I haven't absolutely proven it yet, but I am fairly sure that my Campbell line tracks back to Dr. Samuel LeGrand Campbell of Rockbridge County, Virginia. I haven't found his LeGrand connection, either, but there are LeGrands in the area where he lived. Jack ----- Original Message ----- From: "John R. Clarke" <jclarke@rose.net> To: <DANIEL-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 10:37 PM Subject: Re: [DANIEL-L] Ancestry.com charging for One World Tree > 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 > > > > > > > > ==== 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 >

No message pertaining to the subject line. Sent only to prove a point: Make the subject line reflect your actual message ;-)