In a message dated 4/1/2006 10:29:15 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, sherrycook@insightbb.com writes: Maybe we need a new list administrator . I have been on this list for years, it seems, but never see anything that maybe I could use or not use.

Well, Jerry I am extremely disappointed that as list administrator you feel the need to resort to derogatory name-calling rather than presenting your position in a logical and coherant manner . You, in your position, should be well above that, no matter what your private feelings. I assume that this will fall on deaf ears, but one more time - no one wants to read the PRIVATE email. List members have complete control on what they share publicly. We simply want this list to operate as well for the genealogy community as many of the other genealogy lists where true DISCUSSIONS are taking place. And, as you so eloquently point out, you control the list so obviously we're not even going to get a chance to prove our point. Enjoy your quiet list. Jerry W. Murphy wrote: >I am not changing the list! > >Remember the little old ladies down the street who listened in on everyone's >phone calls back in the days of party lines? That's what this makes me think >about. They just can't stand it because they can't see your private >messages. > >End of discussion > >

I wrote several days ago about Urbana and Jane H. Reser Glanville. Just today I came across some Yeager family history. The writer of this family history says the town was first called Urbana and then when the railroad went through it was changed to Limestone with only the Urbana Cemetery containing the name Urbana. I was told the Urbana Methodist Church became Limestone Methodist, but was possibly the town called Urbana? I have been asked to write a piece about our Urbana that will go in a book and I would like to have my information correct about the TN connection. Thank you. Linda Crawford

This message has been forwarded to the list by the administrator. ----- Original Message ----- From: "T. Roberts" <troberts@hiwaay.net> To: <TNWASHIN-L-request@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 5:07 PM Subject: Re: [TNWASHIN-L] Let me see if I understand the discussion on automatic reply! >I usually just lurk in the background and watch but I did not realize that >we were not getting all the mail. > > I would like to see it mainly to watch for my ggggrandmothers line. I > know almost nothing about her except that she was born 22 May 1796 in > either TN or N.C. One census says one and the next one will say the > other. She married in TN bet. 1810 & 1815 Joseph Turney and ended up in > No. Ala. We think their oldest child was B. in TN in 22 May1816. She > died 2 May 1852 in AL. > > Her husband's father was Henry Turney who died in DeKalb Co. TN in 1843 > > We have been hunting for her for 20 years but most of that time under the > wrong surname. Her name was Nancy Little. We feel that she was probably > b. in the part of TN that was claimed by N.C. > > I keep hoping that I will see some names that will possibly connect with > her. > > I would appreciate any clues that anyone could furnish me. > > Telette > > At 03:52 PM 3/31/2006 -0500, you wrote: >>Anna, >>Everyone on the list dosen't Need to read the mail sent between individual >>members on any list. That's an invasion of privacy! As I have explained, >>setting the default to send all messages to the list, makes it difficult >>for members to send a private message to another member.. The list is set >>properly now for best operation. >>Why do you want to read other peoples' mail? >>G. Lee Hearl >>Authentic Appalachian Storyteller >>Abingdon, Va. >> >> >>==== TNWASHIN Mailing List ==== >>To unsubscribe, send request to TNWASHIN-L-request@rootsweb.com >>or TNWASHIN-D-request@rootsweb.com with only the word unsubscribe >>in the body of the message. >> > > > >

I am not changing the list! Remember the little old ladies down the street who listened in on everyone's phone calls back in the days of party lines? That's what this makes me think about. They just can't stand it because they can't see your private messages. End of discussion! Jerry W. Murphy jwm_genealogy@hotmail.com Jerry's Homepage: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~jwmurphy/ Rootsweb List Administrator: ALFRANKL-L, TNHARDIN-L, TNWASHIN-L, TNWAYNE-L BRATTON-L, CAVENDER-L, COCHRAN-L, HAFLEY-L, PATTERSON-L, SOWERBY-L Wayne County, Tennessee Co-County Coordinator: http://www.netease.net/wayne

Sherry Cook wrote: > I have a John Stanton (1833-1897) who married Mary Ann Broyles > (1837-1917), daughter of Alexander Julius Broyles and Elizabeth Mauk. > Alexander was the son of Julius Broyles and Catherine (haven't found > last name). Sherry - If the Alexander Broyles you reference here was born in 1811, I believe he is the son of Julius Broyles (abt 1785 - abt 1866) and Catherine Snapp (abt 1787 - 1851/1858). Catherine Snapp was born in Shenandoah Co., VA and the daughter of Abraham Snapp (1761-1833) and Mary Magdalene Foglesong (abt 1760 - 1810/1830). John

Sherry, Robert Stanton who married Sarah Ellen Templin is our Robert Stanton. Robert was 7 years of age and living with his mother Polly Stanton age 30, Elizabeth age 20, and brothers James W. & Samuel M. Stanton (twins) age 9 months in the 1850 Washington County, TN census. (Don't have my notes in front of me but from memory believe this ages are correct) Their father, Beverly Staunton, (according to Samuel M.'s death certificate) is not shown in the census so we have to assume that he is deceased. Robert's mother is listed as Paullia "Boyles" Staunton on Samuel's death certificate. We feel certain that she was a Broyles and not Boyles. I have a copy of Robert Stanton's death certificate which shows both of his parents as "Unknown". My husband and I have been researching the families of James W. & Samuel M. Stanton since March of 2001. We have located descendants of Robert Stanton living in Oregon but as of yet have not contacted them. I have been in contact with more than one Templin family researcher and they have been unable to give me any information on Robert Stanton or his family. We do know that the Stanton's came into Tennessee via North Carolina and feel strongly that they may have a direct link to Robert Stanton from England. With help from Sevier County historian, Sam Maner, we were able to track the Stanton family back to the early 1820's in North Carolina. It appears that Robert's father, Beverly, was married in North Carolina and that Robert was born there. Beverly's first wife must have died and Beverly then married Polly (Paullia) Broyles who is the mother of the Stanton twins. She could also be the mother of Robert but if so that would put a 7 year age difference between he and the twins with no other children in between. Elizabeth who is living with Polly I believe may be Robert's older sister and child of Beverly by his first marriage. All of this of course is speculation since we have been unable to find family bibles or documents for Robert's family. James W. Stanton is my husband's gggrandfather so Robert Stanton would be his ggg uncle. Last August, my husband, Dan, & I were lucky enough to find a book on Ebay titled "Our Ancestors the Stanton's. As I am sure you know , this book was privately published by William Henry Stanton in 1922. William Henry Stanton is a descendant of Robert Stanton who was born in England in 1599. We are hoping to uncover a clue in the early 1800's to tie our Stanton's into this line. I have a private Myfamily.com website dedicated to the research of our Stanton twins and we host a Stanton family reunion at our home each fall. Are you from the Templin or Stanton side? We are always thrilled when we locate another member of our Stanton family and look forward to sharing more information with you. Sheila Hutchison ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sherry Cook" <sherrycook@insightbb.com> To: "Sheila Hutchison" <2doghouse@tds.net> Cc: <TNWASHIN-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 6:18 PM Subject: Re: [TNWASHIN-L] Re: Early Washington Co., TN > Sheila Hutchison wrote: > >> Do either your Templin or Broyles line tie into the Stanton/Staunton >> line from Washington County, TN around 1849? >> > Hi Sheila, > > Yes, although so far I do not have a direct Stanton ancestor, I do have > Stantons connecting to both the Templin and Broyles lines. > > I have a Robert Stanton (1844-1922) who married Sarah Ellen Templin > (1851-1915) on 12 Sept. 1868. Sarah was the daughter of Jacob K. Templin > and Sarah Booth. Jacob K. Templin was the son of Samuel Templin and > Rebecca Brown. > I have a John Stanton (1833-1897) who married Mary Ann Broyles > (1837-1917), daughter of Alexander Julius Broyles and Elizabeth Mauk. > Alexander was the son of Julius Broyles and Catherine (haven't found last > name). > > I also have a Franklin B. Stanton who married into my Dugger line. > > What are you looking for? > > Best regards, > Sherry > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.3/298 - Release Date: 3/30/2006 > >

I would appreciate it if the list moderator would get in touch with me privately. Or, could someone tell me how to get in touch with the moderator? Sadly, someone felt that it was appropriate to send me (personally and unsigned) a personally insulting flame in response to my innocent contribution to this discussion. I would like to forward that email to the moderator. -----Original Message----- From: julie saltz [mailto:rjctds@jtt.net] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 10:38 PM To: TNWASHIN-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [TNWASHIN-L] Continuing the discussion on automatic reply! You know, I did not want to get involved in this discussion. But the words "stupid" and "list member" should not be in the same sentence! You could have found a better way of saying what you said. Someone elses research abilities (or lack of) should not determine the outcome of this situation. Maybe it is those with lesser research abilities or knowledge who could benefit from messages going directly to the list rather than only to an individual. If this list is in place to help eachother, how are we helping them if they are not given the opportunity to tap into more information? I have changed my opinion since this discussion began. I believe that the list members should have the option of deleting messages with a subject line of something that they are not interested in rather than possibly missing out on useful information. It's not that hard to hit the delete button! I know, "Reply to All" is not all that difficult either, but I vote for message replies to go to the entire group. I do hope that the moderator is listening to ALL of the opinions and taking them into consideration. Julie Saltz ----- Original Message ----- From: "G. Lee Hearl" <glh@naxs.com> To: <TNWASHIN-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 9:13 PM Subject: Re: [TNWASHIN-L] Continuing the discussion on automatic reply! > Anyone who is too stupid to determine what is useful to other list members > and decide to whom it should be sent isn't much of a researcher. I > administer several lists and I give my members credit for their > intelligence on the matter. > This ends my involvement in this discussion... last message.... > G. Lee Hearl > Authentic Appalachian Storyteller > Abingdon, Va. > > > ==== TNWASHIN Mailing List ==== > Visit Washington County TNGenWeb at http://www.rootsweb.com/~tnwashin/ > Tour Jonesborough TN at http://www.rootsweb.com/~tncjones/ > ==== TNWASHIN Mailing List ==== To unsubscribe, send request to TNWASHIN-L-request@rootsweb.com or TNWASHIN-D-request@rootsweb.com with only the word unsubscribe in the body of the message.

Anyone who is too stupid to determine what is useful to other list members and decide to whom it should be sent isn't much of a researcher. I administer several lists and I give my members credit for their intelligence on the matter. This ends my involvement in this discussion... last message.... G. Lee Hearl Authentic Appalachian Storyteller Abingdon, Va.

You know, I did not want to get involved in this discussion. But the words "stupid" and "list member" should not be in the same sentence! You could have found a better way of saying what you said. Someone elses research abilities (or lack of) should not determine the outcome of this situation. Maybe it is those with lesser research abilities or knowledge who could benefit from messages going directly to the list rather than only to an individual. If this list is in place to help eachother, how are we helping them if they are not given the opportunity to tap into more information? I have changed my opinion since this discussion began. I believe that the list members should have the option of deleting messages with a subject line of something that they are not interested in rather than possibly missing out on useful information. It's not that hard to hit the delete button! I know, "Reply to All" is not all that difficult either, but I vote for message replies to go to the entire group. I do hope that the moderator is listening to ALL of the opinions and taking them into consideration. Julie Saltz ----- Original Message ----- From: "G. Lee Hearl" <glh@naxs.com> To: <TNWASHIN-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 9:13 PM Subject: Re: [TNWASHIN-L] Continuing the discussion on automatic reply! > Anyone who is too stupid to determine what is useful to other list members > and decide to whom it should be sent isn't much of a researcher. I > administer several lists and I give my members credit for their > intelligence on the matter. > This ends my involvement in this discussion... last message.... > G. Lee Hearl > Authentic Appalachian Storyteller > Abingdon, Va. > > > ==== TNWASHIN Mailing List ==== > Visit Washington County TNGenWeb at http://www.rootsweb.com/~tnwashin/ > Tour Jonesborough TN at http://www.rootsweb.com/~tncjones/ >

And another point. Note that, with the default set the way it is now, every time someone hits the reply to all key, which people should be doing most of the time, the sender of the original message gets TWO messages in their inbox. That's annoying. Ava -----Original Message----- From: Ava H. Nackman [mailto:ava@nackman.com] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 9:24 PM To: 'Sherry Cook'; 'TNWASHIN-L@rootsweb.com' Subject: RE: [TNWASHIN-L] Continuing the discussion on automatic reply! There, I just hit "reply to all"! I must say that I agree with Sherry. Bottom line, there are two ways to approach this: (1) You can set the default to reply to the individual and hope that everyone thinks to hit reply to all when they respond with genealogical information, or (2) you can set the default to reply to all and hope that, should someone have personal info to share, they will delete the list address from the reply. I think the chances of people remembering to do either are probably about equal. However, since the vast majority of responders will be responding on topic with genealogical info that could be useful to many individuals, it would be better to set the default to reply to the entire group. The instances of people responding with really personal info that they would not want the entire list to see are much less frequent. (And, once they've done that once, they will have learned not to do it again!) To me (and, boy, this is wishful thinking!), it would be much more useful if people focused on properly adjusting the topic in the subject line and adding name, location, and date info on a regular basis. That would allow people to easily delete emails that are clearly not relevant to them without their having to read the entire thing. It would also catch the eye of busy people who really do have something to add and might otherwise have missed the email. :>) Ava -----Original Message----- From: Sherry Cook [mailto:sherrycook@insightbb.com] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 5:33 PM To: TNWASHIN-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [TNWASHIN-L] Let me see if I understand the discussion on automatic reply! Gary06074@aol.com wrote: >If the information is worthy of the whole list, all participants here are >intelligent enough to do such. After all, aren't we all here to help and be >helped? > > Yes, Gary, we are intelligent. And yes, we are all here to help and be helped. The point is - it's not happening and my experience as a usability engineer tells me that it's largely a factor of the way the defaults are set up. Unless you can contribute to the intial request for information, you have no idea if you have any information to offer or not to a discussion. If the subsequent posts always go directly back to the original requester (as most obviously do on this list), the rest of us have no opportunity to either learn from the discussion or to contribute. (My point being that although the "Reply to All" option exists, as does the ability to change the recipient manually from the poster to the list, they are obviously not being used.) And yes, mistakes happen but I still don't believe they happen all that often. As I said, I'm on over 200 separate discussion lists and only 2 of them are set to reply to the individual - this one that doesn't get a lot of traffic and another one that does get quite a bit of traffic, but only from about 20 people out of over 600. 20-some-odd of those lists are genealogy-related discussion lists and every one but this one is set to reply back to the list. I've been on each of those genealogy lists for years and the problems you describe just aren't that prevalent (frankly I can't remember a problem on any of my genealogy lists, but of course it could happen). Those lists include the Rootsweb lists for Greene County, Unicoi County, Carter County, among others - all of which are directly analogous to this list. They just don't have the problems you describe. And you don't have to take my word for it - check out their archives at www.rootsweb.com. If we do have those problems, they are easy enough to take care of (we are intelligent after all, LOL). I would like to see the moderator set the default to reply back to the list for a trial period to see how we all like it. It can always be set back. Washington County is extremely important to US researchers and it's a real shame that this list is so underutilized. Respectfully, Sherry ==== TNWASHIN Mailing List ==== Visit Washington County TNGenWeb at http://www.rootsweb.com/~tnwashin/ Tour Jonesborough TN at http://www.rootsweb.com/~tncjones/

There, I just hit "reply to all"! I must say that I agree with Sherry. Bottom line, there are two ways to approach this: (1) You can set the default to reply to the individual and hope that everyone thinks to hit reply to all when they respond with genealogical information, or (2) you can set the default to reply to all and hope that, should someone have personal info to share, they will delete the list address from the reply. I think the chances of people remembering to do either are probably about equal. However, since the vast majority of responders will be responding on topic with genealogical info that could be useful to many individuals, it would be better to set the default to reply to the entire group. The instances of people responding with really personal info that they would not want the entire list to see are much less frequent. (And, once they've done that once, they will have learned not to do it again!) To me (and, boy, this is wishful thinking!), it would be much more useful if people focused on properly adjusting the topic in the subject line and adding name, location, and date info on a regular basis. That would allow people to easily delete emails that are clearly not relevant to them without their having to read the entire thing. It would also catch the eye of busy people who really do have something to add and might otherwise have missed the email. :>) Ava -----Original Message----- From: Sherry Cook [mailto:sherrycook@insightbb.com] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 5:33 PM To: TNWASHIN-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [TNWASHIN-L] Let me see if I understand the discussion on automatic reply! Gary06074@aol.com wrote: >If the information is worthy of the whole list, all participants here are >intelligent enough to do such. After all, aren't we all here to help and be >helped? > > Yes, Gary, we are intelligent. And yes, we are all here to help and be helped. The point is - it's not happening and my experience as a usability engineer tells me that it's largely a factor of the way the defaults are set up. Unless you can contribute to the intial request for information, you have no idea if you have any information to offer or not to a discussion. If the subsequent posts always go directly back to the original requester (as most obviously do on this list), the rest of us have no opportunity to either learn from the discussion or to contribute. (My point being that although the "Reply to All" option exists, as does the ability to change the recipient manually from the poster to the list, they are obviously not being used.) And yes, mistakes happen but I still don't believe they happen all that often. As I said, I'm on over 200 separate discussion lists and only 2 of them are set to reply to the individual - this one that doesn't get a lot of traffic and another one that does get quite a bit of traffic, but only from about 20 people out of over 600. 20-some-odd of those lists are genealogy-related discussion lists and every one but this one is set to reply back to the list. I've been on each of those genealogy lists for years and the problems you describe just aren't that prevalent (frankly I can't remember a problem on any of my genealogy lists, but of course it could happen). Those lists include the Rootsweb lists for Greene County, Unicoi County, Carter County, among others - all of which are directly analogous to this list. They just don't have the problems you describe. And you don't have to take my word for it - check out their archives at www.rootsweb.com. If we do have those problems, they are easy enough to take care of (we are intelligent after all, LOL). I would like to see the moderator set the default to reply back to the list for a trial period to see how we all like it. It can always be set back. Washington County is extremely important to US researchers and it's a real shame that this list is so underutilized. Respectfully, Sherry ==== TNWASHIN Mailing List ==== Visit Washington County TNGenWeb at http://www.rootsweb.com/~tnwashin/ Tour Jonesborough TN at http://www.rootsweb.com/~tncjones/

I totally agree with you Julie. Rudeness has not place on this list. Unless the information is there for all of the list to see, we will have no idea whether any of it is relevent to our research or not. Delete is easy. Using information which has been sent, offlist, to only one person, is impossible and of no use to the rest of us. All but one of my many lists has replies go to all of the members. There is always a lot of information which is not about my families, but with good subject lines, I don't have to go through all of the messages and just delete those I don't need. I too, hope the list moderator will consider changing this so that we can have discussions and start truly sharing our information with the whole group. Jane Unger julie saltz <rjctds@jtt.net> wrote: You know, I did not want to get involved in this discussion. But the words "stupid" and "list member" should not be in the same sentence! You could have found a better way of saying what you said. Someone elses research abilities (or lack of) should not determine the outcome of this situation. Maybe it is those with lesser research abilities or knowledge who could benefit from messages going directly to the list rather than only to an individual. If this list is in place to help eachother, how are we helping them if they are not given the opportunity to tap into more information? I have changed my opinion since this discussion began. I believe that the list members should have the option of deleting messages with a subject line of something that they are not interested in rather than possibly missing out on useful information. It's not that hard to hit the delete button! I know, "Reply to All" is not all that difficult either, but I vote for message replies to go to the entire group. I do hope that the moderator is listening to ALL of the opinions and taking them into consideration. Julie Saltz ----- Original Message ----- From: "G. Lee Hearl" To: Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 9:13 PM Subject: Re: [TNWASHIN-L] Continuing the discussion on automatic reply! > Anyone who is too stupid to determine what is useful to other list members > and decide to whom it should be sent isn't much of a researcher. I > administer several lists and I give my members credit for their > intelligence on the matter. > This ends my involvement in this discussion... last message.... > G. Lee Hearl > Authentic Appalachian Storyteller > Abingdon, Va. > > > ==== TNWASHIN Mailing List ==== > Visit Washington County TNGenWeb at http://www.rootsweb.com/~tnwashin/ > Tour Jonesborough TN at http://www.rootsweb.com/~tncjones/ > ==== TNWASHIN Mailing List ==== To unsubscribe, send request to TNWASHIN-L-request@rootsweb.com or TNWASHIN-D-request@rootsweb.com with only the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. Hoot Owl Hollow NurseryNew Marshfield OH 45766740-664-2409 http://www.hootowlhollow.com --------------------------------- Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1&cent;/min.

STOP ALREADY! Let's get on with the search. Eric

I agree. It is easier to delete what you don't want than to find something that is not there. Richard Wilcox Farmers Branch, TX ----- Original Message ----- From: "Anna Bertram" <abertram@heartoftn.net> To: <TNWASHIN-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 10:37 AM Subject: Let me see if I understand the discussion on automatic reply! > Dear Jerry: > > Please reconsider making the Washington County email list an opportunity > for genealogical discussion and to allow the subscribers to either read > all the messages or delete them as they choose. Then, if it gets > out-of-hand, as you fear it might, take action to change it back. What can > you lose? > > Sincerely, > Anna Bertram > abertram@heartoftn.net > phone 615-765-535 > > >

BIll Lovelace wrote: > > My Lovelace line ties into both the Templin and Erwin lines. Ooh, Bill, please share. All I have on the Lovelace family so far is a Jesse Lovelace marrying Susan Emeline Templin (1836-1891) on 05 September 1858 in Washington County, Tennessee. I'd love more info on Jesse Lovelace and on his family. And I'd love to know how the Lovelaces tie into the Erwins. Thanks! Sherry

Sheila Hutchison wrote: > Do either your Templin or Broyles line tie into the Stanton/Staunton > line from Washington County, TN around 1849? > Hi Sheila, Yes, although so far I do not have a direct Stanton ancestor, I do have Stantons connecting to both the Templin and Broyles lines. I have a Robert Stanton (1844-1922) who married Sarah Ellen Templin (1851-1915) on 12 Sept. 1868. Sarah was the daughter of Jacob K. Templin and Sarah Booth. Jacob K. Templin was the son of Samuel Templin and Rebecca Brown. I have a John Stanton (1833-1897) who married Mary Ann Broyles (1837-1917), daughter of Alexander Julius Broyles and Elizabeth Mauk. Alexander was the son of Julius Broyles and Catherine (haven't found last name). I also have a Franklin B. Stanton who married into my Dugger line. What are you looking for? Best regards, Sherry

>> This is the only true discussion list dedicated to Washington County of which I am aware (feel free to point me in the direction of others if you know of them). << Sherry, I'm sure that most counties in Tennessee have Rootsweb E-mail lists. some are set to "reply to list only", others are not. John Fullers website has all of them listed with descriptions of each list.... G. Lee Hearl Authentic Appalachian Storyteller Abingdon, Va.

Gary06074@aol.com wrote: >If the information is worthy of the whole list, all participants here are >intelligent enough to do such. After all, aren't we all here to help and be >helped? > > Yes, Gary, we are intelligent. And yes, we are all here to help and be helped. The point is - it's not happening and my experience as a usability engineer tells me that it's largely a factor of the way the defaults are set up. Unless you can contribute to the intial request for information, you have no idea if you have any information to offer or not to a discussion. If the subsequent posts always go directly back to the original requester (as most obviously do on this list), the rest of us have no opportunity to either learn from the discussion or to contribute. (My point being that although the "Reply to All" option exists, as does the ability to change the recipient manually from the poster to the list, they are obviously not being used.) And yes, mistakes happen but I still don't believe they happen all that often. As I said, I'm on over 200 separate discussion lists and only 2 of them are set to reply to the individual - this one that doesn't get a lot of traffic and another one that does get quite a bit of traffic, but only from about 20 people out of over 600. 20-some-odd of those lists are genealogy-related discussion lists and every one but this one is set to reply back to the list. I've been on each of those genealogy lists for years and the problems you describe just aren't that prevalent (frankly I can't remember a problem on any of my genealogy lists, but of course it could happen). Those lists include the Rootsweb lists for Greene County, Unicoi County, Carter County, among others - all of which are directly analogous to this list. They just don't have the problems you describe. And you don't have to take my word for it - check out their archives at www.rootsweb.com. If we do have those problems, they are easy enough to take care of (we are intelligent after all, LOL). I would like to see the moderator set the default to reply back to the list for a trial period to see how we all like it. It can always be set back. Washington County is extremely important to US researchers and it's a real shame that this list is so underutilized. Respectfully, Sherry

My Keeners comes from Rev. Ulrich Keener b. 1801 and brother Joseph b. 1809, both in Washington County, TN. I need to prove they are the sons of George T. Keener and Margaret Harris Keener. George died abt 1850 (after the census). He was living in Sevier County with a Daughter Amanda Keener Bryan. I need to find his will or any data that will lead me to my Rev. Ulrich Keener, Methodist Preacher to the Cherokees. My Thanks Lynda Ellis Gibbs <lynda2@bellsouth.net>