Since I posted the message that led to Judy's response that led to the "stop cluttering" message, I suppose I should own up here to my responsibility in this matter. I apologize if my original message and enquiry to Judy were out of line, although I don't think they were. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the purpose of the list seems to be to share information about Gilmore genealogy. I was sharing a particular interest in Gilmore family history that I have, and Judy kindly responded. Frankly I don't see the problem, but perhaps that can be chalked up to my own relative inexperience in such matters. And Judy, thanks again. Peter Gilmore Shirley Hendrix wrote: > > Dear List: > > I apologise I thought that I was responding to the sender only. I > personally like > > to cut people a lot of slack most mistakes are not intintional and > hitting deleat > > is pretty easy. It was Gillmore information. > > Thank,s > > Judy :) > > No need to apologize, Judy. Most of us joined the list just to see if we > can find connections to our Gilmores. If everyone posted all their info > privately, then how could we find a connection? Even posting quarries, we > don't always find people that may have info because they don't know it. By > posting to the list, we may notice a name we are familiar with that > connects, but was not in our quarry because it was a lateral name. But, we > should cut irrelevant material from previous posts. Hope this makes sense. > In my humble opinion, I think we should always post to the list when it is > Gilmore data, as long as it is data. There is usually more than one person > that belongs to each of these Gilmore lines!! Shirley