On Wed, 26 Dec 2001 16:18:09 -0500, "Todd L. Sherman/KB4MHH" <afn09444@afn.org> wrote: >> From Adam to Noah is rather simple. Shem is the father of the Jews, >> not much is known about all of Ham's descendants and the rest of us > > Ham's descendants are easy, too. You can find many of the one's in >America by looking them up on the Federal Communications Commision's >database of licensees. > Because of they're assigned "callsigns," it's easy to tell from which >continental landmass they come. For example, those living in the US would >have prefixes starting with "K," "A," "N," or "W." Those from the UK might >have a prefix of "G"...and...and...and... > > Eh-hem. ...Sorry. Saw the opportunity and took it. You can hit me, now, >if you wish. I deserve it. I'll...I'll...I'll take it like a man.. [bows >his head in shame] 8^) > > Anyway, hoping all of you all had a Merry Christmas! > >Todd I should have thought of that - I'm WA4QZU. 8-) Hugh ========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======: Message-ID: <cancel.3c2a4501.29801812@news.cis.dfn.de> Control: cancel <3c2a4501.29801812@news.cis.dfn.de> Subject: cmsg cancel <3c2a4501.29801812@news.cis.dfn.de> From: sull@adelphia.net (J. Hugh Sullivan) Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 02:55:35 GMT X-No-Archive: yes Newsgroups: microsoft.test,comp.lang.c,soc.genealogy.misc NNTP-Posting-Host: wonenara.ozemail.com.au 203.108.164.177 Lines: 1 Path: news.sol.net!spool1-nwblwi.newsops.execpc.com!newsfeeds.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!dfw-peer.news.verio.net!sea-feed.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!msrnewsc1!cppssbbsa01.microsoft.com!tkmsftngp01!tkmsftngp05!u.n.a.c.a.n.c.e.l.l.e.r This message was cancelled from within Mozilla.

On 26 Dec 2001 18:47:24 -0000, frisk@complex.is (Fridrik Skulason) wrote: >In <BB8563051DFAF367.6440C0964B8A92DB.3150FF38F203EFB4@lp.airnews.net> shmartonak@ticnet.com writes: > >>I want all the information about all the descendants of all my ancestors. > >Which in theory would mean the entire human race... A bit ambitious ;-) > >-- >Fridrik Skulason Frisk Software International phone: +354-5-617273 >Author of F-PROT E-mail: frisk@complex.is fax: +354-5-617274 Not really. From Adam to Noah is rather simple. Shem is the father of the Jews, not much is known about all of Ham's descendants and the rest of us descend from Japheth. You track him to Milesius, across to Ireland, down through Olioll Olium and Suilebhain. All of a sudden you are at John O' Sullivan who immigrated to VA in 1655 and on down to me in MS (although I moved). It's pretty easy - I've done it. But I didn't track all the branches - I had to leave something for the others to do. 8-) Hugh

On 26 Dec 2001 18:47:24 -0000, frisk@complex.is (Fridrik Skulason) wrote: >In <BB8563051DFAF367.6440C0964B8A92DB.3150FF38F203EFB4@lp.airnews.net> shmartonak@ticnet.com writes: > >>I want all the information about all the descendants of all my ancestors. > >Which in theory would mean the entire human race... A bit ambitious ;-) > >-- >Fridrik Skulason Frisk Software International phone: +354-5-617273 >Author of F-PROT E-mail: frisk@complex.is fax: +354-5-617274 Not really. From Adam to Noah is rather simple. Shem is the father of the Jews, not much is known about all of Ham's descendants and the rest of us descend from Japheth. You track him to Milesius, across to Ireland, down through Olioll Olium and Suilebhain. All of a sudden you are at John O' Sullivan who immigrated to VA in 1655 and on down to me in MS (although I moved). It's pretty easy - I've done it. But I didn't track all the branches - I had to leave something for the others to do. 8-) Hugh ========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======: Message-ID: <cancel.3c2a36a6.26127489@news.cis.dfn.de> Control: cancel <3c2a36a6.26127489@news.cis.dfn.de> Subject: cmsg cancel <3c2a36a6.26127489@news.cis.dfn.de> From: sull@adelphia.net (J. Hugh Sullivan) Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 02:10:49 GMT X-No-Archive: yes Newsgroups: microsoft.test,comp.lang.c,soc.genealogy.misc NNTP-Posting-Host: wonenara.ozemail.com.au 203.108.164.177 Lines: 1 Path: news.sol.net!spool1-nwblwi.newsops.execpc.com!newsfeeds.sol.net!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.cwix.com!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!sea-feed.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!msrnewsc1!cppssbbsa01.microsoft.com!tkmsftngp01!tkmsftngp05!u.n.a.c.a.n.c.e.l.l.e.r This message was cancelled from within Mozilla.

In <BB8563051DFAF367.6440C0964B8A92DB.3150FF38F203EFB4@lp.airnews.net> shmartonak@ticnet.com writes: >I want all the information about all the descendants of all my ancestors. Which in theory would mean the entire human race... A bit ambitious ;-) -- Fridrik Skulason Frisk Software International phone: +354-5-617273 Author of F-PROT E-mail: frisk@complex.is fax: +354-5-617274 ========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======: Message-ID: <cancel.a0d5vs$akh$1@banani.complex.is> Control: cancel <a0d5vs$akh$1@banani.complex.is> Subject: cmsg cancel <a0d5vs$akh$1@banani.complex.is> From: frisk@complex.is (Fridrik Skulason) Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 03:13:11 GMT X-No-Archive: yes Newsgroups: microsoft.test,comp.lang.c,soc.genealogy.misc NNTP-Posting-Host: wonenara.ozemail.com.au 203.108.164.177 Lines: 1 Path: news.sol.net!spool1-nwblwi.newsops.execpc.com!newsfeeds.sol.net!priapus.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!news-xfer.siscom.net!newspump.sol.net!dfw-peer.news.verio.net!sea-feed.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!msrnewsc1!cppssbbsa01.microsoft.com!tkmsftngp01!tkmsftngp05!u.n.a.c.a.n.c.e.l.l.e.r This message was cancelled from within Mozilla.

In <BB8563051DFAF367.6440C0964B8A92DB.3150FF38F203EFB4@lp.airnews.net> shmartonak@ticnet.com writes: >I want all the information about all the descendants of all my ancestors. Which in theory would mean the entire human race... A bit ambitious ;-) -- Fridrik Skulason Frisk Software International phone: +354-5-617273 Author of F-PROT E-mail: frisk@complex.is fax: +354-5-617274

J. Hugh Sullivan wrote: > My question is obvious - can, or should, my three data bases be linked > by preponderance of evidence? It goes without saying that the lack of > absolute proof should be noted if I combine them. I'm not sure I'd *link* them yet, but I'd certainly get all three into one! Then I'd finagle, any way necessary, a bd-sorted list. Amazing how many things you can rule-in/rule-out that way. ;) -- there was for instance the woman who simultaneously had babies in Tidewater Virginia and in eastern Illinois in July of a certain year. I'm pretty certain that *still* isn't physically possible. (g) If the bd-sort list doesn't rule-out your pet theory, then I'd do some more sorts and see if something pops out at me as being an orange dress in a St.Paddy's parade. If not, go for it. As the man in the Tom Lehrer song gloats: *I* published first! (g) Cheryl

J. Hugh Sullivan wrote: > My question is obvious - can, or should, my three data bases be linked > by preponderance of evidence? It goes without saying that the lack of > absolute proof should be noted if I combine them. I'm not sure I'd *link* them yet, but I'd certainly get all three into one! Then I'd finagle, any way necessary, a bd-sorted list. Amazing how many things you can rule-in/rule-out that way. ;) -- there was for instance the woman who simultaneously had babies in Tidewater Virginia and in eastern Illinois in July of a certain year. I'm pretty certain that *still* isn't physically possible. (g) If the bd-sort list doesn't rule-out your pet theory, then I'd do some more sorts and see if something pops out at me as being an orange dress in a St.Paddy's parade. If not, go for it. As the man in the Tom Lehrer song gloats: *I* published first! (g) Cheryl ========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======: Message-ID: <cancel.3C2A8939.717F9BC4@erols.com> Control: cancel <3C2A8939.717F9BC4@erols.com> Subject: cmsg cancel <3C2A8939.717F9BC4@erols.com> From: Singhals <singhals@erols.com> Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 05:51:09 GMT X-Trace: winter.news.erols.com 331882737 77135 29.94.20.186 (Sun, 30 Dec 2001 05:44:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com X-No-Archive: yes Newsgroups: microsoft.test,comp.lang.c,soc.genealogy.misc NNTP-Posting-Host: wonenara.ozemail.com.au 203.108.164.177 Lines: 1 Path: news.sol.net!spool1-nwblwi.newsops.execpc.com!newsfeeds.sol.net!priapus.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!newspump.sol.net!dfw-peer.news.verio.net!sea-feed.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!msrnewsc1!cppssbbsa01.microsoft.com!tkmsftngp01!tkmsftngp05!u.n.a.c.a.n.c.e.l.l.e.r This message was cancelled from within Mozilla.

Singhals wrote: > One neat thing, may be NYC specific, may be in any big city, > dunno; but here on the Citizenship slot on the Soundex card, I'm > seeing things like "1893 - NA - 1903" or "1889 -Pa-" which look > like immigration dates and naturalization dates. That'll save me > a trip to the actual census (g). Be interesting to see if any > match with what I've got from EllisIsland. Progress Report on that last sentence. EllisIsland gives me 67 hits with the given-surname combo; 12 arrived AFTER the 1920 Census. (55 possibilities) I have (so far) 47 entries from the Soundex, less 15 who were born in NY. (32 possibilities). There is ONE man who is a "probable hit" -- birthplace matches, extrapolated bd matches; date of immigration doesn't match. I've had better odds. Cheryl

Singhals wrote: > One neat thing, may be NYC specific, may be in any big city, > dunno; but here on the Citizenship slot on the Soundex card, I'm > seeing things like "1893 - NA - 1903" or "1889 -Pa-" which look > like immigration dates and naturalization dates. That'll save me > a trip to the actual census (g). Be interesting to see if any > match with what I've got from EllisIsland. Progress Report on that last sentence. EllisIsland gives me 67 hits with the given-surname combo; 12 arrived AFTER the 1920 Census. (55 possibilities) I have (so far) 47 entries from the Soundex, less 15 who were born in NY. (32 possibilities). There is ONE man who is a "probable hit" -- birthplace matches, extrapolated bd matches; date of immigration doesn't match. I've had better odds. Cheryl ========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======: Message-ID: <cancel.3C2A8640.2F58D2E7@erols.com> Control: cancel <3C2A8640.2F58D2E7@erols.com> Subject: cmsg cancel <3C2A8640.2F58D2E7@erols.com> From: Singhals <singhals@erols.com> Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 06:02:07 GMT X-Trace: winter.news.erols.com 186880655 44676 221.74.128.51 (Sun, 30 Dec 2001 05:05:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com X-No-Archive: yes Newsgroups: microsoft.test,comp.lang.c,soc.genealogy.misc NNTP-Posting-Host: wonenara.ozemail.com.au 203.108.164.177 Lines: 1 Path: news.sol.net!spool0-nwblwi.newsops.execpc.com!newsfeeds.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!nntp1.roc.gblx.net!nntp.gblx.net!nntp.gblx.net!feeder.qis.net!nntp.abs.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!sea-feed.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!msrnewsc1!cppssbbsa01.microsoft.com!tkmsftngp01!tkmsftngp05!u.n.a.c.a.n.c.e.l.l.e.r This message was cancelled from within Mozilla.

> From Adam to Noah is rather simple. Shem is the father of the Jews, > not much is known about all of Ham's descendants and the rest of us Ham's descendants are easy, too. You can find many of the one's in America by looking them up on the Federal Communications Commision's database of licensees. Because of they're assigned "callsigns," it's easy to tell from which continental landmass they come. For example, those living in the US would have prefixes starting with "K," "A," "N," or "W." Those from the UK might have a prefix of "G"...and...and...and... Eh-hem. ...Sorry. Saw the opportunity and took it. You can hit me, now, if you wish. I deserve it. I'll...I'll...I'll take it like a man.. [bows his head in shame] 8^) Anyway, hoping all of you all had a Merry Christmas! Todd

> From Adam to Noah is rather simple. Shem is the father of the Jews, > not much is known about all of Ham's descendants and the rest of us Ham's descendants are easy, too. You can find many of the one's in America by looking them up on the Federal Communications Commision's database of licensees. Because of they're assigned "callsigns," it's easy to tell from which continental landmass they come. For example, those living in the US would have prefixes starting with "K," "A," "N," or "W." Those from the UK might have a prefix of "G"...and...and...and... Eh-hem. ...Sorry. Saw the opportunity and took it. You can hit me, now, if you wish. I deserve it. I'll...I'll...I'll take it like a man.. [bows his head in shame] 8^) Anyway, hoping all of you all had a Merry Christmas! Todd ========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======: Message-ID: <cancel.a0df1p$r1r$1@oak.cise.ufl.edu> Control: cancel <a0df1p$r1r$1@oak.cise.ufl.edu> Subject: cmsg cancel <a0df1p$r1r$1@oak.cise.ufl.edu> From: "Todd L. Sherman/KB4MHH" <afn09444@afn.org> Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 02:22:10 GMT X-No-Archive: yes Newsgroups: microsoft.test,comp.lang.c,soc.genealogy.misc NNTP-Posting-Host: wonenara.ozemail.com.au 203.108.164.177 Lines: 1 Path: news.sol.net!spool0-nwblwi.newsops.execpc.com!newsfeeds.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!sea-feed.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!msrnewsc1!cppssbbsa01.microsoft.com!tkmsftngp01!tkmsftngp05!u.n.a.c.a.n.c.e.l.l.e.r This message was cancelled from within Mozilla.

Thanks guys, now I don't feel so much like the grinch who stole Christmas! Sazee ========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======: Message-ID: <cancel.3c29e27a.1823024@news.cybercomm.net> Control: cancel <3c29e27a.1823024@news.cybercomm.net> Subject: cmsg cancel <3c29e27a.1823024@news.cybercomm.net> From: sarakay@cybercomm.net (Sazee) Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 06:05:03 GMT X-No-Archive: yes Newsgroups: microsoft.test,comp.lang.c,soc.genealogy.misc NNTP-Posting-Host: wonenara.ozemail.com.au 203.108.164.177 Lines: 1 Path: news.sol.net!spool1-nwblwi.newsops.execpc.com!newsfeeds.sol.net!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!nycmny1-snh1.gtei.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!sea-feed.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!msrnewsc1!cppssbbsa01.microsoft.com!tkmsftngp01!tkmsftngp05!u.n.a.c.a.n.c.e.l.l.e.r This message was cancelled from within Mozilla.

Thanks guys, now I don't feel so much like the grinch who stole Christmas! Sazee

Hi Steve, Thanks for your thoughtful response. Just to clarify, the person I'm referring to has asked for **ALL** of my research. He's related to me (if indeed he is related, see below) through my mother's grandmother. But he also wants information on all my other maternal lines, plus information on my paternal lines. I've already sent him everything I have on the line that I believe is his. He SAYS he is related, but has sent me no confirming information; in fact, he's sent me nothing at all. For all I know, he could be a troll just having a little fun. Or someone wanting to steal identities. (For that reason, I never share information on people born after 1900.) And no, I don't believe the information is **mine**. A lot of my data is already on my web site, free for the world to see. I respond readily to requests for information in other formats. As I indicated in my original message, I've already sent him the information that I think would apply to his line, plus copies of family photos. Happy holidays! Sazee On Mon, 24 Dec 2001 11:49:33 -0600, shmartonak@ticnet.com wrote: > >Well, let's back up a minute. Let's try to give him the benefit of the >doubt. It could be that he's making a legitimate request, but using less >than precise or tactful language. Let's also examine your own reactions. > >I want all the information about all the descendants of all my ancestors. >To me that is a fairly simple and a legitimate goal (not that I expect to >finish it in my lifetime). This means that I often end up asking some >new-found 4th cousin for "everything on your family". I try to explain >why I want it and also that anything I post on the internet will have >dates and locations of living people filtered out. This is usually >sufficient to get the information I want. On the other hand, some people >just can't understand why I want to information. Nor do they have any >interest in the information I've already gathered on other branches of the >family. If they don't want to give me the information, I don't make an >issue of it. But I still want it. > >What exactly do you mean when you say "it hasn't been established to my >satisfaction that he has any relationship to ME?" I think that my >ancestor and my corespondent's ancestor were brother and sister. For me >the evidence of this is sufficient. For her, it isn't. Does this mean I >shouldn't have any interest in her family? > >Why are you reluctant to share your information? What could he do with it >that you're afraid of? Just what are you planning on doing with "the >entire results of my years of research" if not share it? Also, keep in >mind that the results of your research do not necessarily belong to you. >You cannot, for example, copyright your ancestor's birthdate. It doesn't >matter how long it took or how much money you spent to learn it. Copyright >on pictures belongs to the person who took it, not to the person who >currently has the picture. If you have a 120 year old picture of your >great-grandmother on your website, anybody can download it and do anything >they want with it. > >But to your immediate question. If you don't want to deal with the guy, >just ignore his emails. Don't try to write a tactful response. Just >ignore him. Let him get his information off your website one name at a >time. > >JMHO > >Steve >http://users.ticnet.com/stevem/ >-- > > > > ========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======: Message-ID: <cancel.3c29dff6.1178806@news.cybercomm.net> Control: cancel <3c29dff6.1178806@news.cybercomm.net> Subject: cmsg cancel <3c29dff6.1178806@news.cybercomm.net> From: sarakay@cybercomm.net (Sazee) Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 05:56:09 GMT X-No-Archive: yes Newsgroups: microsoft.test,comp.lang.c,soc.genealogy.misc NNTP-Posting-Host: wonenara.ozemail.com.au 203.108.164.177 Lines: 1 Path: news.sol.net!spool1-nwblwi.newsops.execpc.com!newsfeeds.sol.net!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!nntp1.roc.gblx.net!nntp.gblx.net!nntp.gblx.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!sea-feed.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!msrnewsc1!cppssbbsa01.microsoft.com!tkmsftngp01!tkmsftngp05!u.n.a.c.a.n.c.e.l.l.e.r This message was cancelled from within Mozilla.

Hi Steve, Thanks for your thoughtful response. Just to clarify, the person I'm referring to has asked for **ALL** of my research. He's related to me (if indeed he is related, see below) through my mother's grandmother. But he also wants information on all my other maternal lines, plus information on my paternal lines. I've already sent him everything I have on the line that I believe is his. He SAYS he is related, but has sent me no confirming information; in fact, he's sent me nothing at all. For all I know, he could be a troll just having a little fun. Or someone wanting to steal identities. (For that reason, I never share information on people born after 1900.) And no, I don't believe the information is **mine**. A lot of my data is already on my web site, free for the world to see. I respond readily to requests for information in other formats. As I indicated in my original message, I've already sent him the information that I think would apply to his line, plus copies of family photos. Happy holidays! Sazee On Mon, 24 Dec 2001 11:49:33 -0600, shmartonak@ticnet.com wrote: > >Well, let's back up a minute. Let's try to give him the benefit of the >doubt. It could be that he's making a legitimate request, but using less >than precise or tactful language. Let's also examine your own reactions. > >I want all the information about all the descendants of all my ancestors. >To me that is a fairly simple and a legitimate goal (not that I expect to >finish it in my lifetime). This means that I often end up asking some >new-found 4th cousin for "everything on your family". I try to explain >why I want it and also that anything I post on the internet will have >dates and locations of living people filtered out. This is usually >sufficient to get the information I want. On the other hand, some people >just can't understand why I want to information. Nor do they have any >interest in the information I've already gathered on other branches of the >family. If they don't want to give me the information, I don't make an >issue of it. But I still want it. > >What exactly do you mean when you say "it hasn't been established to my >satisfaction that he has any relationship to ME?" I think that my >ancestor and my corespondent's ancestor were brother and sister. For me >the evidence of this is sufficient. For her, it isn't. Does this mean I >shouldn't have any interest in her family? > >Why are you reluctant to share your information? What could he do with it >that you're afraid of? Just what are you planning on doing with "the >entire results of my years of research" if not share it? Also, keep in >mind that the results of your research do not necessarily belong to you. >You cannot, for example, copyright your ancestor's birthdate. It doesn't >matter how long it took or how much money you spent to learn it. Copyright >on pictures belongs to the person who took it, not to the person who >currently has the picture. If you have a 120 year old picture of your >great-grandmother on your website, anybody can download it and do anything >they want with it. > >But to your immediate question. If you don't want to deal with the guy, >just ignore his emails. Don't try to write a tactful response. Just >ignore him. Let him get his information off your website one name at a >time. > >JMHO > >Steve >http://users.ticnet.com/stevem/ >-- > > > >

In article <5523448545098F45.6D0AF4189C75A543.19598BE591E4497E@lp.airnews.net>, shmartonak@ticnet.com wrote: >On Mon, 24 Dec 2001, Don Nickell wrote: > >> I've occasionally been using the CA birth records to find information >> and suddenly (this month?) find that >> http://userdb.rootsweb.com/ca/birth/search.cgi is now Forbidden. I >> wrote and was told that people had demanded it be removed. >> >> Has anyone else heard anything? I just wonder if it's not now under >> Ancestry.com for sale. >> >> Thanks, > >In this case "people" was a handful of activists and a couple of noisy >politicians. In addition to the usual blather about the >non-existent "right to privacy", were concerns that adoptees could more >easily identify their biological parents. Texas birth records have also >been pulled from rootsweb and the Texas Dept of Health website. The data is all still available from vitalsearch-ca including Texas. -- Ron ========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======: Message-ID: <cancel.jrp59-2C7E7B.07364126122001@dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net> Control: cancel <jrp59-2C7E7B.07364126122001@dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net> Subject: cmsg cancel <jrp59-2C7E7B.07364126122001@dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net> From: Ron Parsons <jrp59@gte.net> Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 05:13:18 GMT X-No-Archive: yes Newsgroups: microsoft.test,comp.lang.c,soc.genealogy.misc NNTP-Posting-Host: wonenara.ozemail.com.au 203.108.164.177 Lines: 1 Path: news.sol.net!spool0-nwblwi.newsops.execpc.com!newsfeeds.sol.net!priapus.visi.com!zeus.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!sea-feed.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!msrnewsc1!cppssbbsa01.microsoft.com!tkmsftngp01!tkmsftngp05!u.n.a.c.a.n.c.e.l.l.e.r This message was cancelled from within Mozilla.

In article <5523448545098F45.6D0AF4189C75A543.19598BE591E4497E@lp.airnews.net>, shmartonak@ticnet.com wrote: >On Mon, 24 Dec 2001, Don Nickell wrote: > >> I've occasionally been using the CA birth records to find information >> and suddenly (this month?) find that >> http://userdb.rootsweb.com/ca/birth/search.cgi is now Forbidden. I >> wrote and was told that people had demanded it be removed. >> >> Has anyone else heard anything? I just wonder if it's not now under >> Ancestry.com for sale. >> >> Thanks, > >In this case "people" was a handful of activists and a couple of noisy >politicians. In addition to the usual blather about the >non-existent "right to privacy", were concerns that adoptees could more >easily identify their biological parents. Texas birth records have also >been pulled from rootsweb and the Texas Dept of Health website. The data is all still available from vitalsearch-ca including Texas. -- Ron

Think your "sharing" has gone much further that it should without something comming back. I'd tell that person I'm happy to help but if there is a family connection, I'd like to see what he has and perhaps be able to fill in gaps in your data. Father, how does what I've sent so far match his data and are there any discrepancies? I'd need more before I can consider additional information. I always offer sharing in the event any connections may be apparent. Searching: Houdek,King,Lames,Campbell,Croushorn, Gast,Roberts,Stevens, and lots of others. Bill Houdek bhoudek@swbell.net "Sazee" <sarakay@cybercomm.net> wrote in message news:3c26a868.1796578@news.cybercomm.net... > O.K., here's my rant of the day ... > > A few months ago I got an e-mail from someone claiming to be a distant > cousin (based on the info on my web site). He wanted information > about my ggg grandparents and their kids. I e-mailed him information. > > Then he asked for copies of pictures I have on my web site. I burned > a CD and mailed it to him. > > Then he asked for a gedcom. I cut a gedcom containing the folks he's > supposedly related to (minus ones born after 1900, for privacy > reasons) and sent him that. > > Then he wrote back. "No no! I want a gedcom of your whole family > tree - everyone on your web site!" This is over 4000 names, most of > whom have not one shred of relationship to him. Actually, it hasn't > been established to my satisfaction that he has any relationship to ME > - probably because he has sent me NO information at all. > > Bearing in mind that it's the holiday season, and we're all supposed > to be nice, please help me compose a message to this character > informing him that I have absolutely no intention of sending him the > entire results of my years of research, to do God knows what with. > The language I would use right now would be, shall we say, less than > tactful. > > Grrrrr!!!

On Mon, 24 Dec 2001 20:06:42 GMT, Bill Floyd <billgflo@postoffice.swbell.net> wrote: >Hugh, for what little it is worth, I have kept two data bases. One has >'proven' data, the other 'assumed' or whatever you would like to call >it. At times, a link will be proven and I merge that one. If I share any >of the 'assumed' I point that out. >Best, >Bill Doesn't that mean that you have to maintain three data bases? Did you decide against maintaining only one data base with the ability to split it should it become necessary? Hugh

Hugh, for what little it is worth, I have kept two data bases. One has 'proven' data, the other 'assumed' or whatever you would like to call it. At times, a link will be proven and I merge that one. If I share any of the 'assumed' I point that out. Best, Bill "J. Hugh Sullivan" wrote: > > Christmas time may not be the best time to pose a question which > probably has multiple complex answers. Nevertheless I rush ahead of > the angels.... > > I have three major data bases. Each has provable links but the three > are not combined because the links between them are not provable by > any evidence which has surfaced so far. On the other hand... > > There are three Sullivan families in Brunswick Co. VA between 1735 and > 1800. The father and one son are well-documented but the other son, > who inherited, is not. The third family appears to descend from the > inheriting son but there is no absolute proof. > > That third family moves to Warren Co. NC before 1800 where they are > the only Sullivans. That generation and the next are well documented > up to 1812 as they go to Halifax, Anson, Caswell and Franklin Cos. The > Sullivan in Franklin leaves a will indicating children but only names > one daughter - a cause for inappropriate language. The last census > before his death lists 3 males and 3 females in his household, > presumably 2 sons and 2 daughters. > > Two years after his death the family is not on the tax list. Four > years after his death three Sullivan boys appear in Johnston Co. NC. > There is no proof of their origin but they are close to two other > probable family members and other families which walked the same > trails from county to county. One of the males is probably an older > brother who was on his own by 1809. Two of the boys made bond for my > gg grandfather who had at least 4 base born children by three ladies - > he married the one who had two. > > My dad's family and my mother's family wind up in AL, about 90 miles > apart, by 1835. Both sides of mother's family were in Warren Co. at > the same time as my assumed gggg and ggg grandfather. All sides of my > dad's family were in adjacent counties. All except my dad's family > came from Surrey and Isle of Wight Co. in VA - my dad's family may > have also based on probability, but fewer facts to construct logic. > > My question is obvious - can, or should, my three data bases be linked > by preponderance of evidence? It goes without saying that the lack of > absolute proof should be noted if I combine them. > > Isn't it funny how you can't say "it goes without saying" without > saying it? 8-) > > Everything I have found indicates the probability of my theoretical > genealogy. Nothing I have found discredits my theory. Because the > family resided in Franklin Co., a part of the Lord Granville Grant, I > doubt the possibility of proof ever coming to light. It appears that > my probable ggg grandfather never owned land and my probable ggggg and > gggg grands didn't after moving from VA. > > If it gets to the point, I am more of a family historian than a pure > genealogist yet I draw the line somewhere. If "family" is slow and > "genealogy" is fast, I guess I'm half-fast. 8-) > > I thank you for opinions. > > Hugh