> > Perhaps your newsreader can get confused if a thread contains a > > mixture of posts with and without reference headers. > > > > Mike Williams <[email protected]> > > Since it's threading the posts by using the reference headers, then > of course it won't thread them if they don't match with what it's > expecting. > > I suspect you've got Turnpike set to "thread by subject," which > would account for your seeing it correctly threaded even though > the references are broken. > > Christopher Jahn Turnpike threads by reference when the references are present, which they are in the particular post that you complained about. It's only the [email protected] postings in this thread that have no references. -- Mike Williams Gentleman of Leisure

> In my mind genealogy is not practiced as a form of moral judgment. > Genealogy is not the problem. The problem is people who set > themselves up as God in judgment after a voyeuristic research of > dates. > > P. S. My mother would have been scandalized, too, if that was her > situation. > > [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) I'm not sure I quite understand what you're implying.....are you suggesting that genealogy/genealogists are a version of voyeurism? Or, are suggesting that those who attempt to interpret and pass judgment upon the facts gathered via genealogical research are the voyeurs? As far as the question asked in an earlier post: "One of my sons was married at 17 and it lasted less than a year. Was it a "roll in the hay" or is it genealogy? My advice to my clients would be dependent upon whether or not their were offspring. If not, I'd be comfortable in overlooking it. If there were offspring, then it would definitely be a genealogical fact and must be included in a family line. Wayne Howell GenSearch Port Townsend, WA whowell <[email protected]>

> Forty years ago it might have had some social implications, but now > it's all historical reference... > > John As I've said, distance of time and kinship and f2f interaction affects one's attitude there. If it's your great-grandmother who got "caught" back in the naughty-aughties, it's historical reference. If it's your pious aunt, at whose home you now celebrate some important holiday, it's a little less historical. If it's your 16-yr-old daughter, it isn't in the least bit historical. Then there's the problem of -- if I do a data-dump of everything I know about certain people's parents, those people are likely to get in my face at the next family reunion...and they're likely to get in my mother's face at the next opportunity. The moral high-ground of being justified in not-hiding info gets a tad shaky where you're dealing with living persons who have known you since you were in diapers. IMO, YMMV Cheryl singhals <[email protected]>

> > > Thank you, > > > > > > [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) > > > > This one's a perfect example: this post should have been highlighted > > as a reply to my post, but all the headers have been stripped, > > breaking the thread AND my news client's ability to recognize that > > this is a reply to my post. > > > > Christopher Jahn > > That particular post has a correct set of reference headers. If > your newsreader fails to thread it properly, then the problem is at > your end. My newsreader (Turnpike) does correctly thread it as a > reply to your post. > > The posts by [email protected] in this thread do have missing > reference headers, so Turnpike can't possibly work out which posts > they are replies to, so it ends up threading them as replies to the > oldest unexpired post in the thread, making it seem like > [email protected] is talking to himself. > > Mike Williams <[email protected]> That is my experience. Hugh

> People on this newsgroup have indicated that posting the data in PDF > or as a .jpg might provide that type security. I think needing a > password to view the site would defeat my purpose of being available > to all but not copyable. > > J. Hugh Sullivan And therein lies the rub... anything viewable is copyable depending on the effort one is willing to expend to copy it. "[email protected]" <[email protected]>

> I use Free Agent - I thought it was a newsreader. > > [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) A crappy one. But yes, it is a newsreader. And again, header data has been stripped. Perhaps your server is truncating them. -- }:-) Christopher Jahn {:-( http://home.comcast.net/~xjahn/Main.html Overall, there was a smell of fried onions. Christopher Jahn <[email protected]>

> Perhaps your newsreader can get confused if a thread contains a > mixture of posts with and without reference headers. > > Mike Williams <[email protected]> Since it's threading the posts by using the reference headers, then of course it won't thread them if they don't match with what it's expecting. I suspect you've got Turnpike set to "thread by subject," which would account for your seeing it correctly threaded even though the references are broken. -- }:-) Christopher Jahn {:-( http://home.comcast.net/~xjahn/Main.html Never appeal to a man's "better nature". He may not have one. Robert Heinlein Christopher Jahn <[email protected]>

> so it ends up threading them as replies to the > oldest unexpired post in the thread, making it seem like > [email protected] is talking to himself. > > [email protected] Or herself in this case...and in some instances, the best conversations I've had are with myself. <g> Joan

> > > > I doubt "change your reaction" would be your response if someone > > > > stole from you. I really don't see that I should get MY case jumped > > > > when all I'm wanting is to make it a bit more difficult for a thief > > > > to steal from me, and I see it as no different from locking my doors > > > > and windows to make it difficult enough for a thief to get into my > > > > house, or my truck, that he'll decide it's not worth the effort and > > > > will move on. I really don't see why I should be criticized for not > > > > > > > > "Karen Rhodes" > > > > > > Putting stuff on a web page is the equivalent of pinning it > > > up on a supermarket bulletin boards, with signs on the billboards > > > saying it is there.... > > > > > > Dennis Lee Bieber > > > > That makes it sound like we request people to "Please Steal" when we > > create a web page. Actually we're saying here is a source, please > > observe sourcing protocol. > > > > I'm beginning to think my web page should read, I have organized > > more than 50 pages of facts, single-spaced, with sources, on > > Sullivans in VA and NC up to about 1835. If you want to know what > > they are please contact me and I will forward up to 10 of them. > > > > Of course no one would contact me but I would have made a good faith > > effort. > > > > [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) > > I came late to this discussion, so I must apologize for re-opening > healing wounds. > > Unfortunately, there is no way to control what people do with > publicly posted information. As Denis Bieber pointed out, putting > your data on, e.g., WorldConnect is akin to posting it on a > supermarket bulletin board for all to see and use. What folks do > with your information, how they use it, whether or not they give due > credit to you for your work becomes a matter of individual ethics, > of which there seems a diminishing supply in today's world. > > Those who know me from soc.genealogy.computing and alt.genealogy > know that I run my own genealogy webserver (apache + mysql + > phpgedview). Now, before y'all go trotting off to > rgmhome.homeunix.net, be forewarned that it's a by invitation site > and password protected at two levels: once to access the site and > once for full access to the genealogical data. And who do I invite? > Relatives, mostly, who are serious family researchers in my > estimation. This way, _I_ control who sees the fruits of my > research and that of the other participants. While I don't believe > I "own" the information on the site, I do exert some control over > what is seen and by whom. I am convinced this is, if not the only > way, the best way to handle the concerns I've seen expressed in this > thread. > > If you would like to discuss this with me off-group, I'll happily > arrange for you to have guest access to the site and provide details > on my setup. Drop me a line at the reply-to address in the header. > > [email protected] (Robert Melson) Am definitely self-pushed to jump in here for two reasons: 1. My data is at WORLD CONNECT with no sources [I will supply if I am asked] and most notes suppressed [I choose what John Q Public gets to read. IMHO I believe that only a few names at a time can be gleaned from my posted data [Golly I hope that I am right!!!] 2. I have had two extremely wonderful results of having my data online 1. I was contacted by a total stranger who found me through WORLD CONNECT. He collects pictures from 2nd hand store places and tries to locate a connected family owner. In my case the picture that he had was of a man and a woman and written on the back was, 'Helen Dann and husband'. Helen Dann is my husband, Richard's maternal grandmother whom I had never seen a picture of, I had seen a picture of his maternal grandfather in a book I purchased on his DYER family by a distant cousin, that picture was of Francis Marion DYER and his then wife Molly DYER. 2. I was contacted by a DYER cousin and bought his book which catapulted me back on the DYER lines by six [6] generations which also led me to a MY FAMILY site for DYER which has filled in more DYER connections than I ever thought possible. NOTE: Watson B. DYER, who sold me that important DYER book died in Georgia at the wonderful age of 104 blind and living in his own home with relatives to care for him. 3. Yes there is a 3, I had an important connection from my maternal side come to see me from Coarsegold, CA [near Yosemite] to here in Sacramento. We exchange pictures, stories and data all of the time. Yes, Virginia there are more benefits from sharing [carefully] than not sharing Blessings and profitable sharing and researching. MY WORLD CONNECT: http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=purplevw1&id=I1807 ENJOY, I DO Sandra Tyler Duncan [email protected]

> I've enjoyed the recent posts and want to share my opinion, worth 2 > cents or less. > > I LOVE RootsWeb's worldconnect project. I've been at this about > seven years and have found it to be the best FREE resource > available. I've discovered many distant cousins and additions to > the lines that interest me. But, so many of my cousins make error > filled multiple posts to worldconnect and have no interest in > correcting them or feign ignorance about how to remove prior posts > they have already found are incorrect. > > Sharing info is great and I'm delighted to do that, but my info at > worldconnect is NOT downloadable. Certainly it is copyable, but I'm > the only one who can download my file. Worldconnect provides me a > backup file if I have a disaster on my computer but it does not > provide "name collectors" a file to download and add to their own > files. My file at http://worldconnect.genealogy.rootsweb.com/ can > be found by using the key word search for "mckee-main". I really > like the search capabilities at worldconnect and have found them to > be superior to searching at Ancestry.com. > > Providing sources is tedious, time consuming and yet justifiably > expected by many. I'm lazy, so to keyboard into the computer that I > have neither of my parents birth certificates but do have old US > passports showing date and place of birth for both of them seems > like too much work. > > http://homepage.mac.com/mmmain/c_main1774/ is a web page I created > to share information about my brick wall and to solicit information. > Some of the information there has citations so others can find it > and some are just images to be believed or not. > > Again, I've enjoyed the discussion and just wanted to offer my view, > biased as it is. > > Mac Main <[email protected]> In my mind the above is part of what this group is about. Obviously it has increased the input and I hope I'm not the only one who has learned something. Hugh

> > > > I doubt "change your reaction" would be your response if someone > > > > stole from you. I really don't see that I should get MY case jumped > > > > when all I'm wanting is to make it a bit more difficult for a thief > > > > to steal from me, and I see it as no different from locking my doors > > > > and windows to make it difficult enough for a thief to get into my > > > > house, or my truck, that he'll decide it's not worth the effort and > > > > will move on. I really don't see why I should be criticized for not > > > > > > > > "Karen Rhodes" <[email protected]> > > > > > > Putting stuff on a web page is the equivalent of pinning it > > > up on a supermarket bulletin boards, with signs on the billboards > > > saying it is there.... > > > > > > Dennis Lee Bieber <[email protected]> > > > > That makes it sound like we request people to "Please Steal" when we > > create a web page. Actually we're saying here is a source, please > > observe sourcing protocol. > > > > I'm beginning to think my web page should read, I have organized > > more than 50 pages of facts, single-spaced, with sources, on > > Sullivans in VA and NC up to about 1835. If you want to know what > > they are please contact me and I will forward up to 10 of them. > > > > Of course no one would contact me but I would have made a good faith > > effort. > > > > [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) > > I came late to this discussion, so I must apologize for re-opening > healing wounds. > > Unfortunately, there is no way to control what people do with > publicly posted information. As Denis Bieber pointed out, putting > your data on, e.g., WorldConnect is akin to posting it on a > supermarket bulletin board for all to see and use. What folks do > with your information, how they use it, whether or not they give due > credit to you for your work becomes a matter of individual ethics, > of which there seems a diminishing supply in today's world. > > Those who know me from soc.genealogy.computing and alt.genealogy > know that I run my own genealogy webserver (apache + mysql + > phpgedview). Now, before y'all go trotting off to > rgmhome.homeunix.net, be forewarned that it's a by invitation site > and password protected at two levels: once to access the site and > once for full access to the genealogical data. And who do I invite? > Relatives, mostly, who are serious family researchers in my > estimation. This way, _I_ control who sees the fruits of my > research and that of the other participants. While I don't believe > I "own" the information on the site, I do exert some control over > what is seen and by whom. I am convinced this is, if not the only > way, the best way to handle the concerns I've seen expressed in this > thread. > > If you would like to discuss this with me off-group, I'll happily > arrange for you to have guest access to the site and provide details > on my setup. Drop me a line at the reply-to address in the header. > > Bob Melson <[email protected]> Thank you, Bob. At the moment I feel some loyalty to the two web hosts who have been so helpful. Of course they are in sales but they never seemed to be controlled by their watch. As background I don't plan to post a tree. I plan to post about 45-50 pages of researched facts with sources - something like all the Sullivan genealogy data for VA and NC up to about 1835 being in one book at the library instead of 100 books. I want it to be a service to Sullivan researchers but I don't want them to be able to cut and paste the entire site to their word processor. And I don't want commercial organizations to harvest the data. But goodness of the heart is not my entire motive. I plan to expand the collection as people pass new data - data that I hope will ultimately let me provably determine the ancestors of my gg grandfather b. 1790. It's everybody's web site - I'll just be paying for it and I'm the sole editor. People on this newsgroup have indicated that posting the data in PDF or as a .jpg might provide that type security. I think needing a password to view the site would defeat my purpose of being available to all but not copyable. Hugh [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan)

"John" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I want to take pictures at cemeteries and wondering what kind of > > > resolution I should look for in a digicam, as well as any other > > > features that would be good for genealogical purposes. I realize > > > that more pixels gives better pictures, but it makes for larger > > > pictures, more space taken up etc. When taking photos of really old head stones, you might see more of a worn inscription by altering the white balance or other features. I think all but the most basic point and shoot models allow for these options. Steve "Steve Stone" <[email protected]>

> > > > > Then there are family historians - good-hearted people who > > > > > sometimes (sometimes is a key word here) waive commonly accepted > > > > > rules of genealogy to please family and friends. This includes the > > > > > righteous among us who properly insist on bloodlines but who will be > > > > > in for a few disappointments when DNA testing is universal. > > > > > > > > > > J. Hugh Sullivan > > > > > > > > Mr. Sullivan: > > > > > > > > Your above comment (extracted from the full post), made me laugh out > > > > loud as I recalled my kin folks' reaction to the discovery I had > > > > made that proved the maternal GrGrandfather was illegitimate. While > > > > the kin folks knew this to be true, they did not want such records > > > > available for public use (the record was found at NARA) and they > > > > certainly did not want "the kid" knowing of and discussing this part > > > > of the family history. Many offers were made to me---payments if > > > > you will----to withhold that information. > > > > > > > > Your lines above gave me a good walk down memory lane. > > > > > > > > Fred Frederick <[email protected]> > > > > > > your post brings up a good point. as i work very diligently trying > > > to research my family history while I still have my mother and my > > > grandmother to use as sources i come across a situation where my > > > mother and an aunt had been married for a short period of time to > > > different men. neither of them wants to share any of their history > > > during those times. I know of these marriages because they were in > > > my lifetime so I have written them in my notes for use at a later > > > date but how does a person make others in the family understand that > > > this is a family history to share with our descendants so they can > > > know where they came from and who we are, They enjoy researching > > > with me and love to find new stories about our ancestors but still > > > are adamant about not sharing a small piece of their past. How can > > > we make people understand so they will share? > > > > > > Robin Percy <[email protected]> > > > > If there is any degree of "shame" or embarrassment you don't change > > their minds. It's not history yet because it happened to them - > > history is about dead people. Genealogy is not about morals but no > > one agrees with me. > > > > One of my sons was married at 17 and it lasted less than a year. > > Was it a "roll in the hay" or is it genealogy? > > > > My mother would never speak of her father because he divorced her > > mother. I didn't realize until after she died that she must have > > had a father. She never told me she had a miscarriage. It's > > gradually becoming easier to speak of those things. > > > > When a person's mind is made up they don't want to be confused by > > facts. > > > > [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) > > I recently discovered that my mother was born some 6 months before > her parents were married. As I don't remember that set of > grandparents ever celebrating an anniversary, I have to wonder > whether my mother knew the truth. > > If my totally prim-and-proper mother were still alive, she would be > scandalized to learn of her parents' indiscretion. I'm sure she > would argue the point, but I do have copies of their marriage > certificate and her birth certificate. The dates are in the > database, as are notes about the marriage and birth certificates. > Forty years ago it might have had some social implications, but now > it's all historical reference... > > John <[email protected]> In my mind genealogy is not practiced as a form of moral judgment. Genealogy is not the problem. The problem is people who set themselves up as God in judgment after a voyeuristic research of dates. Hugh P. S. My mother would have been scandalized, too, if that was her situation. [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan)

> > > > > > Out of curiosity, why do you start a new thread instead > > > > > > of replying to a post? I mean no offense - just > > > > > > curious. > > > > > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > I didn't--I replied to the existing thread. > > > > > > > > > > Joan <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > Then I don't understand why your replies to me are not > > > > indented below previous replies. > > > > > > > > [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) > > > > > > There's a mailing list mucking up the newsgroup threading. > > > When replies from the mailing list are made to the group, > > > they break the threads. > > > > > > Email and newsgroups do not play well together. > > > > > > Christopher Jahn <[email protected]> > > > > Thank you, > > > > [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) > > This one's a perfect example: this post should have been highlighted > as a reply to my post, but all the headers have been stripped, > breaking the thread AND my news client's ability to recognize that > this is a reply to my post. > > Go get a newsreader, and see how much better life can be! > > Christopher Jahn <[email protected]> Interesting. My reply to you and your reply to me were in red until I read them. And each was indented under the header to which it responded. New threads are in red until read and/or deleted but not indented because they are new threads, not responses. I'm not sure how it could be clearer. I use Free Agent - I thought it was a newsreader. Hugh [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan)

> > Thank you, > > > > [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) > > This one's a perfect example: this post should have been highlighted > as a reply to my post, but all the headers have been stripped, > breaking the thread AND my news client's ability to recognize that > this is a reply to my post. > > Christopher Jahn That particular post has a correct set of reference headers. If your newsreader fails to thread it properly, then the problem is at your end. My newsreader (Turnpike) does correctly thread it as a reply to your post. The posts by [email protected] in this thread do have missing reference headers, so Turnpike can't possibly work out which posts they are replies to, so it ends up threading them as replies to the oldest unexpired post in the thread, making it seem like [email protected] is talking to himself. Perhaps your newsreader can get confused if a thread contains a mixture of posts with and without reference headers. [ All, part of the problem is the moderation software. I just found (but haven't fixed yet) another bug in how the "References:" header is being processed. ): Sorry, Mod ] -- Mike Williams Gentleman of Leisure Mike Williams <[email protected]>

HI: I'm researching my great-grandmother's (ADELIA/ADA BOWMAN) family. Her maternal grandparents were WILSON and ELIZA (later Wilson married MIHALY HIGHWARDEN) COWEN. Ada's mother ELIZABETH died in 1869 in childbirth, so her materna aunt ELIZA (COWEN) EMMONS raised her. Ada's father was THOMAS BOWMAN, but I don't know anything more about him. WILSON and ELIZA moved from Tenn. (unknown county) to BROWN CO., OH in the mid-1840s. They are listed in the 1850-1870 Censuses as having children named ELIZABETH, AMANDA, FRANKLIN, JULIA, SARAH BELLE, ELIZA, JAMES and possibly MARY (she may be Wilson's daughter with his 2nd wife MIHALY). Wilson and Mihaly had 2 other children (a boy and a girl) who died in the mid-1860s in Brown Co. I have found an ANNIE COWEN married to JAMES TALL(e)Y living in Tenn. She opened a couple of bank accounts with the Freedmen's Bank from 1871-1874, for her and her son JAMES CHESTER TALLY. Her first account named WILSON and ELIZA (dead) COWEN as her parents, and that she was born in OH. All of this is true about my Brown Co. Cowens. Unfortunately when guessing at her age, Annie would have been born in the mid-1860s in Brown Co., and I haven't found her birth records in the county. How do I confirm that Annie is indeed the daughter of Wilson and Eliza? How do I proceed to research her? I can't find her or her husband and child in the 1880 Census in either TN or OH. Thanks, Kberry [email protected]

> > > I doubt "change your reaction" would be your response if someone > > > stole from you. I really don't see that I should get MY case jumped > > > when all I'm wanting is to make it a bit more difficult for a thief > > > to steal from me, and I see it as no different from locking my doors > > > and windows to make it difficult enough for a thief to get into my > > > house, or my truck, that he'll decide it's not worth the effort and > > > will move on. I really don't see why I should be criticized for not > > > > > > "Karen Rhodes" <[email protected]> > > > > Putting stuff on a web page is the equivalent of pinning it > > up on a supermarket bulletin boards, with signs on the billboards > > saying it is there.... > > > > Dennis Lee Bieber <[email protected]> > > That makes it sound like we request people to "Please Steal" when we > create a web page. Actually we're saying here is a source, please > observe sourcing protocol. > > I'm beginning to think my web page should read, I have organized > more than 50 pages of facts, single-spaced, with sources, on > Sullivans in VA and NC up to about 1835. If you want to know what > they are please contact me and I will forward up to 10 of them. > > Of course no one would contact me but I would have made a good faith > effort. > > [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) I came late to this discussion, so I must apologize for re-opening healing wounds. Unfortunately, there is no way to control what people do with publicly posted information. As Denis Bieber pointed out, putting your data on, e.g., WorldConnect is akin to posting it on a supermarket bulletin board for all to see and use. What folks do with your information, how they use it, whether or not they give due credit to you for your work becomes a matter of individual ethics, of which there seems a diminishing supply in today's world. Those who know me from soc.genealogy.computing and alt.genealogy know that I run my own genealogy webserver (apache + mysql + phpgedview). Now, before y'all go trotting off to rgmhome.homeunix.net, be forewarned that it's a by invitation site and password protected at two levels: once to access the site and once for full access to the genealogical data. And who do I invite? Relatives, mostly, who are serious family researchers in my estimation. This way, _I_ control who sees the fruits of my research and that of the other participants. While I don't believe I "own" the information on the site, I do exert some control over what is seen and by whom. I am convinced this is, if not the only way, the best way to handle the concerns I've seen expressed in this thread. If you would like to discuss this with me off-group, I'll happily arrange for you to have guest access to the site and provide details on my setup. Drop me a line at the reply-to address in the header. Bob Melson -- Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas "People unfit for freedom---who cannot do much with it---are hungry for power." ---Eric Hoffer ------- End of Forwarded Message [email protected] (Robert Melson)

> > > > > Out of curiosity, why do you start a new thread instead > > > > > of replying to a post? I mean no offense - just > > > > > curious. > > > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > I didn't--I replied to the existing thread. > > > > > > > > Joan <[email protected]> > > > > > > Then I don't understand why your replies to me are not > > > indented below previous replies. > > > > > > [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) > > > > There's a mailing list mucking up the newsgroup threading. > > When replies from the mailing list are made to the group, > > they break the threads. > > > > Email and newsgroups do not play well together. > > > > Christopher Jahn <[email protected]> > > Thank you, > > [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) This one's a perfect example: this post should have been highlighted as a reply to my post, but all the headers have been stripped, breaking the thread AND my news client's ability to recognize that this is a reply to my post. Go get a newsreader, and see how much better life can be! -- }:-) Christopher Jahn {:-( http://home.comcast.net/~xjahn/Main.html I need someone real bad. Are you real bad? Christopher Jahn <[email protected]>

I've enjoyed the recent posts and want to share my opinion, worth 2 cents or less. I LOVE RootsWeb's worldconnect project. I've been at this about seven years and have found it to be the best FREE resource available. I've discovered many distant cousins and additions to the lines that interest me. But, so many of my cousins make error filled multiple posts to worldconnect and have no interest in correcting them or feign ignorance about how to remove prior posts they have already found are incorrect. Sharing info is great and I'm delighted to do that, but my info at worldconnect is NOT downloadable. Certainly it is copyable, but I'm the only one who can download my file. Worldconnect provides me a backup file if I have a disaster on my computer but it does not provide "name collectors" a file to download and add to their own files. My file at http://worldconnect.genealogy.rootsweb.com/ can be found by using the key word search for "mckee-main". I really like the search capabilities at worldconnect and have found them to be superior to searching at Ancestry.com. Providing sources is tedious, time consuming and yet justifiably expected by many. I'm lazy, so to keyboard into the computer that I have neither of my parents birth certificates but do have old US passports showing date and place of birth for both of them seems like too much work. http://homepage.mac.com/mmmain/c_main1774/ is a web page I created to share information about my brick wall and to solicit information. Some of the information there has citations so others can find it and some are just images to be believed or not. Again, I've enjoyed the discussion and just wanted to offer my view, biased as it is. Mac Mac Main <[email protected]>

> > I want to take pictures at cemeteries and wondering what kind of > > resolution I should look for in a digicam, as well as any other > > features that would be good for genealogical purposes. I realize > > that more pixels gives better pictures, but it makes for larger > > pictures, more space taken up etc. > > > > Zev Griner <[email protected]> > > I'll be the Grinch. (g) I've used everything from a point-and-shoot > Kodak camera with a 110 cartridge, through a 35mm SLR Nikon, a > low-end Polaroid, and a 3Mp digital camera. I've taken good, bad, > and indifferent pictures with each. I suspect it's the photographer > not the camera in all three cases. (g) > > Low-end digitals seem to be 5 or 6 Mp these days, but just for > giggles, pop for one of the single-use digitals and see how bad you > think it is. Then borrow a better camera and reshoot the same > scenes. If there's $200 worth of difference visible to your eye, > then borrow an even better camera and repeat until you quit seeing a > difference or until you hit your price limit. > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> I think that's the most practical advice I've seen on how much entry level camera to buy ;-) John