I don't think many of us are just plucking information off the internet and jotting it down in our books as fact. I use the information people share with me to start ordering records -- census documents, wills, etc. But, I admit, I do short-cut information when I'm posting to see if I can find connections with other researchers. As you say, it takes a lot of time to write out all the proofs and conjectures and most of us don't have that time to do it into a void. When I posted the note about the Griffin/Green family today, I wasn't sure anyone else was researching the family -- and as I mentioned in my subsequent note, I discovered a great number of people are researching those lines -- so I was simply casting out information to see what came back. I look at some of this e-mail as a way to introduce ourselves -- hey, this is who I'm looking at, and this is what I'm hearing/have learned/have found out. Do you have the same information? Where can I find more information? Sometimes, it's as weak as where the devil do I start looking for my family, especially with names as common as Rogers, Green, Griffin, and so on. When I'm contacted, and when I write up my notes, I certainly keep track of the controversies, the differing opinions, and the actual reports from census information, wills, etc. And I share what I learn -- good or bad -- with the others who have shared with me or who contact me later. And that is what has made the Internet a great tool for genealogy -- not that someone else is doing your work for you or that you're sitting around just sucking up information without verifying it, but because it gives you some good ideas where to start looking, and gives you a chance to swap primary source documentation with other researchers. Sandy