No, not a headmistress, just one who feels that if you volunteer for a project you understand and read the guidelines and rules and do not try and hijack the project to your own aims. They are not my rules but commonly called for requirements of any project. You just have to know there are protocols and rules to follow if you sign up. It's generally a basic premise that if you join a conversation you make an effort of some sort to find out what happened prior to you joining in. The problem is that this conversation has been going so long that it is difficult for newbies to know where it started and some oldies to recognise when the conversation topic died. The internet has gone a long way to killing that art. Having sat in on this conversation for some time, on and off, and watched the players I get a feeling about what some people say. Being a watcher of some lists gives you an insight into how some people operate. I often drop in on different genealogy based newsgroups to see the current tone and conversation, quite often I drop back out again. Observation has led me to say the things I have. You may not agree with me, but then I may not agree with you either. I was new to this not so long ago but feel 8 years of watching lists and getting to know how the players operate has flavoured my opinions. I am not saying this list is 8 years old but many of the players have been around for quite a while and their same words can be found in many of the usual lists. The way they operate can also be observed. One fellow explained his lack of any punctuation on his recently broken arm - I advised him he should change doctors as he had the same complaint since 1998 or so (and was well known for his style which he regarded as uncharacteristic) Helen Castle Shellharbour NSW -----Original Message----- From: Steve Gaunt [mailto:steve@email.hinet.hr] Sent: Sunday, 7 September 2003 7:23 PM To: helen.castle@telstra.com; FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: FULL STOPS >So feel free to discuss away, after checking what the project rules are, >what previous discussion has been and how many times it has been discussed. Really? I have your permission if I abide by the rules you set? Are you a headmistress perchance? Steve Gaunt ----- Original Message ----- From: Helen Castle <helen.castle@telstra.com> To: <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2003 10:53 AM Subject: RE: FULL STOPS > There is discussion because people are new and dont realise and there is > discussion which you know has been brought up by the same people over and > over again in one way or another. > > After 18 months away from the project I see the same people bringing up the > same discussion that I saw done to death 18 months ago... This general > conversation has been going on for upwards of 4 years and if you walk in on > the middle of a conversation it is generally accepted that you may have > missed what went on before, unless of course you have been in on the > conversation many times before and just keep bringing up the same old > things. > > So feel free to discuss away, after checking what the project rules are, > what previous discussion has been and how many times it has been discussed. > > Far be it for me to limit free speech. > > Helen Castle > Shellharbour > > -----Original Message----- > From: Lucille Hambling [mailto:l.hambling@ntlworld.com] > Sent: Sunday, 7 September 2003 12:21 AM > To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: FULL STOPS > > > Do I understand from Helen and Loraine that we should not have an opinion or > just not voice it? Should we be mindless drones who transcribe day and > night and not take time to do other things on the computer such as read > e-mails, write messages or anything else we choose to do, when taking a > break from transcribing. > > If the subject of 'full stops' bothers some people then why open the message > > > Lucille > > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go > to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 >

There is discussion because people are new and dont realise and there is discussion which you know has been brought up by the same people over and over again in one way or another. After 18 months away from the project I see the same people bringing up the same discussion that I saw done to death 18 months ago... This general conversation has been going on for upwards of 4 years and if you walk in on the middle of a conversation it is generally accepted that you may have missed what went on before, unless of course you have been in on the conversation many times before and just keep bringing up the same old things. So feel free to discuss away, after checking what the project rules are, what previous discussion has been and how many times it has been discussed. Far be it for me to limit free speech. Helen Castle Shellharbour -----Original Message----- From: Lucille Hambling [mailto:l.hambling@ntlworld.com] Sent: Sunday, 7 September 2003 12:21 AM To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: FULL STOPS Do I understand from Helen and Loraine that we should not have an opinion or just not voice it? Should we be mindless drones who transcribe day and night and not take time to do other things on the computer such as read e-mails, write messages or anything else we choose to do, when taking a break from transcribing. If the subject of 'full stops' bothers some people then why open the message Lucille ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

Good day. May I please make a plea? This is a list for discussion of the FreeBMD project - its policies, its methods and betterment of both of those. I subscribe to the list, and take enough of an interest in the project to read all mails that come from this List. I have been on the list long enough for the Full Stop discussion ongoing at present to appear to me as its third incarnation. If I was fed-up with the topic, I would automatically delete those mails with FULL STOPS in the subject line. Mail programs have filters to enable me - or you - to do this, it doesn't even have to be a manual problem. What I find intolerably rude is for mail ostensibly from this List and about this project with the subject line FULL STOPS to be in fact a tirade of a personal nature against individual or groups of individual members of this great project. As a matter of common politeness I believe that if someone feels strongly that another member should be admonished, then a private mail is the only decent way to do this - i.e. hit Reply, not Reply All. And an even better alternative is to take a deep breath, count to a full day away from the PC and only then decide if you ought to send that PRIVATE mail or if DELETE and forget is a better option. If we, who are "united" in our aim to complete this project, cannot stop becoming that famous typo "untied", then I fear that the mailing lists will become _moderated_ mail lists, with its concommitant Big Brother feel and accusations of censorship flying, to further detract from our task of getting the transcriptions done. The plea? FreeBMD matters in public, personal matters in private, please. Thank you for reading to the end - I guess in some ways this mail contravenes everything it purports to be requesting! Best Wishes -- Anne

Hi Tony One of the good things about Rootsweb lists is the fact that there is a subject field - if the subject doesn't concern you or you are annoyed by it then there is always the delete key. To some people a discussion is not procrastination when it interests them, it is obvious that there is an interest in the subject of that very important part of the English grammar namely the humble full stop. I, like other transcribers, find that the discussions here are a welcome rest from looking at 5000 entries of the same surname and having to transcribe them. And yes, there are more important things than transcribing for FreeBMD - eating, having fun etc. Those, like me, who choose to assist do it on our own terms, when we feel like it and are largely left to get on with it. A discussion implies that there are at least two or more persons involved, when there is only one person left discussing full stops then the subject will die a natural death. As with any other discussion, people get bored and change the subject. I would suggest that discussing a subject ad nauseum is a minor misdemeanour compared with the heinous crime of wanting to curtail free speech. Regards David Banks ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tony" <Horler@one-name.org> To: <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2003 2:04 PM Subject: The subject is FULL STOP! > 07 September 2003 23:02:03 > > The subject of this procrastination is FULL STOP! > > So lets just do it! > > Since the 23rd August 2003 this list has been littered with comments regarding > an inconsequential element of the English language [ . ] > > Is this [ . ] so important that transcribers can take their minds off the more > important factor... > > The transcription of the Births,Marriages & Deaths that occurred in > Wales and England from 1837 - ? > > Those that are organizing this task have more important things to do. > > Those that choose to assist should simply, "Get on with the task and do what it required." > > > -- > > Tony Meighan > Bright,Victoria,Australia mailto:Horler@one-name.org > Transcribing since 2001. > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > >

Rick I'm not going to second guess the answer to query 1 (i.e. TWO full stops). However the answer to question 2 (... mean I cannot tell whether there's a full stop character or not) is adequately answered in the Hints and Help For Beginners at: http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/beginhelp.html scroll down to Transcribing Full Stops (Periods). If you think the instructions are not clear enough please let us know? Allan Raymond -----Original Message----- From: RichardCElliott@aol.com <RichardCElliott@aol.com> To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Date: 07 September 2003 15:09 Subject: Re: fullstops. Hello, I'm just curious. How should one transcribe the following: Smith John J.. ...Aston,6d 999 With TWO full stops? How about this: Smith John.[].... Aston, 6d 999 Where the brackets mean I cannot tell whether there's a full stop character or not. Should that be transcribed Smith John[. ]? This second example is tricky in that, if the bracketed character is a full stop, then the entire sequence of full stops are separators and the entry should be Smith John (no full stop). On the other hand if the unreadable character is just a space then the entry should be Smith, John. (with the full stop). Other variations come to mind. Without meaning to take sides on this issue, may I observe that the reason the full stop issue comes up so often is that it would appear that this is a case wherein the Type What You See rule seemingly clashes with Common Sense? Rick Elliott ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

I am a relative 'new kid' on the block, coming on board in September last year if I remember rightly. This round of full stop DISCUSSIONS is the first I have seen as I haven't been around for 4 years or so. I think these things do need to pop up periodically, and providing no-one gets hot and flustered or bitter and twisted about the opinions of others, the discussions are good. If you don't ask, you don't know! And with our syndicate administrators being so over-worked, this seems to be a good way of answering the inevitable question or two. Please remember that we all need a bit of patience when we are starting out or when we have been around a bit and forget through sheer complacency or just pure brain fade! ;) Warm regards Sonja Scan2 syndicate.

Dave, If I were in your shoes I'd be getting a lot less polite by now. I am positive that you have better things (and more important things) to do than endlessly answer the same questions, slightly reworded with the same explanations. I remember reading your extremely detailed explanations on the list as soon as you came back from holiday, what, just over a week ago. Can't understand why others seem incapable of doing so. Don't they realise that by getting you to keep giving the same explanation you are unable to progress the work of the project and bring the next update online or do something else behind the scenes that is equally important to the project?

I would like to know, is the full stop after a forename a data separator or not? Lucille

>So feel free to discuss away, after checking what the project rules are, >what previous discussion has been and how many times it has been discussed. Really? I have your permission if I abide by the rules you set? Are you a headmistress perchance? Steve Gaunt ----- Original Message ----- From: Helen Castle <helen.castle@telstra.com> To: <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2003 10:53 AM Subject: RE: FULL STOPS > There is discussion because people are new and dont realise and there is > discussion which you know has been brought up by the same people over and > over again in one way or another. > > After 18 months away from the project I see the same people bringing up the > same discussion that I saw done to death 18 months ago... This general > conversation has been going on for upwards of 4 years and if you walk in on > the middle of a conversation it is generally accepted that you may have > missed what went on before, unless of course you have been in on the > conversation many times before and just keep bringing up the same old > things. > > So feel free to discuss away, after checking what the project rules are, > what previous discussion has been and how many times it has been discussed. > > Far be it for me to limit free speech. > > Helen Castle > Shellharbour > > -----Original Message----- > From: Lucille Hambling [mailto:l.hambling@ntlworld.com] > Sent: Sunday, 7 September 2003 12:21 AM > To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: FULL STOPS > > > Do I understand from Helen and Loraine that we should not have an opinion or > just not voice it? Should we be mindless drones who transcribe day and > night and not take time to do other things on the computer such as read > e-mails, write messages or anything else we choose to do, when taking a > break from transcribing. > > If the subject of 'full stops' bothers some people then why open the message > > > Lucille > > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go > to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 >

Dave The good news is that your extremely detailed and useful expose on full stops was added yesterday to the Transcribers Web Page. Chances it is just waiting for one kind person (nod, nod, wink, wink) to press the appropriate button for it to go live. Allan Raymond -----Original Message----- From: Dave Mayall <david.mayall@ukonline.co.uk> To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Date: 07 September 2003 09:32 Subject: Re: Fullstops in the Forename column. >On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 11:04:47 +0100, you wrote: > >>I'm sure this has been said before, and I understand that FreeBMD is doing >>an EXACT transcription of the indexes, but are FULL STOPS really that >>important ? Joe Public who is searching the index for a name won't care if >>there is a full stop or not, and the full stop isn't relevant in the >>searches. I'm sure the GRO won't care if a full stop is there or not when >>the someone requests a certificate, so why is there such a big fuss about >>them ? > >*PLEASE* go back and read my EXCRUCIATINGLY detailed explanation of >why it is important, because having spent several hours that I could >ill afford typing it out, I'm not about to do it again. > >Of course it doesn't matter to the searcher whether there is a full >stop or not. It does, however matter to our matching process which >compares double keyings. > >-- >Dave Mayall > > >============================== >To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: >http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 >

-------Original Message------- From: Lucille Hambling Date: 07 September 2003 10:07:59 To: helen.castle@telstra.com Subject: RE: FULL STOPS -------Original Message------- Far be it for me to limit free speech. Helen Castle ----------------------- Thank you Lucille .

Hello, I'm just curious. How should one transcribe the following: Smith  John J.. ...Aston,6d   999 With TWO full stops? How about this: Smith John.[].... Aston, 6d 999 Where the brackets mean I cannot tell whether there's a full stop character or not. Should that be transcribed Smith John[. ]? This second example is tricky in that, if the bracketed character is a full stop, then the entire sequence of full stops are separators and the entry should be Smith John (no full stop). On the other hand if the unreadable character is just a space then the entry should be Smith, John. (with the full stop). Other variations come to mind. Without meaning to take sides on this issue, may I observe that the reason the full stop issue comes up so often is that it would appear that this is a case wherein the Type What You See rule seemingly clashes with Common Sense? Rick Elliott

If we are stuck with inserting full stops after the forenames in just some of the records, could there not be an option to turn on automatic insertion in one of the menus on WinBMD? David Keetch (scan2 transcriber)

On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 15:21:10 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time), you wrote: >Do I understand from Helen and Loraine that we should not have an opinion or >just not voice it? Should we be mindless drones who transcribe day and >night and not take time to do other things on the computer such as read >e-mails, write messages or anything else we choose to do, when taking a >break from transcribing. Opinions are just fine, and where opinions are voiced, I'm always ready to discuss them here. However, the discussion on full stops has been done to death now, many many times. I have written a DETAILED explanation of why we do it the way we do. The result of that detailed explanation has been a whole raft of messages suggesting that we should change things whilst totally ignoring the reasons I gave for doing it that way. Well, I won't be wasting my time on explaining things in great detail again. -- Dave Mayall

On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 11:44:20 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time), you wrote: >I second everything Andrew has said. I don't think full stops have any >importance and as a member of the searching Joe Public, as long as I get the >names, dates and places, that is all I want. It is far more important that >emphasis is put on transcribing the names as-is, because a full stop is not >going to alter the information the words provide. I've explained the reasons, and the reasons have NOTHING to do with what Joe Public sees. -- Dave Mayall

On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 13:02:34 +0200, you wrote: >The only reasons for putting the fullstops as far as I know are: >1. Something to do with consistancy in transcribing and the software at FreeBMD and double keying. >2. A promise to transcribe the data as is. > >If the software is based an the accurate transcription of every fullstop, comma, etc, then there is the need to transcribe as is, though I am told that double keying would involve different source, which may not even carry the full stop, though I may have that wrong (David, refresh my memory) >Other than the two reasons stated above, there is no reason at all to transcribe full stops. The original handwritten scans didn't carry them; they were put there in later versions. >So: >perhaps the software can be "rewired" so that full stops have no significance? Then it wouldn't matter if they were transcribed or not. The software is wired so they have a minimal significance, please see my explanation previously. -- Dave Mayall

On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 11:04:47 +0100, you wrote: >I'm sure this has been said before, and I understand that FreeBMD is doing >an EXACT transcription of the indexes, but are FULL STOPS really that >important ? Joe Public who is searching the index for a name won't care if >there is a full stop or not, and the full stop isn't relevant in the >searches. I'm sure the GRO won't care if a full stop is there or not when >the someone requests a certificate, so why is there such a big fuss about >them ? *PLEASE* go back and read my EXCRUCIATINGLY detailed explanation of why it is important, because having spent several hours that I could ill afford typing it out, I'm not about to do it again. Of course it doesn't matter to the searcher whether there is a full stop or not. It does, however matter to our matching process which compares double keyings. -- Dave Mayall

On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 09:48:55 +0100, you wrote: >Obviously there must be millions of transcribed entries without the stops so >surely a bulk entry system is going to be needed. Could I pleaded with the >authorities for this to be done sooner rather than later and be made >available to necessary evils like myself? How would a bulk system work? If it were simply a case of all forenames needing a full stop, we wouldn't worry about it, and would add them ourselves. However, that ISN'T the case. Forenames that have a full stop in the index should be transcribed with a full stop, forenames that don't should be transcribed without a full stop. As stated previously, files that have already been uploaded with missing full stops should NOT be corrected, as it isn't a sufficiently important error to warrant that amount of rework. Future submissions should however include full stops if they appear in the index. -- Dave Mayall

For anyone concerned I also raised the point of fullstops after forename but now I accept the reasoning I use SpeedBMD (cant get WinBMD to download after having lost it once) and I have found the following easy way to put in the fullstops which may be useful. 1. Complete the scan WITHOUT fullstops in. 2. Change to block input (f5). 3. Tab to forename field in the LAST entry. then a. Hit END key. b. Hit BACKSPACE key c. Type the "fullstop". d. Hit the "UP" cursor key. and repeat from a. You can soon get into a good rhythm and it is quite easy to do. I use finger from right hand for the fullstop and a finger from left hand for rest. When finished, and watch the first PAGE line verify in normal way. John Mills

Hear Hear!!! a protocol has been established for the project - love it or leave it. knockers can start their own project with your own rules or be part of this one as it is.. Helen Castle Shellharbour NSW -----Original Message----- From: Loraine [mailto:Lol_barnes@lineone.net] Sent: Saturday, 6 September 2003 11:03 PM To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE:FULLSTOPS I am beginning to wonder, John, why you are bothering to transcribe for FreeBMD, when all you appear to do is knock it. If you had had the idea and done all the work in the first place to set up a project like this then you could have done so and arranged it to suit your own tastes. You, don't appear to have done, so stop knocking what is essentially an EXCELLENT project and let those that had the original vision do it their way. They have their reasons which they keep explaining, but people like you don't seem to take any notice. The time you spend endlessly discussing things on the lists could be far more usefully spent transcribing. As could the time the rest of us spend reading your postings! ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237