Denis Beauregard wrote: > On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 19:06:46 GMT, Power-Post 2K <nonews@noname.com> >> For those who have achieved simliar results through DNA testing, what >> do you do? Incorporate the people into the tree, or do something else >> with them? > > DNA is not accurate genealogically speaking. But if you think a particular person might be in your paternal line, matching to a proven descendant might confirm it. So you can be very sure you descended from him (or didn't), but not so sure how far back. -- Wes Groleau Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:53:01 -0400, Denis Beauregard <denis.b-at-francogene.com@fr.invalid> wrote: > On 18 Mar 2008 00:25:01 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@gmail.com> wrote in > soc.genealogy.computing: >>> So, where will you fit someone that you don't >>> know if he is you g-7-father, g-8-father, g-9-father, etc., a cousin, >>> removed cousin, etc. ? >> >>By looking at the other 21 pairs. > > 10 generations back ??? Sorry, I saw "cousin, ...etc" which didn't seem to mean you were specifically talking about 10 generations ago.

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 17:54:19 -0400, Denis Beauregard <denis.b-at-francogene.com@fr.invalid> wrote: > On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 19:06:46 GMT, Power-Post 2K <nonews@noname.com> > wrote in soc.genealogy.computing: > >>For those who have achieved simliar results through DNA testing, what >>do you do? Incorporate the people into the tree, or do something else >>with them? > > DNA is not accurate genealogically speaking. > > Someone with identical DNA, if Y-DNA, can be your brother, father, > uncle, grand-father, gg-father, cousin, removed cousin, etc. (ditto > for mtDNA and women). Yes, that's in one chromosome pair. There's 21 others. > So, where will you fit someone that you don't > know if he is you g-7-father, g-8-father, g-9-father, etc., a cousin, > removed cousin, etc. ? By looking at the other 21 pairs.

On 18 Mar 2008 00:25:01 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@gmail.com> wrote in soc.genealogy.computing: >On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 17:54:19 -0400, Denis Beauregard <denis.b-at-francogene.com@fr.invalid> wrote: >> On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 19:06:46 GMT, Power-Post 2K <nonews@noname.com> >> wrote in soc.genealogy.computing: >> >>>For those who have achieved simliar results through DNA testing, what >>>do you do? Incorporate the people into the tree, or do something else >>>with them? >> >> DNA is not accurate genealogically speaking. >> >> Someone with identical DNA, if Y-DNA, can be your brother, father, >> uncle, grand-father, gg-father, cousin, removed cousin, etc. (ditto >> for mtDNA and women). > >Yes, that's in one chromosome pair. There's 21 others. > >> So, where will you fit someone that you don't >> know if he is you g-7-father, g-8-father, g-9-father, etc., a cousin, >> removed cousin, etc. ? > >By looking at the other 21 pairs. 10 generations back ??? Denis -- Denis Beauregard - Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/ French in North America before 1722 - www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/ Sur cédérom à 1770 - On CD-ROM to 1770

The group has been quiet, so I figure I could post a more speculative question. I've taken a Y-DNA test (as well as the mtDNA test), and I have about 15 matches. One of these matches is a relatively close match (about 7 generations away), and I'm hoping to find the exact connection soon. While a few of the other 14 matches have similar beginnings of surnames, it's probable that the connection is further back in time. Considering that I'm Jewish and my paternal ancestry is from Belarus, I would think it's an almost insurmountable task to trace people prior to the beginning of the 18th century. I was struck by a recent statement someone made, something to the effect of if there is no documntation for the person, then they don't belong on your tree. For those who have achieved simliar results through DNA testing, what do you do? Incorporate the people into the tree, or do something else with them? I'm interested to hear of others' solutions. Bob Kosovsky New York City

moin, habe das programm auch und bin nicht so wirklich begeistert. hast du schon etwas neues? habe das problem, dass ich meinen personen keine bilder zufügen kann und das proggi imer aussteigt

Gary, And who is going to take Ancestry to court if they don't honor their word? Al >It was some time ago so my memory may be fuzzy, but I seem to recall >the originators of RootsWeb (when, due to economics were forced to >use Ancestry as a host) included as part of the contract that >RootsWeb would stay a free resource in perpetuity. > >Gary Templeman

>> <snip> >> RootsWeb to be Moved to Ancestry.com. >> >> As a more-or-less skeptic, I wonder when the other shoe will drop >> and RW will be either terminated or become a for-a-fee service, >> despite Sullivan's claims to the contrary.. >> >> Suspicious Ol' Bob >> "Robert Melson" <melsonr@aragorn.rgmhome.net> > > It was some time ago so my memory may be fuzzy, but I seem to recall > the originators of RootsWeb (when, due to economics were forced to > use Ancestry as a host) included as part of the contract that > RootsWeb would stay a free resource in perpetuity. > > Gary Templeman "GaryT" <gtemplemanPAINT@proaxis.com> Having signed the contract, I'm kinda aware of the details. ;) There was no requirement that RootsWeb stay free or persist in perpetuity. On a practical level, though, we certainly expected that. The user- provided RootsWeb content almost by definition has to stay free, because the users can always take it elsewhere. And it's hard to imagine Ancestry not supporting RootsWeb's functionality, because RootsWeb is relatively inexpensive to operate and serves to grow the customer base for Ancestry's commercial products. >From my perspective, there's nothing particularly good or bad about moving RootsWeb's content inside the Ancestry domain. It clears up some statistical difficulties associated with tracking traffic at the two sites, at the cost of vaguely blurring the line between the free community site and the the commercial data provider. On the balance, that's a yawn. Again from my perspective, the thing that has surprized me is how little effort Ancestry has put into improving RootsWeb over the last seven years. Technology has changed a lot, these days there's a whole variety of powerful new social networking tools and such, but most of RootsWeb has been stagnant or (arguably) has deteriorated. Karen and I have been kinda sitting on the sidelines for some years now, just operating Linkpendium to stay involved. We have lately started gathering the resources to build a next-generation site for genealogists that fully exploits current technology. Stay tuned. ;) Cheers, B. -- Dr. Brian Leverich <leverich@linkpendium.com> Moderator, soc.genealogy.methods/GENMTD-L Founder, RootsWeb.com and Linkpendium.com

> Please 'scuse the multi-post .. thought it the best way > to get this out to "my" groups. > > melsonr@aragorn.rgmhome.net (Robert Melson) Thank you for changing your mind and not multiposting. Crossposting really is much better. -- Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk Steve Hayes <hayesmstw@hotmail.com>

> <snip> > RootsWeb to be Moved to Ancestry.com. > > As a more-or-less skeptic, I wonder when the other shoe will drop > and RW will be either terminated or become a for-a-fee service, > despite Sullivan's claims to the contrary.. > > Suspicious Ol' Bob > "Robert Melson" <melsonr@aragorn.rgmhome.net> It was some time ago so my memory may be fuzzy, but I seem to recall the originators of RootsWeb (when, due to economics were forced to use Ancestry as a host) included as part of the contract that RootsWeb would stay a free resource in perpetuity. Gary Templeman "GaryT" <gtemplemanPAINT@proaxis.com>

> Please 'scuse the multi-post .. thought it the best way > to get this out to "my" groups. > > Interesting article here: > > http://blog.eogn.com/eastmans_online_genealogy/2008/03/rootsweb-to-be.html > > See also: http?//blogs.rootsweb.com/newsroom > > RootsWeb to be Moved to Ancestry.com. > > As a more-or-less skeptic, I wonder when the other shoe will drop > and RW will be either terminated or become a for-a-fee service, > despite Sullivan's claims to the contrary.. > > Suspicious Ol' Bob <melsonr@aragorn.rgmhome.net> (Robert Melson) In spite of the CEO being named Sullivan I think "Suspicious" is warranted - although Tim didn't say, "Read my lips." There will still be 2 URLs so nothing gained there from an ease of access point of view. Bottom Line holding on line 2, Mr. Sullivan. Hugh (Sullivan) Eagle@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan)

> Please 'scuse the multi-post .. thought it the best way > to get this out to "my" groups. > > Interesting article here: > > http://blog.eogn.com/eastmans_online_genealogy/2008/03/rootsweb-to-be.html > > See also: http?//blogs.rootsweb.com/newsroom > > RootsWeb to be Moved to Ancestry.com. > > As a more-or-less skeptic, I wonder when the other shoe will drop > and RW will be either terminated or become a for-a-fee service, > despite Sullivan's claims to the contrary.. > > Suspicious Ol' Bob silly old BOB my own http://www.rootsweb.com/%7Ednkcen/index.html is now also http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/%7Ednkcen/index.html and the old links all work by redirects Hugh W -- For genealogy and help with family and local history in Bristol and district http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Brycgstow/ http://snaps4.blogspot.com/ photographs and walks GENEALOGE http://hughw36.blogspot.com/ MAIN BLOG Hugh Watkins <hugh.watkins@gmail.com>

mels...@aragorn.rgmhome.net (Robert Melson) wrote: > Please 'scuse the multi-post .. thought it the best way > to get this out to "my" groups. > > Interesting article here: > > http://blog.eogn.com/eastmans_online_genealogy/2008/03/rootsweb-to-be... > > See also: =A0http?//blogs.rootsweb.com/newsroom > > RootsWeb to be Moved to Ancestry.com. > > As a more-or-less skeptic, I wonder when the other shoe will drop > and RW will be either terminated or become a for-a-fee service, > despite Sullivan's claims to the contrary.. > > Suspicious Ol' Bob I believe what will happen is at some point all RootsWeb will be frozen and no new input allowed and then it will be treated as any other Ancestry on-line database (i.e. Read Only). >From that point on all RootsWeb functions (mailinglists, SSDI, USGENWEB, etc.) would be done on Ancestry rather than RootsWeb. "the_verminator@comcast.net" <the_verminator@comcast.net>

Robert Melson wrote: > Please 'scuse the multi-post .. thought it the best way > to get this out to "my" groups. Just FYI, you did a cross-post, not a multi-post, and a cross-post was a more appropriate thing to do. Multi-posting (posting several individual articles to several individual newsgroups) is almost never appropriate. > As a more-or-less skeptic, I wonder when the other shoe will drop > and RW will be either terminated or become a for-a-fee service, > despite Sullivan's claims to the contrary.. Me too. clifto <clifto@gmail.com>

Please 'scuse the multi-post .. thought it the best way to get this out to "my" groups. Interesting article here: http://blog.eogn.com/eastmans_online_genealogy/2008/03/rootsweb-to-be.html See also: http?//blogs.rootsweb.com/newsroom RootsWeb to be Moved to Ancestry.com. As a more-or-less skeptic, I wonder when the other shoe will drop and RW will be either terminated or become a for-a-fee service, despite Sullivan's claims to the contrary.. Suspicious Ol' Bob -- Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas ----- Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable reason so few engage in it. -- Henry Ford melsonr@aragorn.rgmhome.net (Robert Melson)

troyj1978@gmail.com wrote: > Criminal records now available for public access > > By Michael Smith > > NEW YORK (AP) - Criminal records, once previously available only to > police and federal law enforcement, are now available to the general > public. > > Bankruptcy records, DMV records, lost relatives, and various other > civil records have been made available to the public through the > Freedom of Information Act and the Patriot Act. People from all over > America are now using http://agentb.records4.hop.clickbank.net/ to > view information on potential employees, friends, and lovers. > > "I never thought I would find information like this!" says Julia Lee, > who recently used the website to find out private information on a > potential business partner. "He was seriously in debt, and had pending > criminal charges!" she said. > > Christopher Jones, of the Institute for Access to Information said > this opens up a whole new world to private citizens. "Previously, you > never had the ability to find out this kind of information." > > "Now, anyone will have the ability to get any kind of records they > want, on almost any individual." > > > Website listed in this article can be found here: > http://agentb.records4.hop.clickbank.net/ I believe money is involved. Paul

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 03:11:03 -0700 (PDT), bblais <bblais@gmail.com> wrote: >I can think of one disadvantage, which could make it personally not a >good choice of calendar. Imagine if your birthday were on a >Monday...it would *always* be on a Monday, and you'd never have the >benefit of having it on a Saturday, etc... My birthday is on a Public Holiday so it wouldn't worry me :-) -- Bob

Criminal records now available for public access By Michael Smith NEW YORK (AP) - Criminal records, once previously available only to police and federal law enforcement, are now available to the general public. Bankruptcy records, DMV records, lost relatives, and various other civil records have been made available to the public through the Freedom of Information Act and the Patriot Act. People from all over America are now using http://agentb.records4.hop.clickbank.net/ to view information on potential employees, friends, and lovers. "I never thought I would find information like this!" says Julia Lee, who recently used the website to find out private information on a potential business partner. "He was seriously in debt, and had pending criminal charges!" she said. Christopher Jones, of the Institute for Access to Information said this opens up a whole new world to private citizens. "Previously, you never had the ability to find out this kind of information." "Now, anyone will have the ability to get any kind of records they want, on almost any individual." Website listed in this article can be found here: http://agentb.records4.hop.clickbank.net/

bblais wrote: > On Mar 10, 5:49 pm, David Harper <devn...@obliquity.u-net.com> wrote: >> This means that you never need to remember what day of the week March >> 10th is going to fall on, because it will always be a Friday. > > I can think of one disadvantage, which could make it personally not a > good choice of calendar. Imagine if your birthday were on a > Monday...it would *always* be on a Monday, and you'd never have the > benefit of having it on a Saturday, etc... My birthday *would* fall on a Saturday, so I'm not complaining :-) David Harper Cambridge, England

David Harper <devnull@obliquity.u-net.com> writes: > bblais wrote: > > On Mar 10, 5:49 pm, David Harper <devn...@obliquity.u-net.com> wrote: > >> This means that you never need to remember what day of the week March > >> 10th is going to fall on, because it will always be a Friday. > > > > I can think of one disadvantage, which could make it personally not a > > good choice of calendar. Imagine if your birthday were on a > > Monday...it would *always* be on a Monday, and you'd never have the > > benefit of having it on a Saturday, etc... > > My birthday *would* fall on a Saturday, so I'm not complaining :-) Mine would be a Monday and I don't care. Those who are born on the leap year day would have WD2 as their birthdate and wouldn't have a day of the week name to use for their birthday. Getting back to the subject line, February 30th wouldn't be a problem since February would have 31 days.