This article really caught my eye since it presents some interesting statistics about the up-take of genealogy. For instance, "one in every 200 internet searches is related to genealogy". http://www.genealogyintime.com/GenealogyResources/Articles/top%20trends%20in%20genealogy%20page%2001.html Unfortunately, I can't see a date for when the data was captured, or when the article was published. Tony Proctor

On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 20:49:06 +0100, "Tony Proctor" <tony@proctor_NoMore_SPAM.net> wrote in soc.genealogy.computing: >This article really caught my eye since it presents some interesting >statistics about the up-take of genealogy. For instance, "one in every 200 >internet searches is related to genealogy". > >http://www.genealogyintime.com/GenealogyResources/Articles/top%20trends%20in%20genealogy%20page%2001.html > >Unfortunately, I can't see a date for when the data was captured, or when >the article was published. In the properties, page is dated August 17th, 2012. The study is based on the same technology used for another study published in 1st quarter of 2012 (from the bottom of that page). So, I would conclude this study is published in 2012. Denis -- Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG) 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 1780 - On CD-ROM to 1780

The /major/ thing I felt was a drawback, back when someone showed me a pre-beta version of it, was -- it requires me to look in two places for a fact, not just one. Still does. Granted, it separates "proven fact" from "evidence", "possibility", and "probability", but IME that wasn't useful enough to be worth the effort of remembering to look in two separate places to see if I already have 'this' fact. What you're doing probably influences how useful it is. Much like a farm hand hoeing Corn doesn't have the same use for a a whistle on a kraut-cutter as a cabbage farmer might. If you don't use a genealogy database program -- a friend of mine doesn't -- CLOOZ (any vers) is _probably_ a good way to store facts until you're ready to collate them into prose. Then, your personal threshold for moving something from Probable to Proven comes into play. A man tells you in front of his wife that Joe is his son, you pretty much have to accept it, particularly when she fails to contradict it. I tend to accept census records, marriage records, and birth records as being solid proof. If they disagree, saying so in a different program won't help. However, I know a researcher who wants to personally view 3 separate contemporaneous primary sources that agree in /every/ particular before the alleged fact is moved from possible to probable. I'm not seeing anything obvious in vers 3 that changes any of that. There are a lot more templates for a wider range of countries than v1 had, but having a template for the 1817 Mecklenburg-Schwerin census record when all your ancestors for the last 5 centuries were in Scotland (or your Germans weren't from M-S) seems to be rather un-useful. [So, I won't complain that there's no template for Danish or Swedish census.] Somehow, I suspect that 2 weeks isn't long enough to convince anyone it's a useful addition to their tool set. If you already use the program, 2 weeks will certainly tell you whether it's worth the upgrade though. To get to specifics -- I imported a LEGACY database into CLOOZ for trial, expecting it to do something with the attached sources. If it did, I've been unable to find out what... it did put the source titles and labels into the section marked SOURCES, but darn if I can see anything attaching those sources to the people they were attached to in Legacy. At this point, I've clicked PEOPLE from the left-side menu, and it shows me a list of the 244 people I imported. The fields showing are ID (aka RIN), Alternate ID, Surname, Given name, Other surnames, birth/bapt, marriage date, death/burial. Clicking on any of those names brings up a screen very like the first few slots on any genie database, its tab is Vitals; across the top are other tabs for census, census substitutes, documents, images, buildings, research logs, file links. The only other tab populated for this person is the file link to the database from which I imported the data. None of the sources for this person show. Other options on the left-hand menu are businesses, buildngs, all censuses, Canadian censuses, French censuses, German censuses, Irish Censuses, Norwegian censuses, UK Censuses, US censuses, Census substitutes, Documents, Images, Sources, Research Log, Lists, Repositories, Reports, External File Links -- each with drop-downs If there's a way to "label" a source as the census record it is -- without retyping the source under the CENSUS templates, I don't see it. And, probably because of all the above, when I try to use the "FILTER" it doesn't give me a place to enter anything, just complains that there was no text entered. FWIW, YMMV and all that jazzzzz Cheryl

Dear All & Steve .... I have a number of non-standard fields in Legacy relating to UK Census returns and I found these did NOT import into Clooz3 from Legacy .... I emailed Clooz and below is the email I received back from Ancestral Systems .... <snip> Clooz only imports people and sources (separately) from Legacy (or any of the other import types). Events are not currently included. It would be nearly impossible to import most of the event types because there is no real format standard and there is a lot of variability in the way people use these events. We do hope to develop means to export census (and other document related events) to Legacy, so that you could gather and record data in Clooz, and then move it over to Legacy without manual reentry. No time estimate on availability for that though. The reports in Clooz can be exported to excel and pdf files, as well as a few other formats. The database itself is an access database (at least in version 3). Version 3 of Clooz was meant to address the critical problems users were having with version 2.1. We have done that, and more. We are planning a full-scale overhaul of the program for Version 4, so we do pay attention to comments such as yours when deciding which features need to be added. <snip> HTH Regards Bill -----Original Message----- From: gencmp-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:gencmp-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Steve Hayes Sent: 14 August 2012 19:35 To: gencmp@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: Free trial of Clooz 3.00 On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 16:18:21 +0200, john <john1@s145802280.onlinehome.fr> wrote: >On 05/08/2012 05:40, Steve Hayes wrote: >> Clooz is a genealogical research tool that enables you to analyse your data in >> various ways, and possibly open up new avenues for research. >> >> Development of the program was recently taken over by Ancestral Systems, and >> they are now offering a free trial of Clooz 3.0, which is due to be released >> soon. >> >> For more information see: >> http://www.clooz.com/ >> > >So have you tried it out yet? Any opinion/comments? I haven't tried it out seriously, though I've been following some of the discussions from others who have. The reason I have not tried it out seriously is that when I imported from my main genealogy database, it did not populate the "Alternate Id" field with the RIN or Id from my main database, and typing them in for 17000+ entries in the trial period is impractical, so I suggested that they introduce that feature, and when they do I'll be willing to give it a bash further. -- Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENCMP-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 16:18:21 +0200, john <john1@s145802280.onlinehome.fr> wrote: >On 05/08/2012 05:40, Steve Hayes wrote: >> Clooz is a genealogical research tool that enables you to analyse your data in >> various ways, and possibly open up new avenues for research. >> >> Development of the program was recently taken over by Ancestral Systems, and >> they are now offering a free trial of Clooz 3.0, which is due to be released >> soon. >> >> For more information see: >> http://www.clooz.com/ >> > >So have you tried it out yet? Any opinion/comments? I haven't tried it out seriously, though I've been following some of the discussions from others who have. The reason I have not tried it out seriously is that when I imported from my main genealogy database, it did not populate the "Alternate Id" field with the RIN or Id from my main database, and typing them in for 17000+ entries in the trial period is impractical, so I suggested that they introduce that feature, and when they do I'll be willing to give it a bash further. -- Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

On 05/08/2012 05:40, Steve Hayes wrote: > Clooz is a genealogical research tool that enables you to analyse your data in > various ways, and possibly open up new avenues for research. > > Development of the program was recently taken over by Ancestral Systems, and > they are now offering a free trial of Clooz 3.0, which is due to be released > soon. > > For more information see: > http://www.clooz.com/ > So have you tried it out yet? Any opinion/comments?

On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 23:48:21 GMT J. Hugh Sullivan opined: >On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 14:10:21 -0600, Bob Melson <amia9018@mypacks.net> >wrote: > >>On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 17:54:55 GMT J. Hugh Sullivan opined: >><snip> >>> He will never see what I said. >>If you believe that, then why bother replying? Dull day at home? >> >>Smilin' Ol' Bob > >I was looking for you and Ian. My turn to hide. > >Hugh > > Now, Commander .... Snippy Ol' Bob -- Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas ----- Nothing astonishes men so much as common sense and plain dealing. Ralph Waldo Emerson

On occasion I merge details from Public Member Trees into my tree (as long as I feel very certain that the details are correct). However, when it comes to adding children from a particular family I find that it has not added the children to both parents but only to one. Consequently my FTM then shows an extra marriage to an unknown spouse and I have to spend a great deal of time detaching each child from that arrangement and then attaching them to the correct two parents. Please can someone tell me if I am doing something wrong or if there is an easier way to make sure that the children show with the correct parents? Many thanks in anticipation, Noreen

On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 14:10:21 -0600, Bob Melson <amia9018@mypacks.net> wrote: >On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 17:54:55 GMT J. Hugh Sullivan opined: ><snip> >> He will never see what I said. >If you believe that, then why bother replying? Dull day at home? > >Smilin' Ol' Bob I was looking for you and Ian. My turn to hide. Hugh

On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 23:45:09 -0700 (PDT), juliejvargas@gmail.com wrote: > Online Women Seeking Men In Perth – Searchsingles.com.au The answer to what you are looking for is here: http://tinyurl.com/8rza96r -- Steve Hayes Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/ http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 14:48:33 +0100, Ian Goddard <goddai01@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: >If the spam is plugging a webside ping it, run whois on the IP address >to get the hosting company and complain there; their T&Cs are almost >certain to forbid advertising by spam. >Ian You didn't like the way I turned it into genealogy? Those guys post one time and run - seldom if ever get caught. It's not like I responded to him with feedback. He will never see what I said. Hugh

If the spam is plugging a webside ping it, run whois on the IP address to get the hosting company and complain there; their T&Cs are almost certain to forbid advertising by spam. -- Ian The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang at austonley org uk

J. Hugh Sullivan reposted a spam andwrote: > Speaking as a man can they prove their ancestry and how far back can > they go? Hugh, surely you know better then to repeat a spam. In fact, don't even bother to reply. Look at the headers, find the posting host, use whois to find its abuse address and complain. Also, f the poster has a gmail address complain at http://support.google.com/mail/bin/request.py?contact_type=abuse&rd=1&&hl=en and if, as is usually the case, they posted via Google Groups note that in the Additional Information box together with a reminder that they're supposed to be experts at semantic processing so why don't they demonstrate this be rejecting spam. -- Ian The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang at austonley org uk

On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 17:54:55 GMT J. Hugh Sullivan opined: <snip> > He will never see what I said. If you believe that, then why bother replying? Dull day at home? Smilin' Ol' Bob > >Hugh -- Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas ----- Nothing astonishes men so much as common sense and plain dealing. Ralph Waldo Emerson

On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 23:45:09 -0700 (PDT), juliejvargas@gmail.com wrote: >For instance, your early communications with your man is a good time to dis= >cuss important online women seeking men in Perth relationship fundamentals = >such as money and children with him prior to you committing your valuable t= >ime and most importantly your feelings to him. http://www.searchsingles.com= >.au/blogs/online-women-seeking-men-in-perth-searchsingles-com-au/ Speaking as a man can they prove their ancestry and how far back can they go? Hugh

For instance, your early communications with your man is a good time to discuss important online women seeking men in Perth relationship fundamentals such as money and children with him prior to you committing your valuable time and most importantly your feelings to him. http://www.searchsingles.com.au/blogs/online-women-seeking-men-in-perth-searchsingles-com-au/

On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 02:24:38 -0700 (PDT), pblair <pblair@pcug.org.au> wrote: >Thanks, people. Followed the suggestion, worked just fine. > >Paul It is very difficult not to get an answer to a question here. Sometimes the answers are correct. :-) Hugh

On Friday, August 10, 2012 1:15:06 AM UTC+10, J. Hugh Sullivan wrote: > On Thu, 09 Aug 2012 10:12:42 +0200, Steve Hayes > > <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote: > > > > >On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 20:05:25 -0700 (PDT), pblair <pblair@pcug.org.au> wrote: > > > > > >>I've been asked to help with an upgrade. > > >> > > >>I notice that there are quite a few structural changes between these versions. So what is the best way to go? > > >> > > >>My thoughts run like this: take a GEDCOM from the v6 build, rename the present Legacy folder to something else, and build v7.x in a new Legacy folder. Import GEDCOM to v7.x.... > > >> > > >>That seems simple enough - but there may be a better way, of course. Suggestions welcome... > > > > > >Just install it, open the Legacy 6.0 database with the new version and it will > > >convert it. > > > > As Steve says, jus let 'er hap'n Cap'n. > > > > But I always have a GED of every data base JIC. > > > > Hugh Thanks, people. Followed the suggestion, worked just fine. Paul

Than k On Thursday, August 9, 2012 1:05:25 PM UTC+10, pblair wrote: > I've been asked to help with an upgrade. > > > > I notice that there are quite a few structural changes between these versions. So what is the best way to go? > > > > My thoughts run like this: take a GEDCOM from the v6 build, rename the present Legacy folder to something else, and build v7.x in a new Legacy folder. Import GEDCOM to v7.x.... > > > > That seems simple enough - but there may be a better way, of course. Suggestions welcome... > > > > Paul Thanks, people. Followed the suggestion, worked just fine. Paul

On Thu, 09 Aug 2012 10:12:42 +0200, Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote: >On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 20:05:25 -0700 (PDT), pblair <pblair@pcug.org.au> wrote: > >>I've been asked to help with an upgrade. >> >>I notice that there are quite a few structural changes between these versions. So what is the best way to go? >> >>My thoughts run like this: take a GEDCOM from the v6 build, rename the present Legacy folder to something else, and build v7.x in a new Legacy folder. Import GEDCOM to v7.x.... >> >>That seems simple enough - but there may be a better way, of course. Suggestions welcome... > >Just install it, open the Legacy 6.0 database with the new version and it will >convert it. As Steve says, jus let 'er hap'n Cap'n. But I always have a GED of every data base JIC. Hugh