>> expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that matter, would >>> do your research for you for free? What do you think professional >>> genealogists have been doing for years? They have been collecting >>> information and selling it to you. >>> >>> Personally, I have submitted my information to World Connects. I sent >>> it >>> prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued to update >>> it >>> since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited immensely by so >>> doing >>> in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many new friends >>> and relatives researching the same line. My research has expanded by >>> leaps and bounds. >>> >>> While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why Ancestry took >>> over >>> Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported Rootsweb >>> strongly >>> enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It depended on >>> our >>> contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but not enough >>> of >>> us supported them monetarily. >>> >>> As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, Family >>> Tree >>> Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? There are >>> many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have never forced >>> anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want to share >>> your >>> "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will continue to do so. >>> We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. >>> >>> Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the biggest >>> owners >>> of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now that I have >>> been told, my next question is...so what? What does that have to do >>> with >>> anything? >>> >>> Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we each had >>> to >>> travel to the countless archives scattered around the country (not to >>> mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a resounding >>> "NO!" >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> >>> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >>> Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >>> Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >>> Mail Mode: >>> mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >>> or- >>> Digest Mode: >>> mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> Mail Mode: >> mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> or- >> Digest Mode: >> mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> > Hello John: > > I agree with you and thank you for the information. I don't mind paying a > little bit of a fee for some of the records, but recently it does seem to > me > that the Utah people have gotten a tad greedy. So much so, that I cannot > subscribe at this time which is very frustrating. > All the best, > > Sharon > -- > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > DO NOT FORGET: This is a Genealogical Mailing List and the posting of > messages that do not relate to the DANIEL Family, its collateral families > or those of a historical nature relating to genealogical research -- are > not allowed on this list. >

Jack: There is something to John's statement. I've used the LSD Films extensively over the last few years to research Monroe Co., AL court records. After ordering a number of films and taking a great number of prints off the films - I was reminded by the center's Librarian of the Family History Center's Strict Copyright policy. They feel that when they have filmed records that they own the copyright on them. And, likewise you will not find the same records recorded in any type of media in the AL State Archives. Yes, the original records are still in the basement of the old Monroe Courthouse - now Heritage Museum. And, by asking the right person, I understand that folks can still go down and prowl through the dusty records in a dirty basement. It appears that the State of AL upholds the LSD copyright. As you know, I love sharing what I have on my families lines and do it freely (and that's the key word - FREELY). I've spent a good dime on my research as many of you have. And, anyone with a little ambition will know all that I know by reading on the Internet - I post to lists very often. And, talk about some cobbeled up histories that will be the results! If my families get cobbled up - I'd rather have done it myself ;>) Just my two cents - Ruth in Portland, OR ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack V Butler" <JackVButler@comcast.net> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 7:07 PM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > One entity controlling all of the genealogical information? Are you > tripping, John? The information is still out there, in the State Archives, > the Courthouses, in the Churches, the City Halls. Believe me, I have gone > and found it there. Been to the National Archives, too. All of that cost > me a whole lot of money in travel, lodging and meals on the road - and most > of it was fishing trips, going to where I THOUGHT that I might find my > ancestors records. > > Now, I pay a little money and sit in the convenience of my own home, in a > comfortable chair, with my shoes off, while I look at scans of original > census records at 10:00 p.m. at night. In short, I pay for the convenience > of easy multiple searches and of ease of delivery. I don't HAVE to go to > these sources, I could go back and do it the old way - indeed, I often do. > But now I almost always have much better leads when I go to a courthouse > because I have often found a transcript or original record to point me in > the right direction. > > Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against free resources - I have > volunteered to digitize records for several county sites and will probably > do so again. But I certainly don't begrudge the fees that I pay to the > folks who went to the trouble to collect into a single location large > quantities of the kind of records that I want to see. > > Nobody is forced to use the subscription services - but I cannot imagine why > they wouldn't. > > Jack Butler > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 9:46 PM > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > > > Bill, > > I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical information > belongs > > to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do not think > you > > have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a professional > > genealogist, have you? > > Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some person to do > this > > work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as the end > results > > of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the process, persons > > that I never would have known, otherwise. > > As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates to the > > genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with that and > not > > just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance companies, > > etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a lot of > > information about you and your family strictly from the history of your > > family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, etc. > Normally, > > this information is pretty well protected because these entities do not > know > > your family history but put it all in one location and watch out. Let > them > > get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. > > Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, using tax > exempt > > NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their overall > wealth > > through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes on any of > > it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the richest of > > any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws to their > > benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot smarter than > the > > rest of us in this regard. > > I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business until I was > > in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few years ago and > > read in their local paper an investigative report done one of their staff > > writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I never > > associated any organized religion with this type of business. I also > assume > > you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one time. > > In this country we have laws to protect each of our individual > religious > > beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe some, but to > have > > one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical > information > > of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government will > sooner > > or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. > > It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as they are > and > > have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of these > historical > > facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put "historical > facts" > > and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the case with any > > GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a religious > umbrella, > > then you have created the situation where your family information can be > > sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that family > > information....... > > > > John R. Clarke > > Thomasville, GA > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> > > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM > > Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > > > > > > This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, Ancestry.com > > > collects information, which they then turn around and sell. What do you > > > expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that matter, would > > > do your research for you for free? What do you think professional > > > genealogists have been doing for years? They have been collecting > > > information and selling it to you. > > > > > > Personally, I have submitted my information to World Connects. I sent > it > > > prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued to update > it > > > since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited immensely by so > doing > > > in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many new friends > > > and relatives researching the same line. My research has expanded by > > > leaps and bounds. > > > > > > While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why Ancestry took > over > > > Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported Rootsweb > strongly > > > enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It depended on > our > > > contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but not enough > of > > > us supported them monetarily. > > > > > > As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, Family > Tree > > > Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? There are > > > many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have never forced > > > anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want to share > your > > > "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will continue to do so. > > > We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. > > > > > > Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the biggest > owners > > > of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now that I have > > > been told, my next question is...so what? What does that have to do > with > > > anything? > > > > > > Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we each had > to > > > travel to the countless archives scattered around the country (not to > > > mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a resounding > > > "NO!" > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > > > Mail Mode: > > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > > > or- > > > Digest Mode: > > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > > Mail Mode: > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > > or- > > Digest Mode: > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives at: > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >

The free family trees that have been donated may be free now but just watch how quickly that disappears once Ancestry makes some money with The OneWorldTree Preview. They are out to make money and if they see they can by charging you for the same thing that's available free, they'll do away with the free to make even more money. Amy S. Smith My Site - http://www.outwar.com/page.php?x=2077893 ----- Original Message ----- From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:58 AM Subject: [DANIEL-L] Changes at Ancestry.com - Important Notice. > Important Notice. > > If you have posted a family tree to Ancestry.com, you might want to know of > a change about to be implemented by them. > > Family Trees that have been donated to Ancestry for free distribution to > other researchers will soon be sold by subscription. The OneWorldTree > Preview cost will be $49.95 for 14 months. > > The link below will inform you of how to ensure your tree is included in the > new OneWorldTree site and not deleted in the conversion. However, if you > would prefer that your information was not to be sold, there is a link below > which will take you to a set of instructions on opting out by deleting your > tree. After clicking on the link and arriving at the page, click on "What's > a preview?" near the top of the page. Read thoroughly and then click on > "View our checklist" and then click Deleting a tree you submitted . > > Among other things, you will see the following sentence: "If for any reason > you do not want your tree to be part of the new OneWorldTree service, you > must delete it from the Ancestry World Tree database by tentatively May 21, > 2004." > > This is the link: http://www.ancestry.com/search/rectype/trees/owt/ > > > > John R. Clarke > Thomasville, GA > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > DO NOT FORGET: This is a Genealogical Mailing List and the posting of messages that do not relate to the DANIEL Family, its collateral families or those of a historical nature relating to genealogical research -- are not allowed on this list. > >

John I have a question. If I already belong to Ancestry. com do I have to pay another $49.95 to belong to One World Tree. I have been away so missed some of the messages. Marjorie ----- Original Message ----- From: Don Wright<mailto:sherido1@pacbell.net> To: DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com<mailto:DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 2:34 PM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree On 5/4/04 6:46 PM, "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net<mailto:jclarke@rose.net>> wrote: > Bill, > I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical information belongs > to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do not think you > have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a professional > genealogist, have you? > Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some person to do this > work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as the end results > of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the process, persons > that I never would have known, otherwise. > As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates to the > genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with that and not > just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance companies, > etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a lot of > information about you and your family strictly from the history of your > family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, etc. Normally, > this information is pretty well protected because these entities do not know > your family history but put it all in one location and watch out. Let them > get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. > Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, using tax exempt > NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their overall wealth > through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes on any of > it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the richest of > any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws to their > benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot smarter than the > rest of us in this regard. > I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business until I was > in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few years ago and > read in their local paper an investigative report done one of their staff > writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I never > associated any organized religion with this type of business. I also assume > you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one time. > In this country we have laws to protect each of our individual religious > beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe some, but to have > one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical information > of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government will sooner > or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. > It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as they are and > have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of these historical > facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put "historical facts" > and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the case with any > GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a religious umbrella, > then you have created the situation where your family information can be > sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that family > information....... > > John R. Clarke > Thomasville, GA > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com<mailto:wwb@ix.netcom.com>> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com<mailto:DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com>> > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM > Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > >> This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, Ancestry.com >> collects information, which they then turn around and sell. What do you >> expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that matter, would >> do your research for you for free? What do you think professional >> genealogists have been doing for years? They have been collecting >> information and selling it to you. >> >> Personally, I have submitted my information to World Connects. I sent it >> prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued to update it >> since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited immensely by so doing >> in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many new friends >> and relatives researching the same line. My research has expanded by >> leaps and bounds. >> >> While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why Ancestry took over >> Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported Rootsweb strongly >> enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It depended on our >> contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but not enough of >> us supported them monetarily. >> >> As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, Family Tree >> Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? There are >> many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have never forced >> anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want to share your >> "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will continue to do so. >> We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. >> >> Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the biggest owners >> of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now that I have >> been told, my next question is...so what? What does that have to do with >> anything? >> >> Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we each had to >> travel to the countless archives scattered around the country (not to >> mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a resounding >> "NO!" >> >> Bill >> >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> Mail Mode: >> mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe<mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe> >> or- >> Digest Mode: >> mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe<mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe> >> >> > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > Mail Mode: > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe<mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe> > or- > Digest Mode: > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe<mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe> > Hello John: I agree with you and thank you for the information. I don't mind paying a little bit of a fee for some of the records, but recently it does seem to me that the Utah people have gotten a tad greedy. So much so, that I cannot subscribe at this time which is very frustrating. All the best, Sharon -- ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== DO NOT FORGET: This is a Genealogical Mailing List and the posting of messages that do not relate to the DANIEL Family, its collateral families or those of a historical nature relating to genealogical research -- are not allowed on this list.

On 5/4/04 6:46 PM, "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> wrote: > Bill, > I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical information belongs > to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do not think you > have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a professional > genealogist, have you? > Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some person to do this > work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as the end results > of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the process, persons > that I never would have known, otherwise. > As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates to the > genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with that and not > just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance companies, > etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a lot of > information about you and your family strictly from the history of your > family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, etc. Normally, > this information is pretty well protected because these entities do not know > your family history but put it all in one location and watch out. Let them > get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. > Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, using tax exempt > NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their overall wealth > through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes on any of > it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the richest of > any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws to their > benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot smarter than the > rest of us in this regard. > I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business until I was > in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few years ago and > read in their local paper an investigative report done one of their staff > writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I never > associated any organized religion with this type of business. I also assume > you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one time. > In this country we have laws to protect each of our individual religious > beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe some, but to have > one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical information > of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government will sooner > or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. > It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as they are and > have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of these historical > facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put "historical facts" > and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the case with any > GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a religious umbrella, > then you have created the situation where your family information can be > sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that family > information....... > > John R. Clarke > Thomasville, GA > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM > Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > >> This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, Ancestry.com >> collects information, which they then turn around and sell. What do you >> expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that matter, would >> do your research for you for free? What do you think professional >> genealogists have been doing for years? They have been collecting >> information and selling it to you. >> >> Personally, I have submitted my information to World Connects. I sent it >> prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued to update it >> since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited immensely by so doing >> in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many new friends >> and relatives researching the same line. My research has expanded by >> leaps and bounds. >> >> While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why Ancestry took over >> Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported Rootsweb strongly >> enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It depended on our >> contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but not enough of >> us supported them monetarily. >> >> As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, Family Tree >> Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? There are >> many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have never forced >> anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want to share your >> "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will continue to do so. >> We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. >> >> Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the biggest owners >> of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now that I have >> been told, my next question is...so what? What does that have to do with >> anything? >> >> Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we each had to >> travel to the countless archives scattered around the country (not to >> mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a resounding >> "NO!" >> >> Bill >> >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> Mail Mode: >> mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> or- >> Digest Mode: >> mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> >> > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > Mail Mode: > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > or- > Digest Mode: > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > Hello John: I agree with you and thank you for the information. I don't mind paying a little bit of a fee for some of the records, but recently it does seem to me that the Utah people have gotten a tad greedy. So much so, that I cannot subscribe at this time which is very frustrating. All the best, Sharon --

Jack, I have some real privacy issues with what is going on at MyFamily, which is the umbrella company which controls all of this. MyFamily is not a public corporation but a privately held corporation in which the major stockholders are not known but we both know who really owns it. This privately held corporation is in the process of linking all of the information about our ancestors (and us) into one gigantic database that they and they alone control and are able to sell access to. They started realizing about 15 or so years ago that they were sitting on a gold mine of information about our ancestors, even if some of it was wrong. All of this is nothing more than a 21st Century extension of what they have been doing for the past 150 years -- tracing the ancestry of each and every member of their body. Now, they cannot only trace their bunch but yours and mine, as well. I have nothing against any corporation providing this genealogical service, far from it. However, that corporation better be a public corporation, so we know who to go after should they become abusive in their pursuits. With this corporation, you do not have that capability. Also, when that corporation is nothing more than an extension of a religious body, I have real problems with them. As I told a friend, previously, in 49 out of 50 states we have a definite separation of church and state but in UT there is no separation of church and state, because the church is the state. Do you have any idea the uproar that would be heard across this land if all of our genealogical records were under the control of, let's say, the Catholic Church? Or, even the Methodist or Baptist Churches. People would be screaming to the high heaven. I think the last time something like this happened we called it the Reformation. This is not just a matter of us searching for our ancestors. This is about someone's use of our personal family information, much of which we have provided, unknowingly, by a corporation controlled by a single religious body whose sole intent in this pursuit is to make money off of this information. Do you think they have limits to whom they will sell this information? Not likely.... They will sell it to you, to insurance companies who may be considering selling you an insurance policy, to employers who may be considering hiring you or anyone else who is able to throw a buck or two on the table. As we both know, acorns do not fall very far very far from the tree and what happened to your ancestors during their lives will probably be what happens to you. Knowing this information about you, beforehand, can save these companies big bucks down the road and simplify personnel choices. We may have privacy statues covering information about you that can be released about you by the federal and state governments but there are no regulations governing what can be released to others about you by this privately held company. We live in an "Information Age" where information about you or me is not only knowledge but money. I am not so much worried about what they will do with this information but what others will do with this information. I think in our single minded, blind pursuit of our ancestors we have unknowingly created a monster that will come back to bite us in the rear end. John R. Clarke Thomasville, GA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack V Butler" <JackVButler@comcast.net> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 10:07 PM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > One entity controlling all of the genealogical information? Are you > tripping, John? The information is still out there, in the State > Archives, > the Courthouses, in the Churches, the City Halls. Believe me, I have gone > and found it there. Been to the National Archives, too. All of that cost > me a whole lot of money in travel, lodging and meals on the road - and > most > of it was fishing trips, going to where I THOUGHT that I might find my > ancestors records. > > Now, I pay a little money and sit in the convenience of my own home, in a > comfortable chair, with my shoes off, while I look at scans of original > census records at 10:00 p.m. at night. In short, I pay for the > convenience > of easy multiple searches and of ease of delivery. I don't HAVE to go to > these sources, I could go back and do it the old way - indeed, I often do. > But now I almost always have much better leads when I go to a courthouse > because I have often found a transcript or original record to point me in > the right direction. > > Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against free resources - I have > volunteered to digitize records for several county sites and will probably > do so again. But I certainly don't begrudge the fees that I pay to the > folks who went to the trouble to collect into a single location large > quantities of the kind of records that I want to see. > > Nobody is forced to use the subscription services - but I cannot imagine > why > they wouldn't. > > Jack Butler > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 9:46 PM > Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > >> Bill, >> I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical information > belongs >> to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do not think > you >> have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a professional >> genealogist, have you? >> Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some person to do > this >> work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as the end > results >> of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the process, persons >> that I never would have known, otherwise. >> As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates to the >> genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with that and > not >> just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance companies, >> etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a lot of >> information about you and your family strictly from the history of your >> family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, etc. > Normally, >> this information is pretty well protected because these entities do not > know >> your family history but put it all in one location and watch out. Let > them >> get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. >> Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, using tax > exempt >> NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their overall > wealth >> through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes on any of >> it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the richest >> of >> any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws to their >> benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot smarter than > the >> rest of us in this regard. >> I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business until I >> was >> in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few years ago >> and >> read in their local paper an investigative report done one of their staff >> writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I never >> associated any organized religion with this type of business. I also > assume >> you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one time. >> In this country we have laws to protect each of our individual > religious >> beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe some, but to > have >> one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical > information >> of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government will > sooner >> or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. >> It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as they are > and >> have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of these > historical >> facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put "historical > facts" >> and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the case with any >> GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a religious > umbrella, >> then you have created the situation where your family information can be >> sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that family >> information....... >> >> John R. Clarke >> Thomasville, GA >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> >> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM >> Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree >> >> >> > This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, Ancestry.com >> > collects information, which they then turn around and sell. What do >> > you >> > expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that matter, >> > would >> > do your research for you for free? What do you think professional >> > genealogists have been doing for years? They have been collecting >> > information and selling it to you. >> > >> > Personally, I have submitted my information to World Connects. I sent > it >> > prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued to update > it >> > since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited immensely by so > doing >> > in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many new friends >> > and relatives researching the same line. My research has expanded by >> > leaps and bounds. >> > >> > While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why Ancestry took > over >> > Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported Rootsweb > strongly >> > enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It depended on > our >> > contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but not enough > of >> > us supported them monetarily. >> > >> > As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, Family > Tree >> > Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? There are >> > many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have never >> > forced >> > anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want to share > your >> > "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will continue to do >> > so. >> > We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. >> > >> > Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the biggest > owners >> > of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now that I have >> > been told, my next question is...so what? What does that have to do > with >> > anything? >> > >> > Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we each had > to >> > travel to the countless archives scattered around the country (not to >> > mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a resounding >> > "NO!" >> > >> > Bill >> > >> > >> > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> > Mail Mode: >> > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> > or- >> > Digest Mode: >> > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> > >> > >> >> >> >> ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== >> Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe >> Click on the following link and your message is ready to send >> Mail Mode: >> mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> or- >> Digest Mode: >> mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >> > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > IF YOU MISS ANY MESSAGE: You can easily search the DANIEL List Archives > at: > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=DANIEL >

One entity controlling all of the genealogical information? Are you tripping, John? The information is still out there, in the State Archives, the Courthouses, in the Churches, the City Halls. Believe me, I have gone and found it there. Been to the National Archives, too. All of that cost me a whole lot of money in travel, lodging and meals on the road - and most of it was fishing trips, going to where I THOUGHT that I might find my ancestors records. Now, I pay a little money and sit in the convenience of my own home, in a comfortable chair, with my shoes off, while I look at scans of original census records at 10:00 p.m. at night. In short, I pay for the convenience of easy multiple searches and of ease of delivery. I don't HAVE to go to these sources, I could go back and do it the old way - indeed, I often do. But now I almost always have much better leads when I go to a courthouse because I have often found a transcript or original record to point me in the right direction. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against free resources - I have volunteered to digitize records for several county sites and will probably do so again. But I certainly don't begrudge the fees that I pay to the folks who went to the trouble to collect into a single location large quantities of the kind of records that I want to see. Nobody is forced to use the subscription services - but I cannot imagine why they wouldn't. Jack Butler ----- Original Message ----- From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 9:46 PM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > Bill, > I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical information belongs > to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do not think you > have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a professional > genealogist, have you? > Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some person to do this > work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as the end results > of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the process, persons > that I never would have known, otherwise. > As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates to the > genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with that and not > just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance companies, > etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a lot of > information about you and your family strictly from the history of your > family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, etc. Normally, > this information is pretty well protected because these entities do not know > your family history but put it all in one location and watch out. Let them > get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. > Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, using tax exempt > NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their overall wealth > through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes on any of > it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the richest of > any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws to their > benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot smarter than the > rest of us in this regard. > I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business until I was > in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few years ago and > read in their local paper an investigative report done one of their staff > writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I never > associated any organized religion with this type of business. I also assume > you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one time. > In this country we have laws to protect each of our individual religious > beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe some, but to have > one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical information > of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government will sooner > or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. > It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as they are and > have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of these historical > facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put "historical facts" > and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the case with any > GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a religious umbrella, > then you have created the situation where your family information can be > sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that family > information....... > > John R. Clarke > Thomasville, GA > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> > To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM > Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > > > > This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, Ancestry.com > > collects information, which they then turn around and sell. What do you > > expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that matter, would > > do your research for you for free? What do you think professional > > genealogists have been doing for years? They have been collecting > > information and selling it to you. > > > > Personally, I have submitted my information to World Connects. I sent it > > prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued to update it > > since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited immensely by so doing > > in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many new friends > > and relatives researching the same line. My research has expanded by > > leaps and bounds. > > > > While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why Ancestry took over > > Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported Rootsweb strongly > > enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It depended on our > > contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but not enough of > > us supported them monetarily. > > > > As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, Family Tree > > Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? There are > > many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have never forced > > anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want to share your > > "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will continue to do so. > > We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. > > > > Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the biggest owners > > of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now that I have > > been told, my next question is...so what? What does that have to do with > > anything? > > > > Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we each had to > > travel to the countless archives scattered around the country (not to > > mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a resounding > > "NO!" > > > > Bill > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > > Mail Mode: > > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > > or- > > Digest Mode: > > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > > > > > > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > Mail Mode: > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > or- > Digest Mode: > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe >

Bill, I am sorry but I have always felt that genealogical information belongs to the families involved and not some commercial entity. I do not think you have ever seen this old boy recommend resorting to a professional genealogist, have you? Maybe it takes me a little longer than by paying some person to do this work for me but the "thrill of the chase" is as important as the end results of that chase. Plus, I have made lots of friends in the process, persons that I never would have known, otherwise. As for the LDS Church owning most of everything as relates to the genealogical records of this nation, I have real problems with that and not just because of privacy issues, either. Employers, insurance companies, etc.do not have to have your medical records, they can get a lot of information about you and your family strictly from the history of your family, e.g. their typical life spans, their cause of death, etc. Normally, this information is pretty well protected because these entities do not know your family history but put it all in one location and watch out. Let them get a hold of your DNA information and really watch out. Here we have a tax exempt organization, the LDS Church, using tax exempt NPO's, like Rootsweb and probably Ancestry, to increase their overall wealth through commercialization and not having to pay corporate taxes on any of it. Now, do you understand why members of this church are the richest of any organized religion in this country -- they use our tax laws to their benefit. I guess you could say, they are also a whole lot smarter than the rest of us in this regard. I did not know they were in the gaming and casino business until I was in Las Vegas covering the Shot Show for my publication a few years ago and read in their local paper an investigative report done one of their staff writers on this matter. It really surprised me, too, because I never associated any organized religion with this type of business. I also assume you know they also own Novell and Word Perfect, or did at one time. In this country we have laws to protect each of our individual religious beliefs or even to protect us from religion if you believe some, but to have one specific religious body controlling all of the genealogical information of this country, I find appalling. I also feel that government will sooner or later step in because of the privacy issues involved. It is one thing to be a repository of historical facts, as they are and have been, but it is quite another to be able to tie all of these historical facts, together, as we easily do for them. When you put "historical facts" and the links that tie them to specific families, as is the case with any GEDCOMS you submit to them, and put all of this under a religious umbrella, then you have created the situation where your family information can be sold to other parties, parties you never intended to have that family information....... John R. Clarke Thomasville, GA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Brewer" <wwb@ix.netcom.com> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM Subject: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > This whole discussion is getting a little silly. Yes, Ancestry.com > collects information, which they then turn around and sell. What do you > expect? Do you think any company, or anyone else for that matter, would > do your research for you for free? What do you think professional > genealogists have been doing for years? They have been collecting > information and selling it to you. > > Personally, I have submitted my information to World Connects. I sent it > prior to Ancestry taking over Rootsweb, but I have continued to update it > since, and will continue to do so. I have benefited immensely by so doing > in that mistakes have been corrected, and I have found many new friends > and relatives researching the same line. My research has expanded by > leaps and bounds. > > While we're on the subject, have you ever wondered why Ancestry took over > Rootsweb? We, the genealogical public, never supported Rootsweb strongly > enough for it to survive as a non-profit organization. It depended on our > contributions, both money and data. I contributed both, but not enough of > us supported them monetarily. > > As to Ancestry having no competitors...What about GenCircles, Family Tree > Maker, GenServe, National Genealogical Society, etc., etc.? There are > many sources out there, Ancestry is just one, and they have never forced > anyone to contribute to their data bases. If you don't want to share your > "hard-earned data" with them, don't. I have and will continue to do so. > We'll see who benefits the most in the long run. > > Finally, no, I didn't know the owners of Ancestry were the biggest owners > of gambling enterprises on the strip in Las Vegas, and now that I have > been told, my next question is...so what? What does that have to do with > anything? > > Do we really want to go back to the "good old days," where we each had to > travel to the countless archives scattered around the country (not to > mention the world)? In my humble opinion, the answer is a resounding > "NO!" > > Bill > > > ==== DANIEL Mailing List ==== > Going on Vacation for longer than 5 days? Please unsubscribe > Click on the following link and your message is ready to send > Mail Mode: > mailto:DANIEL-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > or- > Digest Mode: > mailto:DANIEL-D-request@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe > >