I have to say, I'm really appreciative of the work done my others online. I certainly don't take it, but I refer to it as a source to give me clues. As a beginner it's been invaluable but I DO wait until I've proven the link myself. It has caused trouble too. I've seen 10 family trees online with my ancestor Johann Carl Liebich who came to Australia on the Sophia. All the trees state his father as Wilhelm Liebich who arrived 3 years earlier on the La Rochelle but I am yet to confirm this relationship myself so I'm refusing to add Wilhelm to my tree for now. When I first started I put EVERYTHING online including the death certificates etc I purchased. I'm now working offline but will continue to add names (without the proof) to my online tree for others to refer to in future. I'm blown away by how lazy some people are though. Name collecting at ancestry.com seems to be out of control and it's funny when you look at a tree and see the same person added in 3 times with three different mothers cause they've just added willy-nilly. What a waste of time and how unrewarding it must be. Rae

Fellow Researchers: Great discussion and points. My goal is for my family, in the very broad sense, will know their family history. Can you imagine if your research is found hundreds of years from now, online or in some archive--and because of your work--and your sharing and publishing, others will know your family's history? People have shared their work with me and I have benefitted by it and I have shared with others--and they may display that data. Sharing is good. The National Genealogical Society has Standards for Sound Genealogical Research and two of them are relevant: Standards for Sound Genealogical Research Recommended by the National Genealogical Society Remembering always that they are engaged in a quest for truth, family history researchers consistently:... use compilations, communications and published works, whether paper or electronic, primarily for their value as guides to locating the original records, or as contributions to the critical analysis of the evidence discussed in them. state carefully and honestly the results of their own research, and acknowledge all use of other researchers' work. The full standards are below: http://www.ngsgenealogy.org/cs/standards_for_sound_genealogical_research Good hunting! Dan On Apr 15, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Rae Harvey wrote: > I have to say, I'm really appreciative of the work done my others > online. I > certainly don't take it, but I refer to it as a source to give me > clues. As > a beginner it's been invaluable but I DO wait until I've proven the > link > myself. It has caused trouble too. I've seen 10 family trees online > with my > ancestor Johann Carl Liebich who came to Australia on the Sophia. > All the > trees state his father as Wilhelm Liebich who arrived 3 years > earlier on the > La Rochelle but I am yet to confirm this relationship myself so I'm > refusing > to add Wilhelm to my tree for now. > > When I first started I put EVERYTHING online including the death > certificates etc I purchased. I'm now working offline but will > continue to > add names (without the proof) to my online tree for others to refer > to in > future. > > I'm blown away by how lazy some people are though. Name collecting at > ancestry.com seems to be out of control and it's funny when you look > at a > tree and see the same person added in 3 times with three different > mothers > cause they've just added willy-nilly. What a waste of time and how > unrewarding it must be. Rae > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and > the body of the message