I was not offended at all on Dan opinion - the old saying goes " that you can't believe half of what you read or hear" - that is a true statement. If you read a magazine or newspaper article and there is a error in the information then the company will print an apology and correction. I have talked to Les many times and mailed him information on my immediate family which he didn't include my granddaughters in the book and numerous errors on dates, names(my sisters wrong) etc. When he was told about the problem it seemed he could care less - to this day there was no correction made and I think he should have printed up an insert to the book with corrections and data he had received in plenty of time but didn't include in book. In my opinion Les was in a big hurry to get out a book because he talked about doing one for a long time and the contents (no reference source) was a hurry up job. A book is not much good based on hear say unless you have references to back up - even a library does not want to accept one as a donation with no source of references. One of my least favorite authors has been Charles Dodrill of book he printed with no reliable source - I have checked the few references he used in the beginning and they didn't exist and the life William Earl and Rebecca was a tale of fiction... If something is worth doing then it should be done correctly - not a hurry up job just to brag that I done a book. I purchased about five books from Les and hope some day he will correct his records - even Don Norman makes corrections if you send him the additional material. Some one on the web has my mother's age about twelve years older then she was - I don't know how to correct that mistake but there are a lot of people that has copied that date and have their records wrong - the legacy we leave for the future should be right and when you are told its wrong then something should be done to make right. Dan and myself stress every day the important of documents and reference source to all genealogy - especially when submitting for public use. This is my opinion -what good is a thousand names if 999 is not correct - who wants hear -say in their files. If you ever want to join an organization you will not get far on a family story. Family stories are fine and entertaining but unless you can proof that great uncle was a Major I would not write his name as such and swear its true. I know that many on the list will not agree with me but that is how I stand on my principles. If I tell you something regarding genealogy even if its not the answer you would like hear - you can believe that its been checked out and research done on my answer not some ones opinion. We all need to learn from each other - we are cousins and have the same goal -learning about our ancestors. Maybe they are laughing at our antics! Patsy On Sat, 01 Jan 2000 18:01:58 -0500 "HAMRICK,DANIEL" <dhamrick@neo.rr.com> writes: > What should we do? Ignore the errors in the family history? > Pretend they > are true? > Give tacit consent to falsehoods that could easily be determined? > Les Hamrick and J.R. McKinney were given the correct information. > Les got > his separately from me, from Anna Dodrill and Beverly Hamrick. I do > not > believe I attacked them personally. I regard both of them as > friends, and I > would not be offended if they questioned information in my files. > Nor would I be if you did. > > This is not that much about editing. Any history teacher should > similarly object if dates cannot be determined by subtracting the > birth date > from the death date. Is that not pretty basic? > > It has a lot to do with the difference between truth and > falsity. It has > a lot more to do with correct family history than with journalism. > Nevertheless, you better hope the news media doesn't use that > standard. > However, I do have some familiarity with the problem that > develops with > the messenger. > > I am sorry you were offended. > > > dhamrick@neo.rr.com > Dan Hamrick > 402 23rd Street NW > Canton OH 44709 > Phone and fax: 330-454-2376 > > >