Darrell, This I have to disagree. a lot of them moved down to New Hampshire, Maine, Massachusetts and Rhode Island. I should know because they're my sister's cousins enmasse. Where's the real line? David Samuelsen On 2/15/2013 9:35 PM, Darrell A. Martin wrote: > For example, an announcement about a French Canadian genealogical > conference, held in New Hampshire, would be on topic for the VERMONT > list. Most Vermont researchers know that the Quebec-Vermont border might > as well not exist, genealogically; and one can drive from any place in > Vermont to anywhere in New Hampshire in less than 250 miles. But I would > gently remonstrate with the poster if they sent it to the VTORANGE list. > The specificity of the latter demands a closer connection be made. > > Darrell

On 2/15/2013 11:35 PM, W David Samuelsen wrote: > Darrell, > > This I have to disagree. a lot of them moved down to New Hampshire, > Maine, Massachusetts and Rhode Island. I should know because they're my > sister's cousins enmasse. > > Where's the real line? > > David Samuelsen David: I am not sure what it is that you are disagreeing with. I think the line has to be drawn by the *admin*, as part of the task of communicating with the subscribers what is expected of them. If the admin has made it clear that French Canadian genealogy -- in general -- is on topic for a specific list (as I have done for VERMONT) then a post about a French Canadian gen conference would be on topic for that list; otherwise not. In my opinion, Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont would be natural connections; the southern New England states maybe not so much. But the only state list I admin is VERMONT. I would not have a problem with the admin's decision, either way, for any other state. Even (say) Nebraska, where the French played a large role in the 18th Century.... Darrell