Thanks, Kathy! I always appreciate hearing from someone who has contributed so much free information for the benefit of all of us. We get the "spin" from the subscription services on their press releases, but we also need to hear from people who don't have a financial interest in it. I can tell you from my personal experience at NARA that the press releases that were written about NARA's "partnerships" (as they call them) with the various subscription services were designed to sell subscriptions, but are often misleading, and don't give the real facts--just like TV commercials. You can't believe everything you see on a press release that was written by someone who is trying to market you (rootsweb is now owned by ancestry). Family Tree Maker used to be a free site on the internet, but now those trees that people posted voluntarily for others to see can't be freely accessed--they are owned, not shared. If we don't learn from history, we are doomed to repeat it, as the saying goes. USgenweb made a wise decision, in light of past history. This discussion is certainly of interest to people on the York list and every other list, and shouldn't be stifled. Someone asked a legitimate question in the course of research on their York ancestors, and it was appropriately answered. Peggy Reeves > I am not misleading anyone. Since ancestry banners and > footers were forced upon us, there were no guarantees that > in the future ancestry wouldn't make the data that was > freely contributed, part of the paid subscription plan. > > All states moved, not just PA. > > Kathy