Over the past couple of weeks I have had enquires from people who appear to be using their work place computers. As nearly all companies do not allow their employees access to download programs or upload files to the internet. Would it be possible to place a note on the home page stating that volunteers must have the ability to download/upload files to the internet. The only place I can find any reference to this is on the http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/7steps.shtml half way down the page, or have I missed it on the home page. thanks Keith Gandalf(uk)

Garry Useful to give your colleagues a reminder about this facility. However, I assumed all Co-ordinators were aware of this link as I mention it in my regular emails regarding "Deletion of Volunteers From FreeBMD". Allan Raymond -----Original Message----- From: Kiwiz <[email protected]> To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Date: 16 November 2004 21:50 Subject: Show all files uploaded Just in case you don't know. Co-Ords can view all of one members uploaded files at any time here http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/show-file.pl Just enter the users SubmitterID in the Users box and leave the File box blank. On the page produced is a list of files with a clickable link to view each file. The list is in real time so has all uploads in it up to it's creation. Garry Kiwiz

Hi I have a number of people in my syndicate who, when they send me a copy of a completed page, the file always arrive with the wrong name, and have the .dat extension (instead of bmd or sca). Any suggestions as to how they come up with these files so I can assist them in sending the correct ones, and suggest on what they might be doing wrong. In most cases, requests for the correct file in the correct file are responded to without any problem. Thanks As an added note, with most of these .dat files, I am able to open them and they usually contain the correct data, and the headers are generally right.

To Syndicate Co-ordinators The latest update (14/11/2004) of the Suspect Report shows a further reduction in the number of Suspect Files. We are now down to 130 Suspect Files and any help you can give in reducing this still further would be appreciated? I'm aware and grateful a number of Co-ordinators are assisting in getting this list down to manageable proportions. In particular, Derek (Scan 2 Syndicate), John (John Pain Syndicate), Brian (Brian's Scan Syndicate), Teri (Western Oz Synd), Sue (The Recordsmiths Syndicate) and Tony (FreeLoaders Syndicates) have advised they are are dealing with their volunteers to correct their suspect files and therefore to avoid duplication of effort I won't be contacting these same volunteers. If any other Co-ordinators are actively involved in sorting out the suspect files of their volunteers could they please let me know ASAP? Co-ordinators can disregard any files where the problem is shown as "Too many entries between +PAGE" as the chances are I'm already working on eliminating these files from the Suspect Report. Some Co-ordinators are waiting for me supply them with "Challenge" details for some of their volunteers to enable them to take over ownership of the volunteers File Management to correct Suspect Files. I hope to complete any outstanding requests later today. Thanks Allan Raymond ---Original Message----- From: Allan Raymond <[email protected]> To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Date: 01 October 2004 23:10 Subject: Suspect files To Co-ordinators Most of you will be aware I have been actively involved with the co-operation of others to eliminate all the suspect files in the Suspect Report at: http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/SuspectFiles.html There were lots of suspects file way back on 23 February 2003 which was whittled down to about 400 by 8 Oct 2003. By 17 September 2004 it had been substantially reduced to less than 30 suspect files and was going down on a daily basis. We are continually tweaking the Suspect Report criteria to weed out more suspect files. Barrie Archer recently identified some file which unfortunately do not conform to our highly recommended naming convention and therefore weren't being picked up the Suspect Report. This situation has been corrected and the most recent Suspect Report picks up these files. The net result is an increase in the number of files in the Suspect Report. I've already started to take action in sorting out some of the suspect files and there are about a further 650 files still to be sorted out. The co-operation of Co-ordinators in checking the Suspect Report on a regular weekly basis to identify and assist any of their volunteers with suspect files would be appreciated. I find I'm spending a lot of time dealing with volunteers who have suspect files which is an area perhaps better dealt with by the intervention of Co-ordinators. There may be a surprise for some Co-ordinators if they visited Suspect Report! I monitor the number of suspect files on a daily basis and my aim is to get the list down to zero figures by the end of December 2004. I'm actively involved in correcting the files of one volunteer who has the predominate number of suspect files. Regards Alan Raymond ==== FREEBMD-SYNDICATES Mailing List ==== Want to help FreeBMD? Go to http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/Signup.html to find out how. ============================== Jumpstart your genealogy with OneWorldTree. Search not only for ancestors, but entire generations. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13972/rd.ashx

Tuesday, November 9, 2004, 10:23:56 PM Hi, One of my new transcribers has been trying to upload a file and persistently receives this message; "Error number 11004 - valid name, no data record of requested type. Please report this error." What action should she take? -- Regards, Tony

Tony, That is a very common error which happens usually when the FreeBMD website is overloaded and unable to respond to WinBMD's upload request in time. It is often the case that the file has actually been uploaded and the transcriber should login via Manage Your Files and check that first. If the file is there and complete then there is nothing else needed, otherwise they will just have to try the upload again at a less busy time. Ian ----- Original Message ----- From: Tony Meighan To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 4:29 AM Subject: Advice please! Tuesday, November 9, 2004, 10:23:56 PM Hi, One of my new transcribers has been trying to upload a file and persistently receives this message; "Error number 11004 - valid name, no data record of requested type. Please report this error." What action should she take? -- Regards, Tony ==== FREEBMD-SYNDICATES Mailing List ==== Need to get a fast answer to your transcribing problems? Go to the Transcribers Knowledge Base at http://FreeBMD.RootsWeb.com/vol_faq.html ============================== Expand your family tree. Search more than 200 million names in Ancestry.com's United Kingdom & Ireland Collection. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13968/rd.ashx --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.791 / Virus Database: 535 - Release Date: 08/11/2004

I thought this was already covered at: http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/vol_faq.html#13i If you were looking for something different please let me know? Allan Raymond -----Original Message----- From: Keith Simpson <[email protected]> To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Date: 07 November 2004 17:49 Subject: FW: Re Better Sources Within Syndicates Discussion I agree with Dave and Jeff. Would it not be wise to place a mention on the question and answer page about using outside sources. I am frequently asked by transcribers in my group if they can use 1837 Online to clarify an entry. Keith Gandalf(uk) ==== FREEBMD-SYNDICATES Mailing List ==== Need to get a fast answer to your transcribing problems? Go to the Transcribers Knowledge Base at http://FreeBMD.RootsWeb.com/vol_faq.html ============================== OneWorldTree - The World's largest family tree. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13971/rd.ashx

Discussion I agree with Dave and Jeff. Would it not be wise to place a mention on the question and answer page about using outside sources. I am frequently asked by transcribers in my group if they can use 1837 Online to clarify an entry. Keith Gandalf(uk)

Hi I make it a requirement to follow the rule to add a comment in the Header if the trancribed data has been read from another source. I have noticed that some of my members do have access to better sources like; at their local FHL, local Library, 1837online, Gen Society or the original record books. I find this out because of my checking program, which checks all uploads and informs me of any comment lines in a header or transcription (begin with # ). From this information I allocate any poor quality scans to these members. Some of these scans are so bad they would produce 10-20% of the data on the scan, but if I give it to one of my members who checks all her work against film, she will get 95 - 100%, mostly 99%. In my small syndicate I have one member on film, one on Fiche, one on 1837online (better scans) and an elderly lady who travels free on London trains and checks against the original books in Middleton Rd, sadly she is one of my slowest at just 30 scans a year, but who's complaining, they're lovely copies. So if Co-Ords are interested in getting more out of your members abilities, try looking for this information when viewing their work on show-file or similar and take advantage of it by allocating correctly!. http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/show-file.pl Garry Kiwiz Synd.

Picking up the discussion -- >>In my small syndicate I have one member on film, one on Fiche, one on >>1837online (better scans) > > Sorry to be a wet blanket, but you *must* ensure that the transcriber > who is using 1837online stops doing so immediately. > > 1837online imposes conditions of use on its images, and transcribing > those images for FreeBMD is a blatant breach of those conditions. > Putting transcription files on the site which have been taken from > 1837online scans leaves us open to legal action by them. > > Whilst it is far from certain that they would actually win, we cannot > afford to become embroiled in such an action, and as such we cannot > under any circumstances allow transcriptions from 1837online to be > uploaded. > > -- > Dave Mayall --------- Recently one of my transcribers, having done a transcription carefully, used some spare credit for 1837online to get another copy and compare. Some of the numbers seemed to be different. He and I both checked, and are of the view that 1837online images must be digitally enhanced, rather than better originals. In one case a rather dodgy printed 3 on the FreeBMD scan had become an apparently clear 8 on the 1837online scan, where the page range from evidence of a number of other entries meant that it had to be a 3. There were other examples, less obvious. Just because 1837online scans look prettier, don't assume they are more accurate! I endorse Dave's instruction that 1837online images should not be used for transcribing. They won't open in WinBMD or BMDVerify anyway! Jeff --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 01/11/2004

On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 17:44:01 +1300, you wrote: >Hi >I make it a requirement to follow the rule to add a comment in the Header if the trancribed data has been read from another source. I have noticed that some of my members do have access to better sources like; at their local FHL, local Library, 1837online, Gen Society or the original record books. I find this out because of my checking program, which checks all uploads and informs me of any comment lines in a header or transcription (begin with # ). > >From this information I allocate any poor quality scans to these members. Some of these scans are so bad they would produce 10-20% of the data on the scan, but if I give it to one of my members who checks all her work against film, she will get 95 - 100%, mostly 99%. > >In my small syndicate I have one member on film, one on Fiche, one on 1837online (better scans) Sorry to be a wet blanket, but you *must* ensure that the transcriber who is using 1837online stops doing so immediately. 1837online imposes conditions of use on its images, and transcribing those images for FreeBMD is a blatant breach of those conditions. Putting transcription files on the site which have been taken from 1837online scans leaves us open to legal action by them. Whilst it is far from certain that they would actually win, we cannot afford to become embroiled in such an action, and as such we cannot under any circumstances allow transcriptions from 1837online to be uploaded. -- Dave Mayall

Quoting Ian Brooke <[email protected]>: > Hi All, > Is it just me or are others having problems with the website? Yesterday > (Wed, UK time) evening I couldn't get into upload-report, this afternoon > (Thu) I can't get into upload-report nor coordinator login. Each sits there > for about a minute then returns an http 400 Bad Request (Page not Found). > Perhaps the site is just overloaded again but if that's the cause then I've > never seen it as bad as this. It is *hugely* overloaded at present. Ever since BBC2 started running a series looking at genealogy a couple of weeks back, the site has seen a hike in usage. A couple of times, this has taken one of the servers over the edge, and left us with 3 servers trying to take the load. We have 2 new servers being commissioned NOW to ease the load, but apart from that there isn't a lot we can do. -- Dave Mayall ---------------------------------------------- This mail sent through http://www.ukonline.net

Here is the copy of an email I received from a new transcriber: "I have downloaded the relevant files but find the WinBMD programme difficult to work with because when I try to close the programme or a window within it tells me that the programme is not responding and will be closed. Is that a familiar problem or should I try the SpeedBMD programme? I am using W2000." I've asked him if anything else was running - including any AV program but have not had a reply yet. Anyone have any thoughts? -- Philip Powell Looking north across the Derwent Valley and Northumberland to The Cheviot

Hi All, Is it just me or are others having problems with the website? Yesterday (Wed, UK time) evening I couldn't get into upload-report, this afternoon (Thu) I can't get into upload-report nor coordinator login. Each sits there for about a minute then returns an http 400 Bad Request (Page not Found). Perhaps the site is just overloaded again but if that's the cause then I've never seen it as bad as this. Ian --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 02/11/2004

The latest update (03/11/2004) of the Suspect Report shows a further reduction in the number of Suspect Files. We are now down to 140 Suspect Files and any help you can give in reducing this still further would be appreciated? I'm aware and greatful a number of Co-ordinators are assisting in getting this list down to manageable proportions. In particular, Derek (Scan 2 Syndicate), John Mellors (John Pain Syndicate), Brian (Brian's Scan Syndicate) and Teri (Western Oz Synd) have advised they are are dealing with their volunteers to correct their suspect files and therefore to avoid duplication of effort I won't be contacting these same volunteers. If any other Co-ordinators are actively involved in sorting out the suspect files of their volunteers could they please let me know ASAP? Co-ordinators can disregard any files where the problem is shown as "Too many entries between +PAGE" as the chances are I'm already working on eliminating these files from the Suspect Report. Some Co-ordinators are waiting for me supply them with "Challenge" details for some of their volunteers to enable them to take over ownership of the volunteers File Management to correct Suspect Files. I hope to complete any outstanding requests later today. Thanks Allan Raymond -----Original Message----- From: Allan Raymond <[email protected]> To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Date: 01 October 2004 23:10 Subject: Suspect files To Co-ordinators Most of you will be aware I have been actively involved with the co-operation of others to eliminate all the suspect files in the Suspect Report at: http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/SuspectFiles.html There were lots of suspects file way back on 23 February 2003 which was whittled down to about 400 by 8 Oct 2003. By 17 September 2004 it had been substantially reduced to less than 30 suspect files and was going down on a daily basis. We are continually tweaking the Suspect Report criteria to weed out more suspect files. Barrie Archer recently identified some file which unfortunately do not conform to our highly recommended naming convention and therefore weren't being picked up the Suspect Report. This situation has been corrected and the most recent Suspect Report picks up these files. The net result is an increase in the number of files in the Suspect Report. I've already started to take action in sorting out some of the suspect files and there are about a further 650 files still to be sorted out. The co-operation of Co-ordinators in checking the Suspect Report on a regular weekly basis to identify and assist any of their volunteers with suspect files would be appreciated. I find I'm spending a lot of time dealing with volunteers who have suspect files which is an area perhaps better dealt with by the intervention of Co-ordinators. There may be a surprise for some Co-ordinators if they visited Suspect Report! I monitor the number of suspect files on a daily basis and my aim is to get the list down to zero figures by the end of December 2004. I'm actively involved in correcting the files of one volunteer who has the predominate number of suspect files. Regards Alan Raymond

I think this is a bug, so please raise a task. Barrie > -----Original Message----- > From: Ian Brooke [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 01 November 2004 23:08 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Upload Report > > > Hi All, > Before I start raising another unnecessary change request > (!), does anyone have any comment on the following..... > > The current upload report doesn't seem to properly order by > page number, instead it seems dependent upon the format that > the page number was entered by the transcriber. For example, > a recent report I ran (1910 M Q2) first shows all the page > numbers that are 4-chars with leading zeroes, then it starts > doing odd things (too odd to describe!) with those with 2 or > 3 etc chars without leading zeroes, etc. I would like it to > be changed so that it intelligently handles page number > formats and produces as close as possible to a correctly ordered list. > > If I hear nothing to the contrary then I shall raise a change > to that effect in a couple of days. > > Regards > Ian > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.786 / Virus Database: 532 - Release Date: 31/10/2004 > > > ==== FREEBMD-SYNDICATES Mailing List ==== > To find out about the FreeBMD project please start at http://FreeBMD.rootsweb.com ============================== Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx

Or a wild card! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Gaunt" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 3:31 AM Subject: Re: Upload Report >I request upload reports using the first entry to order the list. That way > the lsit is perfectly ordered and any discrepancies stand out immediately, > except where the lead name has the forename Male or Female > Steve Gaunt > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ian Brooke" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 12:08 AM > Subject: Upload Report > > >> Hi All, >> Before I start raising another unnecessary change request (!), does >> anyone > have any comment on the following..... >> >> The current upload report doesn't seem to properly order by page number, > instead it seems dependent upon the format that the page number was > entered > by the transcriber. For example, a recent report I ran (1910 M Q2) first > shows all the page numbers that are 4-chars with leading zeroes, then it > starts doing odd things (too odd to describe!) with those with 2 or 3 etc > chars without leading zeroes, etc. I would like it to be changed so that > it > intelligently handles page number formats and produces as close as > possible > to a correctly ordered list. >> >> If I hear nothing to the contrary then I shall raise a change to that > effect in a couple of days. >> >> Regards >> Ian >> >> >> --- >> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. >> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >> Version: 6.0.786 / Virus Database: 532 - Release Date: 31/10/2004 >> >> >> ==== FREEBMD-SYNDICATES Mailing List ==== >> To find out about the FreeBMD project please start at >> http://FreeBMD.rootsweb.com >> >> ============================== >> Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the >> areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. >> Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx >> > > > ==== FREEBMD-SYNDICATES Mailing List ==== > For those in -L mode, to unsubscribe from this mailing list please send > the command UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message to - > [email protected] > > ============================== > Search our Immigration Records and view names from multiple ports > ranging from 1500s - 1900s. Over 23 million records to view. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13967/rd.ashx > >

I request upload reports using the first entry to order the list. That way the lsit is perfectly ordered and any discrepancies stand out immediately, except where the lead name has the forename Male or Female Steve Gaunt ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ian Brooke" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 12:08 AM Subject: Upload Report > Hi All, > Before I start raising another unnecessary change request (!), does anyone have any comment on the following..... > > The current upload report doesn't seem to properly order by page number, instead it seems dependent upon the format that the page number was entered by the transcriber. For example, a recent report I ran (1910 M Q2) first shows all the page numbers that are 4-chars with leading zeroes, then it starts doing odd things (too odd to describe!) with those with 2 or 3 etc chars without leading zeroes, etc. I would like it to be changed so that it intelligently handles page number formats and produces as close as possible to a correctly ordered list. > > If I hear nothing to the contrary then I shall raise a change to that effect in a couple of days. > > Regards > Ian > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.786 / Virus Database: 532 - Release Date: 31/10/2004 > > > ==== FREEBMD-SYNDICATES Mailing List ==== > To find out about the FreeBMD project please start at > http://FreeBMD.rootsweb.com > > ============================== > Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the > areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. > Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx >

Ian You have a valid point regarding Upload Report where I am assuming you are using the "Show" facility. Although I have just run the report using "Show" to reproduce your problem it is extremely rare for me to use this facility as I find "Download" facility far better as an analysis tool which enables sort by page number totally disregarding leading zeroes. "Download" can readily pick up same pages transcribed by different volunteers, pages 124,125 and 126 for example, this you can't readily do if using the "Show" facility. "Download" can also pick up missing pages quite easily. As an aside, for those volunteers using WinBMD I wonder why the +PAGE in some of the files are missing the leading zeroes even though the header and file name are showing them? For example 1910M2B0013 (User Woodchurch +INFO,,xxxxxxxx,SEQUENCED,MARRIAGES #,9z,Sandra,Ian Brooke,1910M2B0013.BMD,10-Apr-2004,Y,N,N,B,0 #, +S,1910,Jun,ACDB-01,12-Apr-2004 +PAGE,13 PTS task seems the route to go. Allan Raymond -----Original Message----- From: Ian Brooke <[email protected]> To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Date: 01 November 2004 23:11 Subject: Upload Report Hi All, Before I start raising another unnecessary change request (!), does anyone have any comment on the following..... The current upload report doesn't seem to properly order by page number, instead it seems dependent upon the format that the page number was entered by the transcriber. For example, a recent report I ran (1910 M Q2) first shows all the page numbers that are 4-chars with leading zeroes, then it starts doing odd things (too odd to describe!) with those with 2 or 3 etc chars without leading zeroes, etc. I would like it to be changed so that it intelligently handles page number formats and produces as close as possible to a correctly ordered list. If I hear nothing to the contrary then I shall raise a change to that effect in a couple of days. Regards Ian --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.786 / Virus Database: 532 - Release Date: 31/10/2004 ==== FREEBMD-SYNDICATES Mailing List ==== To find out about the FreeBMD project please start at http://FreeBMD.rootsweb.com ============================== Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx

Hi All, Before I start raising another unnecessary change request (!), does anyone have any comment on the following..... The current upload report doesn't seem to properly order by page number, instead it seems dependent upon the format that the page number was entered by the transcriber. For example, a recent report I ran (1910 M Q2) first shows all the page numbers that are 4-chars with leading zeroes, then it starts doing odd things (too odd to describe!) with those with 2 or 3 etc chars without leading zeroes, etc. I would like it to be changed so that it intelligently handles page number formats and produces as close as possible to a correctly ordered list. If I hear nothing to the contrary then I shall raise a change to that effect in a couple of days. Regards Ian --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.786 / Virus Database: 532 - Release Date: 31/10/2004