The problem is that stealing will happen no matter what - always has happened, always will happen. I think some just want the answers and don't want to do the work. I don't have a tree on Ancestry (I know I should but, ...) and the few times I have tried to correct someone who has a connection terribly wrong (and I have his family information and offered it to him) people are not all that interested in fixing errors. So agree that there is lots of rubbish out there and we have to go through it and find the gems (like a treasure hunt). I think most GOONs like the process as well as the results. I do like the fact that we can contribute to the Guild's indexes and databases and I will be taking advantage of that in 2015 (on my resolutions list). It took me a few years of membership to learn enough to feel comfortable with registering a surname, and it took me until last month to get my profile up on the website (thanks for the improvements which made it easy for me). But throughout my the past four years I have enjoyed the Journal, the Wiki, the recorded seminars, the presentations at the website, and the hangouts. It appears that I still need a British/American dictionary though - "subs" and "dosh" and who are "Tom, Dick and Harry?" Thanks Tessa Tessa Keough Guild of One-Name Studies, Member No. 5089 Keough (Keogh, Kough & Kehoe) Registered ONS USA West Regional Representative On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Penelope Burton <penelopeburton@gmail.com> wrote: > Tessa, I agree that we need to be careful with language. I might have > used the term "owner" in the past but it really is inappropriate, for > the reasons which you gave. > > I think the "problem" of the "stealing" of data is moot. I do not have > a tree on Ancestry because I was (>10 years ago) fed up with every man > and his dog copying it into bonkers trees with no sourced connection > to any of my ancestors. This is a problem with BURTON, and a cohort of > USA BURTON researchers who are sure we are all descended from some > Norman Knight. We Aren't. > > I have now come to the conclusion that the internet is so full of > rubbish of a genealogical and other nature, that I really should put > all my data (including QUESTED) in the public domain as at least it > will be as correct as I can make it. But this has to wait until I can > get the data as correct as I can.... > > But there is another point, I think. There is a good deal of free data > on the 'net, but much has been monetarised behind paywalls. GOONS does > need to consider this aspect as the subs are quite small and if we end > up as a repository of valuable data, then perhaps we should be > extracting a bit of dosh for Tom, Dick and Harry to get access? > > Penelope Burton > GOONS 4896