At 05:17 PM 1/6/2013, Norma Jennings wrote: >However, my main point here is in response to the question "how many >of you have Counties >in your States that have not been updated in some time?" Not >Iowa! Our county sites MUST >have new data and all broken links repaired at our April and October >reviews. Update it or lose it. >High standards are what makes us one of the best sites in the >nation to do genealogical research. And what if you can't find any new information to add? Failure to update doesn't mean you are not looking for that new data -- but, if you have been diligent about looking and adding everything you find, whether a CC or a Special Project Coordinator, you may eventually hit a brick wall. I CC one county where that is the case for me. I have not been able to add anything for six months because my trolling for new data has been fruitless. So, since I worked for 4 years increasing the site I inherited from 150 to more than 900 pages of real data, I am now to be penalized because I have transcribed and posted everything I have found? IMPO, inflexible rules about "adding new data" in a particular timeframe are nonsensical and can be counter-productive. All of us know that know matter how hard you look, there will always be dry spells in our accumulation/discovery of data. And applying "general" rules to a special project makes even less sense than that. Pat Asher

On 01/06/2013 05:02 PM, Pat Asher wrote: > At 05:17 PM 1/6/2013, Norma Jennings wrote: >> However, my main point here is in response to the question "how many >> of you have Counties >> in your States that have not been updated in some time?" Not >> Iowa! Our county sites MUST >> have new data and all broken links repaired at our April and October >> reviews. Update it or lose it. >> High standards are what makes us one of the best sites in the >> nation to do genealogical research. > And what if you can't find any new information to add? > > Failure to update doesn't mean you are not looking for that new data > -- but, if you have been diligent about looking and adding everything > you find, whether a CC or a Special Project Coordinator, you may > eventually hit a brick wall. I CC one county where that is the case > for me. I have not been able to add anything for six months because > my trolling for new data has been fruitless. So, since I worked for > 4 years increasing the site I inherited from 150 to more than 900 > pages of real data, I am now to be penalized because I have > transcribed and posted everything I have found? > > IMPO, inflexible rules about "adding new data" in a particular > timeframe are nonsensical and can be counter-productive. All of us > know that know matter how hard you look, there will always be dry > spells in our accumulation/discovery of data. And applying "general" > rules to a special project makes even less sense than that. > > > Pat Asher OR, you have a county like one I have. In the entire history of the county the population density has never been over 3 people per square mile. It consists of 2004 sq. miles of land and a population of 4, 812 [ 2010 ], of which 3,009 [ 2010 ] live in the only city in the county. The largest population ever in the county probably never amounted to much more than 6,000, and that may be counting the dogs and cats. To say that not much ever happens there is an understatement. Kind of hard to enter information when nothing ever happens/happened. -- “The only difference between death and taxes is that death doesn't get worse every time Congress meets.” — Will Rogers _ _... ..._ _ _._ ._ ..... ._.. ... .._