Hi all, A big thank you to the many of you who have posted messages and emailed me direct in support of the MullGenealogy website. As the webmaster it is good to see how much the site is appreciated and how it has been able to help so many over the years that the site has been running. I certainly resent the slur "Are they really carrying out their duties to the best of their ability?" I only wish that I kept a count of the many hours that have gone into maintaining the website. I think it would come as a shock to all and I'm not just saying this in martyrdom. I have enjoyed doing it and still enjoy doing it and will continue doing it. Just for the record I have not entered the debate on this occasion because I have not been well (and still only able to spend a limited time at a computer) and my computer came out in sympathy. I have just been getting on with things quietly in the background (as usual) as my thoughts on the need for a second website are well documented. Duplication of data leads to confusion and errors. Far better to have one set of records that everyone is trying to get as accurate as possible rather then two sets that may contradict each other. This helps no one. Simple fact. End of story. It cannot be denied that Michael has been able to help researchers but so have so many others on the list over a period of many years. Lets not forget them. After all it is with their help and contributions that have made MullGenealogy the site that it is. I really cannot leave the question of data accuracy go unchallenged. During the period that open access was made available to MullFamilies I checked out my family as I know a number of others have done by the emails I have received. I regret to say that my family records contain serious errors such that any researcher using the site would be very unlikely to find my family. Others have reported similar issues. Many times on the list the offer has been made to correct any inaccuracy found and that offer still stands. Inaccuracies alone do not warrant the creation of a second website and need to be reported and corrected. Just saying that there are inaccuracies does not help anyone. Please tell me about them and they will be corrected. Nobody is excluded from making contributions to the Rootsweb mailing list and though it to the MullGenealogy website. This way there is no need for a second website and yes, as a result, everyone would benefit greatly. I can only suggest that those who wish to support Michael and his website do so by directly communicating with him. After all there is nothing to stop him setting up the equivalent of a mailing list and having his own subscribers. Personally I would very very much regret such a move as Michael and his subscribers have obviously much to contribute to the Rootsweb list. At the moment Michael appears to be wasting a lot of time duplicating effort. I site his recent posting about transcribing census records when a complete set from 1841 to 1901 already exists on the MullGenealogy website. I again have doubts that he will be able to index the census records to handle different / alternative spellings of surname and forenames and so yet again researchers will not find the records they are looking for. How much better for all if this effort was put into making one website more accurate. Again a big thank you to all who have supported MullGenealogy over the years and I trust will continue to do so. Keep those errors and omissions coming. In this way MullGenealogy will be the most accurate and comprehensive website supporting Mull family researchers. Nothing is ever complete so please let me know of any additional features or facilities you would like to see on the website. I trust that this finally closes this thread. Back to quietly working behind the scenes on behalf of the majority of Mull researchers. Ian

Ian - You make some good points Nobody is perfect, and I include myself. The information provided by BOTH websites is open to correction/debate. Your database is three times the size of mine, as I have ten years of catching up to do. That is why I have so many families missing or not yet complete. You too have serious errors in relation to my own family. As for one site - theoretically it is a good idea, but this has flaws. With one site, there is little or no room for challenging what's there. If there is conflict of information accross two sites, SUPER. It raises questions, as only one can be correct. Once discussed, the 'offending' site can make a correction. I also think stifling or censoring another website, is detrimental to good genealogy. After all, where would our websites be without the existance of the IGI ?. It is regularly referred to. I don't see the difference between them and any other. As regards different spellings etc..., I have 'taken the easy way out'. All names have been standardised. Please take a look at your 1901 Census entry below 1901 Ulva & Gometra District No : 1 Page No : 1 House No : 5 Locality : Achronich Farm House McLean Charles 50 Head Shoemaker Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore McLean Christie 40 Wife Argyll Jura McLean Donald 1* Son Rosteau ??? Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore McLean Allan 14 Son Scholar Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore McLean Donald 12 Son Scholar Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore McLean Duncan 7 Son Scholar Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore McLean Alexander 5 Son Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore McLean Charles 2 Son Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore McLean Flora 10 Dau Scholar Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore Never mind that the age of 17 could not be read, but occupation "Rosteau" ?? - oh please. A little care on the transciber's part would have given a result of *postman*. So no harm in re-transcribing all of them. Let's all keep the peace and continue our research Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ian Phillips" <[email protected]> To: "sct-isleofmull" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2011 1:57 PM Subject: [SCT-ISLEOFMULL] Many thanks > Hi all, > > A big thank you to the many of you who have posted messages and emailed me > direct in support of the MullGenealogy website. As the webmaster it is > good > to see how much the site is appreciated and how it has been able to help > so > many over the years that the site has been running. I certainly resent the > slur "Are they really carrying out their duties to the best of their > ability?" > I only wish that I kept a count of the many hours that have gone into > maintaining the website. I think it would come as a shock to all and I'm > not > just saying this in martyrdom. I have enjoyed doing it and still enjoy > doing > it and will continue doing it. > > Just for the record I have not entered the debate on this occasion because > I > have not been well (and still only able to spend a limited time at a > computer) and my computer came out in sympathy. I have just been getting > on > with things quietly in the background (as usual) as my thoughts on the > need > for a second website are well documented. Duplication of data leads to > confusion and errors. Far better to have one set of records that everyone > is > trying to get as accurate as possible rather then two sets that may > contradict each other. This helps no one. Simple fact. End of story. > > It cannot be denied that Michael has been able to help researchers but so > have so many others on the list over a period of many years. Lets not > forget > them. After all it is with their help and contributions that have made > MullGenealogy the site that it is. > > I really cannot leave the question of data accuracy go unchallenged. > During > the period that open access was made available to MullFamilies I checked > out > my family as I know a number of others have done by the emails I have > received. I regret to say that my family records contain serious errors > such > that any researcher using the site would be very unlikely to find my > family. > Others have reported similar issues. Many times on the list the offer has > been made to correct any inaccuracy found and that offer still stands. > Inaccuracies alone do not warrant the creation of a second website and > need > to be reported and corrected. Just saying that there are inaccuracies does > not help anyone. Please tell me about them and they will be corrected. > > Nobody is excluded from making contributions to the Rootsweb mailing list > and though it to the MullGenealogy website. This way there is no need for > a > second website and yes, as a result, everyone would benefit greatly. > > I can only suggest that those who wish to support Michael and his website > do > so by directly communicating with him. After all there is nothing to stop > him setting up the equivalent of a mailing list and having his own > subscribers. Personally I would very very much regret such a move as > Michael > and his subscribers have obviously much to contribute to the Rootsweb > list. > At the moment Michael appears to be wasting a lot of time duplicating > effort. I site his recent posting about transcribing census records when a > complete set from 1841 to 1901 already exists on the MullGenealogy > website. > I again have doubts that he will be able to index the census records to > handle different / alternative spellings of surname and forenames and so > yet > again researchers will not find the records they are looking for. How much > better for all if this effort was put into making one website more > accurate. > > Again a big thank you to all who have supported MullGenealogy over the > years > and I trust will continue to do so. Keep those errors and omissions > coming. > In this way MullGenealogy will be the most accurate and comprehensive > website supporting Mull family researchers. Nothing is ever complete so > please let me know of any additional features or facilities you would like > to see on the website. > > I trust that this finally closes this thread. > > Back to quietly working behind the scenes on behalf of the majority of > Mull > researchers. > > Ian > > ------------------------------- > 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

Michael, Thanks for your reply. If there is an error then please supply the correction and I will be happy to correct it. >> As regards different spellings etc..., I have 'taken the easy way out'. All names have been standardised. This does not help when a person is looking for Marion and in a record she is recorded as Sarah. Equally it does not help when an individual is recorded in official records with the surname of MacKechnie and you have them as McEachern. Thanks for the correction to the 1901 census. Much appreciated. Ian On 31 July 2011 14:48, MF <[email protected]> wrote: > Ian - You make some good points > > Nobody is perfect, and I include myself. The information provided by BOTH > websites is open to correction/debate. > > Your database is three times the size of mine, as I have ten years of > catching up to do. That is why I have so many families missing or not yet > complete. You too have serious errors in relation to my own family. > > As for one site - theoretically it is a good idea, but this has flaws. With > one site, there is little or no room for challenging what's there. If there > is conflict of information accross two sites, SUPER. It raises questions, > as > only one can be correct. Once discussed, the 'offending' site can make a > correction. > > I also think stifling or censoring another website, is detrimental to good > genealogy. > > After all, where would our websites be without the existance of the IGI ?. > It is regularly referred to. I don't see the difference between them and > any > other. > > As regards different spellings etc..., I have 'taken the easy way out'. All > names have been standardised. > > Please take a look at your 1901 Census entry below > > 1901 Ulva & Gometra District No : 1 Page No : 1 House No : 5 Locality > : Achronich Farm House > McLean Charles 50 Head Shoemaker Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > McLean Christie 40 Wife Argyll Jura > McLean Donald 1* Son Rosteau ??? Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > McLean Allan 14 Son Scholar Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > McLean Donald 12 Son Scholar Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > McLean Duncan 7 Son Scholar Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > McLean Alexander 5 Son Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > McLean Charles 2 Son Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > McLean Flora 10 Dau Scholar Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > > Never mind that the age of 17 could not be read, but occupation "Rosteau" > ?? - oh please. A little care on the transciber's part would have given a > result of *postman*. So no harm in re-transcribing all of them. > > Let's all keep the peace and continue our research > > > > Michael > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ian Phillips" <[email protected]> > To: "sct-isleofmull" <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2011 1:57 PM > Subject: [SCT-ISLEOFMULL] Many thanks > > > > Hi all, > > > > A big thank you to the many of you who have posted messages and emailed > me > > direct in support of the MullGenealogy website. As the webmaster it is > > good > > to see how much the site is appreciated and how it has been able to help > > so > > many over the years that the site has been running. I certainly resent > the > > slur "Are they really carrying out their duties to the best of their > > ability?" > > I only wish that I kept a count of the many hours that have gone into > > maintaining the website. I think it would come as a shock to all and I'm > > not > > just saying this in martyrdom. I have enjoyed doing it and still enjoy > > doing > > it and will continue doing it. > > > > Just for the record I have not entered the debate on this occasion > because > > I > > have not been well (and still only able to spend a limited time at a > > computer) and my computer came out in sympathy. I have just been getting > > on > > with things quietly in the background (as usual) as my thoughts on the > > need > > for a second website are well documented. Duplication of data leads to > > confusion and errors. Far better to have one set of records that everyone > > is > > trying to get as accurate as possible rather then two sets that may > > contradict each other. This helps no one. Simple fact. End of story. > > > > It cannot be denied that Michael has been able to help researchers but so > > have so many others on the list over a period of many years. Lets not > > forget > > them. After all it is with their help and contributions that have made > > MullGenealogy the site that it is. > > > > I really cannot leave the question of data accuracy go unchallenged. > > During > > the period that open access was made available to MullFamilies I checked > > out > > my family as I know a number of others have done by the emails I have > > received. I regret to say that my family records contain serious errors > > such > > that any researcher using the site would be very unlikely to find my > > family. > > Others have reported similar issues. Many times on the list the offer has > > been made to correct any inaccuracy found and that offer still stands. > > Inaccuracies alone do not warrant the creation of a second website and > > need > > to be reported and corrected. Just saying that there are inaccuracies > does > > not help anyone. Please tell me about them and they will be corrected. > > > > Nobody is excluded from making contributions to the Rootsweb mailing list > > and though it to the MullGenealogy website. This way there is no need for > > a > > second website and yes, as a result, everyone would benefit greatly. > > > > I can only suggest that those who wish to support Michael and his website > > do > > so by directly communicating with him. After all there is nothing to stop > > him setting up the equivalent of a mailing list and having his own > > subscribers. Personally I would very very much regret such a move as > > Michael > > and his subscribers have obviously much to contribute to the Rootsweb > > list. > > At the moment Michael appears to be wasting a lot of time duplicating > > effort. I site his recent posting about transcribing census records when > a > > complete set from 1841 to 1901 already exists on the MullGenealogy > > website. > > I again have doubts that he will be able to index the census records to > > handle different / alternative spellings of surname and forenames and so > > yet > > again researchers will not find the records they are looking for. How > much > > better for all if this effort was put into making one website more > > accurate. > > > > Again a big thank you to all who have supported MullGenealogy over the > > years > > and I trust will continue to do so. Keep those errors and omissions > > coming. > > In this way MullGenealogy will be the most accurate and comprehensive > > website supporting Mull family researchers. Nothing is ever complete so > > please let me know of any additional features or facilities you would > like > > to see on the website. > > > > I trust that this finally closes this thread. > > > > Back to quietly working behind the scenes on behalf of the majority of > > Mull > > researchers. > > > > Ian > > > > ------------------------------- > > 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 > > > ------------------------------- > 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 >

Hello Ian, How are you, sorry to hear that you have been ill. We are moving back to Kilmun on Tuesday, putting our furniture in store and we will be hitting Mull on the 6th of Aug, we are staying at a caravan near Pennyghael, so I will be doing a bit of Bunessaning. Will hit Tob at some point, will you bewe knocking about in the week?? Probably weather dependent as I have a strong urge to visit Staffa and Bac Mhor etc. Do you know Attie Macquarie, Rose Cottage, Salen? I will be moving tomorrow, so I won't be accessing email till the end of the week. Hopefully we might be able to catch up. BTW is the museum open as I never got there when it is open? Plenty people getting quite het up on the list at the moment, ah the joys of being grown up?? Hopefully hear from you soon, all the best. On 31 July 2011 14:57, Ian Phillips <[email protected]> wrote: > Michael, > > Thanks for your reply. > > If there is an error then please supply the correction and I will be happy > to correct it. > > >> As regards different spellings etc..., I have 'taken the easy way out'. > All names have been standardised. > > This does not help when a person is looking for Marion and in a record she > is recorded as Sarah. Equally it does not help when an individual is > recorded in official records with the surname of MacKechnie and you have > them as McEachern. > > Thanks for the correction to the 1901 census. Much appreciated. > > Ian > > > On 31 July 2011 14:48, MF <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Ian - You make some good points > > > > Nobody is perfect, and I include myself. The information provided by BOTH > > websites is open to correction/debate. > > > > Your database is three times the size of mine, as I have ten years of > > catching up to do. That is why I have so many families missing or not yet > > complete. You too have serious errors in relation to my own family. > > > > As for one site - theoretically it is a good idea, but this has flaws. > With > > one site, there is little or no room for challenging what's there. If > there > > is conflict of information accross two sites, SUPER. It raises questions, > > as > > only one can be correct. Once discussed, the 'offending' site can make a > > correction. > > > > I also think stifling or censoring another website, is detrimental to > good > > genealogy. > > > > After all, where would our websites be without the existance of the IGI > ?. > > It is regularly referred to. I don't see the difference between them and > > any > > other. > > > > As regards different spellings etc..., I have 'taken the easy way out'. > All > > names have been standardised. > > > > Please take a look at your 1901 Census entry below > > > > 1901 Ulva & Gometra District No : 1 Page No : 1 House No : 5 > Locality > > : Achronich Farm House > > McLean Charles 50 Head Shoemaker Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > > McLean Christie 40 Wife Argyll Jura > > McLean Donald 1* Son Rosteau ??? Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > > McLean Allan 14 Son Scholar Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > > McLean Donald 12 Son Scholar Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > > McLean Duncan 7 Son Scholar Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > > McLean Alexander 5 Son Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > > McLean Charles 2 Son Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > > McLean Flora 10 Dau Scholar Argyll Kilninian and Kilmore > > > > Never mind that the age of 17 could not be read, but occupation "Rosteau" > > ?? - oh please. A little care on the transciber's part would have given a > > result of *postman*. So no harm in re-transcribing all of them. > > > > Let's all keep the peace and continue our research > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Ian Phillips" <[email protected]> > > To: "sct-isleofmull" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2011 1:57 PM > > Subject: [SCT-ISLEOFMULL] Many thanks > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > A big thank you to the many of you who have posted messages and emailed > > me > > > direct in support of the MullGenealogy website. As the webmaster it is > > > good > > > to see how much the site is appreciated and how it has been able to > help > > > so > > > many over the years that the site has been running. I certainly resent > > the > > > slur "Are they really carrying out their duties to the best of their > > > ability?" > > > I only wish that I kept a count of the many hours that have gone into > > > maintaining the website. I think it would come as a shock to all and > I'm > > > not > > > just saying this in martyrdom. I have enjoyed doing it and still enjoy > > > doing > > > it and will continue doing it. > > > > > > Just for the record I have not entered the debate on this occasion > > because > > > I > > > have not been well (and still only able to spend a limited time at a > > > computer) and my computer came out in sympathy. I have just been > getting > > > on > > > with things quietly in the background (as usual) as my thoughts on the > > > need > > > for a second website are well documented. Duplication of data leads to > > > confusion and errors. Far better to have one set of records that > everyone > > > is > > > trying to get as accurate as possible rather then two sets that may > > > contradict each other. This helps no one. Simple fact. End of story. > > > > > > It cannot be denied that Michael has been able to help researchers but > so > > > have so many others on the list over a period of many years. Lets not > > > forget > > > them. After all it is with their help and contributions that have made > > > MullGenealogy the site that it is. > > > > > > I really cannot leave the question of data accuracy go unchallenged. > > > During > > > the period that open access was made available to MullFamilies I > checked > > > out > > > my family as I know a number of others have done by the emails I have > > > received. I regret to say that my family records contain serious errors > > > such > > > that any researcher using the site would be very unlikely to find my > > > family. > > > Others have reported similar issues. Many times on the list the offer > has > > > been made to correct any inaccuracy found and that offer still stands. > > > Inaccuracies alone do not warrant the creation of a second website and > > > need > > > to be reported and corrected. Just saying that there are inaccuracies > > does > > > not help anyone. Please tell me about them and they will be corrected. > > > > > > Nobody is excluded from making contributions to the Rootsweb mailing > list > > > and though it to the MullGenealogy website. This way there is no need > for > > > a > > > second website and yes, as a result, everyone would benefit greatly. > > > > > > I can only suggest that those who wish to support Michael and his > website > > > do > > > so by directly communicating with him. After all there is nothing to > stop > > > him setting up the equivalent of a mailing list and having his own > > > subscribers. Personally I would very very much regret such a move as > > > Michael > > > and his subscribers have obviously much to contribute to the Rootsweb > > > list. > > > At the moment Michael appears to be wasting a lot of time duplicating > > > effort. I site his recent posting about transcribing census records > when > > a > > > complete set from 1841 to 1901 already exists on the MullGenealogy > > > website. > > > I again have doubts that he will be able to index the census records to > > > handle different / alternative spellings of surname and forenames and > so > > > yet > > > again researchers will not find the records they are looking for. How > > much > > > better for all if this effort was put into making one website more > > > accurate. > > > > > > Again a big thank you to all who have supported MullGenealogy over the > > > years > > > and I trust will continue to do so. Keep those errors and omissions > > > coming. > > > In this way MullGenealogy will be the most accurate and comprehensive > > > website supporting Mull family researchers. Nothing is ever complete so > > > please let me know of any additional features or facilities you would > > like > > > to see on the website. > > > > > > I trust that this finally closes this thread. > > > > > > Back to quietly working behind the scenes on behalf of the majority of > > > Mull > > > researchers. > > > > > > Ian > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > > 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 > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > 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 > > > > ------------------------------- > 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 > -- Sláinte Lachaidh.