To help you connect to my RYANS. My Great Grandfather was William J RYAN born 1868 from the Mahanoy City area of PA. His parents are both from Ireland as shown on the 1900 Phila Census. In 1900 he is shown living in Phila with his wife's family and his own family. I have not found out when they all moved to Phila , but I assume it was shortly after 1890. I have a recreated baptismal certificate from St Canicus Church in Mahanoy City for Oct 16 1868 for William RYAN born on Oct 12 1868. Father listed as James Ryan. Mother's maiden name Margaret Curry. By Reverend Michael McEvoy. Sponsors Michael Lonergan and Margaret Carr. I have not found any other information about them upstate before the Phila move. William RYAN became a doctor in Phila sometime after 1910 probably graduating from Temple Med School.> My Great Grandmother was Mary Theresa POPPERT (married RYAN) born 1870 probably from the Girardville or Shenendoaha area of PA. Her parents were Valentine POPPERT (formerly Von POPPERT) born 1838 in Germany and Winifried POPPERT (maiden name unknown) born 1838 in Ireland. The Phila addresses that I have found on the census records are: 1900 Valentine POPPERT and family living at 3513 Market St 1910 Wm J RYAN sr and family living at 5145 Westminster Ave 1920 Wm J RYAN sr and family living at 703 55th St 1920 Wm J RYAN jr living at 5522 Osage Ave If this connects with anybody please let me know. I am trying to make the link from 1900 back thru 1890 and 1880 but I understand that this is hard because of missing census records. Sincerely James R RYAN

To help you connect to my RYANS. My Great Grandfather was William J RYAN born 1868 from the Mahanoy City area of PA. His parents are both from Ireland as shown on the 1900 Phila Census. In 1900 he is shown living in Phila with his wife's family and his own family. I have not found out when they all moved to Phila , but I assume it was shortly after 1890. I have a recreated baptismal certificate from St Canicus Church in Mahanoy City for Oct 16 1868 for William RYAN born on Oct 12 1868. Father listed as James Ryan. Mother's maiden name Margaret Curry. By Reverend Michael McEvoy. Sponsors Michael Lonergan and Margaret Carr. I have not found any other information about them upstate before the Phila move. William RYAN became a doctor in Phila sometime after 1910 probably graduating from Temple Med School.> My Great Grandmother was Mary Theresa POPPERT (married RYAN) born 1870 probably from the Girardville or Shenendoaha area of PA. Her parents were Valentine POPPERT (formerly Von POPPERT) born 1838 in Germany and Winifried POPPERT (maiden name unknown) born 1838 in Ireland. The Phila addresses that I have found on the census records are: 1900 Valentine POPPERT and family living at 3513 Market St 1910 Wm J RYAN sr and family living at 5145 Westminster Ave 1920 Wm J RYAN sr and family living at 703 55th St 1920 Wm J RYAN jr living at 5522 Osage Ave If this connects with anybody please let me know. I am trying to make the link from 1900 back thru 1890 and 1880 but I understand that this is hard because of missing census records.

I disagree. I enjoy begin copied on the follow-up. If it relates to me I can keep it and stay in touch with the discussion. If it does not, I simply erase. Please don't assume everyone feels as you do. Kate O'

-----Original Message----- From: Mary Harris <[email protected]> To: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]> Cc: Wayne L II <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]> Date: Sunday, April 12, 1998 8:37 AM Subject: Re: SICK OF GENEALOGICAL SUICIDE TOPIC >Dear fellow listowners and researchers, > >I too am very tired of seeing this thread and would like to see it stopped >as quickly as possible. The only way to do so is for each listowner of a >closed list to sound off and let the recipients of this post know that >their list is closed and to please remove it from the huge cc: list. In >this post, I have removed from the list pacheste-l and padelawa-l, my own >tow lists, which are closeed to outside posts. I have also stripped out the >Quaker-Roots list and The Roots-L as I know these are also not open lists. >If each of you will do the same and remove your own closed lists from your >posts in the process, we should be able to dwindle this mess down. For that >matter, you could ask to have folks remove your lists from the cc even if >you're not closed. Either way, the irresponsibility of the original poster >has gone on long enough. BRing this to a close! > >REMOVE FROM CC: > > [email protected] > [email protected] > > > > >Mary Harris, listowner > I had rather see "suicide topic" as all the squawking about it.

This thread is the biggest threat to genealogy. This cross posting to all these lists is going to crash rootsweb! Please stop this thread or take it private. If the average list on this thread has 500 people on it, this post generates over 25,000 posts each time someone replies to it. Maiser, a genealogy server like rootsweb was crashed by a single spam of 10,000 posts and is no more. It never recovered. You are putting rootsweb in danger of doing the same. When you cross post, the computer tries to send out all these messages at once. It not only causes an unbalance but can also backlog all these messages until the system overloads and crashes. Brian who runs rootsweb has posted about how dangerous this practice is and has asked that people cross post to only 3 or 4 at a time (in the case of roots-l that has over 10,000 subscribers, post to it alone.) So please, stop this now. A listowner whose list was spammed by this post.

Dear fellow listowners and researchers, I too am very tired of seeing this thread and would like to see it stopped as quickly as possible. The only way to do so is for each listowner of a closed list to sound off and let the recipients of this post know that their list is closed and to please remove it from the huge cc: list. In this post, I have removed from the list pacheste-l and padelawa-l, my own tow lists, which are closeed to outside posts. I have also stripped out the Quaker-Roots list and The Roots-L as I know these are also not open lists. If each of you will do the same and remove your own closed lists from your posts in the process, we should be able to dwindle this mess down. For that matter, you could ask to have folks remove your lists from the cc even if you're not closed. Either way, the irresponsibility of the original poster has gone on long enough. BRing this to a close! REMOVE FROM CC: [email protected] [email protected] Mary Harris, listowner

ENOUGH!!! I am only on two of the mentioned lists and have had over 45 emails about this. This has nothing to do with the two county lists I belong to. LISTOWNERS...PLEASE have them move this to a genealogy CHAT list. I have recently dropped other lists for the same reason. If I drop these as well, many people in my two list counties will miss 1)possible connections I always send them and 2)Lookups I do for people in one of those counties with reference materials I have here. If all of you are so worried about genealogy being researched correctly, then quit your bickering and voicing of opinions and get on with your research and let the rest of us work on ours instead of clogging our mailboxes with off topic subjects. Are you all at dead ends or something? It is MY OPINION that the "serous genealogist" has work and research to do. Not idle time for such chit chat and being involved in off topic threads. Now please drop it people. Get on with your research and your lives. Sharon Bowers Barnes

David, You said: "When one piece of erroneous information becomes 1000 pieces of the same erroneous information, it takes on a life of it's own and an enearned "truth". I don't think this is a problem only on the internet. I have seen genealogies done 100 years ago with oodles of errors. I correspond with several OTT families [of different origins] and some of them have their histories so mixed up, I wonder if the will ever straighten them out! Primary sources, primary sources and then that combined with a big handful of caution and good sense and your genealogy might not present a barrier to your descendants. Unfortunately genealogies are not like dissertations with a review committee, etc. They probably should be, but practically never will be. Cora

Clifford Statler wrote: > Can't some of you list owners do something about this tread? > > Brian L. Cartwright wrote: > > > I will say one thing, this is the first time I've ever felt I've been > > spammed. Almost every mailing list I'm on was hit, I had 87 messages > > in my mail, was only about 12 real messages, all the rest were > > repeats...anyway, my two cents > > > > ---------- > > ==== PACUMBER Mailing List ==== > Have you considered joining the Rootsweb Genealogical Data Cooperative? > > http://www.rootsweb.com/rootsweb/how-to-subscribe.html > > For us forgetful types there is new on-line credit card option.

Now it's time for me to add my $.02 cents about this discussion Dave started. I've very new to genealogy research via internet. I, too, did it the old way for quite some time. However, the internet is a wonderful tool! Key word here is Tool! What's always the first place to start? Interviewing relatives, right? Now, how much inaccuracy do we find there? Plenty! But, it's a tool. No matter what our primary or secondary source is, we do have the privilege to accept what we find until it's disproven. Our responsibility is to prove everything - no matter what the source. I think the idea about two sets of records may be beneficial, but if a record contains an erroneous statement about one thing doesn't mean that it can't help someone else who finds it on a website and uses it for their purposes - it may be correct for theirs. Perhaps unverified (or not verified by two or more sources) should be labeled as such. But left off a website - I vote no. I'm still trying to track down the source some really off the wall records on some of my husband's family. But, it's out there somewhere, internet or not, I don't know. But do I want it thrown out? No! I want to find the source, correct it, and move on from there. Some of it may be incorrect, but at least it helped fill in a few blanks spots where it wasn't. And I thank the stars for duplication. It saves me time! I can see where better identification of sources would help, however. Linda Hollenbach Hartzfeld

Can't some of you list owners do something about this tread? Brian L. Cartwright wrote: > I will say one thing, this is the first time I've ever felt I've been > spammed. Almost every mailing list I'm on was hit, I had 87 messages > in my mail, was only about 12 real messages, all the rest were > repeats...anyway, my two cents > > ----------

HI all, I have been reading all of this stuff about geneaglogical suicide and I do think there is far too much mis-information being posted on the net. I for one do not post my families information without theor consent. That is only for the most recent family members. Next any information I get is always checked out before it is added to my database. I have 2 other ancestors who are doing the research with me and between the 3 of us it all gets verified. If it doesn't check out then it doesn't get entered. Yes, I do think there should be some sort of guidelines for the online geneagolists. Suggestions should be don't post it until you check it out. I hope this all makes sense to you. Diane

“The problem with truth is its verification, the problem with fiction is its veracity.” It is neither the Internet nor its genealogical aspects that is wrong-headed, suicidal, or genocidal. Deamonizing what transpires across genealogy because of the Internet is wrong-headed. Humans have always chosen what they want to believe, frequently in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Critical reflectivity applied to any claim is intelligence applied whether it is genealogy or something else. Information is neither good nor bad but that reflectivity does make it so. Critically reflective intelligence is what we use to derive the value of someone’s claim, to assign it a truth value. The statment of the original problem in the first post is generically true of every human endeavor, not just of genealogy. Lack of a reflective intelligence leads many to develop a sense of ownership of information and knowldge that is not theirs to own, the is often seen in genealogy lists across the net. I wish no one to suffer fools lightly (I don't), but the proof of the efficacy and accuracy of genealogy on the net is within ourselves as we choose to believe. We define what is credible based upon our own standards for evidence. Garbage in, garbage out only happens when there is no application of intelligence. It does not happen because of a process like the internet genealogy system. If we were to cull from our lives all those things for which there is less than conclusive evidence, we would live lives of narrow isolation. Kat Steward’s post states all of this succinctly when she writes, “I just want to feel comfortable that the information I add is as accurate as possible.” She is the one who defines what it means to “feel comfortable” and what is “as accurate as possible.” She does it with the way she chooses to apply her intelligence. “The problem with truth is its verification, the problem with fiction is its veracity.” Thereby making critical reflectivity the most powerful tool for progressing through internet genealogy as well as through life. Indeed, the opportunity for this Saturday dialogue is all part of a very healthy process called thinking and learning. Randy Hoover [email protected]

Thanks for the enlightenment Larry, but I could do without the many different addresses in the header. Bryant

Folks!!!!!! While I found the whole genealogical suicide discussion quite interesting, I am HEARTILY DISMAYED to find it copied and forwarded, etc. to EVERY LIST I AM ON.......my mailbox took a very long time to load today for the simple reason that you all copy every one on God's green earth!!!!! Please, discuss stuff in the lists you use but don't innundate every single list with the same stuff. I am tired of deleting all the stuff that I had to open just to be sure it wasn't actually a real digest from the list I wanted to read, not a copy of the stuff I had already read from one county in PA that I subscribe to. Please do not think me unfriendly. You are all very intelligent folks who made a good variety of interesting points. But please, do not do this again. I had pared down the lists to which I subscribed for this reason..... Otherwise, happy hunting for your families. Deb Owens....who is only copying this once to all lists so all of you who did it get the message....

Dave, That may not be a very good idea, Gracie

My dear friends and subscribers to PASNYDER-L mailing list: I didn't think it would ever happen but it did. We've been spammed! And while I am in sympathy with the intent of the one who began the first spam message (proper documentation of genealogical sources), I do not feel that this message and its responses belong on this mailing list. The purpose of this mailing list is to exchange information and sources for Snyder County, Pennsylvania, genealogy and history. I have been blessed by your positive responses to the availability of this mailing list, and I want to keep our discussions tightly focused as there are a great diversity of mailing lists for nearly every issue facing the amateur and professional genealogist. In the case of this recent spam, the post would have been more appropriate for the GEN-METHOD-L mailing list owned by Dr. Brian Leverich, one of the brains behind the Rootsweb server, which brings you this mailing list and many others as well (along with free web space for county Coordinators for the USGenWeb project). In order to prevent further incidents of posting that are not germaine to the purpose of this list, I will by 15 April begin the process to close this list. That means if you want to post to the list, you must subscribe to it (as many of you already have). This list will not accept e-mail messages sent to it by someone who is not a member. If someone is a member and posts an off-purpose topic, I will be responsible for initiating dialogue with that poster to keep the messages on topic or be eliminated from the mailing list. This is not a free speech issue as there are many other venues with which the postings such as we have recently been deluged can be appropriately directed. As listowner I choose to keep our purpose clear and unswerving: to provide a place for people serious about exchanging information on the genealogy and history of Snyder County, Pennsylvania to share information and questions. I thank you all for your subscriptions and support. I welcome any responsible dialogue on this issue as you wish through my private e-mail address listed below. Grace and peace to all of you. Logan Garth Swanger listowner PASNYDER-L [email protected]

You are using the incorrect term here. It is not GENEALOGICAL SUICIDE, it in reality is GENEALOGICAL GENOCIDE. This is especially true when you have people who come along and say that you do not have the right to information that is rightfully yours. If in the process of preparing my family tree I come upon a name of an ancester, so I decide to go and get a copy of his/her birth certificate for the information that is required for this individual. Oh, no some politician somewhere along the line has decided that I can not have that information. If it is not available, WHAT ARE THEY MAINTAINING THIS INFORMATION FOR IN THE FIRST PLACE. It must have been started for some under handed reason on their part. Well these wrong doing people are long gone so make information available for those that request it. This Genocide is being promoted and exercised by people like WFT and Genserv. If you would realy like to further the usefulness of the internet and genealogy enter the census for your county for a particular year on your counties web site. Look at the Mercer County web page for the 1850 census for that county. I ordinarily do not write on these lists very often but this subject definately rubs me the wrong way. Most of you people do not realy see the forest because there are too many dead trees in the way. Clean up your acts and give the real problems some logical thought then do something about it, not just reterick. -----Original Message----- From: David H. Smith, Sr. <[email protected]> To: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]> Date: Saturday, April 11, 1998 9:43 AM Subject: [PAMERCER-L] GENEALOGICAL SUICIDE >To all genealogists, > > I have been very concerned lately about the destruction of our hobby. The >fate of genealogy is being written as we speak and it is in your hands to >stop it. > >WHY THIS SUDDEN ALARM? > > Our data is being destroyed by two cancers known as "CUT AND PASTE" and >"MERGE". > >ONLINE GENEALOGY > > I began my online genealogy in 1981, the reason for purchase of my first >computer. Soon after I reasoned that if I could just afford that 3MB hard >drive at Radio Shack for only $5000.00 my problems would be over, now at >6GB I am running out of space. I used to prowl around courthouse attics and >weed covered graveyards to uncover a choice treasure now and then with >great anticipation and joy. Now I can get a hundred times more info in an >hour or two. So much so I haven't even had the time to read most of it, let >alone put it into my own database. Which leads me to my point. > >CUT AND PASTE > > Being involved in keeping a Family Website, I get many requests for >information, and some criticism as well. There are two camps. One thinks >every fact needs to be on the Two Tablets Moses brought down from the >mountains. The other thinks that if it is in ASCII it's proof enough. I >have submitted my own tree to the WFT Project, most of which was my own >work. Hoping to find corroborating works I check other trees often, only to >discover my own work pasted into someone else's tree. > >THIS PRACTICE IS DESTROYING ONLINE GENEALOGY. > >FIRST, it gives undue validity. When one piece of erroneous information >becomes 1000 pieces of the same erroneous information, it takes on a life >of it's own and an enearned "truth". >SECOND, it clutters up the internet search engines with hundreds of links >to the same bogus info. When someone does try to verify a fact, they can't >wade through the countless references. >THIRD, file sizes are increased to the point of unmanageablility with the >same, tired, redundant information, even when true. This makes sharing >impractical. >FOURTH, it discourages people with genuinely obtained first generation info >from releasing it. >FIFTH, if carried to it's logical conclusion, everyone will have the same >file. All of them wrong. >SIXTH, it makes compiling huge trees all too easy. >SEVENTH, it makes it impossible to tell whether you are seeing a >corroborating opinion of your data or a repeat of it. > >EXAMPLES > >Great database services, like GENSERV and the World Family Tree project, >although well conceived and of great potential, are being ruined by well >meaning genealogists who seed them with redundant information gathered from >those very same databases. > >Private websites, including my own, have been swamped by large file sizes >which are largely repeat information. (This was a result of my own policy, >which I have rethought, so no criticism intended) > >Believe it or not I have been offered "Family Trees" in excess of 75 MB and >over 125,000 names. I foolishly submitted some trees to add to this pile of >spaghetti. > >WHAT CAN WE DO? > > I propose creating a guide for online genealogists. A compilation of >voluntary "rules of the road". Netiquette for the Genealogist. > > To this end I am offering a few sample suggestions of my own to get the >ball rolling. Please send your comments, criticisms, suggestions, pros and >cons to me personally. (I do not subscribe to ALL the lists above) After >compilation of the ideas, I will submit them for a vote. Success will be >determined by the level of participation. Please submit ideas by April 24th. > >SUGGESTIONS > > If you have undocumented info to share, state that it is speculation. If >you receive that information, paste it into your own file if you choose, >but DO NOT redistribute it with your file. Instead, keep it as a separate >entity. > > As a general rule, do not combine other people's data with your own files >that you redistribute. Keep a file for your eyes only and another for >distribution. Distribute only work which you have done yourself from >primary sources, or have independently verified from primary sources. Do >not simply pass along someone else's data because they have it documented >either. > > Do everyone a favor and pass along transcripts of primary documents. > > If you find documents or trees on a website, download and keep it because >it may evaporate unexpectedly, but do not redistribute it. Instead, if >someone asks for it, check on it's availability and send them a link. > >SAMPLE SUBJECTS AND CATEGORIES > > Etiquette; File contamination avoidance; Source Documentation; Passing on >other's data under what conditions; Submission to databases; Merging trees; >Merging scraps of data; Requesting info; Providing info; Submissions to >redundant websites or databases; Should we pass secondary info at all or >just the source?; How about an unlinked but searchable family group sheet >database, each submitted sheet required to be nearly complete and well >sourced, and containing parents and children of the husband and wife? Any >interest in an online index of primary documents with the cost of >membership being to submit one? > >SEND ME YOUR IDEAS > >Thank you for your time, >Dave > >THE KEYSTONE PROJECT - A PENNSYLVANIA CARD CATALOG of GENEALOGY FILES >In it's infancy, please help! http://www.stonecabin.com/keystone >__________________________________________________________________________ >David H. Smith, Sr. Bensinger Family Genealogy >[email protected] http://www.stonecabin.com/bensinger > > >==== PAMERCER Mailing List ==== > >Any questions/problems regarding the Mercer County, Pennsylvania list, >contact the listowner, Michael L. Hebert mailto:[email protected] > >Visit the Mercer County, Pennsylvania Genealogy web site at: >http://www.rootsweb.com/~pamercer/ >

Hi All, The problem (as I see it) is not so much the duplication of information, as the reliablility of it. How often are we careful to document the information we send across the wires (and I'm as guilty as the next guy). -Barb Landis Carlisle Indian School Research http://www.epix.net/~landis Tammy Lamb wrote: > Hi Dave > > As a county co-ordinator and list server owner I don't see any > suicide here. I have many people that have donated records to the > Genweb page and I am always happy to add them. I have had countless > people write and thank me and others for adding them and allowing > these records to be accessable to those out of the areas. Many people > have found ancestors and links to other family members through > records. > As far as duplication information, its just part of life and don't > think there is any way you are going to get a control on it. What > ever one person has access or found another can do the same. > > Tammy Lamb > > Pa Luzerne County Co-ordinator > > ==== PACUMBER Mailing List ==== > Visit Cumberland County USGenweb and get the latest updates! > > http://www.rootsweb.com/~pacumber/cum_cty_index.html >

Personally I think this subject has been beaten to death! Think it is now time to move on to actual research - which is the reason I subscribe to mailing lists and go surfing the net - guess I'm naive but I thought everyone else had about the same objective - and thought most people out there were adults! Jane