Joan, I could have written this! My sentiments to a tee! I'm not a long time genealogist and I've really had a difficult time understanding people claiming ownership to their ancestors or even the data they dig up. In my opinion there is not much value in genealogy if we don't share what we find. It would be great if those who adopt our information would add a credit line to tell where the info came from. That's not so I get any credit but it would allow someone to verify the data. A good example is SSDI. The dates are often wrong, not by much, but wrong just the same. I have no idea where SSDI gets their info but the case I cite is my own father died on October 20th and SSDI has the 22nd so someone could dispute my first hand knowledge because after all, they found it on the internet. Gale Gorman Houston On Apr 14, 2012, at 5:24 AM, JLA wrote: "we can study ANYONE if [we] like I guess it's a good thing that we can add people to a tree if we want. Over the past 10 years I have compiled a family tree of a small Ohio town. It didn't start out that way. I was documenting one pioneer family but because it is a small town the descendants of the pioneering family married into other families and before I knew it I was building a family tree for an entire town. I find myself and my website being used as source material and that doesn't bother me. I've work hard to document my data and being used as a source is -- well -- flattering. I don't feel like my material was 'stolen' if I felt that way I would not have put it World Connect. If somebody wants to bastardize their family tree so be it. I know that what I have is correct and that's all that concerns me. If I find a error in another tree I will try and contract the owner and let them know about it. If they don't change the error - I don't care. I know that what I have is correct as far as I can document it. Happy hunting to all, Joan Asche On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 1:53 AM, <JYoung6180@aol.com> wrote: > Um...Sally...they ARE his family (if he's a cousin as you state below). He > can put people in his tree even if they are NOT his family if he wants to. > Genealogical research is not limited to our ancestors...we can study ANYONE > if like. I've research many a line I'm not personally related to. > > We don't OWN our ancestors and can't claim any "rights" to names, dates, > and places in our family trees. They are facts and facts can't be owned by > anyone. > > Joan

You also have to be careful with last residence with the SSDI. My mother died in Oklahoma, but last residence was listed as Pennsylvania, because my brother in Pennsylvania was handling her money. Elizabeth C Gale Gorman wrote: > Joan, > > I could have written this! My sentiments to a tee! I'm not a long time genealogist and I've really had a difficult time understanding people claiming ownership to their ancestors or even the data they dig up. > > In my opinion there is not much value in genealogy if we don't share what we find. > > It would be great if those who adopt our information would add a credit line to tell where the info came from. That's not so I get any credit but it would allow someone to verify the data. A good example is SSDI. The dates are often wrong, not by much, but wrong just the same. I have no idea where SSDI gets their info but the case I cite is my own father died on October 20th and SSDI has the 22nd so someone could dispute my first hand knowledge because after all, they found it on the internet. > > Gale Gorman > Houston > > > > On Apr 14, 2012, at 5:24 AM, JLA wrote: > > "we can study ANYONE if [we] like > > > I guess it's a good thing that we can add people to a tree if we want. > Over the past 10 years I have compiled a family tree of a small Ohio > town. It didn't start out that way. I was documenting one pioneer > family but because it is a small town the descendants of the > pioneering family married into other families and before I knew it I > was building a family tree for an entire town. > > I find myself and my website being used as source material and that > doesn't bother me. I've work hard to document my data and being used > as a source is -- well -- flattering. I don't feel like my material > was 'stolen' if I felt that way I would not have put it World > Connect. > > If somebody wants to bastardize their family tree so be it. I know > that what I have is correct and that's all that concerns me. If I > find a error in another tree I will try and contract the owner and let > them know about it. If they don't change the error - I don't care. > I know that what I have is correct as far as I can document it. > > Happy hunting to all, > > Joan Asche > > On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 1:53 AM,<JYoung6180@aol.com> wrote: >> Um...Sally...they ARE his family (if he's a cousin as you state below). He >> can put people in his tree even if they are NOT his family if he wants to. >> Genealogical research is not limited to our ancestors...we can study ANYONE >> if like. I've research many a line I'm not personally related to. >> >> We don't OWN our ancestors and can't claim any "rights" to names, dates, >> and places in our family trees. They are facts and facts can't be owned by >> anyone. >> >> Joan > ===== > If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >