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 >