Where will I find the list of names, I've found it once before by accident but have looked for it recently and cannot find it. I'm a new transcriber myself and have uploaded 4 pages. I just wanted to see if I was on there. Regards Vince Gledhill [email protected] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary Trevan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 7:14 AM Subject: Re: File Owning > John > > Thanks for the clarification about a neutral ID owning the files rather than > yourself, but I think I'm correct in saying this could still result in an > active transcriber appearing on the list with '0 entries' against their > name. > > Mary > > -----Original Message----- > From: John Pain <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Date: Wednesday, 03 October, 2001 11:33 PM > Subject: Re: File Owning > > > >Mary > > > >Your wrote:- > >>2 - one for my transcriptions (10000+ where my coordinator controls the > >>edits, although he would prefer it if I was one of the 0 entries people > >>since all my transcriptions would appear under his name) > > > >Not True - The transcriptions would appear in a neutral ID ( I set up M1871 > >for 1871 Marriages) with me as the contact for problems. The transcriptions > >would be credited to M1871 in the list of transcribers and not John_Pain. > > > >Regards > > > >John > > > >Researching - Hykin (Anywhere) > >Pai(y)n(e) from Kent 1800's > >Conde Salop. Anytime > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: Mary Trevan <[email protected]> > >To: <[email protected]> > >Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 8:20 PM > >Subject: Re: File Owning > > > > > >> > >> >Our most immediate attention will be given to the removal of volunteers > >who > >> have > >> >registered on the system 2 or more times (the record is currently a > >> volunteer with > >> >6 SubmitterIDs). > >> > >> I have 3 accounts of which 2 are active:- > >> 1 - one a typo with an incorrect email address, so I don't know how you > >> would contact me > >> 2 - one for my transcriptions (10000+ where my coordinator controls the > >> edits, although he would prefer it if I was one of the 0 entries people > >> since all my transcriptions would appear under his name) > >> 3 - and another for my one-name study entries (10000+ where I contol the > >> edits). > >> > >> So if my understanding is correct, not all '0 entries' correspond to > >people > >> who have not done any transcriptions. In some case the '0 entries' will > be > >a > >> static situation where the transcriber sends their transcriptions by > email > >> to their coordinator, and sometimes it is a dynamic situation, since they > >> will go above '0 entries' as they upload the files themselves and then go > >> back down to '0 entries' as their files are uploaded by the coordinator > >> under a different ID and then deleted by the coordinator from the > >> transcriber's account, by the coordinator using the transcriber password. > >> > >> Regards > >> > >> Mary Trevan > >> > >> > >> >----- Original Message ----- > >> >From: "Sheelagh Hawkins" <[email protected]> > >> >To: <[email protected]> > >> >Sent: 03 October 2001 19:00 > >> >Subject: Re: File Owning > >> > > >> > > >> >Dave et al, > >> >While we are on the subject of transcribers who are no longer active can > >I > >> >ask what the position is with the number of people who subscribed but > >have > >> >never actually transcribed anything. When I look at the status list, > >there > >> >are several hundred (a guess - I gave up at 120 and I was still on names > >> >beginning with A!) people who have never submitted a thing. I understand > >> >that some people help out in other ways so don't have time to do the > >manual > >> >graft, but surely not that many. > >> >Should these people be contacted to see if they intend to become active, > >or > >> >if they perhaps need help to get started. > >> >I realise that perhaps this is probably considered a minor problem on > the > >> >list of things to do - I am happy to volunteer to contact them if it is > >> just > >> >a case of waiting for someone to do it. Then I could pass those who need > >> >advice on to Virginia ;-) (I said she might live to regret saying she > >would > >> >handle all the newbies I could send her way) > >> >Regards > >> >Sheelagh > >> > > >> > > >> >============================== > >> >Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate > >> >your heritage! > >> >http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >============================== > >> >Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate > >> >your heritage! > >> >http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> ============================== > >> Visit Ancestry.com for a FREE 14-Day Trial and enjoy access to the #1 > >> Source for Family History Online. Go to: > >> http://www.ancestry.com/subscribe/subscribetrial1y.asp?sourcecode=F11HB > >> > > > > > >============================== > >Search over 1 Billion names at Ancestry.com! > >http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp > > > > > ============================== > Visit Ancestry.com for a FREE 14-Day Trial and enjoy access to the #1 > Source for Family History Online. Go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/subscribe/subscribetrial1y.asp?sourcecode=F11HB >

Surely if that is the case they would simply reply to Virginia's query and the problem is solved! The clean up is designed to get rid of the entries that contain mistakes so won't work, or to catch up those who are having problems getting started. Sheelagh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary Trevan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 7:14 AM Subject: Re: File Owning > John > > Thanks for the clarification about a neutral ID owning the files rather than > yourself, but I think I'm correct in saying this could still result in an > active transcriber appearing on the list with '0 entries' against their > name. > > Mary > > -----Original Message----- > From: John Pain <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Date: Wednesday, 03 October, 2001 11:33 PM > Subject: Re: File Owning > > > >Mary > > > >Your wrote:- > >>2 - one for my transcriptions (10000+ where my coordinator controls the > >>edits, although he would prefer it if I was one of the 0 entries people > >>since all my transcriptions would appear under his name) > > > >Not True - The transcriptions would appear in a neutral ID ( I set up M1871 > >for 1871 Marriages) with me as the contact for problems. The transcriptions > >would be credited to M1871 in the list of transcribers and not John_Pain. > > > >Regards > > > >John > > > >Researching - Hykin (Anywhere) > >Pai(y)n(e) from Kent 1800's > >Conde Salop. Anytime > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: Mary Trevan <[email protected]> > >To: <[email protected]> > >Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 8:20 PM > >Subject: Re: File Owning > > > > > >> > >> >Our most immediate attention will be given to the removal of volunteers > >who > >> have > >> >registered on the system 2 or more times (the record is currently a > >> volunteer with > >> >6 SubmitterIDs). > >> > >> I have 3 accounts of which 2 are active:- > >> 1 - one a typo with an incorrect email address, so I don't know how you > >> would contact me > >> 2 - one for my transcriptions (10000+ where my coordinator controls the > >> edits, although he would prefer it if I was one of the 0 entries people > >> since all my transcriptions would appear under his name) > >> 3 - and another for my one-name study entries (10000+ where I contol the > >> edits). > >> > >> So if my understanding is correct, not all '0 entries' correspond to > >people > >> who have not done any transcriptions. In some case the '0 entries' will > be > >a > >> static situation where the transcriber sends their transcriptions by > email > >> to their coordinator, and sometimes it is a dynamic situation, since they > >> will go above '0 entries' as they upload the files themselves and then go > >> back down to '0 entries' as their files are uploaded by the coordinator > >> under a different ID and then deleted by the coordinator from the > >> transcriber's account, by the coordinator using the transcriber password. > >> > >> Regards > >> > >> Mary Trevan > >> > >> > >> >----- Original Message ----- > >> >From: "Sheelagh Hawkins" <[email protected]> > >> >To: <[email protected]> > >> >Sent: 03 October 2001 19:00 > >> >Subject: Re: File Owning > >> > > >> > > >> >Dave et al, > >> >While we are on the subject of transcribers who are no longer active can > >I > >> >ask what the position is with the number of people who subscribed but > >have > >> >never actually transcribed anything. When I look at the status list, > >there > >> >are several hundred (a guess - I gave up at 120 and I was still on names > >> >beginning with A!) people who have never submitted a thing. I understand > >> >that some people help out in other ways so don't have time to do the > >manual > >> >graft, but surely not that many. > >> >Should these people be contacted to see if they intend to become active, > >or > >> >if they perhaps need help to get started. > >> >I realise that perhaps this is probably considered a minor problem on > the > >> >list of things to do - I am happy to volunteer to contact them if it is > >> just > >> >a case of waiting for someone to do it. Then I could pass those who need > >> >advice on to Virginia ;-) (I said she might live to regret saying she > >would > >> >handle all the newbies I could send her way) > >> >Regards > >> >Sheelagh > >> > > >> > > >> >============================== > >> >Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate > >> >your heritage! > >> >http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >============================== > >> >Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate > >> >your heritage! > >> >http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> ============================== > >> Visit Ancestry.com for a FREE 14-Day Trial and enjoy access to the #1 > >> Source for Family History Online. Go to: > >> http://www.ancestry.com/subscribe/subscribetrial1y.asp?sourcecode=F11HB > >> > > > > > >============================== > >Search over 1 Billion names at Ancestry.com! > >http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp > > > > > ============================== > Visit Ancestry.com for a FREE 14-Day Trial and enjoy access to the #1 > Source for Family History Online. Go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/subscribe/subscribetrial1y.asp?sourcecode=F11HB > >

I've had a good look round the site to see if there is an answer available but with no success. Is there a mechanism in place to report obvious[0] errors on the original scans? I'm not talking about 'spelling mistakes', smudges or faint entries but things like the 2[1]I've seen: a) 'Soseph' in a typeset scan after 'John' and before 'Lucy' - making it a reasonable assumption that the typesetter had picked up an 'S' instead of a 'J'; b) 'Elizabeth' in both the forename and district columns in an otherwise perfect handwritten scan where there was no doubt about a single letter or number on the scan. In this particular case, the clerk who had numbered the pages at the top had clearly spotted it as he'd added ??? after both occurrences. 0: for some value of 'obvious' (-: 1: my experience so far would indicate that there is about a 1:10 000 chance of such an error. -- Philip Powell

if you go to the transcribers page then under the STATISTICS heading is a sub heading "current database status" This is where you can find your name Shell

Mary Your wrote:- >2 - one for my transcriptions (10000+ where my coordinator controls the >edits, although he would prefer it if I was one of the 0 entries people >since all my transcriptions would appear under his name) Not True - The transcriptions would appear in a neutral ID ( I set up M1871 for 1871 Marriages) with me as the contact for problems. The transcriptions would be credited to M1871 in the list of transcribers and not John_Pain. Regards John Researching - Hykin (Anywhere) Pai(y)n(e) from Kent 1800's Conde Salop. Anytime ----- Original Message ----- From: Mary Trevan <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 8:20 PM Subject: Re: File Owning > > >Our most immediate attention will be given to the removal of volunteers who > have > >registered on the system 2 or more times (the record is currently a > volunteer with > >6 SubmitterIDs). > > I have 3 accounts of which 2 are active:- > 1 - one a typo with an incorrect email address, so I don't know how you > would contact me > 2 - one for my transcriptions (10000+ where my coordinator controls the > edits, although he would prefer it if I was one of the 0 entries people > since all my transcriptions would appear under his name) > 3 - and another for my one-name study entries (10000+ where I contol the > edits). > > So if my understanding is correct, not all '0 entries' correspond to people > who have not done any transcriptions. In some case the '0 entries' will be a > static situation where the transcriber sends their transcriptions by email > to their coordinator, and sometimes it is a dynamic situation, since they > will go above '0 entries' as they upload the files themselves and then go > back down to '0 entries' as their files are uploaded by the coordinator > under a different ID and then deleted by the coordinator from the > transcriber's account, by the coordinator using the transcriber password. > > Regards > > Mary Trevan > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Sheelagh Hawkins" <[email protected]> > >To: <[email protected]> > >Sent: 03 October 2001 19:00 > >Subject: Re: File Owning > > > > > >Dave et al, > >While we are on the subject of transcribers who are no longer active can I > >ask what the position is with the number of people who subscribed but have > >never actually transcribed anything. When I look at the status list, there > >are several hundred (a guess - I gave up at 120 and I was still on names > >beginning with A!) people who have never submitted a thing. I understand > >that some people help out in other ways so don't have time to do the manual > >graft, but surely not that many. > >Should these people be contacted to see if they intend to become active, or > >if they perhaps need help to get started. > >I realise that perhaps this is probably considered a minor problem on the > >list of things to do - I am happy to volunteer to contact them if it is > just > >a case of waiting for someone to do it. Then I could pass those who need > >advice on to Virginia ;-) (I said she might live to regret saying she would > >handle all the newbies I could send her way) > >Regards > >Sheelagh > > > > > >============================== > >Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate > >your heritage! > >http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > > > > > > > >============================== > >Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate > >your heritage! > >http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > > > > > > ============================== > Visit Ancestry.com for a FREE 14-Day Trial and enjoy access to the #1 > Source for Family History Online. Go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/subscribe/subscribetrial1y.asp?sourcecode=F11HB >

>Our most immediate attention will be given to the removal of volunteers who have >registered on the system 2 or more times (the record is currently a volunteer with >6 SubmitterIDs). I have 3 accounts of which 2 are active:- 1 - one a typo with an incorrect email address, so I don't know how you would contact me 2 - one for my transcriptions (10000+ where my coordinator controls the edits, although he would prefer it if I was one of the 0 entries people since all my transcriptions would appear under his name) 3 - and another for my one-name study entries (10000+ where I contol the edits). So if my understanding is correct, not all '0 entries' correspond to people who have not done any transcriptions. In some case the '0 entries' will be a static situation where the transcriber sends their transcriptions by email to their coordinator, and sometimes it is a dynamic situation, since they will go above '0 entries' as they upload the files themselves and then go back down to '0 entries' as their files are uploaded by the coordinator under a different ID and then deleted by the coordinator from the transcriber's account, by the coordinator using the transcriber password. Regards Mary Trevan >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Sheelagh Hawkins" <[email protected]> >To: <[email protected]> >Sent: 03 October 2001 19:00 >Subject: Re: File Owning > > >Dave et al, >While we are on the subject of transcribers who are no longer active can I >ask what the position is with the number of people who subscribed but have >never actually transcribed anything. When I look at the status list, there >are several hundred (a guess - I gave up at 120 and I was still on names >beginning with A!) people who have never submitted a thing. I understand >that some people help out in other ways so don't have time to do the manual >graft, but surely not that many. >Should these people be contacted to see if they intend to become active, or >if they perhaps need help to get started. >I realise that perhaps this is probably considered a minor problem on the >list of things to do - I am happy to volunteer to contact them if it is just >a case of waiting for someone to do it. Then I could pass those who need >advice on to Virginia ;-) (I said she might live to regret saying she would >handle all the newbies I could send her way) >Regards >Sheelagh > > >============================== >Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate >your heritage! >http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > > > >============================== >Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate >your heritage! >http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog >

>Our most immediate attention will be given to the removal of volunteers who have >registered on the system 2 or more times (the record is currently a volunteer with >6 SubmitterIDs). I have 3 accounts of which 2 are active:- 1 - one a typo with an incorrect email address, so I don't know how you would contact me 2 - one for my transcriptions (10000+ where my coordinator controls the edits, although he would prefer it if I was one of the 0 entries people since all my transcriptions would appear under his name) 3 - and another for my one-name study entries (10000+ where I contol the edits). So if my understanding is correct, not all '0 entries' correspond to people who have not done any transcriptions. In some case the '0 entries' will be a static situation where the transcriber sends their transcriptions by email to their coordinator, and sometimes it is a dynamic situation, since they will go above '0 entries' as they upload the files themselves and then go back down to '0 entries' as their files are uploaded by the coordinator under a different ID and then deleted by the coordinator from the transcriber's account, by the coordinator using the transcriber password. Regards Mary Trevan >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Sheelagh Hawkins" <[email protected]> >To: <[email protected]> >Sent: 03 October 2001 19:00 >Subject: Re: File Owning > > >Dave et al, >While we are on the subject of transcribers who are no longer active can I >ask what the position is with the number of people who subscribed but have >never actually transcribed anything. When I look at the status list, there >are several hundred (a guess - I gave up at 120 and I was still on names >beginning with A!) people who have never submitted a thing. I understand >that some people help out in other ways so don't have time to do the manual >graft, but surely not that many. >Should these people be contacted to see if they intend to become active, or >if they perhaps need help to get started. >I realise that perhaps this is probably considered a minor problem on the >list of things to do - I am happy to volunteer to contact them if it is just >a case of waiting for someone to do it. Then I could pass those who need >advice on to Virginia ;-) (I said she might live to regret saying she would >handle all the newbies I could send her way) >Regards >Sheelagh > > >============================== >Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate >your heritage! >http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > > > >============================== >Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate >your heritage! >http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog >

I also wish all questions could be answered this easily. Allan Raymond [email protected] http://www.btinternet.com/~allan_raymond/Monarchies_of_Europe.htm FreeBMD - putting birth marriages and deaths on the Internet http://FreeBMD.rootsweb.com/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sheelagh Hawkins" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: 03 October 2001 20:50 Subject: Re: File Owning Oh if all questions could be answered as easily as this one :-) Nice to know that I wasn't just dreaming up more problems to keep the top team busy. Sheelagh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Allan Raymond" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 7:22 PM Subject: Re: File Owning > Sheelagh > > Virginia and I are aware of this problem and have already done some work in this > area (OK Virginia did the hard ground work). > > We are just waiting for some finishing touches to be done to the software to give > both of us access to FreeBMD to remove such volunteers. > > Our most immediate attention will be given to the removal of volunteers who have > registered on the system 2 or more times (the record is currently a volunteer with > 6 SubmitterIDs). > > Allan Raymond > [email protected] > http://www.btinternet.com/~allan_raymond/Monarchies_of_Europe.htm > FreeBMD - putting birth marriages and deaths on the Internet > http://FreeBMD.rootsweb.com/ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sheelagh Hawkins" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: 03 October 2001 19:00 > Subject: Re: File Owning > > > Dave et al, > While we are on the subject of transcribers who are no longer active can I > ask what the position is with the number of people who subscribed but have > never actually transcribed anything. When I look at the status list, there > are several hundred (a guess - I gave up at 120 and I was still on names > beginning with A!) people who have never submitted a thing. I understand > that some people help out in other ways so don't have time to do the manual > graft, but surely not that many. > Should these people be contacted to see if they intend to become active, or > if they perhaps need help to get started. > I realise that perhaps this is probably considered a minor problem on the > list of things to do - I am happy to volunteer to contact them if it is just > a case of waiting for someone to do it. Then I could pass those who need > advice on to Virginia ;-) (I said she might live to regret saying she would > handle all the newbies I could send her way) > Regards > Sheelagh > > > ============================== > Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate > your heritage! > http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > > > > ============================== > Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate > your heritage! > http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > > ============================== Search over 1 Billion names at Ancestry.com! http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp

Mary Just by way of an example. In fact there are 4 entries shown against you in the database. Two of these are shown as fully registered and the other two are part registrations. Interestingly, one of these latter part registrations looks as if was an attempt by a co-ordinator to register on your behalf, it failed due a slight misspelling in the co-ordinator's email address. Before deleting any duplicate volunteer, we will contact the volunteer using all the email addresses shown against the volunteer and also check the database to see if their accounts are active. The first tranche of volunteers with duplicate registrations were contacted back in May and these will be at the front of the queue for deletions (obviously based on the responses from the volunteers). You personally would not have yet been contacted in this first tranche, because according to the database your first registration was way back in March with the other 3 attempted registrations occurring in August. So in answer to your query, when we do get around to contacting you regarding your duplications we will send an email to all 4 of the email addresses shown against your registrations, at least one of these should reach you. At that stage you would then tell us which are your active and non active accounts (plus the dynamic total situations). Allan Raymond [email protected] http://www.btinternet.com/~allan_raymond/Monarchies_of_Europe.htm FreeBMD - putting birth marriages and deaths on the Internet http://FreeBMD.rootsweb.com/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary Trevan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: 03 October 2001 20:20 Subject: Re: File Owning >Our most immediate attention will be given to the removal of volunteers who have >registered on the system 2 or more times (the record is currently a volunteer with >6 SubmitterIDs). I have 3 accounts of which 2 are active:- 1 - one a typo with an incorrect email address, so I don't know how you would contact me 2 - one for my transcriptions (10000+ where my coordinator controls the edits, although he would prefer it if I was one of the 0 entries people since all my transcriptions would appear under his name) 3 - and another for my one-name study entries (10000+ where I contol the edits). So if my understanding is correct, not all '0 entries' correspond to people who have not done any transcriptions. In some case the '0 entries' will be a static situation where the transcriber sends their transcriptions by email to their coordinator, and sometimes it is a dynamic situation, since they will go above '0 entries' as they upload the files themselves and then go back down to '0 entries' as their files are uploaded by the coordinator under a different ID and then deleted by the coordinator from the transcriber's account, by the coordinator using the transcriber password. Regards Mary Trevan >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Sheelagh Hawkins" <[email protected]> >To: <[email protected]> >Sent: 03 October 2001 19:00 >Subject: Re: File Owning > > >Dave et al, >While we are on the subject of transcribers who are no longer active can I >ask what the position is with the number of people who subscribed but have >never actually transcribed anything. When I look at the status list, there >are several hundred (a guess - I gave up at 120 and I was still on names >beginning with A!) people who have never submitted a thing. I understand >that some people help out in other ways so don't have time to do the manual >graft, but surely not that many. >Should these people be contacted to see if they intend to become active, or >if they perhaps need help to get started. >I realise that perhaps this is probably considered a minor problem on the >list of things to do - I am happy to volunteer to contact them if it is just >a case of waiting for someone to do it. Then I could pass those who need >advice on to Virginia ;-) (I said she might live to regret saying she would >handle all the newbies I could send her way) >Regards >Sheelagh > > >============================== >Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate >your heritage! >http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > > > >============================== >Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate >your heritage! >http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > ============================== Visit Ancestry.com for a FREE 14-Day Trial and enjoy access to the #1 Source for Family History Online. Go to: http://www.ancestry.com/subscribe/subscribetrial1y.asp?sourcecode=F11HB

Oh if all questions could be answered as easily as this one :-) Nice to know that I wasn't just dreaming up more problems to keep the top team busy. Sheelagh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Allan Raymond" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 7:22 PM Subject: Re: File Owning > Sheelagh > > Virginia and I are aware of this problem and have already done some work in this > area (OK Virginia did the hard ground work). > > We are just waiting for some finishing touches to be done to the software to give > both of us access to FreeBMD to remove such volunteers. > > Our most immediate attention will be given to the removal of volunteers who have > registered on the system 2 or more times (the record is currently a volunteer with > 6 SubmitterIDs). > > Allan Raymond > [email protected] > http://www.btinternet.com/~allan_raymond/Monarchies_of_Europe.htm > FreeBMD - putting birth marriages and deaths on the Internet > http://FreeBMD.rootsweb.com/ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sheelagh Hawkins" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: 03 October 2001 19:00 > Subject: Re: File Owning > > > Dave et al, > While we are on the subject of transcribers who are no longer active can I > ask what the position is with the number of people who subscribed but have > never actually transcribed anything. When I look at the status list, there > are several hundred (a guess - I gave up at 120 and I was still on names > beginning with A!) people who have never submitted a thing. I understand > that some people help out in other ways so don't have time to do the manual > graft, but surely not that many. > Should these people be contacted to see if they intend to become active, or > if they perhaps need help to get started. > I realise that perhaps this is probably considered a minor problem on the > list of things to do - I am happy to volunteer to contact them if it is just > a case of waiting for someone to do it. Then I could pass those who need > advice on to Virginia ;-) (I said she might live to regret saying she would > handle all the newbies I could send her way) > Regards > Sheelagh > > > ============================== > Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate > your heritage! > http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > > > > ============================== > Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate > your heritage! > http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > >

Sheelagh Virginia and I are aware of this problem and have already done some work in this area (OK Virginia did the hard ground work). We are just waiting for some finishing touches to be done to the software to give both of us access to FreeBMD to remove such volunteers. Our most immediate attention will be given to the removal of volunteers who have registered on the system 2 or more times (the record is currently a volunteer with 6 SubmitterIDs). Allan Raymond [email protected] http://www.btinternet.com/~allan_raymond/Monarchies_of_Europe.htm FreeBMD - putting birth marriages and deaths on the Internet http://FreeBMD.rootsweb.com/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sheelagh Hawkins" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: 03 October 2001 19:00 Subject: Re: File Owning Dave et al, While we are on the subject of transcribers who are no longer active can I ask what the position is with the number of people who subscribed but have never actually transcribed anything. When I look at the status list, there are several hundred (a guess - I gave up at 120 and I was still on names beginning with A!) people who have never submitted a thing. I understand that some people help out in other ways so don't have time to do the manual graft, but surely not that many. Should these people be contacted to see if they intend to become active, or if they perhaps need help to get started. I realise that perhaps this is probably considered a minor problem on the list of things to do - I am happy to volunteer to contact them if it is just a case of waiting for someone to do it. Then I could pass those who need advice on to Virginia ;-) (I said she might live to regret saying she would handle all the newbies I could send her way) Regards Sheelagh ============================== Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate your heritage! http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog

Dave et al, While we are on the subject of transcribers who are no longer active can I ask what the position is with the number of people who subscribed but have never actually transcribed anything. When I look at the status list, there are several hundred (a guess - I gave up at 120 and I was still on names beginning with A!) people who have never submitted a thing. I understand that some people help out in other ways so don't have time to do the manual graft, but surely not that many. Should these people be contacted to see if they intend to become active, or if they perhaps need help to get started. I realise that perhaps this is probably considered a minor problem on the list of things to do - I am happy to volunteer to contact them if it is just a case of waiting for someone to do it. Then I could pass those who need advice on to Virginia ;-) (I said she might live to regret saying she would handle all the newbies I could send her way) Regards Sheelagh

On Wed, 3 Oct 2001 01:16:22 +0000, you wrote: >>Hi All, >>I've been trying to mould my brain around this concept of File >>Ownership and I am truly stumped. Why is it that a file of data, >>originating from FreeBMD, transcribed by a volunteer to FreeBMD, >>Uploaded to FreeBMD is considered to be the 'property' and >>responsibility of that transcriber? > ><snipped> > >>Regards >>Ian > >I have the same problem in understanding this concept. > >Surely there must be an ever increasing number of transcribers who >leave the project and disappear without trace. Indeed, and we are able to handle that situation. -- Dave Mayall

smithpock wrote: > > I agree wholeheartedly. It would also prevent any disenchanted transcribers taking their files away along with their bats! ???? And how would they do that? Although it might appear that a transcriber can remove all their files in a fit of pique, assuming that this is the case without knowing exactly how the system works can lead you to a false conclusion. FreeBMD has been written to protect against mistakes being made, so deleting a file does NOT actually delete the data, merely moves it to a deleted files area. A disgruntled user could easily TRY to delete their files, but we could very easily restore them again. > I have always thought this was a ridiculous system. Probably sensible in the beginning with few transcribes but now after growth and so many "dormant" members it has become outdated and in my opinion extremely insecure. In what way is it insecure?? On the contrary, it is very secure, particularly against rogue additions. Consider a scenario where somebody sought to damage FreeBMD by deliberately loading incorrect data. In our model, it is trivially easy to expunge the data. Without file ownership it would represent a monumental task. I appreciate that the model may seem slightly odd, BUT it has been chosen for a reason, and we are ensuring that the problems (dormant subscribers) can be addressed. -- Dave Mayall

I agree wholeheartedly. It would also prevent any disenchanted transcribers taking their files away along with their bats! I have always thought this was a ridiculous system. Probably sensible in the beginning with few transcribes but now after growth and so many "dormant" members it has become outdated and in my opinion extremely insecure. Jos ----- Original Message ----- From: Ian Brooke To: [email protected] Sent: 02 October 2001 22:31 Subject: File Owning Hi All, I've been trying to mould my brain around this concept of File Ownership and I am truly stumped. Why is it that a file of data, originating from FreeBMD, transcribed by a volunteer to FreeBMD, Uploaded to FreeBMD is considered to be the 'property' and responsibility of that transcriber? I see little sense and little advantage in it at all and it seems to create far more problems than solutions. I would have thought that most transcribers would be quite happy to finish a page, upload it and forget about it - FreeBMD could then move it from their upload area to a centralised repository. If changes were needed to that file it wouldn't be too difficult to find a responsible, experienced transcriber(s) willing to take on the task on behalf of the project as a whole. We immediately loose the problems of AWOL transcribers with files that 'no-one' can get at easily when they need changing. We can forget about our (imagined) problems of security of files ("I can't touch 'his' f! iles"), we don't have complaints from ex (and even current) transcribers when they receive emails pointing out mistakes in 'their' files and life generally seems to become simpler. What's the problem with this? I can't see one. Regards Ian ______________________________

Ian Brooke wrote: > > Hi All, > I've been trying to mould my brain around this concept of File Ownership and I am truly stumped. Why is it that a file of data, originating from FreeBMD, transcribed by a volunteer to FreeBMD, Uploaded to FreeBMD is considered to be the 'property' and responsibility of that transcriber? I see little sense and little advantage in it at all and it seems to create far more problems than solutions. I would have thought that most transcribers would be quite happy to finish a page, upload it and forget about it - FreeBMD could then move it from their upload area to a centralised repository. If changes were needed to that file it wouldn't be too difficult to find a responsible, experienced transcriber(s) willing to take on the task on behalf of the project as a whole. We immediately loose the problems of AWOL transcribers with files that 'no-one' can get at easily when they need changing. We can forget about our (imagined) problems of security of files ("I can't touch 'his'! f! > iles"), we don't have complaints from ex (and even current) transcribers when they receive emails pointing out mistakes in 'their' files and life generally seems to become simpler. > What's the problem with this? I can't see one. The idea of file ownership does bring advantages! 1) You can load a page with some unreadable stuff, then replace it later once you have had chance to look at entries again. 2) When a query comes in, it is quite likely that somebody central will not have a copy of the fiche to check the transcription. 3) Splitting the files out by transcriber allows us to identify any potential cases of seriously suspect files and to discard them. 4) Identifying by transcriber ensures that we can show that double keying was truly independent. 5) Ownership ensures that at the stage where we apply corrections to the data, there is no prospect of a "rogue" checker overwriting the data held. Much of the problem seems to result from people not appreciating the data model. The path of asking a transcriber to correct his data is very much part of the early process in the months immediately after transcription, prior to double transcription. Facilities are already being developed for the later stages of the project, where corrections to records will be applied by other people. These facilities will NOT involve editing the submitted files. -- Dave Mayall

Regarding the first part of your query - you are quite correct , at present you then need to delete the "sender" address before sending the email to the list. Re. the second part of your query - of all the mailing lists to which I belong only the "FreeBMD mailing lists" have the particular trait of sending responses to both the "sender" and list. Of the non FreeBMD mailing lists I have not encountered the "mail-loop" scenario. Allan Raymond [email protected] http://www.btinternet.com/~allan_raymond/Monarchies_of_Europe.htm FreeBMD - putting birth marriages and deaths on the Internet http://FreeBMD.rootsweb.com/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Hattam" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: 02 October 2001 15:47 Subject: Re: cryptic handwritten entry A "reply to all" sends a message to the sender *and* to the list. Does this only work in Eudora, or also in Outlook / Outlook Express? Won't setting the "reply-to-address" to the list potentially make a mail-loop and we'll get erroring messages bouncing around? Mark - - At 11:46 am +0100 2/10/01, Allan Raymond wrote: >I am all for having the "reply-to address set back to the list". > >Not everyone may be aware that clicking the "reply to sender" means >actually that. >I get a lot of emails sent personally to me rather returned via the >appropriate >list. > >Allan Raymond > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Dave Mayall" <[email protected]> >To: <[email protected]> >Sent: 02 October 2001 08:19 >Subject: Re: cryptic handwritten entry > >On Mon, 1 Oct 2001 22:02:37 +0100, you wrote: > >I was thinking actually, we should have the reply-to address set back >to the list, to try and ensure that replies go via the list. > >-- >Dave Mayall ============================== Create a FREE family website at MyFamily.com! http://www.myfamily.com/banner.asp?ID=RWLIST2

>Hi All, >I've been trying to mould my brain around this concept of File >Ownership and I am truly stumped. Why is it that a file of data, >originating from FreeBMD, transcribed by a volunteer to FreeBMD, >Uploaded to FreeBMD is considered to be the 'property' and >responsibility of that transcriber? <snipped> >Regards >Ian I have the same problem in understanding this concept. Surely there must be an ever increasing number of transcribers who leave the project and disappear without trace. -- Best regards Dick Jones Leigh-on-Sea Essex UK mailto://[email protected]

Mark Hattam wrote: > > You can delete the unwanted one(s) from the To: line of the reply ... But most people don't. > but two emails is probably better than none. You probably wouldn't say that if you had as many e-mails coming in every day as I do :-) > May have an advantage too where the person being replied to is on > Digest Mode, but the reply gets to him/her straight away. Could be > argued both ways. Yes (IIRC, if we set reply-to then a "reply all" will also send a copy direct to the sender). Then again, people join the Digest version because they DON'T want an immediate individual reply. > As long as mail loops aren't set up, why not? :-) -- Dave Mayall

You can delete the unwanted one(s) from the To: line of the reply ... but two emails is probably better than none. May have an advantage too where the person being replied to is on Digest Mode, but the reply gets to him/her straight away. Could be argued both ways. As long as mail loops aren't set up, why not? Mark - - At 3:51 pm +0100 2/10/01, Dave Mayall wrote: >Mark Hattam wrote: >> >> A "reply to all" sends a message to the sender *and* to the list. >> Does this only work in Eudora, or also in Outlook / Outlook Express? > >That is correct, however that means; >1) If somebody forgets to "reply to all", the list doesn't see the reply >2) People get 2 copies of mails once via the list and once direct. These > people then send e-mails to [email protected] to say > our mail is broken. (this is in addition to people who send mail > to say that our mail is broken when they get a reply to somebody > else's question via the list!) > >> Won't setting the "reply-to-address" to the list potentially make a >> mail-loop and we'll get erroring messages bouncing around? > >Nope. > >Bounces go to the envelope-sender, not reply-to. > >-- >Dave Mayall