Guess, I'm hard-headed. First I haven't seen any of these emails. BUT- I'm not understanding - How can a email (as statted by you all talking about it) that is advertizing a GENEALOGICAL JAMBOREE EVENT.. Not be on topic for a genealogical list? I'm sort of confused here, just because it is not focaused on a specific surname, area, or time frame... it is a gathering of genealogists thus relevant to any genealogical mailing list. Why else are mailing lists created but to spread/ share/ disseminate data on Genealogy... Nelda L. Percival – Helping with something I believe in: http://www.AWAbosnia.org ; http://inmemoryofvucko.org Please visit our online shop in aid of Bosnia's animals at http://awabosnia.org/shop > From: JYoung6180@aol.com > Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 11:23:30 -0500 > To: darrellm@sprynet.com; > Subject: Re: [LO] Mass Postings on lists... > > Darrell- > > Let me clarify: when I say with the admin's permission I am referring ONLY > to the few lists where this specific announcement would BE considered > on-topic -- not for hundreds of unrelated lists. It doesn't have to be an all > or nothing situation. > > Joan > > > In a message dated 2/14/2013 9:46:44 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > darrellm@sprynet.com writes: > > You had me nodding emphatically right up until "AND with permission of > the admins of those lists." I disagree with that. A posted announcement > is either within my list rules, including relevancy, and DOES NOT NEED > my permission; or is not within my list rules, and CANNOT GET my > permission. > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LISTOWNERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

There are now over 250 copies of the announcement and staff has been removing them when reported. -----Original Message----- From: Darrell A. Martin darrellm@sprynet.com

On 2/13/2013 6:26 PM, JYoung6180@aol.com wrote: > It's been brought to my attention that the post to which I replied earlier > concerned a MASS posting to HUNDREDS of lists of the same identical post. > Obviously a mass posting of this nature and scope would never be relevant to > each of the lists where it has been posted. So while I stand by my earlier > reply, I want to emphasize that I was thinking in terms of a conference > announcement that might be relevant to a few counties like the posts I > sometimes get for my central PA lists. > > The key is still specific relevancy...NO announcement is relevant to > HUNDREDS of lists and should only be posted once or a few times to lists where > there is specific relevancy AND with permission of the admins of those lists. > > Joan Joan: You had me nodding emphatically right up until "AND with permission of the admins of those lists." I disagree with that. A posted announcement is either within my list rules, including relevancy, and DOES NOT NEED my permission; or is not within my list rules, and CANNOT GET my permission. Practically speaking, I have never heard of such mass postings coming from someone who is, and who has been, already subscribed to hundreds of lists. A few dozen lists, sure -- I have seen that. I would argue that is not SPAM, just enthusiasm ... possibly misguided, granted, but a different kind of problem. In my experience those messages are at least relevant to the poster's interests, and likely to be relevant to the lists' topics. Each admin will have her or his own way of dealing with off-topic posts from existing subscribers. The real problem is "hit and run" postings, like the batch we are discussing now. The only practical way to prevent these *as admins* is not to require admin approval in advance -- which will never be requested and therefore CANNOT POSSIBLY work -- but to require admin approval of **subscriptions** (List tools->Privacy options->Require approval). My experience, with my 18 lists, is that this is an effort that is not even close to worth it. Other admins may have different experiences and will find this option useful, which is why I mention it. Darrell

They haven't hit Oklahoma yet. I don't see anything wrong in there posting. Just a link and no mention of costs only "a genealogy happening". Fred

David- The posts are excessive in number...hence spam and they are being posted on lists on which there is no relevancy to the subject of the Conference...THAT is the point. Joan In a message dated 2/13/2013 8:48:38 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dsam52@sampubco.com writes: not spam at all.

Fred- It isn't a question of cost...it is a question of VOLUME and RELEVANCY to the lists in question. Joan In a message dated 2/13/2013 9:20:22 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, dittmar_ksa@ou.edu writes: They haven't hit Oklahoma yet. I don't see anything wrong in there posting. Just a link and no mention of costs only "a genealogy happening". Fred

David, They started a second round of mailing. Once I can ignore. Twice is one time too many. I'm usually easy going, but when I see the same thing on list after list, it gets my dander up. I am moderating the culprit. Thanks to everyone who responded. Rel@ively, Patrice At 2/13/2013 09:10 PM, W David Samuelsen wrote: >not spam at all. > >http://genealogyjamboree.us/ > >https://www.facebook.com/genealogyjamboree > >for some reasons, this year was extraordinary in their all out effort in >outreach across many states and counties. > >They posted once in each county mailing list. > >W. David Samuelsen

As the Admin of 3 Tennessee county lists, they've hit all three of mine some time ago. Following are three known email addresses that I am aware of: sparky@netmichigan.net david@genealogyjamboree.us giegerg@hotmail.com Be aware though they advertise this jamboree in Tennessee as far away at Pennsylvania, Alabama and Kansas that I'm personally aware of so you are likely to find them anywhere. All of the posts I read were virtual clones of each other, so that is spam so far as I am concerned. David E. Cann decann@infionline.net -----Original Message----- From: listowners-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:listowners-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Lainee Denton-Jones Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 3:31 PM To: Listowners-L@rootsweb.com; genealogy@cfl.rr.com Subject: Re: [LO] Genealogy Jamboree Patrice, I am getting tons of them...I get them every year. Not on any list I admin so far or I would have dumped the person by now. They are just on lists that subscribe too. Apparently, they do a genealogy jamboree every year...but I still think it is spam and crossposting and should be dealt with...I just can't! LOL Lainee <ship>

It's been brought to my attention that the post to which I replied earlier concerned a MASS posting to HUNDREDS of lists of the same identical post. Obviously a mass posting of this nature and scope would never be relevant to each of the lists where it has been posted. So while I stand by my earlier reply, I want to emphasize that I was thinking in terms of a conference announcement that might be relevant to a few counties like the posts I sometimes get for my central PA lists. The key is still specific relevancy...NO announcement is relevant to HUNDREDS of lists and should only be posted once or a few times to lists where there is specific relevancy AND with permission of the admins of those lists. Joan

not bulk mailing because it was different times to different states. Few persons working together in biggest outreach ever this year. Bulk mailing means direct to you instead of proper mailing lists. They were careful not to hit any non-genealogy lists. David Samuelsen On 2/13/2013 2:57 PM, Paul L LeBlanc wrote: > > Was it customized for that list? > > Otherwise it is a bulk mailing. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: M Nickless > > I saw it come through on the MOCEDAR list two or three weeks ago. It looks > like it’s on the up-and-up, but I just deleted since there’s no way I could get > there. > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LISTOWNERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

not spam at all. http://genealogyjamboree.us/ https://www.facebook.com/genealogyjamboree for some reasons, this year was extraordinary in their all out effort in outreach across many states and counties. They posted once in each county mailing list. W. David Samuelsen On 2/13/2013 1:17 PM, genealogy@cfl.rr.com wrote: > Hi, > > Are you all getting emails for the Genealogy Jam-boree in Tazwell, Tenn? > > I am beginning to suspect a lot of cross posting. Or is it spam? > > Rel@ively, > Patrice > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LISTOWNERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

As far as lists are concerned there isn't really a "bulk mailing" policy as long as each list admin allows and approves of one-time announcements the admin deems suitable for their lists. This type of announcement is left to each admin. This wouldn't be true on the boards where cross-posting is discouraged and I personally prefer if a would-be announcement posts wants to post on one of my lists that they contact me privately first to make sure their announcement is relevant and well formatted for the list --- but there is no global policy on lists about cross-posting. Joan In a message dated 2/13/2013 4:58:36 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, pleblan@aim.com writes: Was it customized for that list? Otherwise it is a bulk mailing. -----Original Message----- From: M Nickless I saw it come through on the MOCEDAR list two or three weeks ago. It looks like it’s on the up-and-up, but I just deleted since there’s no way I could get there. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LISTOWNERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Was it customized for that list? Otherwise it is a bulk mailing. -----Original Message----- From: M Nickless I saw it come through on the MOCEDAR list two or three weeks ago. It looks like it’s on the up-and-up, but I just deleted since there’s no way I could get there.

Hi, Are you all getting emails for the Genealogy Jam-boree in Tazwell, Tenn? I am beginning to suspect a lot of cross posting. Or is it spam? Rel@ively, Patrice

Patrice, I am getting tons of them...I get them every year. Not on any list I admin so far or I would have dumped the person by now. They are just on lists that subscribe too. Apparently, they do a genealogy jamboree every year...but I still think it is spam and crossposting and should be dealt with...I just can't! LOL Lainee -----Original Message----- From: genealogy@cfl.rr.com Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 2:17 PM To: Listowners-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [LO] Genealogy Jamboree Hi, Are you all getting emails for the Genealogy Jam-boree in Tazwell, Tenn? I am beginning to suspect a lot of cross posting. Or is it spam? Rel@ively, Patrice ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LISTOWNERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I saw it come through on the MOCEDAR list two or three weeks ago. It looks like it’s on the up-and-up, but I just deleted since there’s no way I could get there. From: genealogy@cfl.rr.com Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 12:17 PM To: Listowners-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [LO] Genealogy Jamboree Hi, Are you all getting emails for the Genealogy Jam-boree in Tazwell, Tenn? I am beginning to suspect a lot of cross posting. Or is it spam? Rel@ively, Patrice ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LISTOWNERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Darrell A. Martin wrote: > Well said. Without questioning how other admins do things, I agree with > you that moderation (whether of new subscribers or of whole lists) is > not intended to be a regular, normal tool of list administration. It is > like a fire extinguisher; where there is smoke and flame, sure, use it. > But don't spray the stove before every use "just in case"!! I think an element of personal experience also comes into it as well. > I hasten to say that I have seen Charani's posts enough to suspect that > with her caution, she combines diligence. Messages sent to *her* lists > do not sit around for hours waiting for her to make time to check how > things are going. For her, moderation and subscriber verification are > tools to keep a list running smoothly -- not a way to sacrifice > subscriber convenience on the altar of total security. If that is true, > Charani, bless you! Don't change a thing. Thank you for your kind words :)) I have the dubious advantage of being around a lot ot the time because half my family is disabled. If I am going to be out of any length of time, I'll take my laptop with me. I know my way of working won't suit the majority of admins, but it works for me and trouble is stopped almost before it starts and in some cases before it starts. The only ones that might wait longer than normal are those where I'm not sure what to do about them for some reason. None of my lists are run in full moderation as a matter of course. > I am concerned that if our RootsWeb mailing lists do not provide > **quick** responses, younger genealogists (say, anyone currently under > 40) will write them off as useless -- archaic relics of a world before > computers, run by old fuddy-duddies who have nightmares about the > Internet sneaking in the window. It will be much worse if they turn out > to be *RIGHT*. Many researchers of all ages now expect instant answers and I think a percentage do give up when they don't get those answers, when it means waiting until the next batch of images or transcripts is uploaded or - shock, horror - having to actually visit an archive! Genealogists and patience don't go together for the most part :)) -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, Greinton and Clutton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

On 2/7/2013 2:54 PM, mbousman wrote: [snip] > If there is trouble I do moderate new subscribers for a day or two. > Otherwise I leave them alone and they have to do something wrong to be > moderated. Personally I don't feel that the RootsWeb's lists are meant to > moderate everyone until they "prove" themselves. If I posted new on a list a > had to wait on an admin to getting around to approving it...I'd leave. I > have a couple of state lists and international lists besides my small > surnames and just about everyday people join those lists and post within an > hour. For the big ones many only stay for a few days until they have > received their help. I'd have to live on my email to send them through and > I guess approve each join so I could moderate them immediately. That's just > not what it's about for me. > > I'm not saying your choice is wrong, but I do think it needs to be said to > newbie's reading that moderation is not "the thing to do anyway" for many of > us. Moderation to me is a tool to use when needed. If I'm supposed to > police every address everyday I think I'd quit. > > Have a good one and enjoy your lists! > Margy Margy: Well said. Without questioning how other admins do things, I agree with you that moderation (whether of new subscribers or of whole lists) is not intended to be a regular, normal tool of list administration. It is like a fire extinguisher; where there is smoke and flame, sure, use it. But don't spray the stove before every use "just in case"!! I hasten to say that I have seen Charani's posts enough to suspect that with her caution, she combines diligence. Messages sent to *her* lists do not sit around for hours waiting for her to make time to check how things are going. For her, moderation and subscriber verification are tools to keep a list running smoothly -- not a way to sacrifice subscriber convenience on the altar of total security. If that is true, Charani, bless you! Don't change a thing. But for other lists, including a few to which I subscribe, the heavy, trembling hand of a fearful admin is all too evident. I sometimes wonder why I stay subscribed, except these lists have so little traffic that it is hardly a bother.... I am concerned that if our RootsWeb mailing lists do not provide **quick** responses, younger genealogists (say, anyone currently under 40) will write them off as useless -- archaic relics of a world before computers, run by old fuddy-duddies who have nightmares about the Internet sneaking in the window. It will be much worse if they turn out to be *RIGHT*. My grandmother began to hand off the family history to me when I was 19. She was a Vermont farm wife, with almost no experience of such new-fangled things as photocopiers, and no opportunity to visit a research library that I know of. For me, such things were second nature for almost three decades. The Newberry and Allen County Public libraries are within an easy drive; the Chicago NARA branch and a Mormon FHC would be within *bicycle* range, if it weren't for the arthritic hips and knees (and of course Chicago weather). I do not believe Grammie ever even used a microfilm reader. She did have a typewriter, and oh, could she write letters. Still, if she had expected me to do genealogy the same way she did, AT THE SAME PACE that was natural to her, I would probably have taken up some more exciting hobby, like stamp collecting. Ancestry.com and FamilySearch.org (e.g.) provide nearly instantaneous results, if they have the data. Internet research is now the norm for me. Among other things, this means if I can't find a link to an image of a primary source in 15 minutes, I conclude none is available yet. If I subscribed to a RootsWeb list and posted a message, and did not see my post appear within an hour or two, I *might* wait. But then again (after doing the usual checks to ensure I was correctly subscribed) I might suspect a "heavy, trembling hand" was involved -- sigh -- and go find some other place to ask questions. Darrell

M Nickless wrote: > I did a Google search and found this email address associated with > a young woman who has a site called “Princess Poetry”. > http://princesspoetry.webs.com/ Her “contact me” link even > lists a postal address. Seems safe, but I’d moderate if in > doubt. Many thanks. Concensus is she's OK. I'll see how she posts. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, Greinton and Clutton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

Admins run the lists they manage for RootsWeb differently, every list has its own personality in my opinion. I've run lists here for 12 years and for the most part enjoy it, I dislike it when turmoil breaks out and then put the whole list on moderation until things settle and many times keep the trouble maker on until they behave themselves long enough. (some have never come off :) ) I also moderate anyone with a computer virus sending links to the lists. If there is trouble I do moderate new subscribers for a day or two. Otherwise I leave them alone and they have to do something wrong to be moderated. Personally I don't feel that the RootsWeb's lists are meant to moderate everyone until they "prove" themselves. If I posted new on a list a had to wait on an admin to getting around to approving it...I'd leave. I have a couple of state lists and international lists besides my small surnames and just about everyday people join those lists and post within an hour. For the big ones many only stay for a few days until they have received their help. I'd have to live on my email to send them through and I guess approve each join so I could moderate them immediately. That's just not what it's about for me. I'm not saying your choice is wrong, but I do think it needs to be said to newbie's reading that moderation is not "the thing to do anyway" for many of us. Moderation to me is a tool to use when needed. If I'm supposed to police every address everyday I think I'd quit. Have a good one and enjoy your lists! Margy -----Original Message----- From: listowners-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:listowners-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Deloris Williams Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 12:10 PM To: listowners@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LO] An iffy address As a general rule, I put all new subscribers on moderation until they at least post a couple of legitimate messages. The address looks genuine, but even if it isn't, putting it on moderation is the thing to do anyway. Deloris Williams -------------------------------------------------- From: "Charani" <charani.b@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 6:43 AM To: <LISTOWNERS@rootsweb.com> Subject: [LO] An iffy address > I've had a subscription request to one of my lists from > hrh_princess_hannah@hotmail.co.uk which sounds a little suspicious but > may not be. > > I've done a check in the archives with no results. > > Anyone see this address before? Or just a new researcher with a not > so bright idea for an email address? > > S/he would be put on mod immediately as a precaution if no one has any > issues with him/her. > > -- > Charani (UK) > OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, > Greinton and Clutton, SOM > http://wsom-opc.org.uk > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LISTOWNERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LISTOWNERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message