Tony Proctor wrote: > 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. One recent trend on s.g.britain is that of replies to posts which are years old. I suspect Android and/or Apple apps for querying Google Groups. I wonder if such apps bother quoting the date. -- Ian The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang at austonley org uk

"Ian Goddard" <goddai01@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message news:a9ovhfFnmuU1@mid.individual.net... > Tony Proctor wrote: >> 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. > > One recent trend on s.g.britain is that of replies to posts which are > years old. I suspect Android and/or Apple apps for querying Google > Groups. I wonder if such apps bother quoting the date. > > -- > Ian > > The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang > at austonley org uk Yes, the date can be very important, especially to the relevance of a survey like this quoted one. I'm very surprised that no date was published at its head. Not everyone would be able to find it as Denis did. With replies to old posts, Ian, are you saying that the replies do not always carry the current date, or that people reply not always knowing the date of the origina thread? Tony Proctor