Hi What about appointing some adjudicators that have access to FRC and have them check disputed records from the actual indexes. These can then be taken as the definitive records and the respective transcribers can then amend their records accordingly. Otherwise we will be in the area of decreasing circles until an orifice appears to disappear into. Regards John Researching - Hykin (Anywhere) Pai(y)n(e) from Kent 1800's Conde Salop. Anytime ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Mayall <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 9:01 PM Subject: Re: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-D Digest V01 #98 > On Fri, 7 Sep 2001 02:01:55 +1000, you wrote: > > > Dave Mayall wrote..... > >>"As transcription and more formal checking proceeds, the people who are given >responsibility for deciding between 2 variant readings by different transcribers will be given >appropriate access to flag entries as incorrect (although they STILL can't alter what you have > >>transcribed)" > > > >Don't know if there may be some technical, philosophical, or logical) reason against this idea..... > >if people go to all the trouble to look at the variant readings and decide which one is *definitely* correct; then wouldn't it be better that they be given access to alter what is incorrect and and have *their* id placed against the corrected entry? > > We want to recognise that even the person resolving the differences > might be wrong, so; > > 1) They *will* enter the correction under their ID. > 2) The site will show the "adjudication" as the "favoured" reading, > but will still note that there was doubt and that transcriber "abc123" > felt it should read "1234" > > -- > Dave Mayall > > > ============================== > Create a FREE family website at MyFamily.com! > http://www.myfamily.com/banner.asp?ID=RWLIST2 >

On Fri, 7 Sep 2001 02:01:55 +1000, you wrote: > Dave Mayall wrote..... >>"As transcription and more formal checking proceeds, the people who are given >responsibility for deciding between 2 variant readings by different transcribers will be given >appropriate access to flag entries as incorrect (although they STILL can't alter what you have >>transcribed)" > >Don't know if there may be some technical, philosophical, or logical) reason against this idea..... >if people go to all the trouble to look at the variant readings and decide which one is *definitely* correct; then wouldn't it be better that they be given access to alter what is incorrect and and have *their* id placed against the corrected entry? We want to recognise that even the person resolving the differences might be wrong, so; 1) They *will* enter the correction under their ID. 2) The site will show the "adjudication" as the "favoured" reading, but will still note that there was doubt and that transcriber "abc123" felt it should read "1234" -- Dave Mayall

Hi, On 7 Sep 2001, at 2:01, Steve wrote: Date forwarded: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 09:56:33 -0600 From: "Steve" <[email protected]> > Dave Mayall wrote..... > >"As transcription and more formal checking proceeds, the people who > >are given >responsibility for deciding between 2 variant readings by > >different transcribers will be given >appropriate access to flag > >entries as incorrect (although they STILL can't alter what you have > >transcribed)" > > Don't know if there may be some technical, philosophical, or logical) > reason against this idea..... if people go to all the trouble to look > at the variant readings and decide which one is *definitely* correct; > then wouldn't it be better that they be given access to alter what is > incorrect and and have *their* id placed against the corrected entry? Of course, the checker can just submit their own version of an entry. This doesn't need any special programming, but the person with the correction does need to make some effort. Cheers Camilla -- Camilla Gemmingen von Massenbach Email: [email protected] FreeBMD co-founder http://FreeBMD.RootsWeb.com/ IIGS member http://www.iigs.org/ Personal site: http://www.links.org/surnames.htm

Steve wrote: > > Yesterday I received an e-mail from someone who described himself as a syndicate co-ordinator and commented on what he thought one of my transcribed entries should have been. > > He'd had an enquiry from one of his volunteers, checked the source data, and mailed me to tell me what he "definetely" (sic) thought it was; and then asked me if I would edit the file. > > He also saw fit to mention a point relating to the use of asterisks, even though the way that I had entered it was appropriate for what I saw as "multiple unreadable characters". > > The issues this raises for me are:- > 1. Just because he said that he is a syndicate co-ordinator doesn't neccessarily mean he is. He could be anyone one of a million people who have stumbled onto the FreeBMD website. > 2. Even taking it on face value that he is a syndicate co-ordinator, he is not *my* syndicate co-ordinator or one of the Admin people and therefore his *opinion* on what he sees carries only as much weight as any other transcriber. I'm not in the least bit interested in receiving heaps of e-mails from people who think that just because an entry is a *definite* for them, that I should therefore amend what I have seen. I work on the basis of "type exactly what you see" except when I am unsure of the characters involved. Even after having another look at the scan file I thought there was still some uncertainty. > 3. File ownership:- if the files/entries I have sent to FreeBMD are to be carrying my name and my e-mail address, then to me it makes sense that *I* have to be satisfied in my own mind about what I have seen and transcribed; not to be told by a syndicate co-ordinator or anyone else what editing I *should* do because of what they "definetely" see in a scan. The alternative that I see to this is once a file is sent to FreeBMD, then transcribers give up all rights and responsibilities for their content and admin people or veteran transcribers fix up any errors contained therein. > > What do others think? In essence, I think you have about the right slant on it Steve. At the initial transcription phase, we have provision for peer feedback about mistakes (and we all make them!) Such feedback can only *ever* be a suggestion that the transcriber look again at an entry, and decide; a) that he stands by the original transcription b) that he agrees with the original transcription c) that he believes there is now doubt and changes a certain entry to uncertain Whether the sender of the e-mail is or is not a co-ordinator make no particular difference to the process of analysing the entry, BUT it does provide a useful filtering mechanism for those of us who deal will lots of these feedback e-mails. "I am a co-ordinator and I think this is wrong because..." is far more use than "This person is my GGGF and he always used this spelling..." As transcription and more formal checking proceeds, the people who are given responsibility for deciding between 2 variant readings by different transcribers will be given appropriate access to flag entries as incorrect (although they STILL can't alter what you have transcribed) -- Dave Mayall

Hi Raymond Ian tells me it's a bug, winbmd automatically capitalizes +page, I did try entering uppercase but still got the error message. thanks anyway eddie [email protected] South coast of Hampshire, England ----- Original Message ----- From: "Allan Raymond" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 7:21 PM Subject: Re: winbmd help > Try +PAGE,003 > > (PAGE in upper case) > > 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: "eddie allen" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: 04 September 2001 18:30 > Subject: winbmd help > > > Hi list > > What is the proper way to enter the '+page' line at the end of the file. > > If I enter +Page,003 I get an invalid page number error, however if I enter +Page > with no number it's ok. > > regards > > eddie > [email protected] > > South coast of Hampshire, England > > > ============================== > 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 > >

Try +PAGE,003 (PAGE in upper case) 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: "eddie allen" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: 04 September 2001 18:30 Subject: winbmd help Hi list What is the proper way to enter the '+page' line at the end of the file. If I enter +Page,003 I get an invalid page number error, however if I enter +Page with no number it's ok. regards eddie [email protected] South coast of Hampshire, England ============================== Search over 1 Billion names at Ancestry.com! http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp

Thanks Ian Sorry, I obviously did not study the menus closely enough. regards eddie [email protected] South coast of Hampshire, England ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ian Brooke" <[email protected]> To: "eddie allen" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 4:44 PM Subject: Re: winbmd - request to Ian > Hi Eddie, > There is an item on the Options menu called "Warnings include 1 letter > names". If this item is NOT ticked (not checked) then these messages don't > appear. Personally, I think it's better to have a choice how you want the > program to behave :o) > Ian > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "eddie allen" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 8:40 AM > Subject: winbmd - request to Ian > > > > Hi Ian & list > > > > When Initials are entered in the forename field the box comes up to ask if > I wish to add them to the picklist, would it be possible to eliminate this > for initials. In one case I had the following entry:- > > > > Tollemache,Mabel H E H B B E V de L de O P T S,Grantham,7a,443 > > > > This would generate 14 requests to add to picklist. I must admit that I > prefer the speedbmd method which doesn't interrupt the flow of entering data > but retains the option. > > > > regards > > > > eddie > > [email protected] > > > > South coast of Hampshire, England > > > > > > ============================== > > Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate > > your heritage! > > http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > > > > >

Hi list What is the proper way to enter the '+page' line at the end of the file. If I enter +Page,003 I get an invalid page number error, however if I enter +Page with no number it's ok. regards eddie [email protected] South coast of Hampshire, England

Hi Ian & list When Initials are entered in the forename field the box comes up to ask if I wish to add them to the picklist, would it be possible to eliminate this for initials. In one case I had the following entry:- Tollemache,Mabel H E H B B E V de L de O P T S,Grantham,7a,443 This would generate 14 requests to add to picklist. I must admit that I prefer the speedbmd method which doesn't interrupt the flow of entering data but retains the option. regards eddie [email protected] South coast of Hampshire, England

Hi Eddie, Unfortunately what you are entering is correct but there is a bug in versions of the program prior to 2.0.8 which causes it to report an error - version 2.1.0 will be available shortly for download which will include this fix. Regards Ian ----- Original Message ----- From: "eddie allen" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 11:30 AM Subject: winbmd help > Hi list > > What is the proper way to enter the '+page' line at the end of the file. > > If I enter +Page,003 I get an invalid page number error, however if I enter +Page with no number it's ok. > > regards > > eddie > [email protected] > > South coast of Hampshire, England > > > ============================== > Search over 1 Billion names at Ancestry.com! > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/rwlist1.asp > >

Hi Eddie, There is an item on the Options menu called "Warnings include 1 letter names". If this item is NOT ticked (not checked) then these messages don't appear. Personally, I think it's better to have a choice how you want the program to behave :o) Ian ----- Original Message ----- From: "eddie allen" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 8:40 AM Subject: winbmd - request to Ian > Hi Ian & list > > When Initials are entered in the forename field the box comes up to ask if I wish to add them to the picklist, would it be possible to eliminate this for initials. In one case I had the following entry:- > > Tollemache,Mabel H E H B B E V de L de O P T S,Grantham,7a,443 > > This would generate 14 requests to add to picklist. I must admit that I prefer the speedbmd method which doesn't interrupt the flow of entering data but retains the option. > > regards > > eddie > [email protected] > > South coast of Hampshire, England > > > ============================== > Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate > your heritage! > http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > >

Hi there , should I panic?!!!!! I have just read that our Passwords should not be entered in the heading of our Batches. I entered mine in the very first file and it is still there. Should I go in to each file and delete it? Mind you I wouldn't know what to do with the files I have already uploaded. Audrey

Yesterday I received an e-mail from someone who described himself as a syndicate co-ordinator and commented on what he thought one of my transcribed entries should have been. He'd had an enquiry from one of his volunteers, checked the source data, and mailed me to tell me what he "definetely" (sic) thought it was; and then asked me if I would edit the file. He also saw fit to mention a point relating to the use of asterisks, even though the way that I had entered it was appropriate for what I saw as "multiple unreadable characters". The issues this raises for me are:- 1. Just because he said that he is a syndicate co-ordinator doesn't neccessarily mean he is. He could be anyone one of a million people who have stumbled onto the FreeBMD website. 2. Even taking it on face value that he is a syndicate co-ordinator, he is not *my* syndicate co-ordinator or one of the Admin people and therefore his *opinion* on what he sees carries only as much weight as any other transcriber. I'm not in the least bit interested in receiving heaps of e-mails from people who think that just because an entry is a *definite* for them, that I should therefore amend what I have seen. I work on the basis of "type exactly what you see" except when I am unsure of the characters involved. Even after having another look at the scan file I thought there was still some uncertainty. 3. File ownership:- if the files/entries I have sent to FreeBMD are to be carrying my name and my e-mail address, then to me it makes sense that *I* have to be satisfied in my own mind about what I have seen and transcribed; not to be told by a syndicate co-ordinator or anyone else what editing I *should* do because of what they "definetely" see in a scan. The alternative that I see to this is once a file is sent to FreeBMD, then transcribers give up all rights and responsibilities for their content and admin people or veteran transcribers fix up any errors contained therein. What do others think? Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2001 6:00 AM Subject: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-D Digest V01 #95

Hi Steve I maintain the list of Syndicate co-ordinators, so if you would like to email details off list I can verify his credentials for you. You may wish to elaborate on the point about "use of asterisks" to enable an informed comment to be made on your concerns. It may very well be that the source used by the "co-ordinator" was the original from which the scans were made and therefore may be a more pristine copy for identifying possible transcription errors. My own personal opinion is that until we start the formal "Transcription and Verification Process" as defined in http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/process.html it is up the to the actual transcriber of the record to decide what is correct. The caveat on this is that some Syndicate co-ordinators already undertake their own verification process (which is quite separate to the formal "Transcription and Verification Process") and therefore transcribers in these particular syndicates may be requested to amend their files after verification by the co-ordinator. Again on a personal front I agree with your comments in para 3 that you have to be satisfied that you agree with any suggested amendments. 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: "Steve" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: 01 September 2001 23:19 Subject: Re: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-D Digest V01 #95 Yesterday I received an e-mail from someone who described himself as a syndicate co-ordinator and commented on what he thought one of my transcribed entries should have been. He'd had an enquiry from one of his volunteers, checked the source data, and mailed me to tell me what he "definetely" (sic) thought it was; and then asked me if I would edit the file. He also saw fit to mention a point relating to the use of asterisks, even though the way that I had entered it was appropriate for what I saw as "multiple unreadable characters". The issues this raises for me are:- 1. Just because he said that he is a syndicate co-ordinator doesn't neccessarily mean he is. He could be anyone one of a million people who have stumbled onto the FreeBMD website. 2. Even taking it on face value that he is a syndicate co-ordinator, he is not *my* syndicate co-ordinator or one of the Admin people and therefore his *opinion* on what he sees carries only as much weight as any other transcriber. I'm not in the least bit interested in receiving heaps of e-mails from people who think that just because an entry is a *definite* for them, that I should therefore amend what I have seen. I work on the basis of "type exactly what you see" except when I am unsure of the characters involved. Even after having another look at the scan file I thought there was still some uncertainty. 3. File ownership:- if the files/entries I have sent to FreeBMD are to be carrying my name and my e-mail address, then to me it makes sense that *I* have to be satisfied in my own mind about what I have seen and transcribed; not to be told by a syndicate co-ordinator or anyone else what editing I *should* do because of what they "definetely" see in a scan. The alternative that I see to this is once a file is sent to FreeBMD, then transcribers give up all rights and responsibilities for their content and admin people or veteran transcribers fix up any errors contained therein. What do others think? Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2001 6:00 AM Subject: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-D Digest V01 #95 ============================== Create a FREE family website at MyFamily.com! http://www.myfamily.com/banner.asp?ID=RWLIST2

Thanks, Ian I now have my source/scan ref # and have all along added the letter. For some reason (delerium, probably) it just suddenly seemed an odd coincidence. I was not looking forward to going back through my batches looking for letters to remove and thankfully now I won't have to. Thanks, again, to you Ian, and to the others who answered my queries. I'm all sorted now and back to transcribing. Regards Karen Davies

Hi Karen, It means that you ask your co-ordinator. However, some syndicates don't use this field in the same way and it may be that yours doesn't use it at all but you should still ask. A letter following the number indicates that this is a page inserted in the index afterwards - to hold omitted entries etc. They are perhaps more common than you think. Transcribe the entry at the indicate insert point exactly as it is written - including the letter. Regards Ian ----- Original Message ----- From: "Karen Davies" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 7:33 PM Subject: Back at it with questions > Hi list > I've been unable to get at my transcribing lately but am home with flu so thought I'd get back at it. I've downloaded WinBMD and love it but have a question pertaining to the Batch Header. There is a spot for Source/Scan Ref. The pop up message states that the reference for the data is allocated by my co-ordinator. Does this mean that I leave it blank for now or do I contact my co-ordinator for a reference number or is it the Batch ID number created when I select the event type, year, quarter etc.? > I have one other question unrelated to WinBMD. I have noticed on the index pages that where a person has been added by hand (written in at the bottom of the column with an "x" marking where it is to be inserted) the index number often, if not always, has what appears to be the letter "a" after it. Since index numbers followed by letters are rarely seen in the typed entries, I am wondering if this is actually some sort of shorthand mark which should not be part of the index number?? > Thanks > Karen Davies > > > > ============================== > Create a FREE family website at MyFamily.com! > http://www.myfamily.com/banner.asp?ID=RWLIST2 > >

Hi list I've been unable to get at my transcribing lately but am home with flu so thought I'd get back at it. I've downloaded WinBMD and love it but have a question pertaining to the Batch Header. There is a spot for Source/Scan Ref. The pop up message states that the reference for the data is allocated by my co-ordinator. Does this mean that I leave it blank for now or do I contact my co-ordinator for a reference number or is it the Batch ID number created when I select the event type, year, quarter etc.? I have one other question unrelated to WinBMD. I have noticed on the index pages that where a person has been added by hand (written in at the bottom of the column with an "x" marking where it is to be inserted) the index number often, if not always, has what appears to be the letter "a" after it. Since index numbers followed by letters are rarely seen in the typed entries, I am wondering if this is actually some sort of shorthand mark which should not be part of the index number?? Thanks Karen Davies

On Aug 28 Andrew Billinghurst wroteto FREEBMD Admins L List.... "To everyone here. This list is solely for the discussion of the FreeBMD project. It is not for virus warnings, no matter the good nature or however well intentioned. The simple fact is that you are just as likely to get a virus from a friend or acquaintance (maybe more likely) than you are from someone completely unknown. This is because most of the viruses/worms affect Outlook Express (aka Virus Express) addressbooks, and you are more likely to be in a friend's addressbook than an unknown person's. Sending broadband warnings doesn't affect how we deal with email. Those who don't care or don't understand, don't listen; while those who do care already have virus protection, so no point in warning us...... etc, etc, etc........" Yes Andrew, I may be just as likely to get a virus from a friend or acquaintance, but that doesn't mean that the "completely unknowns" who subscribe to the Admins list have never sent me e-mails, or have me in their address books. I have previously received an e-mail with an attachment from one of these "unknowns" that was warned about through the Admins list. My virus/worm tally from friends and acquaitances currently stands at nil. I also think that it is a huge assumption that "those who don't care or don't understand, dont listen"! Maybe some people don't understand, but this may be the very point in time when they decide that they had better do something about it. As for the Admin list being "solely for discussion of the FreeBMD project"; my understanding (and I'm sure I'll be corrected if wrong) is that the Admins list is "a Questions and Answers forum for transcribers and volunteers. Answers to questions will come from experienced transcribers who are familiar with the whole project. Answers that reflect practice within a particular syndicate or which reflect the opinion of a transcriber as to a better way of doing things are not allowed. However, there has been plenty of messages to the list that do not fit that criteria. I'm just wondering why worm/virus warnings in particular is something that you are critical of, or am I missing something and are you responding to all the other improper messages that end up in the Admins list? Steve

Keith Tinkler wrote: >Is there any way we can build known pairings into the results eventually - or would we require an ancillary, or entirely independent, site to which people with certificates could submit known pairings? I wholeheartedly agree. It would go against the ethos of 'type what you see', but it would give additional helpful information to searchers, where that data is known for pre-1912 marriages. The main limitation is that it would depend on personal research data and would be independent of the transcription process. At the present time the amount of personal data submitted to FreeBMD as a proportion of the 15 million entries is small, and may not justify the programming necessary. Dave Mayall would want to comment on the programming and indexing implications, but I suspect that links would have to be as supplementary data and be the responsibility of the contributor. Having said that I would like to see the links included. Perhaps BDMExchange (if they are back online) could contribute and provide an additional link. Peter Hendy-Ibbs -- Researching: IBBS from Hunts/Beds and HENDY from Pembrokeshire Transcribing and reformatting for FreeBMD (http://freebmd.rootsweb.com)

Dr. Mellor Wrote >I do not think there are enough hours in the day to program this thing. I am already totally bogged down. Every time I open speedbmd I get a blue page which says STOP in line 0 of module BMD BAT at address 2081: 0982. Sorry, but this is too complicated for me. NM< So sorry to disagree but I think the SpeedBMD programme is great. After I downloaded the programme and before I tried transcribing anything I looked at, and did, the 'Tutorial'. I find the programme easy to use. Oh dear, I do hope my little gloat isn't tempting fate! Audrey