Lisa, I understand what you are saying, but since I am a relatively "new comer" I look at that stuff, and wonder why it is there. Why not just state that Charts #3,4,5,and 6 are no longer available. Just leave the researcher's or researchers' names up there with their address. I spent time trying to figure out why I couldn't get them open. I haven't been part of the disagreements, but felt it was unfair, to have them on there without an explanation. If several people have the same chart with a different opinion, why not put up a short note directing people to Version A, of Chart #?, or Version B of Chart #? This would save all of you the frustration of the nonsense that seems to have gone before. Let those who want to choose whichever version they want. Goodness knows there are enough errors already, so let people make their own mistakes, but forwarn them that it is "Their" choice. I know there are people who will never accept the fact that "they could be Wrong", and they will lead their descendants down the wrong path. You can't stop that from happening, it is their choice. It would appear to me, that all of you had hoped to get the correct information, and thought everyone would agree it was the last word. It will never be the last word, even with the Charts that will open. All it takes is someone to go looking for a person that may have eloped, disappeared, and turned up years later in another state or area, with a family that no one knew existed. There must be some way for all these hard headed Hancocks and their relatives to come up with a reasonable solution. Of course, maybe that is the reason we all have survived! Hard Heads! I would like to view the other Charts, even though I do know how to view Chart #3. Ardath ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lisa" <lpcraven@triad.rr.com> To: <HANCOCK-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 10:59 PM Subject: Re: [HANCOCK-L] Hancock Charts > I would like to clarify one point in Bob's message. We did not volunteer, > we were asked and voted on by the list to put this data together. We have > been bombarded with very nasty emails when there are differences of opinions > on lines. We never agreed to research each line to find out which opinion > was correct. These emails prompted some of the lines to be taken off the > Project site. > > I think each of the members of the committee who put so much time into this > Project, have had their own personal challenges to deal with that we did not > anticipate. That type of thing just happens. It's not an excuse, it's just > a fact of life. > > We sorted thousands of Hancock's in these files to combine each line into > one file. I don't think the Project was too big a job for any of us that > have worked on it, but it does dampen the spirit of the Project when we find > message after message in our mailboxes blasting us over the info on the > website or someone accusing us of playing God because they think we favored > one person's work over another's. We tried very hard to get this done > correctly, but as everyone knows, we all have an opinion, and usually those > opinions are different. > > This is the reason we began linking to researchers own personal websites for > different versions of the same lines. This way, everyone had a voice, and > has their chance to offer their opinion to everyone. It seems this is the > best solution we found to a very difficult situation. > > If you need to flame me over this message, please keep it off the list, and > go directly to me. It can't be any worse than emails I've already received > over this project. > > Lisa > > > Check out my website at > http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Valley/7502/index.html > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <BOBHOP@aol.com> > To: <HANCOCK-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 5:08 PM > Subject: Re: [HANCOCK-L] Hancock Charts > > > > Ardath- > > > > Well-- that should do it! > > > > I think the real reason is that the Hancock Project is too big for the > > volunteers who offered to do it. > > > > The other reason, is that there is one "researcher" who seems slightly > > demented. She kept telling me to change what I had found to what she said > she > > had (from her mother) but would never show what she had. I kept telling > her > > to submit the data and let the powers-to-be decide. This irked Julia and > John > > and there was a spitting contest. The "researcher" was banned and "my" > Chart > > 3 ostracized. > > > > You will probably shake tree now. BobHop > > > > Visit our home page http://mx4.xoom.com/bhop1 > > > > Major family names- Abel, Adams, Anders, Bellisfield, Brock, Byers, Davis, > > Dement, Field, Guffey, Hancock, Hockaday, Hopkins, Irvine, McClanahan, > > Scarbrough, Shipley, Strother, Stonestreet, Wade, Wampler, Westlake > > > > > > ==== HANCOCK Mailing List ==== > > Feel free to post the data you find on HANCOCK > > in your research. Census, bible, wills, marriages, > > deaths, cemetery, deeds, tax lists, and other > > useful data. You might help a cousin who needs it. > > > > > ==== HANCOCK Mailing List ==== > Check out our HANCOCK Project World Wide at: > http://members.aol.com/heatherjvw/Hancock/ >