I have a line back to Robert BOYES, bapt. 31 March 1827 at Gainsborough, son of John and Jane BOYES of Morton, father a sailor. John and Jane had 6 children bapt. at Gainsborough up to 1833. I cannot find any birth or bapt. of this John BOYES. When Robert BOYES, b. 1827, married Jane HIRD 27 Nov. 1848 at Hull his father is John BOYES, deceased mariner. Jane HIRD’s father is also ‘deceased mariner’. So there may have been some confusion here? In the 1851 Census of Hull/Sculcoates John’s son William, b. 1831 at Gainsborough, is living with Sarah Ann BOYES, b. 1833 at Gainsborough, daughter of Robert BOYES, b. 1794 at Gainsborough Workhouse. This infers that John BOYES the Gainsborough mariner is brother to this Robert BOYES, b. 1794, bapt. 1797 age 2 ½ at Gainsborough Workhouse. 1850 marr. of William BOYES, b. 1831(brother of Robert BOYES b. 1827) father is John BOYES, mariner [not shown as deceased]. 1851 second marr. of Robert BOYES, b. 1827, father John BOYES, mariner [not shown as deceased]. 1864 marr. of John BOYES, b. 1833, father late John BOYES, mariner. John BOYES and his wife Jane appear to have avoided the Census of 1841 and 1851. The Death Cert. of John BOYES of 1855, age 63 a journeyman cooper, was, from 1851 Census, born at Walkington, East Yorks., a cooper and sloopman. Bob Jennings

Was just about to post that I still use Paf when Nivard beat me to it. So many of the more recent programs make adding notes for instance too precise. I just like the way that PAF takes odd ball entries without complaint ! Plus you can always tart up your tree info by exporting it to another program so easily with the aid of a Ged file. W. Smith >

Can only say "Well written Lou". Surely part of the fun of family research is checking information yourself and perhaps adding that extra nugget of data..... W. Smith >

Hi Nivard.  Thanks. Yes I have the programe on disk so should be OK.  A few weeks ago you gave me info on army records for ww2. And we're to get information. I followed that up with the mod in glassgo.  They are going to send me some information on about a months time as they are in in dated with requests. I may get back to you Re  my william collins who as you said was not born at langtoft in lincs although the bans said he was from there. He died in 1830 aged 80. Thanks. Regards. John Sent from my Samsung device -------- Original message -------- From: Nivard Ovington via <eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com> Date: 28/03/2016 11:05 (GMT+00:00) To: eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LIN] Admin. note: Research Hi John, Barbara and all If you use FTM2005 it should continue to work for as long as you need it, barring problems with the program itself Keep doing backups and storing some at least away from home and also export gedcoms periodically in the same manner But there is no reason its shouldn't continue to do what you want of it for as long as you want it I am using PAF 5.3, support has long since discontinued but the program is so good I have never needed support The later programs, be that Family Historian or Family Tree Maker or whatever the software may be, have so many bells and whistles that the majority never get round to using them, most never learn how to use the program even partially never mind fully John, when you say "If ancestry get rid of it", they have ceased supply and support as far as I know but you have bought the program (& hopefully have it on disc) so it doesn't matter what Ancestry do, your use is not dependent on them in any way Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 28/03/2016 10:49, John Lindley via wrote: > Hi Barbara. > I use ftm 2005. I got ftm 2012 and found it difficult to use so went back > to 2005 edition and still use it. If ancestry get rid of it I may have to > get another programe or pack it up altogether and print off what I have > got. Regards. John. South yorkshire. > On 28 Mar 2016 10:24, "Barbara Paris via" wrote: --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-LINCSGEN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Victor To the best of my knowledge, all software available for at least a decade also has the same facility At least all I have tested or used have done, that includes most if not all the major suppliers I use PAF and that hasn't been updated for donkeys years and that alerts if you attempt to add a child whose birth is to close to the other siblings or the mother is deceased etc etc The problem I think is more due to those who just accept all or force the program to accept whatever they enter as they want numbers not true relatives I don't see that problem ending any time soon Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 28/03/2016 08:54, Victor Markham via wrote: > Lou > > My tree software is Family Historian it is designed such that when one > puts in a year and it detects that it could be wrong a message pops up > asking me to check it. > > For example if I put in 1984 instead of 1884 the message asks me to > confirm it. > > Another example if I out in a birth date after the mother had died a > similar message comes up making me check this. > > There have been times when the birth date was correct but the mother > turned out to be the second wife with the same Christian name. > > The message always appear when I put in 100 but if I confirm it is > correct then it accepts it. > > It really comes down not just to human errors but also the design of the > software you use. > > Victor --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Hi John, Barbara and all If you use FTM2005 it should continue to work for as long as you need it, barring problems with the program itself Keep doing backups and storing some at least away from home and also export gedcoms periodically in the same manner But there is no reason its shouldn't continue to do what you want of it for as long as you want it I am using PAF 5.3, support has long since discontinued but the program is so good I have never needed support The later programs, be that Family Historian or Family Tree Maker or whatever the software may be, have so many bells and whistles that the majority never get round to using them, most never learn how to use the program even partially never mind fully John, when you say "If ancestry get rid of it", they have ceased supply and support as far as I know but you have bought the program (& hopefully have it on disc) so it doesn't matter what Ancestry do, your use is not dependent on them in any way Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 28/03/2016 10:49, John Lindley via wrote: > Hi Barbara. > I use ftm 2005. I got ftm 2012 and found it difficult to use so went back > to 2005 edition and still use it. If ancestry get rid of it I may have to > get another programe or pack it up altogether and print off what I have > got. Regards. John. South yorkshire. > On 28 Mar 2016 10:24, "Barbara Paris via" <eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com> wrote: --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Good advise Lou, Hope it isn't too late for the folk who have just started out and those who have already printed out their work and given it to families already. I think it true to say that all of us whether researching for over 30 years or more, have at the beginning made a mistake as we have found a record in some published work of our families and have taken it as gospel, only to find otherwise at a later date, it wasn't the case. Researching for over 30 years does not make us experts in everything though, as some of us may of been making the same mistakes for 30 years, I hope I have rectified most of my mistakes by now. I certainly have made one or two early on. I would rather leave my research at a point of being correct, than add some person who could be the right one and go off cockeyed. Work on the known and put meat on them, photos, newspaper, certificates, etc. Doesnt matter if you havent got 10,000 names like Jo Blow, as apposed to say a more workable 3,000 with a lot of interesting true facts attached to them. I will certainly be doing that and most likely will only have 3,000 people over all of my families. I want a Family History that is not all names and dates. I want my Family History to have a Photo attached where possible if not a photo of the person, maybe something of significance to them like a medal or favourite thing, gravestone,newspaper article, certificates if any, what e! ver, just not all text. That is my aim, not how many names I can gather. We all have our ideas of what we want dont we? Edie ------------------------------------------ From: lr_mills via <eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com> To: eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com; Subject: [LIN] Admin. note: Research Hi, Missing Lincs, I know that many of you know how to do research, but it surprises me how often I find people who "take the shortest path". Nivard, Bazza and others have talked about finding more than one source to document a relative, but too many family trees are based on a leap of faith based on one entry found online.

Hi Barbara. I use ftm 2005. I got ftm 2012 and found it difficult to use so went back to 2005 edition and still use it. If ancestry get rid of it I may have to get another programe or pack it up altogether and print off what I have got. Regards. John. South yorkshire. On 28 Mar 2016 10:24, "Barbara Paris via" <eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Hello Victor. > > Just read your email and that you mentioned Family Historian in it. > > I've just bought Family Tree and cannot get on with it at all. I used FT > several years ago and found it quite user friendly but the newer version > and Ancestry itself is less comprehendible!!!!! > > Can only think age has something to do with it!!!! > > Barbara. > > Sent from my iPad > > > On 28 Mar 2016, at 08:54, Victor Markham via <eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com> > wrote: > > > > Lou > > > > My tree software is Family Historian it is designed such that when one > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ENG-LINCSGEN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hello Victor. Just read your email and that you mentioned Family Historian in it. I've just bought Family Tree and cannot get on with it at all. I used FT several years ago and found it quite user friendly but the newer version and Ancestry itself is less comprehendible!!!!! Can only think age has something to do with it!!!! Barbara. Sent from my iPad > On 28 Mar 2016, at 08:54, Victor Markham via <eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > Lou > > My tree software is Family Historian it is designed such that when one >

Lou My tree software is Family Historian it is designed such that when one puts in a year and it detects that it could be wrong a message pops up asking me to check it. For example if I put in 1984 instead of 1884 the message asks me to confirm it. Another example if I out in a birth date after the mother had died a similar message comes up making me check this. There have been times when the birth date was correct but the mother turned out to be the second wife with the same Christian name. The message always appear when I put in 100 but if I confirm it is correct then it accepts it. It really comes down not just to human errors but also the design of the software you use. Victor On 27/03/2016 11:34 PM, lr_mills via wrote: > Hi, Missing Lincs, > > I know that many of you know how to do research, but it surprises me how often I find people who "take the shortest path". Nivard, Bazza and others have talked about finding more than one source to document a relative, but too many family trees are based on a leap of faith based on one entry found online. > > Fact #1: The internet is loaded with errors. Blame the humans, for the most part. Computers seldom make errors unless some silly human has set them up to fail. My wife's grandmother had some small problems with computers when she became 100 years old. Some computers couldn't handle three digits for the age. Silly programmers! When you reach 100, you'll still find some out there. > > Fact #2: Human brains don't always see our own errors. We put in 1984 when we meant 1884. We don't see the error. We put in a marriage date into a Family Tree program that is 10 years after the first child was born. Is it a mistake? Maybe not. Ever try to tell a fetus that it is too early? They just don't listen. In a way, it is a good thing your relatives were fertile. In another way, not so good. > > Fact #3: Our children are used to doing reports for school based on information that they find on the Internet. Who is the Internet Librarian who decides if a work is fact or fiction? I have found battles from the English Civil War that were set in the wrong place or wrong century. I've tried to correct those that I find, as you should too, but they keep reappearing like gophers in my garden. > > Fact #4: Our ancestors often didn't know. Where they were born, precisely. Even when they were born. Don't get me started on women's ages in the census. Most of you know those problems. I had a female relative send me the birthdates for her and all her brothers and sisters - each with about three years added to the birth year to make them look younger. My step-father's parents were from Hungary. Have you checked the borders of Hungary in the 1800s? All over the place! Turns out his mother was from Austria - well, it was part of Austria at the time. > > Enough of this! Do your research. Find at least three sources, please, before you go off and publish your family tree. > > Lou (list admin.) > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-LINCSGEN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I am trying to find any baptism for John Bradford (5x gt grandfather) possibly at Creeton Lincs between 1718 - 1722. If found it may help to identify his father. His wife was Mary Perkins. Many thanks Margaret

Hi, Missing Lincs, I know that many of you know how to do research, but it surprises me how often I find people who "take the shortest path". Nivard, Bazza and others have talked about finding more than one source to document a relative, but too many family trees are based on a leap of faith based on one entry found online. Fact #1: The internet is loaded with errors. Blame the humans, for the most part. Computers seldom make errors unless some silly human has set them up to fail. My wife's grandmother had some small problems with computers when she became 100 years old. Some computers couldn't handle three digits for the age. Silly programmers! When you reach 100, you'll still find some out there. Fact #2: Human brains don't always see our own errors. We put in 1984 when we meant 1884. We don't see the error. We put in a marriage date into a Family Tree program that is 10 years after the first child was born. Is it a mistake? Maybe not. Ever try to tell a fetus that it is too early? They just don't listen. In a way, it is a good thing your relatives were fertile. In another way, not so good. Fact #3: Our children are used to doing reports for school based on information that they find on the Internet. Who is the Internet Librarian who decides if a work is fact or fiction? I have found battles from the English Civil War that were set in the wrong place or wrong century. I've tried to correct those that I find, as you should too, but they keep reappearing like gophers in my garden. Fact #4: Our ancestors often didn't know. Where they were born, precisely. Even when they were born. Don't get me started on women's ages in the census. Most of you know those problems. I had a female relative send me the birthdates for her and all her brothers and sisters - each with about three years added to the birth year to make them look younger. My step-father's parents were from Hungary. Have you checked the borders of Hungary in the 1800s? All over the place! Turns out his mother was from Austria - well, it was part of Austria at the time. Enough of this! Do your research. Find at least three sources, please, before you go off and publish your family tree. Lou (list admin.)

On 27 Mar 2016, at 2:23 PM, Graham Taylor via wrote: > > > I am trying to find any baptism for John Bradford (5x gt grandfather) > possibly at Creeton Lincs between 1718 - 1722. If found it may help to > identify his father. Margaret, have you tried the General Register on Lincs to the Past/ The following URL may take you there: http://www.lincstothepast.com/General-register/596788.record?pt=T Good Luck, Denny Perth Ontario

I would think a "youth" would be late teens. I've seen early teens, even up to 15, described as "children" in docs. Anne Anne Cole, President, Lincolnshire Family History Society Duncalf(e)/Duncuff/Duncuft One-name Study GOONS member 513 http://www.one-name.org/profiles/duncalf.html http://duncalfonenamestudy.tribalpages.com/ Lincolnshire Post 1837 Marriage Index http://mi.lincolnshiremarriages.org.uk/ Lincolnshire Family History Society http://www.lincolnshirefhs.org.uk -----Original Message----- From: eng-lincsgen-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:eng-lincsgen-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Denny Lowe via Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2016 11:49 PM To: Eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com Subject: [LIN] William Lowe, burial at South Thoresby 11 Mar 1796 Greetings, Listers, Lincs to the Past have a burial record for William Lowe that I am finding rather difficult to read. May I ask for some assistance, please? I "think" I have the majority of the script as follows: "William Lowe a youth servant of F Rogers death by [ ...?... ] of a Horse burried March 11." [in 1796] This can be found under South Thoresby Par/1/3 - Baptisms & Burials (1771 - 1812) Image 12, midway down the left hand page. (1) Do you agree with the name of William's employer? (2) Any suggestions as to how William was killed by a Horse? (3) In the late 1700s, how old would a "youth" be? I'm thinking as young as 12, as old as in his late teens. Any suggestions will be most welcome. Denny, Perth Ontario. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-LINCSGEN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11895 - Release Date: 03/27/16 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11895 - Release Date: 03/27/16

Greetings, Listers, Lincs to the Past have a burial record for William Lowe that I am finding rather difficult to read. May I ask for some assistance, please? I "think" I have the majority of the script as follows: “William Lowe a youth servant of F Rogers death by [ ...?... ] of a Horse burried March 11.” [in 1796] This can be found under South Thoresby Par/1/3 - Baptisms & Burials (1771 - 1812) Image 12, midway down the left hand page. (1) Do you agree with the name of William's employer? (2) Any suggestions as to how William was killed by a Horse? (3) In the late 1700s, how old would a "youth" be? I'm thinking as young as 12, as old as in his late teens. Any suggestions will be most welcome. Denny, Perth Ontario.

Thank you everyone for your help. I'm quite sure Rebecca Stanley and Rebecca Staniland is one of the same. No one has found anything that I haven't already seen other than the GRO marriage certificate. I understand with dialect how a name can be misspelt. I have already had that many years ago with John Redhead and Ann Grainger marriage. I originally ordered the marriage under Ann name as lucky I knew that and it came with the correct person but down as Readheath. Again keep up the good work everyone. Chris

Hi Lesley, I agree, I would look for William in Lincolnshire as well and there are a few possibles there. I actually found another possible this morning, but it was another spelling just to add to the other spelling variation of Rowbotham, you have found already. It was William Robotam Chr 13 July 1755 at Ropsley,Lincoln, England to Henry Robotam and Mary.. It is a little place just about one and a half miles southeast of Grantham and only about 12 miles for Holbeach. Since there was a Henrietta, maybe she could have been named after this Henry. Just another one to consider. There seems only to be this couple named Robotam so it does look like another spelling for Rowbotham. Since you have William Rowbotham in the subject heading, one day at some time, a family member will hopefully pick up on it for you. It has happened to me years later sometimes. Edie ------------------------------------------ From: Lesley O'Connell <lesleyo@tesco.net> To: eamca@bigpond.com; ENG-LINCSGEN@rootsweb.com; Subject: RE:[LIN] WILLIAM ROWBOTHAM Hi Edie Thanks for your input. I have found details of various Williams born around the right period but none stands out as an obvious candidate. I was hoping that someone out there might have some info handed down the family that might confirm or eliminate some of the possibles. Although it is conceivable that William was born outside Lincolnshire I prefer to exhaust the possibilities within the county first before looking elsewhere.

Hi Edie Thanks for your input. I have found details of various Williams born around the right period but none stands out as an obvious candidate. I was hoping that someone out there might have some info handed down the family that might confirm or eliminate some of the possibles. Although it is conceivable that William was born outside Lincolnshire I prefer to exhaust the possibilities within the county first before looking elsewhere. Sometimes if you take a break from researching an individual you can find that when coming back to them there have been new resources released or new clues have emerged when researching other members of the family. Lesley Aveyron, France -------- Original Message -------- From: eamca@bigpond.com Sent: 21 March 2016 09:55:00 CET To: ENG-LINCSGEN@rootsweb.com Subject: RE:[LIN] WILLIAM ROWBOTHAM Lesley, Looking into familysearch.org, searching from 1750 until 1772, in 1754 there is a William baptised in Long Bennington, Lincoln in 1754 father William mother Sarah and others in that time frame in Lincoln and other places mentioned before. https://familysearch.org/search/collection/results?count=20&query=%2Bgivenname%3AWilliam~%20%2Bsurname%3ARowbotham~%20%2Bbirth_year%3A1750-1772~%20%2Bgender%3AM&collection_id=1473014 Edie ------------------------------------------ From: Lesley O'Connell via <eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com> To: ENG-LINCSGEN@rootsweb.com; Subject: [LIN] WILLIAM ROWBOTHAM Lou's comments about the lack of messages recently has prompted me to post a query. My ggg grandfather William Rowbotham shows up in Holbeach in 1792 when he marries my ggg grandmother SUSANNAH THIMBLEBY. They had four children, of whom three died in infancy, leaving only my gg grandmother Harriet Thimbleby Rowbotham to survive to adulthood, although she died young as well, at the age of 26 However I can find no information as to where he originally came from. There don't seem to have been any Rowbothams in Holbeach before William's appearance and no other Rowbotham families there afterwards. William was said to be 'of this parish' when he married, so no clues there as to his origins. From the age he was said to be at burial he would have been born around 1756. It looks as if the vast majority of Rowbothams lived in and around Brigg, with a limited number living in Northwest Lincolnshire. Is there anyone on the list researching the Rowbotham family? I have looked at variants such as Rowbottom and Rowbotham on Ancestry, Family Search and FreeReg and have also had a quick look at Linc's to the Past and the TNA website. Any information or suggestions would be most welcome. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-LINCSGEN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Sorry Susan, I can't help you with Elizabeth Vicars. I can trace Charles's ancestors back to the same period but they were all from Scothorne / Scothern a few miles north of Lincoln - and I have many reservations since there are many John Vickers. They are probably related but I don't know when. I assign little value to the change of spelling since I consider it mostly due to the clerk recording the parish births, marriages and burials. Alan Swindale > -----Original Message----- > From: eng-lincsgen-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:eng-lincsgen- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Susan Reynolds via > Sent: 18 March 2016 04:11 > To: eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com > Subject: [LIN] Charles Isaac VICKERS > > ​Okay, Alan. You got my attention so now I just have to know about your > Charles Isaac. > > My 5th great grandmother was Elizabeth VICARS. Her birth date and > palce are unknown, but probably sometime around 1750. > > Elizabeth married George HOLBROOK 30 Jan 1770 at Leadenham. His parish > of residence is listed as Fulbeck. Witnesses listed as John DOUGHTY > and Oswald FOSTER. > > They had ten children. All dates are baptism dates Jane 11 Dec 1770 > buried 11 March 1771 Leadenham > Susannah17 Mar 1772 as HOLDBROOK Leadenham George 15 Aug 1773 Leadenham > (my 4th great grandfather). He was buried 25 Aug 1847 Fulbeck. > Ann 13 Jun 1775 Leadenham > John 31 May 1777 New Sleaford > William 18 Oct 1778 as HAWBROOK New Sleaford, residence given as > Holdingham Benjamin 9 May 1781 as HAWBROOK New Sleaford Elizabeth 18 > Jul 1783 as HAWBROOK New Sleaford Samuel 10 Apr 1786 as HAWBROOK New > Sleaford > > Elizabeth was buried 15 Apr 1788 New Sleaford George died after 12 Aug > 1788, the date he married Mary GARRATT in South Kyme. > > Son George married Rebecca CHRISTIAN 2 May 1806 Fulbeck. She was born > about 1779 Grantham buried 13 Jul 1854 Fulbeck. From this point his > surname generally appears as AWBROOK or AUBROOK > > Does Elizabeth appear on your tree? That would be ever so lovely! She > is a mystery for us. > > Have a wonderful day! > Susan Reynolds > Kentucky USA > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-LINCSGEN- > request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message

I also did a DNA test last year – got sent lots of ‘cousins’ but actually only 1 seens at all close. Waste of time I think, and glad I did it as part of a large group of people, and it was free. Wouldn’t bother again. Jan Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10 From: David Meredith via<mailto:eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 11:50 PM To: linda<mailto:vesey@dccnet.com>; eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com<mailto:eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com> Subject: Re: [LIN] Quiet on Lincs Linda, I took a DNA test with Ancestry back in February. Many of my supposed matches relate to subscribers who either haven't posted their tree on Ancestry or alternatively have private trees. Just in passing my autosomal DNA sample tested by Ancestry provided some interesting ethnicity suggestions which were contradicted when I uploaded my DNA sample for analysis by FamilytreeDNA the latter being in partnership with the US National Geographic Magazine which on balance I think trust more. David Meredith.... Nottinghamshire. ________________________________ From: linda via<mailto:eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com> Sent: ‎20/‎03/‎2016 23:48 To: eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com<mailto:eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com> Subject: Re: [LIN] Quiet on Lincs Hi all, I have put my PLOWRIGHT/HOOTON tree on Ancestry as it appears no one is interested in taking it up when my time comes. I wonder how many trees on Ancestry are there but the one that has compile the tree is not around anymore? At the moment it is "a private tree" however, it appears if you do the DNA thing your tree has to be "public" or it won't produce the connections one wishes to find. Is that the case? Linda BC Canada I am as mystified as you are Murray as to why so few reply I do know there was a problem with the Ancestry internal email system and people were never getting the messages, hence no replies I have done some tests at different times but they got through (I messaged known people and emailed to alert them to reply and also in reverse) But whether there is still a problem is hard to say Certainly its very strange that so few respond and its not just us as its been mentioned in several places previously A lot of the people are it seems accessing Ancestry on a regular basis or perhaps that triggering system is not working as it should and more people are not actually using Ancestry at all and the accounts we are contacting are dormant? Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-LINCSGEN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-LINCSGEN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message