On 09-06-2013 15:17, Lesley Robertson wrote: > Grrrr, > I've just had an email from someone wanting me to send him all of the > photos included in the burial ground section of my website! It's a > complete burial ground, there's a lot of photos (and work) there. I > politely replied that I wasn't willing to send them all, and that > there's no way that all of the people in the burial ground are related. > The answer's just come back that he has nearly all the names, so needs > all the pictures, but if I don't want to send him all of them, could he > just have those in a longish list.... > > I'm a bit reluctant to tell him that I know that there's several > unrelated lines among the more common surnames because I've checked the > families in case he demands the research notes as well! > > I don't mind helping people with ancestors in my OPS, but this is > seriously over the top! > > Grrrrr > Lesley Robertson Looks similar to me to one asking the whole family tree on some surname. I then think "can be found in the archives if you are willing to spend time". My scope here is "if he wants it he can get it at the respective graveyards". Willing to help but not on such a major work for own purposes. Richard -- Richard van Schaik f.m.a.vanschaikREMOVE@THISgmail.com http://www.fmavanschaik.nl/

On 9 Jun at 23:53, Richard van Schaik <f.m.a.vanschaikREMOVE@THISgmail.com> wrote: > On 09-06-2013 15:17, Lesley Robertson wrote: > > Grrrr, > > I've just had an email from someone wanting me to send him all of the > > photos included in the burial ground section of my website! It's a > > complete burial ground, there's a lot of photos (and work) there. I > > politely replied that I wasn't willing to send them all, and that > > there's no way that all of the people in the burial ground are > > related. The answer's just come back that he has nearly all the > > names, so needs all the pictures, but if I don't want to send him > > all of them, could he just have those in a longish list.... > > > > I'm a bit reluctant to tell him that I know that there's several > > unrelated lines among the more common surnames because I've checked > > the families in case he demands the research notes as well! > > > > I don't mind helping people with ancestors in my OPS, but this is > > seriously over the top! > > > > Grrrrr Lesley Robertson > > Looks similar to me to one asking the whole family tree on some > surname. I then think "can be found in the archives if you are willing > to spend time". My scope here is "if he wants it he can get it at the > respective graveyards". Willing to help but not on such a major work > for own purposes. That's more like it: I don't do pictures but have been known to make an entry or two into a family tree. The issue I am faced with is that I am not immortal and our infants are not too interested to working over all this dusty stuff. But at some time in the future it is likely that someone will actually take an interest again in the family tree. Where do they find it? The only finding place that I reckon will last is the internet itself. So I put all my hard won factoids and the odd less-than-factoid on an internet site and anyone can and does copy it, thus preserving it for their lifetime as well as mine. So: be grateful to those who would copy all your stuff, they are doing your descendants a favour. -- Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/

On 10-06-2013 15:35, Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote: > On 9 Jun at 23:53, Richard van Schaik > <f.m.a.vanschaikREMOVE@THISgmail.com> wrote: > >> On 09-06-2013 15:17, Lesley Robertson wrote: >>> Grrrr, >>> I've just had an email from someone wanting me to send him all of > the >>> photos included in the burial ground section of my website! It's a >>> complete burial ground, there's a lot of photos (and work) there. I >>> politely replied that I wasn't willing to send them all, and that >>> there's no way that all of the people in the burial ground are >>> related. The answer's just come back that he has nearly all the >>> names, so needs all the pictures, but if I don't want to send him >>> all of them, could he just have those in a longish list.... >>> >>> I'm a bit reluctant to tell him that I know that there's several >>> unrelated lines among the more common surnames because I've checked >>> the families in case he demands the research notes as well! >>> >>> I don't mind helping people with ancestors in my OPS, but this is >>> seriously over the top! >>> >>> Grrrrr Lesley Robertson >> >> Looks similar to me to one asking the whole family tree on some >> surname. I then think "can be found in the archives if you are willing >> to spend time". My scope here is "if he wants it he can get it at the >> respective graveyards". Willing to help but not on such a major work >> for own purposes. > > That's more like it: I don't do pictures but have been known to make an > entry or two into a family tree. The issue I am faced with is that I am > not immortal and our infants are not too interested to working over all > this dusty stuff. But at some time in the future it is likely that > someone will actually take an interest again in the family tree. Where > do they find it? The only finding place that I reckon will last is the > internet itself. So I put all my hard won factoids and the odd > less-than-factoid on an internet site and anyone can and does copy it, > thus preserving it for their lifetime as well as mine. > > So: be grateful to those who would copy all your stuff, they are doing > your descendants a favour. And they copy the mistakes you (or I) inadvertently made and those do get their own live? I made some other arrangement for my data hoping to keep it save for future generations. I know any arrangement has its pitfalls. Most is on my site but not all as part is far beyond my scope (but entered it), part less then three generations, part not reliable enough. The way I am thinking of conserves all and might enhance. Future will learn after I've stopped learning. Richard -- Richard van Schaik f.m.a.vanschaikREMOVE@THISgmail.com http://www.fmavanschaik.nl/

On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 01:17:30 +0200, Richard van Schaik <f.m.a.vanschaikREMOVE@THISgmail.com> wrote: >On 10-06-2013 15:35, Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote: >> So: be grateful to those who would copy all your stuff, they are doing >> your descendants a favour. > >And they copy the mistakes you (or I) inadvertently made and those do >get their own live? I made some other arrangement for my data hoping to >keep it save for future generations. I know any arrangement has its >pitfalls. Most is on my site but not all as part is far beyond my scope >(but entered it), part less then three generations, part not reliable >enough. The way I am thinking of conserves all and might enhance. Future >will learn after I've stopped learning. Speaking of conserving data, has anyone been using the new (or rather new new) FamilySearch? I've been having a look at it, and it seems to be one of the better places for keeping an online family tree. My review is here: http://t.co/1oFxWjJOHk I've resisted the commercial sites for putting your family tree online, but the FamilySearch people seem to have learnt from others' mistakes, and since they're not in it mainly for the money, it seems more likely that it will last. -- Steve Hayes Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/ http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

On 09/06/2013 23:53, Richard van Schaik wrote: > On 09-06-2013 15:17, Lesley Robertson wrote: >> Grrrr, >> I've just had an email from someone wanting me to send him all of the >> photos included in the burial ground section of my website! If they are already on your web site tell him to download them?