On 2/29/2012 5:22 PM, W David Samuelsen wrote: > It will not be off topic at all and will not be moderated. There are > still many who have not signed on to volunteer to index. > > https://www.familysearch.org/1940census > > Indexes created by volunteers will be shared through FamilySearch, > brightsolid.com and archives.com > > Other than that,I will watch for any discussion that might spiral out of > control. > > Let's see 10 years ago when 1930 came out, there wasn't much discussions > either. David: If memory serves correctly, 10 years ago there was much less anticipation of *immediate online* availability of the data, and still there was a *LOT* of discussion. At least on the lists I subscribed to but did not admin. > Answers to your questions. This is an illustration of exactly how people do not always understand what is being asked, and things get out of hand. I *KNOW* the answers to each of the questions. I am not at all interested in reading the answers ... again ... but in a discussion of how my fellow admins plan on dealing with the issue of the questions being asked, probably repeatedly (if they plan on dealing with the issue at all). ... > 5. It won't be slow and only slow if you're dependent on local dialup > service. I hope you are right. But I have heard "it won't be slow" before. And, "we are from the government and we are here to help" and "the check is in the mail". Ask anybody who dealt with the computer system at the Census Bureau during the 2010 federal enumeration. I am one who did. But hey, maybe this time it will be true! ... Darrell

Darrell A. Martin wrote: > This is an illustration of exactly how people do not always > understand what is being asked, and things get out of hand. I > *KNOW* the answers to each of the questions. I am not at all > interested in reading the answers ... again ... but in a discussion > of how my fellow admins plan on dealing with the issue of the > questions being asked, probably repeatedly (if they plan on dealing > with the issue at all). If other list admins aren't understanding you, then maybe you ought to be clearer, and less tetchy when you are misunderstood. If you didn't want answers to your example questions, there was no need to include them. A simple "how are other admins planning on dealing with the possibly repeated questions about such things as enlarging images, etc, if at all" would probably have sufficed, or repeating the subject line in the body of the mail. Screaming at people not to write to you directly or address replies to you (when the list appears to be set for replies to go to both the list AND the sender) isn't going to help you either. Eventually admins will start ignoring you completely. So: "Will 1940 Census be OT on your lists?" No. Better? -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk http://www.savethegurkhas.co.uk/