I'm going to jump in some deep water here, probably risking life & limb, but I am an Ancestry.com subscriber. I am wondering if this concern could be alleviated somewhat if Ancestry.com made a more consciencious effort to require that GEDCOM submissions be annotated with sources, which 99.9% don't currently include. As a subscriber, I would also be happier if Ancestry.com did a better job of keeping Email addresses current for these files. Don't know how that could be accomplished, but there is nothing more frustrating that find a morsel that's important to you, sending off an Email and having it bounce back as no longer valid. In order for Ancestry.com to maintain its credibility, however, the issue of sources is critical. Thanks, this is a useful discussion on a volatile topic. Regards, Ellen Bisson mailto:thebissons@worldnet.att.net John M. Scroggins wrote: > > GF> If, John, we, on the other side of the coin, can help get Ancestry > GF> in line with our desires and your company can be an example for the > GF> other companies then let's thread this for a bit with your > GF> answer/rebuttal here. > > OK, I'll try to reply point by point. I'll spread my answer out over > several messages (not all at once), and I'll only quote the parts I'm > responding to in each message so that I don't sent this whole thread to > the list over and over again. > > For purposes of introduction, I'll state that > > (1) I have been employed by Ancestry.com for just under a year. > > (2) I was on the staff of the National Archives for over 35 years, > most of that in management positions. During that time I created NARA's > regional archives system and ran it for over 13 years, I managed the > development of NARA's first automated system for controlling the records > in the 70's, I ran the NARA microfilm program in the late 60's, and I > worked at both personnel records center buildings in St. Louis in 1962 > and 63. > > (3) I have roots in Macoupin and Madison counties and spent time in > the records in both courthouses and walking through cemeteries during > several visits to the area around 1970. > > John M. Scroggins > Director of Electronic Records > Ancestry.com > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gloria Frazier [mailto:glofra@townsqr.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 1999 12:54 PM > > To: ILMACOUP-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: RE: [ILMACOUP-L] FYI - Ancestry Reply > > Importance: High > > > > > > If, John, we, on the other side of the coin, can help get Ancestry > > in line with our desires and your company can be an example for the > > other companies then let's thread this for a bit with your > > answer/rebuttal here. You have to admit that you and your company > > are making a dime. And you have to admit that I am not making money > > so I don't have a penny for a lawsuit against you and your company > > which makes it easier for your company to use my data without > > asking me. So, companies can use any excuse needed to squelch me. > > > > Unless someone requests more family info from me because I > > supposedly submitted data to a company or they send me to Ancestry > > or FTM or another business site, I don't have time to check them out. > > > > I really want to say here, ahhhh, my time is spent spending > > hundreds of dollars to put free censuses, births, rosters, etc on > > the Macoupin page, but I won't. I could have made my money back by > > selling all this information to Macoupin researchers. Anyway, as > > long as I don't think about making money, it doesn't bother me. > > > > A side note: In fact, the best dream I could have is if a company > > like yours would go to Macoupin County or any county and offer them > > a very goodly sum of money for all the pre 1925 records in the dome > > which are rotting and then the pre 1925 records in the offices and > > I could buy them on CD. > > > > I definitely do not mind at all buying CDs with data from archives, > > court records, or even proven data. I certainly do not like the CD > > comeons where you only get a sort of sampling of data from areas. I > > call that using the consumer. > > > > By proven data I mean if a date is there, reference the date of > > marriage, death, birth, Bible, will, tombstone record with a > > book/page/cemetery number/name then we know what weight to put on > > the proof knowing well that no data is fullproof. > > > > A submitter to your company sends in data. Do you not put an > > obvious/large title on each submitted tree when the data shows no > > proof such as I mentioned above? > > > > A submitter of data to your company gives my name as a reference. > > My "pain" comes from finding out my first/inital set of research > > data with all the errors and I know the data has been sent in by a > > person who did not ask me/I would have never dreamed but who could > > have only gotten their information from me. The submitter doesn't > > have to answer anyone. It is me, the OTHER name on the data, the > > OTHER name with the incorrect data, who has to answer. Don't you > > think this is a little embarassing for myself?? > > > > And, my name has been put on the data by another submitter, but no > > piece of data has a note/asterisk/footnote that a name/date has not > > been proven by me. > > > > And, for the life of me, I cannot understand why any living name or > > living date needs to be put in the public arena. Researchers and > > companies should know that is just plain common courtesy in > > genealogy not to use living names or dates for public eyes. > > > > Ima thinkin there has to be a better deal without stifling the > > exchange of genealogy research data without a bunch of > > combativeness between parties. The actions of CD companies has cut > > my sharing down to about a third of what I would normally have done > > if my input had been allowed along with the submitter who used my > > information and my name without my knowledge. Isn't it illegal to > > use my name if I didn't wish it without my permission? > > > > Gloria > > > > > > At 10:10 AM 3/17/99 -0500, you wrote: > > >Thank you. I don't really want to try to push Ancestry in > > >non-commercial environments, but I get irritated when people > > accuse us > > >of things we do not do. > > > > > >FYI, Ancestry will be adding more non-subscription services and > > content > > >soon. I'd call them "free", but there really is no "free" > > >data--somebody pays for everything, whether by paying for > > subscriptions > > >or individual searches, by making cash donations, by paying taxes, by > > >reading ads, or by donating labor. In the latter case it's the > > >originator who pays, not the end user, but there is still a cost > > >involved somewhere along the line. > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Gloria Frazier [mailto:glofra@townsqr.com] > > >> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 1999 9:16 AM > > >> To: ILMACOUP-L@rootsweb.com > > >> Subject: [ILMACOUP-L] FYI - Ancestry Reply > > >> Importance: High > > >> > > >> > > >> From: "John M. Scroggins" <scroggjm@erols.com> > > >> To: "Jack Cox" <jack_cox@kc.net>, <MADMANSMON@aol.com>, > > >> "Gloria Frazier" <glofra@townsqr.com> > > >> Subject: RE: [ILMACOUP-L] Uploads to CD Suppliers > > >> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 08:00:11 -0500 > > >> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > > >> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 > > >> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 > > >> Importance: Normal > > >> > > >> Gloria: Since this could be construed as a commercial message, > > I'll > > >> leave it up to you whether to put it on the list to correct the > > >> mistaken > > >> impression that Ancestry.com sells CD's with user-contributed > > files. > > >> > > >> Contrary to what Mr. Cox and Mary (MADMANSMOM@aol.com) imply, > > >> Ancestry.com does NOT sell family tree information on CD's and does > > >> NOT > > >> charge for access to such information users post in order to share > > >> with > > >> other users. > > >> > > >> Gedcom files submitted to Ancestry.com by users are freely > > >> available to > > >> all visitors to the site without subscription; they are not put on > > >> CD's; > > >> and the data is not sold to anybody and never will be. > > Ancestry.com > > >> both makes it easy to contact the submitter directly by providing > > >> email > > >> addresses, but no personal information. And Ancestry.com makes it > > >> easy > > >> for a user to withdraw a file at any time for any reason (as was > > >> recently done by another Scroggin researcher who plans to update > > his > > >> large, well documented file that includes information about a few > > >> early > > >> Macoupin County settlers). > > >> > > >> Most of the CD's produced by Ancestry.com for sale are searchable > > >> copies > > >> of standard reference books ("The Source," "Ancestry's Red > > Book," "The > > >> Library," "The Library of Congress," the Allen County Public > > Library's > > >> "PERiodical Source Index," etc.), not family tree information. > > >> > > >> Most of Ancestry.com's subscription databases are ones for which > > there > > >> was a substantial conversion cost and/or a need to compensate the > > >> copyright owner. As a result, there is a growing amount of > > >> information > > >> online that simply wouldn't be there otherwise. > > >> > > >> Ancestry.com does post large amounts of information that is freely > > >> available without subscription and will continue to do so. And > > >> Ancestry.com will make user-contributed data available for free if > > >> there > > >> is no purchase or conversion cost. > > >> > > >> John M. Scroggins > > >> Director of Electronic Records > > >> Ancestry.com > > >> Subscriber to ILMACOUP-L > > >> (Scroggins, Gaskill, Tatum in Macoupin and Madison before 1856) > > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: Jack Cox [mailto:jack_cox@kc.net] > > >> > Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 1999 9:28 PM > > >> > To: ILMACOUP-L@rootsweb.com > > >> > Subject: [ILMACOUP-L] Uploads to CD Suppliers > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > I share Gloria Frazier's concerns about posting information > > >> > up to the various on-line "collectors" such as Ancestry and > > >> > Family Tree Maker. All of these CD makers encourage you to > > >> > post your information in order to "share" it with other > > >> > researchers. If it was sharing, they wouldn't be charging > > >> > what they do for the disks. I don't begrudge them a profit, > > >> > but earning money on my hard earned information - > > >> > particularly after I shelled out the money for their > > >> > software - seems a bit off center to me. > > >> > > > >> > I see a real problem here. If we don't share our > > >> > information, then how will we continue to help the other > > >> > researchers out there? On the other hand, if we do share, > > >> > our information can be misused, and at best will lead people > > >> > down the wrong path. > > >> > > > >> > Personally, I have never bought a CD from any of the family > > >> > tree program companies. I have looked at their info when > > >> > they have "free" promotions, but have found little that > > >> > hellps me, and unfortunately, the "proofs" are very thin and > > >> > usually nonexistant. Unfortunately, I have even found many > > >> > serious errors in the information provided by LDS. > > >> > > > >> > I do, on occasion, add information to my "cousins" part of > > >> > the tree without complete verification - at least from > > >> > people I trust, and if there are enough clues to indicate a > > >> > probable fit. However, if no annotation of source is > > >> > included, I take it as unproven. > > >> > > > >> > My recommendation . . . don't post information you have > > >> > gotten from others without their permission, and never post > > >> > it without credit. Posting unproven data is probably the > > >> > worst idea of all. > > >> > > > >> > I have long had a personal rule that I will never "post up" > > >> > my information to one of the "CD" sites. However, I will go > > >> > out of my way to share information with anyone who needs > > >> > help. > > >> > > > >> > My two cents worth . . . > > >> > > > >> > Jack Cox > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: MADMANSMOM@aol.com [mailto:MADMANSMOM@aol.com] > > >> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 1999 12:20 AM > > >> To: ILMACOUP-L@rootsweb.com > > >> Subject: Re: [ILMACOUP-L] Uploads to CD Suppliers > > >> > > >> > > >> In a message dated 99-03-16 21:35:48 EST, you write: > > >> > > >> << I share Gloria Frazier's concerns about posting information > > >> up to the various on-line "collectors" such as Ancestry and > > >> Family Tree Maker. >> > > >> I agree with both Jack and Gloria. The only good thing I see about > > >> FTM > > >> and > > >> Ancestry is that maybe someone will purchase the CDs and happen > > to be > > >> connected to you and then contact you to share and update the > > >> information. > > >> Maybe that is a dreamers attitude. Mary > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> ==== ILMACOUP Mailing List ==== > > >> Difference between ILMACOUP-L and ILMACOUP-D: > > >> ILMACOUP-L mailing list allows you to receive every posting > > >> made to ILMACOUP as a separate email. > > >> ILMACOUP-D mailing list allows you to receive several > > >> postings as a single large message. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------ > > Gloria Frazier > > Macoupin County ILGenWeb County Coordinator > > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ilmacoup/macoupin.htm > > > > > > ==== ILMACOUP Mailing List ==== > > To unsubscribe from ILMACOUP-L-request@rootsweb.com, send a message to > > ILMACOUP-L-request@rootsweb.com > > that contains in the body of the message the command > > unsubscribe > > and no other text. No subject line is necessary, but if your > > software requires one, just use unsubscribe in the subject, > > too. AOL requires a subject line. > > > > ==== ILMACOUP Mailing List ==== > If you need a Macoupin County Professional Researcher please check out: > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ilmacoup/m_pros.htm