I have responded off-list...thank you. best Anne H. On 4.2.15 21:10, Paul Howes wrote: > Anne, please contact me off list. I can offer a solution > Paul > > On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 3:58 PM, anne higham via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: >> >> >> I have a Pythonesque problem getting details of a marriage from >> the City Clerk’s office in XXX,Massachusetts & wondered if anyone >> has hit similar, & whether they found an answer. Bear in mind that >> I live in the UK. >> >> FEES: The fee is $20 & should be paid using cash or a money order. >> No personal cheques are acceptable. I offered to pay via Visa but >> that’s not acceptable. I offered PayPay (and I would bear the cost >> of the charges which usually accrue to the recipient) but that’s not >> acceptable either. Mentally resigned myself to getting the dollars. >> >> POSTAGE: Subsequently I was told that I must provide “a self >> addressed pre paid envelope”. >> I explained that the website of the US Embassy in London >> says”"There is no retail outlet for U.S. stamps in the UK". >> I offered to pay the postage costs by adding extra dollars to the >> amount I would be sending. That’s not acceptable..... “The City of >> XXX does not have the means to send mail to England.” >> >> To get around the thorny postage problem I asked if the item could >> be scanned & sent as an attachment to an email....guess what - >> they “can not send Vital Records via email”! >> >> The one pro-active suggestion made by this department was that >> they had a mailer who used FEDEX. Not being familiar with >> Fedex I’ve pottered around their website, but think I must >> (surely!) have misunderstood the calculation process as it appears >> to be quoting US$56 or $81 depending on urgency. >> >> Ideas anyone??? >> >> best >> Anne H. >> 1020 Lyford >> >> >> _____________________________________________ >> >> RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >

One thing I used a few years ago to get a Death certificate was via an Ancestry ‘partner’. Ancestry had a list of people who could visit the office and obtain a copy of what you want, then post it to you. I am not sure whether they still do that, though. Lawrence Tristram > On 4 Feb 2015, at 20:58, anne higham via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > > > I have a Pythonesque problem getting details of a marriage from > the City Clerk’s office in XXX,Massachusetts & wondered if anyone > has hit similar, & whether they found an answer. Bear in mind that > I live in the UK. > > FEES: The fee is $20 & should be paid using cash or a money order. > No personal cheques are acceptable. I offered to pay via Visa but > that’s not acceptable. I offered PayPay (and I would bear the cost > of the charges which usually accrue to the recipient) but that’s not > acceptable either. Mentally resigned myself to getting the dollars. > > POSTAGE: Subsequently I was told that I must provide “a self > addressed pre paid envelope”. > I explained that the website of the US Embassy in London > says”"There is no retail outlet for U.S. stamps in the UK". > I offered to pay the postage costs by adding extra dollars to the > amount I would be sending. That’s not acceptable..... “The City of > XXX does not have the means to send mail to England.” > > To get around the thorny postage problem I asked if the item could > be scanned & sent as an attachment to an email....guess what - > they “can not send Vital Records via email”! > > The one pro-active suggestion made by this department was that > they had a mailer who used FEDEX. Not being familiar with > Fedex I’ve pottered around their website, but think I must > (surely!) have misunderstood the calculation process as it appears > to be quoting US$56 or $81 depending on urgency. > > Ideas anyone??? > > best > Anne H. > 1020 Lyford > > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Everyone, Is anyone going to Kew in the next few days who would be willing to photograph 3 pages from a document for me? My husband visited Kew and photographed a report on the defences of Jersey, but when I came to type it up three pages are missing. Thanks Debbie Gomersall Member 808

I have a Pythonesque problem getting details of a marriage from the City Clerk’s office in XXX,Massachusetts & wondered if anyone has hit similar, & whether they found an answer. Bear in mind that I live in the UK. FEES: The fee is $20 & should be paid using cash or a money order. No personal cheques are acceptable. I offered to pay via Visa but that’s not acceptable. I offered PayPay (and I would bear the cost of the charges which usually accrue to the recipient) but that’s not acceptable either. Mentally resigned myself to getting the dollars. POSTAGE: Subsequently I was told that I must provide “a self addressed pre paid envelope”. I explained that the website of the US Embassy in London says”"There is no retail outlet for U.S. stamps in the UK". I offered to pay the postage costs by adding extra dollars to the amount I would be sending. That’s not acceptable..... “The City of XXX does not have the means to send mail to England.” To get around the thorny postage problem I asked if the item could be scanned & sent as an attachment to an email....guess what - they “can not send Vital Records via email”! The one pro-active suggestion made by this department was that they had a mailer who used FEDEX. Not being familiar with Fedex I’ve pottered around their website, but think I must (surely!) have misunderstood the calculation process as it appears to be quoting US$56 or $81 depending on urgency. Ideas anyone??? best Anne H. 1020 Lyford

Of course an alternative approach to the guild marriage index and the world wide marriage index is to use the guild members' archives which have been available for 10 years and contain over 1.5 million records uploaded by members. There is no need for post holders in the guild to maintain them, each member can choose to make available what they wish and it can be made available to the public or just members - the study owner chooses. And of course for marriages in England and Wales there is the ability for guild members to search across all published members records in one go. Using the template that Marie Byatt developed it is possible to develop a single search of all marriages even though each study name is maintained separately. If the guild chose to include marriages for which there has not been a study owner, these could easily be held in an orphan study and would still be searchable from a single search by guild members. A far better approach in my opinion to the efforts taking place to recreate huge databases of marriages once again. Paul Millington Member No. 2181

Paul - you definitely have a gift for words. One other point - not all the indexes are trying to achieve the same thing - perhaps the Worldwide one should be called a collection. With the GMI - all the information is there - you really don't need to contact another party. The worldwide index relies on the contact with the other member that 'shares' the marriage. Our members are experts on their studies and establishing contact with them is far more than answering a random query on a message board. The GMI is like an reference book - full of information but only on one topic The Worldwide is more like meeting a teacher - still full of information but the interaction can lead you down other roads as well. You choose which you prefer - I like using both. Marie (GOONS 5318) Bringing the world together one surname at a time. 'A Pepler Name' http://pepler.tribalpages.com 'Hedgerow - the Ancestors' http://cranberry.tribalpages.com Pepler DNA Study http://www.familytreedna.com/public/pepler-ow/ 'Scroops, Scropes and Scroopes' http://dentonlk.tribalpages.com ________________________________ From: Paul Howes via <goons@rootsweb.com> To: mingay <mingay@xtra.co.nz>; goons@rootsweb.com Sent: Wednesday, February 4, 2015 9:26 PM Subject: Re: [G] -WWMI -GMI. Hello Tony. I'm not sure what you are saying, I'm afraid. I just input the name Radcliff, which is not a name under study, and got a few answers. When I clicked on them, I went almost straight to the results. I could see that first the Guild site looked at the cookie on my PC and accepted that I am a member. I suppose that non-members must get a reply saying sorry, but you need to join. I'll try to give you a fresh perspective on the worldwide index which I have supported since its birth. I remember even getting slapped around during its conception but I'm not going to take that analogy any farther! I'm happy with all manner of data contributed from members, rather than just names under study, for several reasons: 1) One of the unique attributes of the Guild is the collaborative spirit of its membership. We aren't just plowing our own furrows but helping others with their ploughs too. Especially in these more selfish times since the innternet personalized everything, I bow down before all of those folks who do marriage challenges, produce cardinal points or volunteer for posts in the management of the Guild. None of those are practical for me right now but recognizing the efforts of others I do my best to give back to the Guild in other ways and I believe many others feel that way too, by supporting the growth of indexes. As someone who has stood on a stand at shows, it's easy to talk about how collaborative people are but in the past it has't been as easy as it is now to demonstrate it just by running a surname search. 2) The more you see others contribute the more it is a reminder to do your share/give back and so on. 3) I remember too the fear I had when I began that I didn't know where to start. It's a lot easier to take on or begin a study when you can see that you can click on a button and interact with someone who has already contributed some data for you. It may not be a lot of data but it breaks the psychological wall. It also demonstrates collaboration to new people. 4) Most of our names under study are of British Isles origin or have been there long enough that they feel British. Some folks accuse us of British bias. We all know that we don't mean to be that way and that the principles we use are useful to a single-name studies wherever the main concentrations of that name are. If we restricted our index data only to study names, we'd never get away from that British-bias perspective, The good news is that within each of our studies, as we pursue our own names we end up with all kinds of surnames from around the world. Each may have a few, but when we add them all together we have a lot. Would you have guessed that the Guild has more occurrences of the name Lopez in our indexes than we have for Radcliff? I certainly wouldn't. Lopez as just the first really non-British surname I thought of and I know it's not a fair comparison to Radcliff but it did surprise me. 5) Finally, there's the push versus pull factor. I admit that I don't check every surname I come across in my study and contact another member if the name is under study. With such a large study I wouldn't get anything done. Much better to put it in a central store and have others tap into it when they feel like it and contact me if they want more. I've had a couple so far, which is just fine. Hope this helps a bit Paul On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 7:13 PM, mingay via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Hi All, > I have looked at the 'homepage' of the new website and have tried > the surname search and have read the 'further instructions' with the result > that ONLY registered names will produce any results, so how can it be > claimed that any 'old name' can found? What am I doing wrong? > > Dissention, I thought it was healthy discussion of different views! > > > Regards Tony > Anthony John MINGAY, now in NZ once of Kent & Suffolk, England but still > researching Worldwide the surname MINGAY & its variants. > http://www.mingayhistory.co.uk. > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message -- Paul Howes www.howesfamilies.com Researching House, Howes, Hows, Howse & Howze worldwide _____________________________________________ RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Corinne’s "Dummies’ guide" looks good to me, and Mark’s comments are very helpful - the link to Terry Barton’s site was very useful. I have had very little success growing my Duignan Y-DNA project, even though some of the results from the very small number of participants seemed (to me anyway) quite interesting. However, I’m intending to post something in my ONS FaceBook group that I hope may excite a little more interest, and reading what you both had to say has given me some ideas. Fiona — 5538 - Duignan & variants worldwide > On 4 Feb 2015, at 17:44, Mark Bunch via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > Hello John, > > > In my own experience with the Bunch Y-DNA Surname Project, it has been much easier to recruit Americans (currently ~60 test results) than Britons (currently 0 tests), but I'm still actively seeking ways to turn that around. One thought I've had is to post to my website the first few generation of the largest British Bunch family trees I've come across in the course of one-name research -- maybe someone searching on a particular name/place will come across the trees there and be motivated to do a DNA test. Since you asked, here' the text of my direct reply to Corinne: > > > Hi Corinne, > > I'm facing the same dilemma of providing a brief-but-informative overview of DNA testing for genealogy to an audience. I'm to give a ~30 minute presentation at a genealogy fair in North Carolina in June -- about half to be devoted to explaining the DNA tests used for genealogical purposes, the other half to talking about my surname project. It's the first half that I'm more concerned about! > > I think your presentation is fine, but everyone would "skin a cat" a bit differently, so here are my two bits: > > You might do well to mention the two other main types of test besides y-DNA (mitochondrial DNA and autosomal DNA), just to forestall any confusion when your potential contributors head off to FTDNA's website. I think all you would need to do is mention them, then immediately segue to, "but the type of test we're interested in HERE concerns y-DNA." > If you do mention autosomal DNA testing, you might do well to say something about autosomal chromosomes and to mention that the sex chromosomes (x & y) present a special case of them. > There are actually two types of mutations on y-chromosomes -- "single nucleotide polymorphism" (SNP) mutations that happen rarely and are pretty much irreversible, and "short tandem repeat" (STR) mutations that happen much more frequently and can go backward as well as forward (repeated segments can be added or subtracted from one generation to the next). HaploGROUPS are concerned with SNP mutations, and are an indication of deep (ancient) ancestry, going into the tens of thousands of years. HaploTYPES (the strings of digits posted to surname project websites) are concerned with STR mutations, and tend to be an indication of much more recent ancestry. There's a bit of confusion about this distinction caused, in part, by the fact that FTDNA (for the most part) only offers STR testing, but uses the results of an STR test (the STR haploTYPE is the result) in conjunction with their database of results to statistically "predict" an individual's SNP haploGROUP. FTDNA used to off! er! > a test that would directly look at an individual's SNP mutations, but they've since passed that form of testing off to National Geographic's Genographic Project, in a partnership with them (the y-DNA haplogroup results of their Geno 2.0 test can be downloaded directly into FTDNA's database). All of that is probably more information than you want to include, but it might be useful to at least draw a distinction between deep ancestry (SNP) haplogroups and recent ancestry (STR) haplotypes. > Terry Barton's "World Families Network" website offers pages that attempt to explain DNA testing to the layman. You might want to add a link to something there (such as http://www.worldfamilies.net/dnatesting) for people seeking more information. > > > I hope you find at least some of these suggestions helpful. Best wishes with your project! > > -Mark Bunch > Othello, Washington State, USA > GOONS #6223 > > > ---------------------------------------- >> To: goons@rootsweb.com >> Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 15:44:30 +0000 >> Subject: Re: [G] feedback request >> From: goons@rootsweb.com >> >> As someone who took a Y-chromosome test a year ago and has included a DNA page on my website - to no avail - I would appreciate hearing from anyone experience of this. >> >> And, as I suspect I'm not alone in this, could I ask that those who respond to Corrine, do so publicly rather than privately. >> >> In the 21st century, this is an issue of potential interest to all of us. >> >> John Plester > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Tony, I'm not sure how you got the idea that the Worldwide Marriage Index is going to be put in the public domain. It isn't! All that is shown to the public is a number, representing how many entries for a given name there are in the Index - just a number. In your case, the front-page search shows that there is 1 entry for your name of Mingay in the Worldwide Marriage Index. I don't see how this breaches any copyright you or other members may have? So, no, the contributors have not been asked if it can go into the public domain, they have not agreed that it can be in the public domain, and the Committee has not concurred in making it public domain. I am also a bit puzzled at your statement that "the terms & conditions of the WMI are the same as those for the GMI that entries should contain at least one registered name". This has never been a condition of the GMI! in fact there are very many entries in the GMI where the entry does not contain any registered names, for instance those which represent a Cardinal Point, or indeed those where a name has been registered in the past but is no longer. Entries are welcome in both the WMI and the GMI whether they contain a registered name or not, although obviously most will do since most originate from a member's ONS. You referred to the papers on the Marriage Indexes submitted to the Committee meetings by Paul Millington (September meeting) and myself (November meeting). You might also have noticed that the Marriage Indexes were earlier discussed at the May meeting and at the July meeting (papers from Peter Alefounder and Cliff Kemball). In fact, the Marriage Indexes and their possible future direction have been discussed at every Committee meeting this year since the AGM meeting. My paper submitted in November attempted to correct some misunderstandings evident in the earlier papers, and make some proposals which I, as Indexes Administrator, felt were constructive. I withdrew it as a discussion paper because it was becoming very obvious that this discussion of the Indexes was taking up more time than the Committee could afford, and even if agreement could be reached it was unlikely that I would be able to find the time to implement any agreed changes. As Indexes Administrator I am a great believer in Indexes, since they allow each of us to extract precisely the information we want out of a potentially large quantity of data. But even I do not make them mandatory! The website Indexes are provided as a service to members, and members are very welcome to use them. Equally, members such as yourself are very welcome not to use them. They cost the Guild nothing, as the data and the programming are provided for free by volunteers. I hope, therefore, that the Indexes will not be seen as a "contentious issue". I, and I'm sure all Guild volunteers, have only the best interests of the Guild at heart. Anne Shankland Web Indexes Administrator P.S. I should point out that, rather than the WMI going public domain, posts such as this one denigrating the facilities provided to the Guild membership do automatically go into the public domain - and don't improve the public image of the Guild. If you have an issue with the Guild services, why not contact the person responsible directly to get it resolved, rather than air it in public? ----- Original Message ----- From: "mingay via" <goons@rootsweb.com> To: "GOONS Forum" <GOONS@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2015 11:50 PM Subject: Re: [G] - Worldwide Marriage Index > Hi All, > In a reply to my comments/views of the so called Worldwide > Marriage Index I was amazed to see that they are to be put in the > Public Domain. I presume all contributers have agree to that happening, > has > the possible infringement of copyright been fully investigated and that > the > Committee has also concurred to this publication. I think not, (see > Minutes > of meetings on 13 sep 2014 & 15 Nov 2014 & submitted papers by Paul > MILLINGTON 10 pages & Anna SHANKLAND, 12 pages, the latter being with > drawn). Again it is my understanding that the terms & conditions of the > WMI > are the same as those for the GMI that entries should contain at least one > registered name, if not then it has no relevance to the members of the > Guild > of One Name Studies > > Further more I note that the whole issue of the Guild Indexes has been > discussed at length within the Committee (again see Minutes of meetings on > 13 sep 2014 & 15 Nov 2014 & submitted papers by Paul MILLINGTON 10 pages & > Anne SHANKLAND, 12 pages, the latter being with drawn) with no firm > conclusion reached. Confusion reigns in my reading of those minutes as to > why the GMI has to be singled out for being 'English' and to be not > 'worldwide', it is solely related to England just the same as the SMI is > so > 'Scottish' and the proposed Irish marrige index is so 'Irish'. > One is left wondering what was said at the 31 Jan 2015 meeting on the > subject and if any decision reached? > > No doubt this contentious issue will be the subject of many more > discussions > and may be the platform of prospective candidates for the next elected > committee (if an there is an election of course). Sadly due to personal > reasons I cannot stand as a candidate but if circumstances were different > I > would love to be on the Committee even it meant staying up all night to > attend :-)) > > Regards Tony > Anthony John MINGAY, now in NZ once of Kent & Suffolk, England but still > researching Worldwide the surname MINGAY & its variants. > http://www.mingayhistory.co.uk. > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message >

Anne (and Paul), If the marriage occurred prior to 1911, I can provide faux certificates for them from published VR’s. Send the details and I’ll what I can. Bob Young Danbury, CT RangerONS 2940 On Feb 4, 2015, at 4:10 PM, Paul Howes via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Anne, please contact me off list. I can offer a solution > Paul > > On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 3:58 PM, anne higham via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: >> >> >> I have a Pythonesque problem getting details of a marriage from >> the City Clerk’s office in XXX,Massachusetts & wondered if anyone >> has hit similar, & whether they found an answer. Bear in mind that >> I live in the UK. >> >> FEES: The fee is $20 & should be paid using cash or a money order. >> No personal cheques are acceptable. I offered to pay via Visa but >> that’s not acceptable. I offered PayPay (and I would bear the cost >> of the charges which usually accrue to the recipient) but that’s not >> acceptable either. Mentally resigned myself to getting the dollars. >> >> POSTAGE: Subsequently I was told that I must provide “a self >> addressed pre paid envelope”. >> I explained that the website of the US Embassy in London >> says”"There is no retail outlet for U.S. stamps in the UK". >> I offered to pay the postage costs by adding extra dollars to the >> amount I would be sending. That’s not acceptable..... “The City of >> XXX does not have the means to send mail to England.” >> >> To get around the thorny postage problem I asked if the item could >> be scanned & sent as an attachment to an email....guess what - >> they “can not send Vital Records via email”! >> >> The one pro-active suggestion made by this department was that >> they had a mailer who used FEDEX. Not being familiar with >> Fedex I’ve pottered around their website, but think I must >> (surely!) have misunderstood the calculation process as it appears >> to be quoting US$56 or $81 depending on urgency. >> >> Ideas anyone??? >> >> best >> Anne H. >> 1020 Lyford >> >> >> _____________________________________________ >> >> RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > -- > Paul Howes > www.howesfamilies.com > Researching House, Howes, Hows, Howse & Howze worldwide > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Anne, please contact me off list. I can offer a solution Paul On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 3:58 PM, anne higham via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > > I have a Pythonesque problem getting details of a marriage from > the City Clerk’s office in XXX,Massachusetts & wondered if anyone > has hit similar, & whether they found an answer. Bear in mind that > I live in the UK. > > FEES: The fee is $20 & should be paid using cash or a money order. > No personal cheques are acceptable. I offered to pay via Visa but > that’s not acceptable. I offered PayPay (and I would bear the cost > of the charges which usually accrue to the recipient) but that’s not > acceptable either. Mentally resigned myself to getting the dollars. > > POSTAGE: Subsequently I was told that I must provide “a self > addressed pre paid envelope”. > I explained that the website of the US Embassy in London > says”"There is no retail outlet for U.S. stamps in the UK". > I offered to pay the postage costs by adding extra dollars to the > amount I would be sending. That’s not acceptable..... “The City of > XXX does not have the means to send mail to England.” > > To get around the thorny postage problem I asked if the item could > be scanned & sent as an attachment to an email....guess what - > they “can not send Vital Records via email”! > > The one pro-active suggestion made by this department was that > they had a mailer who used FEDEX. Not being familiar with > Fedex I’ve pottered around their website, but think I must > (surely!) have misunderstood the calculation process as it appears > to be quoting US$56 or $81 depending on urgency. > > Ideas anyone??? > > best > Anne H. > 1020 Lyford > > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message -- Paul Howes www.howesfamilies.com Researching House, Howes, Hows, Howse & Howze worldwide

As someone who took a Y-chromosome test a year ago and has included a DNA page on my website - to no avail - I would appreciate hearing from anyone experience of this. And, as I suspect I'm not alone in this, could I ask that those who respond to Corrine, do so publicly rather than privately. In the 21st century, this is an issue of potential interest to all of us. John Plester

Right on --Paul. As you know I've been an advocate for a single marriage index from the word go. The biggest problems I see are 1. Many members don't use the archives or even organize their material to be be archived. This is one of the reasons I 'floated' the Worldwide index idea and continually beg for contributors. Some people seem to respond better when asked to contribute to something specific. I would not be surprised to learn that many members don't really even know how to 'get to' the archives since the new website came in. 2. There is a group that want very discreet data sets without overlaps and don't really seem to grasp the idea of a universal search. I truly feel that the Guild's strength is not in 'how many indexes we can reproduce on the website' but rather in the scholarship and expertise of our members and the data they have correlated into a meaningful study. We can help each other with the riches of this data - a universal search mechanism helps a great deal in doing this. I make sure when someone sends me marriages for the WMI that they know they will be expected to answer queries. Just as Tribal pages only runs their search on the sites that have opted in and Ancestry has it's privacy settings. SO any such search must be optional. Having said all that - the present search results from the homepage are great for luring in possible new members. THey put in their name and see that how many times it occurs in various indexes as well as if a study is already being done. But they can't see the actual index results - have to be a member for that. Here the fact that the results come from 3 or 4 different indexes is actually a plus. Marie (GOONS 5318) Bringing the world together one surname at a time. 'A Pepler Name' http://pepler.tribalpages.com 'Hedgerow - the Ancestors' http://cranberry.tribalpages.com Pepler DNA Study http://www.familytreedna.com/public/pepler-ow/ 'Scroops, Scropes and Scroopes' http://dentonlk.tribalpages.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Millington via <goons@rootsweb.com> To: goons-l@rootsweb.com Cc: Sent: Wednesday, February 4, 2015 2:48 PM Subject: [G] Guild indexes Of course an alternative approach to the guild marriage index and the world wide marriage index is to use the guild members' archives which have been available for 10 years and contain over 1.5 million records uploaded by members. There is no need for post holders in the guild to maintain them, each member can choose to make available what they wish and it can be made available to the public or just members - the study owner chooses. And of course for marriages in England and Wales there is the ability for guild members to search across all published members records in one go. Using the template that Marie Byatt developed it is possible to develop a single search of all marriages even though each study name is maintained separately. If the guild chose to include marriages for which there has not been a study owner, these could easily be held in an orphan study and would still be searchable from a single search by guild members. A far better approach in my opinion to the efforts taking place to recreate huge databases of marriages once again. Paul Millington Member No. 2181 _____________________________________________ RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I've been trying to find an easy way of explaining DNA to drum up more support for my surname study,and have put a post on my blog https://sennettfamilytree.wordpress.com/ entitled "Genealogical DNA for Dummies". Not being a DNA expert at all, but just wanting to get folk enthused about the possibilities, I'm not sure if my post has hit the mark. I'd therefore be interested to get any feedback on whether folk here think what I have written explains enough (but not too much) that it would encourage someone to look a bit more into taking a DNA test. In the interests of not clogging up the mailing list, it might be easier to send feedback directly to me at sennett@one-name.org Thanks. Corinne Curtis #5579

Hi Ann, You can print your own U.S. postage via stamps.com, but I'm not sure how you would calculate the correct amount -- just go a bit overboard, I guess. Otherwise, would you be willing to have a 3rd party stateside serve as a go-between? I'd be more than willing to do that (only because you said "Pythonesque"), even though I'm about as far away from Massachusetts as you can get outside of Alaska and Hawaii. -Mark Bunch Othello, Washington, USA GOONS #6223 ---------------------------------------- > Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 20:58:36 +0000 > To: GOONS@rootsweb.com > Subject: [G] Massachusetts marriage > From: goons@rootsweb.com > > > > I have a Pythonesque problem getting details of a marriage from > the City Clerk’s office in XXX,Massachusetts & wondered if anyone > has hit similar, & whether they found an answer. Bear in mind that > I live in the UK. > > FEES: The fee is $20 & should be paid using cash or a money order. > No personal cheques are acceptable. I offered to pay via Visa but > that’s not acceptable. I offered PayPay (and I would bear the cost > of the charges which usually accrue to the recipient) but that’s not > acceptable either. Mentally resigned myself to getting the dollars. > > POSTAGE: Subsequently I was told that I must provide “a self > addressed pre paid envelope”. > I explained that the website of the US Embassy in London > says”"There is no retail outlet for U.S. stamps in the UK". > I offered to pay the postage costs by adding extra dollars to the > amount I would be sending. That’s not acceptable..... “The City of > XXX does not have the means to send mail to England.” > > To get around the thorny postage problem I asked if the item could > be scanned & sent as an attachment to an email....guess what - > they “can not send Vital Records via email”! > > The one pro-active suggestion made by this department was that > they had a mailer who used FEDEX. Not being familiar with > Fedex I’ve pottered around their website, but think I must > (surely!) have misunderstood the calculation process as it appears > to be quoting US$56 or $81 depending on urgency. > > Ideas anyone??? > > best > Anne H. > 1020 Lyford > > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi All, In a reply to my comments/views of the so called Worldwide Marriage Index I was amazed to see that they are to be put in the Public Domain. I presume all contributers have agree to that happening, has the possible infringement of copyright been fully investigated and that the Committee has also concurred to this publication. I think not, (see Minutes of meetings on 13 sep 2014 & 15 Nov 2014 & submitted papers by Paul MILLINGTON 10 pages & Anna SHANKLAND, 12 pages, the latter being with drawn). Again it is my understanding that the terms & conditions of the WMI are the same as those for the GMI that entries should contain at least one registered name, if not then it has no relevance to the members of the Guild of One Name Studies Further more I note that the whole issue of the Guild Indexes has been discussed at length within the Committee (again see Minutes of meetings on 13 sep 2014 & 15 Nov 2014 & submitted papers by Paul MILLINGTON 10 pages & Anne SHANKLAND, 12 pages, the latter being with drawn) with no firm conclusion reached. Confusion reigns in my reading of those minutes as to why the GMI has to be singled out for being 'English' and to be not 'worldwide', it is solely related to England just the same as the SMI is so 'Scottish' and the proposed Irish marrige index is so 'Irish'. One is left wondering what was said at the 31 Jan 2015 meeting on the subject and if any decision reached? No doubt this contentious issue will be the subject of many more discussions and may be the platform of prospective candidates for the next elected committee (if an there is an election of course). Sadly due to personal reasons I cannot stand as a candidate but if circumstances were different I would love to be on the Committee even it meant staying up all night to attend :-)) Regards Tony Anthony John MINGAY, now in NZ once of Kent & Suffolk, England but still researching Worldwide the surname MINGAY & its variants. http://www.mingayhistory.co.uk.

Hi One-Namers Everywhere Do we have a member living in Jersey, Channel Islands who may be willing to do some lookups and look for a grave or two in the Island. John P Laws Registrar Laws Family Register Putting Flesh on the Bones of History wwww.lawsfamilyregisterr.tribalpages.com www.lawsandlawes.blogspot.com

I appreciate your concerns, Tony, but going back to first principles, if publication and sharing information are key principles in one name studies, then surely putting as much out into the public domain as possible is an important way to go - remembering that the public still don't get full access (it is after all just an index) and still have to contact the registered study to get more than just basic index references. As for study names or non-study names - any name has the potential to become a study name in the future. Why artificially restrict it to just those who have currently signed up? - especially as we now have the option of indicating "surnames of interest" rather than only registered study names. I'm not convinced GOONS has the most useful arrangement of indexes - yet - but the only way it can develop is by members trusting the process, and contributing index information (note that I'm saying "index information", not full details) in an unrestricted and permanent way to allow the committee and officers to test, adapt, and develop a resource that has increased dramatically in size since I became a member, that potentially has uses to members as well as providing a contact point between members and the general public. There is still confusion about the purpose of the Indexes, and it would be good for the committee to clarify this, but putting too much restriction or rules on how contributions are to be used or who "owns" them at this stage isn't going to be useful at all. I also don't believe copyright is an issue at all for an index created by the independent academic effort of contributors if the contributors themselves waive any copyright. And to show my support for the indexes, I'm in the process of tidying up my marriages spreadsheet and will be very shortly sending it in with all 7500 or so marriage references - no strings attached - to be included as deemed appropriate by the index coordinator in any GOONS index. Corinne Curtis #5579 On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 11:50 PM, mingay via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Hi All, > In a reply to my comments/views of the so called Worldwide > Marriage Index I was amazed to see that they are to be put in the > Public Domain. I presume all contributers have agree to that happening, has > the possible infringement of copyright been fully investigated and that the > Committee has also concurred to this publication. ......... > > > Regards Tony > Anthony John MINGAY, now in NZ once of Kent & Suffolk, England but still > researching Worldwide the surname MINGAY & its variants. > http://www.mingayhistory.co.uk. >

Hello John, In my own experience with the Bunch Y-DNA Surname Project, it has been much easier to recruit Americans (currently ~60 test results) than Britons (currently 0 tests), but I'm still actively seeking ways to turn that around. One thought I've had is to post to my website the first few generation of the largest British Bunch family trees I've come across in the course of one-name research -- maybe someone searching on a particular name/place will come across the trees there and be motivated to do a DNA test. Since you asked, here' the text of my direct reply to Corinne: Hi Corinne, I'm facing the same dilemma of providing a brief-but-informative overview of DNA testing for genealogy to an audience. I'm to give a ~30 minute presentation at a genealogy fair in North Carolina in June -- about half to be devoted to explaining the DNA tests used for genealogical purposes, the other half to talking about my surname project. It's the first half that I'm more concerned about! I think your presentation is fine, but everyone would "skin a cat" a bit differently, so here are my two bits: You might do well to mention the two other main types of test besides y-DNA (mitochondrial DNA and autosomal DNA), just to forestall any confusion when your potential contributors head off to FTDNA's website. I think all you would need to do is mention them, then immediately segue to, "but the type of test we're interested in HERE concerns y-DNA." If you do mention autosomal DNA testing, you might do well to say something about autosomal chromosomes and to mention that the sex chromosomes (x & y) present a special case of them. There are actually two types of mutations on y-chromosomes -- "single nucleotide polymorphism" (SNP) mutations that happen rarely and are pretty much irreversible, and "short tandem repeat" (STR) mutations that happen much more frequently and can go backward as well as forward (repeated segments can be added or subtracted from one generation to the next). HaploGROUPS are concerned with SNP mutations, and are an indication of deep (ancient) ancestry, going into the tens of thousands of years. HaploTYPES (the strings of digits posted to surname project websites) are concerned with STR mutations, and tend to be an indication of much more recent ancestry. There's a bit of confusion about this distinction caused, in part, by the fact that FTDNA (for the most part) only offers STR testing, but uses the results of an STR test (the STR haploTYPE is the result) in conjunction with their database of results to statistically "predict" an individual's SNP haploGROUP. FTDNA used to offer! a test that would directly look at an individual's SNP mutations, but they've since passed that form of testing off to National Geographic's Genographic Project, in a partnership with them (the y-DNA haplogroup results of their Geno 2.0 test can be downloaded directly into FTDNA's database). All of that is probably more information than you want to include, but it might be useful to at least draw a distinction between deep ancestry (SNP) haplogroups and recent ancestry (STR) haplotypes. Terry Barton's "World Families Network" website offers pages that attempt to explain DNA testing to the layman. You might want to add a link to something there (such as http://www.worldfamilies.net/dnatesting) for people seeking more information. I hope you find at least some of these suggestions helpful. Best wishes with your project! -Mark Bunch Othello, Washington State, USA GOONS #6223 ---------------------------------------- > To: goons@rootsweb.com > Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 15:44:30 +0000 > Subject: Re: [G] feedback request > From: goons@rootsweb.com > > As someone who took a Y-chromosome test a year ago and has included a DNA page on my website - to no avail - I would appreciate hearing from anyone experience of this. > > And, as I suspect I'm not alone in this, could I ask that those who respond to Corrine, do so publicly rather than privately. > > In the 21st century, this is an issue of potential interest to all of us. > > John Plester

Corinne and All GOONS Excellent post and while there might be discussion of number and types of indexes on the Guild website (and how best to make use of in future), they are a very useful benefit of our membership. I gather much information when I research (often this has to be transcribed - as photocopies, scans are not allowed AND this information will not be placed online elsewhere) and so the marriage information (and other vital records) is helpful to others. Perhaps one of the names I transcribed is your ONS, or it is one of your registered interested surnames (or would be if you knew others had some information to share). Why not share that data? I view this the same way as those helpful Guild members who send me a link to a website or a scan of an obituary or newspaper article where they found a KEOUGH reference. You can bet that I write down their registered ONS surname and am on the lookout for them where I live (after I send a quick email of thanks for their efforts). Let's think about how we can help each other, add to our Guild's knowledge base, and work together - no strings attached - for our individual members and the Guild. We need to be on the giving and well as the receiving side of any of these efforts. Thanks for the reminder Corinne. Tessa Tessa Keough Guild of One-Name Studies, Member No. 5089 Keough (Keogh, Kough & Kehoe) Registered ONS On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 2:36 AM, Corinne Curtis via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: > I appreciate your concerns, Tony, but going back to first principles, > if publication and sharing information are key principles in one name > studies, then surely putting as much out into the public domain as > possible is an important way to go - remembering that the public still > don't get full access (it is after all just an index) and still have > to contact the registered study to get more than just basic index > references. As for study names or non-study names - any name has the > potential to become a study name in the future. Why artificially > restrict it to just those who have currently signed up? - especially > as we now have the option of indicating "surnames of interest" rather > than only registered study names. > > I'm not convinced GOONS has the most useful arrangement of indexes - > yet - but the only way it can develop is by members trusting the > process, and contributing index information (note that I'm saying > "index information", not full details) in an unrestricted and > permanent way to allow the committee and officers to test, adapt, and > develop a resource that has increased dramatically in size since I > became a member, that potentially has uses to members as well as > providing a contact point between members and the general public. > > There is still confusion about the purpose of the Indexes, and it > would be good for the committee to clarify this, but putting too much > restriction or rules on how contributions are to be used or who "owns" > them at this stage isn't going to be useful at all. I also don't > believe copyright is an issue at all for an index created by the > independent academic effort of contributors if the contributors > themselves waive any copyright. > > And to show my support for the indexes, I'm in the process of tidying > up my marriages spreadsheet and will be very shortly sending it in > with all 7500 or so marriage references - no strings attached - to be > included as deemed appropriate by the index coordinator in any GOONS > index. > > Corinne Curtis #5579 > > On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 11:50 PM, mingay via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: >> Hi All, >> In a reply to my comments/views of the so called Worldwide >> Marriage Index I was amazed to see that they are to be put in the >> Public Domain. I presume all contributers have agree to that happening, has >> the possible infringement of copyright been fully investigated and that the >> Committee has also concurred to this publication. ......... >> >> >> Regards Tony >> Anthony John MINGAY, now in NZ once of Kent & Suffolk, England but still >> researching Worldwide the surname MINGAY & its variants. >> http://www.mingayhistory.co.uk. >> > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

At the Guild Committee last Saturday the Committee decided to extend the Early Bird Booking discount until 17th February. This will give anybody still thinking about coming to join us for an excellent Conference.  I have been helping to compile the Conference Handbook and been able to read precis of each session and they all sound excellent. Here you will find details and links to on line booking or a booking form you can send in by post. http://www.one-name.org/conf2015_Brigg.html We already have about 120 bookings so come and join us, meet new friends or catch up with old ones. Regards Peter