> > > > 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 John <[email protected]>

Dear Editor: Attached you will find a notice about the 2007 program of the National Institute on Genealogical Research (N.I.G.R.) in Washington, DC. Would it be possible to include it in your upcoming issue(s)? Application brochures will be mailed out in early 2007 (late January or early February), so we'd like to get as much exposure for the program as possible between now and then. Please let me know if you will be able to include this announcement in your publication. Many thanks, in advance. Claire Bettag, CG, CGL Director National Institute on Genealogical Research ### National Institute on Genealogical Research 15-21 July 2007 The National Institute on Genealogical Research (N.I.G.R.), at the National Archives in Washington D.C. and College Park, Maryland, is an intensive program offering on-site examination of federal records. Designed for experienced researchers, it is not an introduction to genealogy. The 2007 program focuses on commonly used immigration, military, land, cartographic, African American, and non-population census records. Complementing those core lectures will be presentations on lesser-known federal records useful to family historians. Attendees will spend one day at Archives II in College Park, Maryland, for presentations on resources at that facility and for an opportunity to conduct research there. Evening sessions at the Library of Congress and the National Society Daughters of the American Revolution Library are optional. To facilitate direct contact between the students and the lecturers and archivists, enrollment is limited. Brochures with an application form will be mailed in February 2007. The class fills very quickly. Tuition is $350 for applications postmarked on, or before, 15 May 2007, or $400 for applications postmarked after that date. For more information about the 2007 program, or to obtain an application brochure, see the institute's Web site at www.rootsweb.com/~natgenin/ and add your name to the mail list; or e-mail <[email protected]>; or write to NIGR, P.O. Box 724, Lanham, MD 20703-0724. Two scholarships are available, each offering a five hundred dollar stipend to help defray expenses of attending the institute. The N.I.G.R. Alumni Association offers the Richard S. Lackey Scholarship to "an experienced researcher in either a paid or volunteer position in the service of the genealogical community." For information, see the institute's Web site for application information, or write to: Lackey Scholarship, NIGRAA, P.O. Box 14274, Washington, D.C. 20044-4274. Applications must be received by 15 January 2007. Winners will be notified no later than 20 February 2007. The American Society of Genealogists offers the ASG Scholar Award, based on a manuscript or published paper of at least five thousand words. The application deadline is 1 January 2007. For details, see the society's Web site at <http://www.fasg.org>; or write to: ASG Scholarship Committee, P. O. Box 398 Demorest, GA 30535-0398. N.I.G.R. has been a leader in the field of genealogical education since its founding in 1950. In 1989 the institute was incorporated as an independent, non-profit corporation. Its board of trustees consists of representatives of the American Society of Genealogists, the Association of Professional Genealogists, the Board for Certification of Genealogists, the Federation of Genealogical Societies, the National Genealogical Society, and the institute's alumni association. The National Archives, a non-voting member of the corporation, provides strong support. The institute maintains a non-discriminatory policy toward enrollment. Applicants are accepted without regard to sex, race, creed, color, or national or ethnic origin. Claire Bettag <[email protected]>

> > > > I had a similar thing happen but before all these online trees. > > > > About 18 years ago I exchanged info with a cousin. I had created a > > > > small family genealogy based on my great grandmother's stories and > > > > sent her a copy. About 10 years later another cousin said she found > > > > this booklet written by a well know local genealogist that included > > > > our family. She bought a copy for me at $15. When I got it is was > > > > a copy of the booklet I had sent out with all the spelling errors I > > > > had. The only change was the title page which now bore the name of > > > > the other genealogist with no mention of me or my grandmother. I > > > > contacted the woman and she said she had no memory of corresponding > > > > with me. When I sent he copies of her letters including the one > > > > acknowledging the receipt of the booklet. She simply refused to > > > > talk to me. I often wonder how much of her reputation was built on > > > > work of other people. > > > > > > > > They only way to keep people from claiming your work as their own is > > > > to share with no one. And that negates the very reason we do > > > > genealogy. You cannot copyright dates as they are facts of records. > > > > > > > > You can copyright your narrative and try to sue anyone who used the > > > > narrative without your permission but that is extremely expensive > > > > and you would have to prove they had your work before they wrote > > > > theirs. Not easy. > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > or publish it first > > > and give copies to relevant libraries > > > > > > soon 71 years of age, my death is beginning to be foreseable so I > > > don't care what other people do with my data > > > > > > Hugh Watkins <[email protected]> > > > > You are still a young man. > > > > J. Hugh Sullivan > > but I am too damn fat :-) > > Hugh Watkins <[email protected]> ....as long as it is not above the neck! Hugh

> > > > 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, Hugh

> > > When you refer to "that young man" I assume you mean the one who > > > fathered your aunt's child. > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > No, I refer to the young man who doesn't know he's adopted. I > > believe that eventually his mother will tell him. That's up to her, > > not me. BTW, the birth father never had any interest in the child, > > never saw him actually, and signed over his rights so that my uncle > > could adopt him. > > > > [email protected] > > in modern countries adopted children have a right to know their > birth parents > > medical genealogy AKA forensic genealogy may make that a matter of > life or death in a couple of generations time > > Hugh Watkins So, OK, *if* he asks me directly, and _if_ the adoptive parents are deceased or non-compos mentos, I'd probably tell him. In the meantime ... I think Pat's right on this one. Cheryl singhals <[email protected]>

> > > 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 {:-( http://home.comcast.net/~xjahn/Main.html The horror! The horror! Christopher Jahn <[email protected]>

Found this very interesting link .... Kathleen Anast http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/index.html American Memory provides free and open access through the Internet to written and spoken words, sound recordings, still and moving images, prints, maps, and sheet music that document the American experience. It is a digital record of American history and creativity. These materials, from the collections of the Library of Congress and other institutions, chronicle historical events, people, places, and ideas that continue to shape America, serving the public as a resource for education and lifelong learning. Kathleen & Tim Anast <[email protected]>

> > > > > I have a 1920 census record which says a specific man was born in > > > > > Russia/Poland and emigrated in 1905. His parents were both also > > > > > born in Russia/Poland, and the native language of both is Hebrew. > > > > > His wife was born in Pa, her father in Russia/Poland native language > > > > > Hebrew and her mother born in Hungary native language Hungarian > > > > > (struck-through and Magyar written above). > > > > > > > > > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > As usual for me, I'm not sure what exactly you are asking, > > > > > > > > Lisa Lepore > > > > > > I was hoping for an itemized list of the things that could deduced > > > from the information quoted. > > > > > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> > > > > Cheryl, why don't you list what you think could be deduced and let > > us critique. > > > > bob gillis > > I wanted to know where others came out independently without the > influence of my thoughts. > > I see several have mentioned the conclusion I drew -- that the > family is Jewish -- and so the next opinion wanted is: > > How credible is it that this family is *descended* from German > Lutherans who arrived in Philadelphia in the early 1740s? > > It's immaterial to my research whether they are *related*, only > whether they are DESCENDED. > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> My immedeiate thought was no, not very credible, but then I started thinking..... I don't know much about Pennsylvania Lutherans and Jews. I had a look to see if there was a Jewish population in Philadelphia that early. According to the Pennsylvania State Archives page http://www.phmc.state.pa.us/bah/pahist/quaker.asp?secid=31 "There was a significant Jewish population in colonial Pennsylvania. Its Mikveh Israel Congregation was established in Philadelphia in 1740." Based only on the 1920 census info, it doesn't seem likely they would be DESCENDED from German Lutherans, but how can we know if the info stated there was correct? You didn't mention if we are looking at the man or his wife? The wife's mother didn't speak Hebrew on that census. There is a period of 180 yrs between the census and 1740. What if a Jewish person went to PA c. 1740, but left descendants in Europe, it could then be possible these descendants, [the census couple's ancestors] made their way to Hungary, then on to the US again a couple of generations later. The original immigrant could have been Jewish but converted to Lutheran in the US at some point after arrival. Or, if we are talking about the wife's family, it was not clear from the census that they were Jewish. Is it possible some of your *German Lutherans* converted from Judaism? If it were me, I'd want a whole lot more information on the parents of the census couple before I wrote them off completely. Lisa "Lisa Lepore" <[email protected]>

> > > I had a similar thing happen but before all these online trees. > > > About 18 years ago I exchanged info with a cousin. I had created a > > > small family genealogy based on my great grandmother's stories and > > > sent her a copy. About 10 years later another cousin said she found > > > this booklet written by a well know local genealogist that included > > > our family. She bought a copy for me at $15. When I got it is was > > > a copy of the booklet I had sent out with all the spelling errors I > > > had. The only change was the title page which now bore the name of > > > the other genealogist with no mention of me or my grandmother. I > > > contacted the woman and she said she had no memory of corresponding > > > with me. When I sent he copies of her letters including the one > > > acknowledging the receipt of the booklet. She simply refused to > > > talk to me. I often wonder how much of her reputation was built on > > > work of other people. > > > > > > They only way to keep people from claiming your work as their own is > > > to share with no one. And that negates the very reason we do > > > genealogy. You cannot copyright dates as they are facts of records. > > > > > > You can copyright your narrative and try to sue anyone who used the > > > narrative without your permission but that is extremely expensive > > > and you would have to prove they had your work before they wrote > > > theirs. Not easy. > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > or publish it first > > and give copies to relevant libraries > > > > soon 71 years of age, my death is beginning to be foreseable so I > > don't care what other people do with my data > > > > Hugh Watkins <[email protected]> > > You are still a young man. > > J. Hugh Sullivan but I am too damn fat :-) Hugh W -- Beta blogger http://nanowrimo3.blogspot.com/ visiting my past http://hughw36-2.blogspot.com/ re-entry http://snaps4.blogspot.com/" photographs and walks old blogger http://hughw36.blogspot.com/ MAIN BLOG Hugh Watkins <[email protected]>

> > I had a similar thing happen but before all these online trees. > > About 18 years ago I exchanged info with a cousin. I had created a > > small family genealogy based on my great grandmother's stories and > > sent her a copy. About 10 years later another cousin said she found > > this booklet written by a well know local genealogist that included > > our family. She bought a copy for me at $15. When I got it is was > > a copy of the booklet I had sent out with all the spelling errors I > > had. The only change was the title page which now bore the name of > > the other genealogist with no mention of me or my grandmother. I > > contacted the woman and she said she had no memory of corresponding > > with me. When I sent he copies of her letters including the one > > acknowledging the receipt of the booklet. She simply refused to > > talk to me. I often wonder how much of her reputation was built on > > work of other people. > > > > They only way to keep people from claiming your work as their own is > > to share with no one. And that negates the very reason we do > > genealogy. You cannot copyright dates as they are facts of records. > > > > You can copyright your narrative and try to sue anyone who used the > > narrative without your permission but that is extremely expensive > > and you would have to prove they had your work before they wrote > > theirs. Not easy. > > > > [email protected] > > or publish it first > and give copies to relevant libraries > > soon 71 years of age, my death is beginning to be foreseable so I > don't care what other people do with my data > > Hugh Watkins <[email protected]> You are still a young man. Hugh

> > 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. Did you reply to my last reply or some other post? [ General note -- much of the standardized formatting of Methods posts is done by the moderator using a set of automated tools. Mistakes do occur occasionally, for which I apologize. - Mod ] Hugh [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan)

>>>>>>I have a 1920 census record which says a specific man was born in >>>>>>Russia/Poland and emigrated in 1905. His parents were both also >>>>>>born in Russia/Poland, and the native language of both is Hebrew. >>>>>>His wife was born in Pa, her father in Russia/Poland native language >>>>>>Hebrew and her mother born in Hungary native language Hungarian >>>>>>(struck-through and Magyar written above). >>>>>> >>>>>>Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> >>>>> >>>>>As usual for me, I'm not sure what exactly you are asking, >>>>> >>>>>Lisa Lepore >>>> >>>>I was hoping for an itemized list of the things that could deduced >>>>from the information quoted. >>>> >>>>Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> >>> >>>Cheryl, why don't you list what you think could be deduced and let >>>us critique. >>> >>>bob gillis >> >>I wanted to know where others came out independently without the >>influence of my thoughts. >> >>I see several have mentioned the conclusion I drew -- that the >>family is Jewish -- and so the next opinion wanted is: >> >>How credible is it that this family is *descended* from German >>Lutherans who arrived in Philadelphia in the early 1740s? >> >>It's immaterial to my research whether they are *related*, only >>whether they are DESCENDED. >> >>Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> > > What I see is a family who was reported as being recent immigrants > and were probably of Jewish religion orgins. The wife's mother was > Hungarian so it is possible she was not of Jewish origin especially > as she did not speak Hebrew. It is possible that by Hebrew they > meant Yiddish. I would have to look up whether Hebrew was actually > spoken in Russian. > > However, if someone has entered any of these people as having had > ancestors that settled in Pennsylvania in the early 1700s I would > have to see how it went. I have seen a few who move back to Europe > for various reason. I have a women of early PA descent who had a > society marriage in Washington in 1905 to a Jewish diplomat and then > had a son born in Iran before probably dying in the death camps with > her husband during WWII. > > So how does the website think it happened? > > You know a lot of the stuff on line is done by people with no basis > in reality. I have a site that consistantly talks about a son born > in 1781 to a father who died in 1759. There must be over 30 > messages discussing the son's family. They all parrot the > connection to the father and not one of them said wait a minute > something is wrong here. The son was born 22 years after the father > died. > > Julia <[email protected]> Hi. No, it's straight out of a census record, not someone's webpage. It is my "gut feeling" that these folks are NOT descendants and so do NOT need to be documented in my database of descendants of Johannes Whozit. I just thought a little support from other experienced researchers wouldn't hurt before I said Plonk and marked the family off. I know whatchamean about odd-ball listings. I carried on a 3 week argument with someone over the issue of the info he supplied me in which a 100-year-old woman gave birth to an infant. I couldn't penetrate his tunnel-vision about 1874-1773 = 101 and 101 yr old women DO NOT GET PREGNANT! Cheryl singhals <[email protected]>

> > > > > > I have a 1920 census record which says a specific man > > > > > > was born in Russia/Poland and emigrated in 1905. His > > > > > > parents were both also born in Russia/Poland, and the > > > > > > native language of both is Hebrew. His wife was born > > > > > > in Pa, her father in Russia/Poland native language > > > > > > Hebrew and her mother born in Hungary native language > > > > > > Hungarian (struck-through and Magyar written above). > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > As usual for me, I'm not sure what exactly you are > > > > > asking, > > > > > > > > > > Lisa Lepore > > > > > > > > I was hoping for an itemized list of the things that > > > > could deduced from the information quoted. > > > > > > > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> > > > > > > Cheryl, why don't you list what you think could be deduced > > > and let us critique. > > > > > > bob gillis > > > > I wanted to know where others came out independently without > > the influence of my thoughts. > > > > I see several have mentioned the conclusion I drew -- that > > the family is Jewish -- and so the next opinion wanted is: > > > > How credible is it that this family is *descended* from > > German Lutherans who arrived in Philadelphia in the early > > 1740s? > > > > It's immaterial to my research whether they are *related*, > > only whether they are DESCENDED. > > > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> > > What I see is a family who was reported as being recent > immigrants and were probably of Jewish religion orgins. The > wife's mother was Hungarian so it is possible she was not of > Jewish origin especially as she did not speak Hebrew. It is > possible that by Hebrew they meant Yiddish. I would have to > look up whether Hebrew was actually spoken in Russian. > > However, if someone has entered any of these people as having > had ancestors that settled in Pennsylvania in the early 1700s > I would have to see how it went. I have seen a few who move > back to Europe for various reason. I have a women of early PA > descent who had a society marriage in Washington in 1905 to a > Jewish diplomat and then had a son born in Iran before > probably dying in the death camps with her husband during > WWII. > > So how does the website think it happened? > > You know a lot of the stuff on line is done by people with no > basis in reality. I have a site that consistantly talks about > a son born in 1781 to a father who died in 1759. There must > be over 30 messages discussing the son's family. They all > parrot the connection to the father and not one of them said > wait a minute something is wrong here. The son was born 22 > years after the father died. > > [email protected] My grandmother went on and on about how her great-great grandmother's husband built a house for her, and that the house was still standing, and all sorts of other "facts." My research reveals - conclusively - that she lived in a completely different town married to the BROTHER of the man who built the house. Family lore isn't always a reliable source of information. -- }:-) Christopher Jahn {:-( http://home.comcast.net/~xjahn/Main.html "Often it does seem a pity that Noah and his party did not miss the boat." - Samuel Clemens Christopher Jahn <[email protected]>

> > When you refer to "that young man" I assume you mean the one who > > fathered your aunt's child. > > > > [email protected] > > No, I refer to the young man who doesn't know he's adopted. I > believe that eventually his mother will tell him. That's up to her, > not me. BTW, the birth father never had any interest in the child, > never saw him actually, and signed over his rights so that my uncle > could adopt him. > > [email protected] in modern countries adopted children have a right to know their birth parents medical genealogy AKA forensic genealogy may make that a matter of life or death in a couple of generations time Hugh W -- Beta blogger http://nanowrimo3.blogspot.com/ visiting my past http://hughw36-2.blogspot.com/ re-entry http://snaps4.blogspot.com/" photographs and walks old blogger http://hughw36.blogspot.com/ MAIN BLOG Hugh Watkins <[email protected]>

> I had a similar thing happen but before all these online trees. > About 18 years ago I exchanged info with a cousin. I had created a > small family genealogy based on my great grandmother's stories and > sent her a copy. About 10 years later another cousin said she found > this booklet written by a well know local genealogist that included > our family. She bought a copy for me at $15. When I got it is was > a copy of the booklet I had sent out with all the spelling errors I > had. The only change was the title page which now bore the name of > the other genealogist with no mention of me or my grandmother. I > contacted the woman and she said she had no memory of corresponding > with me. When I sent he copies of her letters including the one > acknowledging the receipt of the booklet. She simply refused to > talk to me. I often wonder how much of her reputation was built on > work of other people. > > They only way to keep people from claiming your work as their own is > to share with no one. And that negates the very reason we do > genealogy. You cannot copyright dates as they are facts of records. > > You can copyright your narrative and try to sue anyone who used the > narrative without your permission but that is extremely expensive > and you would have to prove they had your work before they wrote > theirs. Not easy. > > [email protected] or publish it first and give copies to relevant libraries soon 71 years of age, my death is beginning to be foreseable so I don't care what other people do with my data Hugh W -- Beta blogger http://nanowrimo3.blogspot.com/ visiting my past http://hughw36-2.blogspot.com/ re-entry http://snaps4.blogspot.com/" photographs and walks old blogger http://hughw36.blogspot.com/ MAIN BLOG Hugh Watkins <[email protected]>

> 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

I received this from another list thought it might be helpful to someone. Kathleen Anast If you have ancestors who died in Missouri you may be able to view the death certificate at this link: http://www.sos.mo.gov/archives/resources/deathcertificates/#search Not all are viewable online yet, but they are working on it. I saw several other names that I'll be going back to check on every few weeks. If you are patient enough think of the fees you'll save! Kathleen & Tim Anast <[email protected]>

> > > > > I have a 1920 census record which says a specific man was born in > > > > > Russia/Poland and emigrated in 1905. His parents were both also > > > > > born in Russia/Poland, and the native language of both is Hebrew. > > > > > His wife was born in Pa, her father in Russia/Poland native language > > > > > Hebrew and her mother born in Hungary native language Hungarian > > > > > (struck-through and Magyar written above). > > > > > > > > > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > As usual for me, I'm not sure what exactly you are asking, > > > > > > > > Lisa Lepore > > > > > > I was hoping for an itemized list of the things that could deduced > > > from the information quoted. > > > > > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> > > > > Cheryl, why don't you list what you think could be deduced and let > > us critique. > > > > bob gillis > > I wanted to know where others came out independently without the > influence of my thoughts. > > I see several have mentioned the conclusion I drew -- that the > family is Jewish -- and so the next opinion wanted is: > > How credible is it that this family is *descended* from German > Lutherans who arrived in Philadelphia in the early 1740s? > > It's immaterial to my research whether they are *related*, only > whether they are DESCENDED. > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> Cheryl What I see is a family who was reported as being recent immigrants and were probably of Jewish religion orgins. The wife's mother was Hungarian so it is possible she was not of Jewish origin especially as she did not speak Hebrew. It is possible that by Hebrew they meant Yiddish. I would have to look up whether Hebrew was actually spoken in Russian. However, if someone has entered any of these people as having had ancestors that settled in Pennsylvania in the early 1700s I would have to see how it went. I have seen a few who move back to Europe for various reason. I have a women of early PA descent who had a society marriage in Washington in 1905 to a Jewish diplomat and then had a son born in Iran before probably dying in the death camps with her husband during WWII. So how does the website think it happened? You know a lot of the stuff on line is done by people with no basis in reality. I have a site that consistantly talks about a son born in 1781 to a father who died in 1759. There must be over 30 messages discussing the son's family. They all parrot the connection to the father and not one of them said wait a minute something is wrong here. The son was born 22 years after the father died. Julia [email protected]

> When you refer to "that young man" I assume you mean the one who > fathered your aunt's child. > > [email protected] No, I refer to the young man who doesn't know he's adopted. I believe that eventually his mother will tell him. That's up to her, not me. BTW, the birth father never had any interest in the child, never saw him actually, and signed over his rights so that my uncle could adopt him.

> > > I can appreciate that you would not feel good if this > > > happened, but I fear that the reality is that the only > > > thing that you can change is your reaction. > > > > > > Chris J Dixon > > > > I'm a descendant of Puritans with a strong law-and-order streak, > > what can I say? > > > > 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 > > wanting to become a victim while I DO want to assist others by > > providing my information to those who will use it legitimately and > > who will be kind and courteous enough to render proper credit to the > > person who did the work. > > > > I really can't see any of y'all wanting any less for yourselves, > > either. > > > > "Karen Rhodes" <[email protected]> > > I don't think Chris was jumping on your case. I think the message > here is there is no way to control your data once you put it on > line. If it were in a jpeg format, that might hinder the automated > data collectors, but it would not necessarily stop the individuals > who are name collectors from taking your info and adding it to their > trees. > > Is it wrong not to give credit to the creator of the data? Well of > course it is, but many people operate under the assumption that if > it's on the internet, it is free, or free to use as the copier > wants. [And yes, this is a copyright matter, but let's not go there] > > I don't think there is anything that can be done to stop someone > from taking your work posted on line, so the only choices left are > to not publish on line, or put your information out there, and don't > worry about who takes it. That is what I took from Chris' message > to you. > > If you were to post the facts, and only the facts without the > sources - but with a note that sources are available, a serious > researcher will contact you for more information. The people who > take your data and incorporate it into their own - well who cares > about them? > > Even if they go on to publish it in a book or on another web page, > they can't pass their work off as well researched, or reliable if > they have no sources to back up their data. They will not be taken > seriously by people interested in factual genealogy research. > > "Lisa Lepore" <[email protected]> But the problem is that erroneous information does everyone an injustice. Tell a lie, even inadvertently, often enough and it attains some credibility. If anyone knows better don't you have a problem with them thinking you don't know better either? That happens if you're a pretty well-known researcher of your line. I don't want to be known as a good researcher but very loose with "facts". Hugh [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan)