Greetings, Please see the following statement from the Archivist of the United States, David S. Ferriero announcing the closing/consolidation of three National Archives Facilities. The Fort Worth - Montgomery Plaza location is scheduled to close in FY 2016. http://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2014/nr14-41.html Sincerely, Suzanne Fritz, Librarian Fort Worth Library -- Central

Some will no doubt already be aware that Ancestry have many videos on You Tube <http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsc0AQkAh_2cQmxqwD6VWRw> The latest is this one on the sliders they have just added Sliders <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jz3PFkEtgQQ&feature=em-subs_digest> Hopefully it may help some who are using new search There are of course many other videos on various subjects from Ancestry, some good some not so, just beware of the shelf life, the more recent ones are more likely to be pertinent to the site as it is today Others, like the one on baptisms may be longer lasting <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15C9mhhG0-4&list=UUsc0AQkAh_2cQmxqwD6VWRw> -- Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK)

All the comments pro and con about Ancestry have me looking forward to this coming Saturday! I signed on for an all day conference jointly hosted by the Historical Society of Pennsylvania and Ancestry. It is being held at the Convention Center Grand Ballroom in Philadelphia, PA this Saturday. When I paid my $45.00 I thought I would go and learn a few new tricks. Now it seems I am going to learn ALL new tricks! I am actually looking forward to the day, especially since lunch break will take me to the Reading Terminal Market for BASSETS ICE CREAM. the best ice cream and the oldest ice cream company in the US! And, did you know on 9 September 1843 Nancy Johnson of Philadelphia got her "artificial freezer" patented? It consisted of a tub, cylinder, lid, dasher and crank and the design is still in use today! Happy St. Patrick's Day. It's a few days early, but celebration begins this week-end. Mary McCanney Finley

I don't have a membership so I use the one provided by our local library. I had no trouble finding information. I wonder if they have not "improved" the library editions? If not I hope they don't. Stuart Price

Hi Ron When the tree owner goes to their Ancestry tree, under Tree pages next to the Tree name, select Share your tree They then get an option of share by email or Ancestry User name if known After the invite to the tree you can manage invites and roles on the Tree Settings page ie as Guest or Editor Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 12/03/2014 21:12, Ron Mitchell wrote: > > Hope this is a simple request. I have made the acquaintance who would > like help with compiling a family tree. > > What I need to know is specific instructions as to how she can give me > access to her tree as a contributor. > Thanks, > Ron > Submarine Vet.

Super!!! That pretty well sums up my feelings as well. Ron Submarine Vet. On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 5:01 PM, [email protected] wrote: > I must say I have been doing genealogy for 19 years now and used > Ancestry for the better part of it. I don't like major change and was > very skeptical about the latest new search change. But, personally, I > think it is great. It is much better than the old search methods. I > had been trying to find a tough family for years in the census so I > gave that one a try. Guess what? There they were and badly > misspelled. But the new search found them. Since then I have been > successful in a couple others I have had issues with in other records > and found them now, too. > I have found it is just a matter of playing around and getting > acquainted with things but quite frankly it did not take me long. I > would never encourage anyone to leave Ancestry but that option is > there if anyone hates it as bad as I have seen some say. Hey, there > are some sites I can't stand so I complain and if no movement they > don't get my loot anymore. > I am sure some complaints are quite valid so hopefully complaints are > being made. Just because they don't get back to you or the change > isn't immediate doesn't mean they aren't listening. They may disagree > with you, it may not be possible, etc etc. My view is the site has > done nothing but improve and I am very glad they are here and continue > to add records plus make my search less burdensome and more > successful. > > I can remember back in the day making visit after visit to a library > loaded with books and microfilm that was an hour and a half away. I > spent a ton of money on gas. That day is long gone as now I can do it > from the comfort of my chair with a nice cool or hot drink. > > Thanks Ancestry and keep up the great work! > ===== > If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to > [email protected] and ask for the digest... > > ------------------------------- > 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

I must say I have been doing genealogy for 19 years now and used Ancestry for the better part of it. I don't like major change and was very skeptical about the latest new search change. But, personally, I think it is great. It is much better than the old search methods. I had been trying to find a tough family for years in the census so I gave that one a try. Guess what? There they were and badly misspelled. But the new search found them. Since then I have been successful in a couple others I have had issues with in other records and found them now, too. I have found it is just a matter of playing around and getting acquainted with things but quite frankly it did not take me long. I would never encourage anyone to leave Ancestry but that option is there if anyone hates it as bad as I have seen some say. Hey, there are some sites I can't stand so I complain and if no movement they don't get my loot anymore. I am sure some complaints are quite valid so hopefully complaints are being made. Just because they don't get back to you or the change isn't immediate doesn't mean they aren't listening. They may disagree with you, it may not be possible, etc etc. My view is the site has done nothing but improve and I am very glad they are here and continue to add records plus make my search less burdensome and more successful. I can remember back in the day making visit after visit to a library loaded with books and microfilm that was an hour and a half away. I spent a ton of money on gas. That day is long gone as now I can do it from the comfort of my chair with a nice cool or hot drink. Thanks Ancestry and keep up the great work!

I agree, let's cool the jets on the subject ... it's over and done with ... move forward!!! Having said that, I too got along very well with the old search but have somewhat gotten used to the new methodology ... but not without a tedious learning curve. I gave feedback to Ancestry for three reasons and with two caveats attached. 1) I think they must do a much better job in teaching and documentation efforts, as there are very different levels of experience on the scene from those who barely have ever used a computer to experts both in the use of computers and Ancestry's products. Make features too complex and you run the risk of losing the beginners and the less skilled and inexperienced. Make it too simple and you may have to trade-off versatility. Searching is the backbone of Ancestry's worth to the end-user and for whatever reasons there is a segment of their market that is struggling with this change. Ancestry owes it to themselves, for the continuation of an excellent genealogy site, who single handily has advanced the access to genealogy data more than any one I can think of off hand. Granted support efforts are taxed during most major changes, especially when the changes are complex and non-trivial bugs are embedded. But I feel safe in venturing that the greater portion of Ancestry's subscribers are not in the upper quartile of computer experience and therefore require coaching. And by the way coaching is not ignoring the need, preaching or beating on someone. I once had a football coach who told me as the quarterback I needed to learn when to pat someone on the butt and when to kick someone in the butt (he used a different word). 2) As the founder and present member of a genealogy club in my community, I see the membership frustration with this change at every meeting. I find myself engulfed more and more lately as teacher and councilor, especially with the new genealogists, a preponderance of whom are older and less exposed to the computerization aspects of genealogy. I am 78 but fortunately have a long and broad exposure to computers, am conditioned to accept change and possess an inherent logical approach to problem solving. Sometimes I come home frustrated from our meetings and have resorted to writing detailed papers that expand on Ancestry's efforts to educate. Many of the subjects are the same questions asked on this list or FTM-Tech, so I have plagiarized the good advice. 3) As a former engineer/programmer, everywhere I worked, be it for machine control or data analysis/management, there was a design rule that was mandatory ... it must be user friendly and intuitive ... no ifs or buts!!! I don't think this new search engine has achieved that goal yet, but I believe it will over time. The caveats to my feedback to Ancestry were: a) They are smart and good business people or otherwise they would not be in the successful position they are in today. Therefore, as a subscriber to their offerings and owner of their Family Tree Maker, I have faith that they will improve this search engine ... it's the heart of their product besides their breadth of databases. b) From a technological viewpoint, I fully understand the strategical need to make this change and fully understand that there are technical restrictions in major changes like this, that are beyond the knowledge of the end-users. By the way, I feel the same way about the TreeSync feature in Family Tree Maker, I still am not thrilled with the idiosyncrasies and limitations of that feature. But it's a start and a badly needed one in the big picture of connectivity, portability, redundancy and data recovery in this ever so quickly technology dependent process we call Genealogy. And I would like to thank all the people who contribute to this extremely helpful List and even more so to the contributors to the FTM-Tech list. Especially I would like to draw attention to two people of the FTM-Tech list, Russ Worthington and BJ with his masterful succinct, step by step answers to those in need of help.

Hope this is a simple request. I have made the acquaintance who would like help with compiling a family tree. What I need to know is specific instructions as to how she can give me access to her tree as a contributor. Thanks, Ron Submarine Vet.

Thank you Karen, Very good suggestions. Growing is always better then becoming stagnet. Em "You will never leave where you are until you decide where you'd rather be."

Tells a story doesn't it ! Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) Now every list and Facebook page I am > on has been taken over with Ihate New Search and I am quitting > Ancestry! discussions!

Thank you for your sermon Don most amusing Like you I have used Ancestry for well over a decade and I can say with confidence I have helped many over that period, I assume you don't research for others, no clearly not I have long been an advocate of using Ancestry over other sites but no more To suggest that I and many others are not conversant with search techniques is quite honestly laughable As you clearly haven't used Ancestry to the extent others have I shall leave it there Ancestry have the largest collection of records for the UK bar none, but if you can't find the records you seek or it is such a joyless fight to find them then yes I shall leave and good riddance say you I have watched the many videos and read the blogs etc, half of which are out of date, they attempt to convince everyone that new search works It doesn't except for the obvious Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 12/03/2014 03:42, Don Varner wrote: > Well Nivard all I can say is it does work for me and I prefer it over the > old search. You can craft a much more intelligent search and if used > correctly I believe it works very well. I seriously doubt that my family > is any easier to find than anyone else's. >

Sounds like you will both be editing the tree and I wouldn't like that. Contributor to me means give me the information and I'll enter it. And get ready because I'll probably have lots of questions. Gale Gorman Houston On Mar 12, 2014, at 4:12 PM, Ron Mitchell <[email protected]> wrote: Hope this is a simple request. I have made the acquaintance who would like help with compiling a family tree. What I need to know is specific instructions as to how she can give me access to her tree as a contributor. Thanks, Ron Submarine Vet.

There was a "SISSON" Researcher on Roots a while back but I couldn't remember his email address. One of my lines is Wybrant from County Wicklow Ireland and I ran across the below. Thought it was interesting. Don't know if your Sisson was from Ireland but it came from the "Irish Genealogy" website. Gretchen Area - DUBLIN (COI) , Parish/Church/Congregation - ST. PETER Marriage of GEORGE SISSON WYBRANTS of BLOOMFIELD and ESTHER ANNE BLAYNEY of NEWTOWN MT KENNEDY NEWCASTLE WICKLOW on 2 April 1839 Datee.g. 13/08/1710 More search options Husband Wife Name GEORGE SISSON WYBRANTS ESTHER ANNE BLAYNEY Address BLOOMFIELD NEWTOWN MT KENNEDY NEWCASTLE WICKLOW Occupation ESQUIRE N/R Father SISSON WYBRANTS BLAYNEY Mother N/R N/R Further details in the recordWitness 1 JENKINSON ROBT Witness 2 WILLIAM WYBRANTS About the recordBook Number Page Entry Number Record_Identifier N/R N/R N/R DU-CI-MA-51147 The church register page containing this record has not yet been imaged. Report any error in transcription.

I don't think you understand the problem we are facing Changing the Country is no problem at all and never has been Its *finding* anything with new search that is the problem Its useless for anything that doesn't leap out in your face In short, its garbage Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 12/03/2014 14:57, Don Varner wrote: > For those still struggling with the new search I thought I would pass this > link along. This particular blog post shows how to narrow all searches to > country specific. > > http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2014/03/08/ask-ancestry-anne-search-tip-4-want-to-see-records-just-from-the-us-the-uk-canada/?sf2122552=1 > > If you want to fully utilize Ancestry I would suggest reading some of these > blogs. On the far right of every blog post is a column called Categories. > Click the category you are interested in and you will get a listing of > blogs associated with that subject. > > i find this an invaluable tool to keeping up with what is going on with > Ancestry.com and how to better utilize the site. > > Don Varner

Contact me, Allen, at [email protected] and I would be glad to support your efforts. Looking forward to hear from you. Allen Hunt Founder of Www.onlinegamilynetwork.org On Mar 12, 2014 3:15 PM, "Ron Mitchell" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hope this is a simple request. I have made the acquaintance who would > like help with compiling a family tree. > > What I need to know is specific instructions as to how she can give me > access to her tree as a contributor. > Thanks, > Ron > Submarine Vet. > ===== > If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to > [email protected] and ask for the digest... > > ------------------------------- > 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 >

Nivard, your posts are beginning to sound a bit repetitive.  You obviously are angry and frustrated at New Search.  Perhaps, instead of spewing the same epithets, it would be constructive to give specific examples of what you are having problems with - how you are unable to reproduce the same results in New Search as one you did in Old Search.  As I stated in a previous post, in terms of the collections pertaining to North Carolina, I found all of the collections I used to access and was able to access the same records for my ancestors as I had in Old Search.  Perhaps it is something specific to UK collections that is giving you problems?  If so, I think it would be more helpful to cite the problems you are having. Barton On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Nivard Ovington wrote: > I don't think you understand the problem we are facing > > Changing the Country is no problem at all and never has been > > Its *finding* anything with new search that is the problem > > Its useless for anything that doesn't leap out in your face > > In short, its garbage > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > > On 12/03/2014 14:57, Don Varner wrote: >> For those still struggling with the new search I thought I would pass >> this >> link along. This particular blog post shows how to narrow all >> searches to >> country specific. >> >> >> >> http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2014/03/08/ask-ancestry-anne-search-tip-4-want-to-see-records-just-from-the-us-the-uk-canada/?sf2122552=1 >> >> If you want to fully utilize Ancestry I would suggest reading some of >> these >> blogs. On the far right of every blog post is a column called >> Categories. >> Click the category you are interested in and you will get a listing >> of >> blogs associated with that subject. >> >> i find this an invaluable tool to keeping up with what is going on >> with >> Ancestry.com and how to better utilize the site. >> >> Don Varner > ===== > If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to > [email protected] and ask for the digest... > > ------------------------------- > 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 >

Thank you, Drew! Barton On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Drew Smith wrote: > https://familysearch.org/search/collection/1914217 > > Drew Smith > > On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 11:35 PM, Barton Lewis > wrote: >> I have found references to grants of my ancestors in a book titled >> "Index to >> the Headright and Bounty Grants of Georgia," but the Rev. Silas >> Emmett >> Lucas. Does anyone know where the originals of these grants are >> held, and >> how copies might be obtained? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Barton Lewis >> ===== >> If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to >> [email protected] and ask for the digest... >> >> ------------------------------- >> 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 >

Ancestry is providing all of this information. Think of Ancestry's blog as your program for the show you are watching. You can read it through any reader via rss feed, view it on line or I believe you may even be able to receive it as an email. Their YouTube videos are the show you want to watch. They also provide newsletters, message boards, on line help at the website itself. The reason for the "scattered sources" is to make this information as widely available as possible, in as many different media outlets as people use. So learn better by reading (blogs / written instructions), while some prefer watching (videos or the twice weekly webinars) or listening (my choice). I download the shows from iTunes and listen to them on my daily walk. The information is there for the taking. Sign up for what works best for you. What more can they do? Conduct the searches for you? Oh wait a minute they even do that if you upload your gedcom to their site. Don Varner >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Barbara Young Wrote When you pay for your ticket to the theatre, they provide ushers to help you find your seat so you don't have to keep asking people what seat they are sitting in. It seems Ancestry should be the ones who provide all this information so users don't have to go nuts trying to find the directions from scattered sources. Barbara

I agree Don Varner. I have been using Ancestry since 2002. I have had easy and hard family to find. I am familiar with both old and new search and I find new search vastly better than old. I don't know what people are doing to get the thousands of inapplicable records when they do an exact search, because I don't. If I specify born in Illinois, exact, that's all I get! Some ideas I have: People are typing in their own nameplaces, when they need to select from the drop down listsPeople are typing in a placename WITHOUT specifying what the placename is for, ie birth, death, marrriage....so they will ge a record back for AYTHING in IL, birth, death, marriage, lived in, etc...My cousin was doing this without even realizing. I just think everyone has had over a year to become more familiar with new search. Instead of clinging to the hope that Ancestry wasn't really taking old search away, they should have been using and becoming more with new search. Now every list and Facebook page I am on has been taken over with Ihate New Search and I am quitting Ancestry! discussions! > ------------------------------- > 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