In a message dated 7/24/2007 8:34:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: Thank you Charlotte. I for one appreciate your willingness to try to please everyone, and the way you chose to make a decision that affects all of us. You can never please everyone, and in the end you are the one who has to deal with anyone who wants to complain (and no matter what you do, there will always be complaints!!) - you just have to do the best you can. It's obvious to me that you are doing that!! Thanks again - Bonnie Bonnie, Thank you very much! Yes I am trying to do my best. Charlotte ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

In a message dated 7/24/2007 9:24:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: Well, I just did a quick search and someone has Timothy as John's father from Scituate. I'm not sure I believe that. I do know that the Crooker family was in Hingham, MA. You may want to search there. If I find anything, I'll get back in touch with you. Joe Yeah, I have seen his father listed as Timothy also, but never with any documentation. I think it's because his second son's name is Timothy. But his wife's father was Timothy, so I think that is where that name came from. John's first son, however, is John. Thanks for your help!! Bonnie ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

In a message dated 7/24/2007 9:12:09 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: In a message dated 7/24/2007 8:58:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: John Hall b. abt. 1676 m. Abigail White 27 Feb 1725 --John Hall b. 4 Jan 1712 in Scituate, MA m. 1st Deborah Tilden abt. 1735 m. 2nd Zilpha Crooker 1 Sep 1746 This family, if memory serves be correctly, goes back to John Hall of Barnstable, MA. Yes? I have never been able to find out who John's (1676) parents are or where he was born. If you know of information connecting them, and could point me in the right direction that would be great! thanks - Bonnie Well, I just did a quick search and someone has Timothy as John's father from Scituate. I'm not sure I believe that. I do know that the Crooker family was in Hingham, MA. You may want to search there. If I find anything, I'll get back in touch with you. Joe ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

In a message dated 7/24/2007 8:58:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: John Hall b. abt. 1676 m. Abigail White 27 Feb 1725 --John Hall b. 4 Jan 1712 in Scituate, MA m. 1st Deborah Tilden abt. 1735 m. 2nd Zilpha Crooker 1 Sep 1746 This family, if memory serves be correctly, goes back to John Hall of Barnstable, MA. Yes? I have never been able to find out who John's (1676) parents are or where he was born. If you know of information connecting them, and could point me in the right direction that would be great! thanks - Bonnie ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

In a message dated 7/24/2007 8:54:46 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: John Hall b. abt. 1676 m. Abigail White 27 Feb 1725 --John Hall b. 4 Jan 1712 in Scituate, MA m. 1st Deborah Tilden abt. 1735 m. 2nd Zilpha Crooker 1 Sep 1746 This family, if memory serves be correctly, goes back to John Hall of Barnstable, MA. Yes? Joe ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

In a message dated 7/24/2007 7:41:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: Um, who are your Halls in MA and ME? Joseph S. Hall, Jr. Historian, Halls of Rehoboth (Massachusetts with lines into Maine). John Hall b. abt. 1676 m. Abigail White 27 Feb 1725 --John Hall b. 4 Jan 1712 in Scituate, MA m. 1st Deborah Tilden abt. 1735 m. 2nd Zilpha Crooker 1 Sep 1746 ---Lemuel Hall b. 15 Jul 1747 in Marshfield, MA m. 1st Jean Dam 25 Aug 1772 m. 2nd Mary Gatchell Jul 1796 ----John J. Hall b. 14 Aug 1775 in Bowdoin, ME m. Jane Oliver 5 Aug 1800 -----John J. Hall b. 8 Aug 1816 in Bowdoin, ME m. Matilda Delano abt Jan 1837 ------Benjamin Delano Hall b. 23 Sep 1842 in Georgetwon, ME m. Rosilla Cumner 7 Dec 1865 -------Charles William Hall b. 14 Jul 1866 m. Eldora May Wood 20 Jul 1890 --------Clyde Lee Hall b. 22 Jan 1898 in Mt. Vernon, ME m. Elsie Locke 8 Oct 1918 (my husband's grandparents) Anything sound familiar? Bonnie Leighton ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

Thank you Charlotte. I for one appreciate your willingness to try to please everyone, and the way you chose to make a decision that affects all of us. You can never please everyone, and in the end you are the one who has to deal with anyone who wants to complain (and no matter what you do, there will always be complaints!!) - you just have to do the best you can. It's obvious to me that you are doing that!! Thanks again - Bonnie ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

In a message dated 7/24/2007 12:34:45 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: Okay, I usually don't post much to the list because I don't feel I have that much to offer. My Halls were in MA, and ME mostly, so I don't seem to connect with anyone here yet. Um, who are your Halls in MA and ME? Joseph S. Hall, Jr. Historian, Halls of Rehoboth (Massachusetts with lines into Maine). ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

In a message dated 7/24/2007 12:15:48 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: Having stuck with this list and deleted most of the messages for a very long time, I've made the following observation. It is mainly the males of this list who are involved with DNA. Remember.females are excluded! So, when I notice all the upheaval over DNA, it's usually male/female split. Yes, a few females favor DNA stuff, but it is boring to those of us who have no living male relatives who are willing to be tested. Is it that hard to figure out? Guys can DNA all day long, but most females are stuck with the conventional genealogical tools. WHY our DNA should be so different, I have NO clue! But, it DOES make the female Hall feel more than discriminated against. It was a female Hall from this list that got me to do the DNA test, so yes it is that hard to figure out. Joseph S. Hall, Jr. Historian, Halls of Rehoboth ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

In a message dated 7/24/2007 2:55:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: It is my opinion that those administrators who place a blanket prohibition against *any* discussion of *any* aspect of DNA genealogy are doing their lists (meaning, their subscribers) and themselves a huge disservice. In so doing, they make their lists seem antiquated, fuddy-duddy, so very 20TH CENTURY. I'll say it one more time, DNA isn't the problem. Mike Mike, Yes the discussion is done with, I will not allow anyone to browbeat me into not allowing it to be discussed. Thanks, Charlotte ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

In a message dated 7/24/2007 2:11:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: Let me be the first to say - Hallelujah!! Thanks a bunch, Charlotte! Nel Nel, You are welcome! Charlotte ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

Hi everyone, I have a few suggestions to help make the list run more smoothely. Please change the subject line if it is a new discussion. Also please remember that we are all people with feelings and that we need to be kind to each other and treat each other with respect. Another suggestion that I have, is that when you reply to an e-mail, please leave just enough of the old message that will let us know what you are replying to, not the whole entire message. Thank you and now let's have fun researching our HALL'S! Charlotte ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

Thank you so much to everyone who has voted on the discussion of DNA. The results were a huge number for the discussion and not many against it. So I am closing the voting now. DNA can be freely discussed here! Charlotte ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

I'm male, but this is my situation also. Very well said Dianne! Mike -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dianne L. Ward Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 2:51 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [HALL] Why DNA is important even with no male Halls Mary, look at it this way... I have no living male Halls either. I CAN still benefit tremendously from the DNA project. I can document that I am descended from Moses Hall 1710, Nansemond Co. VA through his son Isaac. Now while MY line down from Isaacs grandson John has no males John (and his uncles!) had several brothers who probably DO have living sons out there. If THEY can document their relationship to Moses 1710 we share DNA from old Moses' ancestors. I follow the DNA study closely in hope that someday one of those other lines coming down from Moses 1710 will be tested and we can connect to compare notes and hopefully document all of these relationships and push our lines back even further. So, we women can't have our own Hall DNA tested but we have just as much a stake in the studies as the men do. .......dianne > > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Charlotte, Thanks! I believe that this is a good decision. In my view, the question should never have been what makes a minority or a majority happy, but rather is DNA genetic genealogy *on topic* for the Hall mailing list. The vote showed people are sophisticated in their knowledge of DNA genetic genealogy and shows its importance in their Hall family genealogical research. More and more, there are great results and connections being made and posted that mention that DNA was the avenue for the discovery and further research. I have a follow-up question that I feel is important. Does this put the DNA genetic genealogy discussion question to rest once and for all or should we expect to see it again when a relatively few subscribers attempt to browbeat you again? It is my opinion that those administrators who place a blanket prohibition against *any* discussion of *any* aspect of DNA genealogy are doing their lists (meaning, their subscribers) and themselves a huge disservice. In so doing, they make their lists seem antiquated, fuddy-duddy, so very 20TH CENTURY. I'll say it one more time, DNA isn't the problem. Mike -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 1:02 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [HALL] Thank You Thank you so much to everyone who has voted on the discussion of DNA. The results were a huge number for the discussion and not many against it. So I am closing the voting now. DNA can be freely discussed here! Charlotte ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

In a message dated 7/24/2007 1:11:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: I am a female with Hall ancestry, my mother was a Hall and I have had a male first and second cousins tested for DNA and we have made a HUGE breakthrough in our Hall brick wall. We could get no further back that Charles Hall born in 1813 and now with DNA testing we have connected to a huge Hall family descended from a William Hall born c. 1730s died before may 1821 in Albemarle Co. VA. There is no way we could or would have made this connection without DNA. Ann Wooten Ann, That is great that you had male cousins who were willing to be tested. I have not had any luck getting any of my male Hall relatives to take the test. Charlotte ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

I am a female with Hall ancestry, my mother was a Hall and I have had a male first and second cousins tested for DNA and we have made a HUGE breakthrough in our Hall brick wall. We could get no further back that Charles Hall born in 1813 and now with DNA testing we have connected to a huge Hall family descended from a William Hall born c. 1730s died before may 1821 in Albemarle Co. VA. There is no way we could or would have made this connection without DNA. Ann Wooten ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

Mary, I am not going to get into a discussion of DNA science on the list. It is wildly inappropriate, but I am willing to answer you (or anyone else) off list why females seem to be excluded on technical grounds. and what to do about it. But, I want to assure you, not only living females seem to be "excluded", but people like me who are male, not with a Hall surname but have Hall ancestry are excluded unless we can find a living cousin who can be our surrogate. I started the Davidson family DNA project almost four years ago, but until 6 months ago I was not represented in the study. My grandmother was a Davidson, but all of the lines daughtered out. It took me until 6 months ago to find someone who could be a test surrogate for me so that I could have a DNA characterization of my family line. I had to find a male living Davidson descendant of a Davidson born in 1790s to find an appropriate cousin. The DNA matched the paper trail. I am now looking for an appropriate Hall. I had hoped that after two years someone would join the study from my Hall family; however, that does not seem to have happened so I am now taking steps to find a Hall surrogate. My 4g-grandfather, Fergus Hall, born in Iredell county, NC, in 1770s was the last male Hall in my line. I cannot find a male line of Halls descended from him. However, I have just recently located a Hall descended from his father Thomas Hall of Iredell county who I hope will be joining the DNA study soon. Maybe this message may help me find someone else. Literally anyone can become involved in the study. Nel is always willing to help people find a way to participate. How to broach the objections. On this list, as in many others, the majority of the people never submit any postings; just out there hoping that someone will mention their family. We have a lot of sharing people active on this list who actually may know of your family, but need to hear from you to get them to look in their records and share data. Your family may in fact already be represented in the study but the link between you and the study participant has just not been found. john. At 12:09 PM 7/24/2007, Mary Marshall wrote: >You asked: > >PS: If we ban DNA discussions from the list, would this message not be >allowed? > >I'd like a chance to have one say, then I'll butt out. > > >Having stuck with this list and deleted most of the messages for a very long >time, I've made the following observation. It is mainly the males of this >list who are involved with DNA. Remember.females are excluded! So, when I >notice all the upheaval over DNA, it's usually male/female split. Yes, a few >females favor DNA stuff, but it is boring to those of us who have no living >male relatives who are willing to be tested. Is it that hard to figure out? >Guys can DNA all day long, but most females are stuck with the conventional >genealogical tools. WHY our DNA should be so different, I have NO clue! But, >it DOES make the female Hall feel more than discriminated against. > >Thanks for letting me say this. > >Mary Hall Marshall (just as much a Hall as the rest of you)

Mary: You have every opportunity to submit a personal sample for analysis of mitochondrial DNA, which will represent your ancestral direct female line. Granted, it's more difficult to follow the female line backwards, due to the fact that we North Americans have, with few exceptions, always been a patriarchal society. Our names are perpetuated through our fathers, and inheritance (and record-keeping) was historically more favorable to sons than to daughters. It's a fact of biology and a fact of history that our research lines have primarily been those of our male ancestors, and that Y-DNA happens to follow those male lines very closely. I paid a lot of money to submit a sample from a third cousin (once removed) whom I've never met, who represents my mother's Hall line, not my male Patrick line. Mother spent forty years looking at microfilms, library records, and courthouse archives, searching for her Hall ancestry, and was always brick-walled at our William Hall (1758-1844). It's gratifying that, even after her death, we might eventually be able to tie Old Willy Hall to the rest of his extended family through Y-DNA comparisons. There's also a chance that we'll never know those answers. Nobody should ever be criticized for unwillingness to participate in DNA project. DNA databases only represent an infinitesimal portion of genealogical data available to us, and DNA is only one tiny little tool. We must avoid the inclination to place too much emphasis on DNA research, simply because it's easy. Our day-to-day creative searches for dependable historical information should never take a second place to the stuff that's in the Y-DNA or mtDNA databases. Best regards, Jim Patrick ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

In a message dated 7/23/2007 12:38:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: Charlotte, Please provide your email for us. Replying directly to your msg will just post it to the list. Thanks, Nel Nel and everyone else, My email address is [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) Thanks, Charlotte ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour