John 1. I wish you well in any new Syndicate? 2. http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/scan-source2.html indicates which Scans events/periods have been allocated to which Syndicates. Bear in mind there is sometimes a time lag between when I request the Web Page to be updated and when it comes live (temporary Web Page at: http://www.btinternet.com/~allan_raymond/FreeBMD_Scan_Source_Temp.html is available during the intervening period) . The Web Pages shows authorised double keying for all to see. 3. http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/cgi/bmd-synd.pl indicates in totality which events/periods have been allocated to which Syndicates, this is independent of the methods of providing source to Syndicate members. This shows authorised double keying for all to see, this is normally up to date as I have access to undertake the necessary corrections. 4. I am certain I have already emailed you off list regarding your option to opt out of double keying when you first raised the issue. 5. 5000 transcribers don't mean they are all active, volunteers come and go. Unfortunately some are no longer with us, others decide they are unable to continue due to ill health and the like whilst other take a sabbatical as you did for a two year period or so. Regardless of whether a volunteer transcribes 1 record or a million records they are still contributing to the project. 6, What I need most is to be able to carry out my tasks to the best of my ability without the need to keep revisiting old chestnuts. We are making great strides and for me to say otherwise would do a great disservice to those volunteers who keep to themselves and just get on with the task in hand. I feel I have said as much as I can on this subject. Allan Raymond -----Original Message----- From: John Fairlie <john.fairlie@blueyonder.co.uk> To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Date: 11 September 2003 08:31 Subject: RE: Shortage of Scans >Allan and all, > >It is certainly an option for me to change syndicates, and I will consider >that. Can it be clarified please what syndicates do what, and how well >stocked each are with source. I for one never actually chose my current >syndicate (Web Scan), it was just what we all were swept into when posting >fiche's about was found to be impractical. Hence the name of that >syndicate. So I might assume that others would rather be employed single >keying new records in a different syndicate than second keying in the one >they are in at the moment as well. > >But with respect, you have still not answered the question!! You are >allocating typeset material to two syndicates at the same time. If you are >telling the syndicate leaders so, they are certainly not telling the >transcribers when they allocate pages. I have particularly requested first >keyings because I want to move that side of the project forward fastest, and >the project themselves have said that second keying has not been officially >rolled out yet. And I STILL get second keyings! All this while early >hand-written remains waiting for first keying. > >I will ask again.....If the shortage of scans is not the limiting factor in >moving the project forward faster - what is? Do we want more transcribers? >82,000 records a day may sound good, indeed it IS good, but with 5,000 >transcribers, it only averages 16 records a day each. I still feel the >project could be moved forward faster if you say what you need most. > >I will leave the subject of us buying scans from 1837online to Dave Mayall >to answer publicly then. He has already kindly exchanged with me off list. > >John Fairlie >Mail us at ..... john@fairlie.plus.com > john.fairlie@blueyonder.co.uk >Home page... http://www.fairlie.plus.com > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Allan Raymond [mailto:allan_raymond@btinternet.com] >Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:31 AM >To: john.fairlie@blueyonder.co.uk; FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com >Subject: Re: Shortage of Scans > > >John > >I requested you to redirect your private reply to the DISCUSS list as the >discussion started off here and should finish here. > >You are entitled to you opinion as to whether you believe what I say is >correct or incorrect. > >I can only state the facts. > >If I can direct you to the FreeBMD-Admins-L Archives and ask you to browse >for the following item from Dave Mayall > >*************************************************************************** * >******* >From: Dave Mayall <david.mayall@ukonline.co.uk> >Subject: Scanned Source availability >Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 15:35:01 +0000 > >For many months, an oft repeated (and valid) criticism has been that there >is a >shortage of scanned source material, and/or that the scanned source has been >of >poor quality. > etc etc. >*************************************************************************** * >***** > >Progress HAS been made in some of the scanning mentioned in Dave's email >above. Dave and I are in discussion on what still needs to be done to >provide scans for all years not previously catered for. This either means >providing scans where none currently exits or replacing the poor qualiy >scans. This will be undertaken by Archive CD Books as per Dave's email above > >I would have come back a little earlier in my response, but I was arranging >for more available scans to be added to the Scan Allocation Web Page. > >Volunteers are totally at liberty to decline to participate in double >keying. > >If you feel so inclined I will use my best endevours to place you with a >Syndicate who is single keying earlier years. Please let me know if this >avenue suits you best? > >Allan Raymond > >-----Original Message----- >From: John Fairlie <john.fairlie@blueyonder.co.uk> >To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> >Date: 10 September 2003 22:24 >Subject: RE: Shortage of Scans > > >>Allan, >> >>But there IS a shortage of scans!! You allocated 1882D3 to both Scan2 and >>Webscan!! Net result: despite me stressing to Linda Bailey that I did NOT >>want second keyings, I am now duplicating what John Renner and Lucille >>Hambling are doing! i.e., 1882D3 pages 11-35 are mine, but Lucille is >doing >>27-36 and John Renner is doing 17-25. >> >>Meanwhile, many gaps exist between 1837, and (generally) the time when >>typeset starts. >> >>You speak with forked tongue!!! >> >>[This e-mail originally sent privately to Allan, but at his prompt, is >being >>sent publicly] >> >>John Fairlie >>Mail us at ..... john@fairlie.plus.com >> john.fairlie@blueyonder.co.uk >>Home page... http://www.fairlie.plus.com >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Allan Raymond [mailto:allan_raymond@btinternet.com] >>Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 9:54 PM >>To: john.fairlie@blueyonder.co.uk; FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com >>Subject: Re: Shortage of Scans >> >> >>I'm don't have the authority to answer about 1837online. >> >>However I am competent to answer the other queries. >> >>Good quality scans were provided to all Syndicates who requested them, very >>recently. More on their way. >> >>We are taking on 6 new volunteers every day. >> >>2 Syndicates are currently accepting new volunteers. >> >>82,000 records added every day, if this isn't moving towards our target I >>don't know what is. >> >>If you are having difficulty in obtaining more source material to >transcribe >>please let me know and I should be able to place you with a Syndicate who >>can oblige? >> >>Allan Raymond >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: John Fairlie <john.fairlie@blueyonder.co.uk> >>To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> >>Date: 10 September 2003 21:14 >>Subject: Shortage of Scans >> >> >>>If the project is slowed by the shortage of decent scans, why don't we get >>>scans from 1837online.com? OK, OK, I know we have to pay for them, but we >>>are currently having to buy film from GRO, buy expensive scanners and do >>>scanning, all of which costs FreeBMD money. It has all already been done >>by >>>the 1837online chaps. >>> >>>And if the shortage of scans is not the limiting factor in moving the >>>project forward faster - what is? Do we want more transcribers? >>> >>>John Fairlie >>>Mail us at ..... john@fairlie.plus.com >>> john.fairlie@blueyonder.co.uk >>>Home page... http://www.fairlie.plus.com >>> >>> >>>============================== >>>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 >> >> > > > >============================== >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 very happy with the new Age at Death function. I (and probably many others) made the request a long time back - and looking through the algorithmic notes provided (if you follow the links from the HELP) had not realised the complications of the computations need. So - thank you all involved. It found one of my rellies! Keith