The key to this kind of thing is not to delete ANY file that someone says you should delta, even if it is someone that you know. Make sure that you have a good virus checker on you computer and check the suspect file with it. The majority of these e-mails are hoaxes. Verify, verify, verify before you delete anything. Jim

Hello everyone, I am sending you this warning because I fell victim to this e-mail hoax. There is an e-mail going around about a file jdbgmgr.exe that is being called a virus and has a teddy bear symbol next to it. THIS IS A HOAX!! DO NOT DELETE THIS FILE!!! I have received this e-mail twice and I did follow the instructions to delete it and now I will not be able to retrieve it. It is not a file most of us need but it is not a virus. A good friend told me to check out <A HREF="http://www.urbanlegends.com/">www.urbanlegends.com</A> anytime I am unsure about the validity of such e-mail forwards. There are many hoaxes out there. Please, check it out for yourself. It proves useful for checking these forwards out before sending them on to others. All the best, Kyra

Thanks. My husband actually got a $300+ bill for an ambulance ride that happened in California. We live in Illinois, and my husband has never been to California. We contacted them by phone, and they had gotten my husband's SSN, birthdate, address, etc. on the internet. They compared the birthdate and name of the one who used the ambulance with the ones on the internet to come up with a close match. Luckily, they canceled the bill. I have had our info deleted from the anybirthday.com website. KimCarLee@aol.com wrote: > There is a web site - http://anybirthday.com which has a vast data base of > people's names and their birthdates. I found mine and all of my adult > children. They have provided for a means to remove names from the list, > which I promptly did. There are all sorts of web sites with all kinds of > info out there. No wonder identity theft is on the rise. > Kathryn Kyle Hall

I meant to say thanks Michelle. Sometimes my fingers run faster than my brain. Jean

Thanks James, My husband and I both were on that birthday site. No longer. Jean

Very well said.

I'm not there....good.....:>) LOL Jana On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 19:53:14 EST Mdvanpelt@aol.com writes: > Also try looking under you maiden name. I looked under mine and the > address > where I used to live and there I was--even though I've been married > almost 20 > years. > > Michele Van Pelt > > >

Also try looking under you maiden name. I looked under mine and the address where I used to live and there I was--even though I've been married almost 20 years. Michele Van Pelt

There is a web site - http://anybirthday.com which has a vast data base of people's names and their birthdates. I found mine and all of my adult children. They have provided for a means to remove names from the list, which I promptly did. There are all sorts of web sites with all kinds of info out there. No wonder identity theft is on the rise. Kathryn Kyle Hall

MJ...Glad you are trying to do something about living folks and they never should be on the net.. ..But once folks passed away it goes right into a newspaper and most papers are on-line...So I don't understand the 25 years ..It wouldn't make sense unless you change everything... Also I am glad I didn't have to wait 25 years to find out my history..Mostly Medical.My Father was adopted ..I had medical concerns that didn't show up on my mothers side.We had my fathers parent's names..They had passed away..To make a long story short ...Because they had passed away we were able to get the medical info that we needed without causing to much fuss.

Regardless of what Rootsweb says their policies are or are not it is their website and they can and should monitor it, it is the business they are in. And I don't believe that is true, that the submitter is the only one who can change those submissions. I have been corresponding with Rootsweb on this matter. They state that they can clean the files. And they can change their options, notice the word "option" Rootsweb/Ancestry provide that option, they can rescind this option. If this would cause many family trees to be deleted then that would have to be a price to pay, for renegade family genealogist's, out to collect names. Those who abuse this luxury of posting information on family trees should suffer the concequences, unfortunately it also affects many others who are searching for information, but, again, the living must not be sacrificed for the dead at no time. There is no purpose posting the names of the living. You can say it all should be taken with a grain of salt, but the fact is, millions of person's see these files and run with the information as the truth without verification (speaking of the living here) from files that can cause much stress, just ask the man whose information was thrown into one of these gedcom's, he was listed with a wife and child prior to the marriage to his current and only wife, she saw this gedcom and the man's life was turned upside down until he proved to his wife that he neither was married prior to her NOR did his run out on a child. The man has only been married ONCE.....so do you think this man and others like him think that other's take this with a grain of salt. I think not. The living have a right to privacy at all times and genealogy should not circumvent this right. Some genealogist's go overboard with information, it's sad but true and it is person's such as this that are going to force restricitions all because they have this overwhelming need to "shout" everything from the Internet, it is person's such as these that are going to force the government to stick their noses into the Information Highway more than they do now. I don't think anyone wants that. But abusers will make it difficult on the rest of us, the innocents that do not abuse this system. If it causes files to be deleted, so be it, the abusers knew better that this in the first place. The dead are not more important than the living. Jana On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 07:29:43 -0500 "mamawlady" <mamawlady@columbus.rr.com> writes: > Cloudeight QuickNotes 58, Linen, NaturalLadies and Gents > > I have been following the discussion on the living vs. actual > identity of > living family member information being uploaded onto the net - > particularly > discussions on those listings on Ancestry.com. > > Actually the program for completing this task was developed by > Rootsweb. > Recently, they have reprogrammed some of their options for listing > living > relatives for those submitting their family data to the Rootsweb > WorldConnect Project. Please note below on item 26 where one > cannot force > their listing of living names to be recorded on line. The > WorldConnect > Project is designed so that only the submitter can change the way > the data > is presented. > > =========================================================== > 24) Cutoff Year - This field specifies the year after which people > without > death dates are considered living. Maximum value is 1930. > =========================================================== > 25) Force Cutoff - Yes/No - This option tells the living finder that > anyone > born after the cutoff date should be handled as living even if they > have > death information. > =========================================================== > 26) Replace Names with Living - This option is now forced on > =========================================================== > 27) Process Descendants as Living - Yes/No - This option tells the > living > finder to treat descendants of people considered to be living as > living even > if they have death information specified. > =========================================================== > > It would be more prudent for Rootsweb to ask that all data submitted > prior > to this change be resubmitted or have any non-compliant submitting > party's > data deleted from the WorldConnect Project. Unfortunately, this > could > eliminate many, many trees that have offered much to the development > of many > nded families. > > Remember - as always, we all should take any data offered on-line > with a > pinch of salt. Personally re-research and document all entries to > make sure > your family is correctly placed in your tree. > > Thank you and have a great day, > Carolyn > > > >

Cloudeight QuickNotes 58, Linen, NaturalLadies and Gents I have been following the discussion on the living vs. actual identity of living family member information being uploaded onto the net - particularly discussions on those listings on Ancestry.com. Actually the program for completing this task was developed by Rootsweb. Recently, they have reprogrammed some of their options for listing living relatives for those submitting their family data to the Rootsweb WorldConnect Project. Please note below on item 26 where one cannot force their listing of living names to be recorded on line. The WorldConnect Project is designed so that only the submitter can change the way the data is presented. =========================================================== 24) Cutoff Year - This field specifies the year after which people without death dates are considered living. Maximum value is 1930. =========================================================== 25) Force Cutoff - Yes/No - This option tells the living finder that anyone born after the cutoff date should be handled as living even if they have death information. =========================================================== 26) Replace Names with Living - This option is now forced on =========================================================== 27) Process Descendants as Living - Yes/No - This option tells the living finder to treat descendants of people considered to be living as living even if they have death information specified. =========================================================== It would be more prudent for Rootsweb to ask that all data submitted prior to this change be resubmitted or have any non-compliant submitting party's data deleted from the WorldConnect Project. Unfortunately, this could eliminate many, many trees that have offered much to the development of many extended families. Remember - as always, we all should take any data offered on-line with a pinch of salt. Personally re-research and document all entries to make sure your family is correctly placed in your tree. Thank you and have a great day, Carolyn

Cheryl but look at the bright side your not the one getting credit for it. Best to laugh at the dumbness and let it go. I learned long ago YOU just got to look on the BRIGHT side in genealogy. We find and see and stumble across many strange events. Blessings Susi

I too have had someone take my research and put it on the internet and also on a CD for probably the end of time. To make matters worse she got the information wrong. She has my father married to his own mother! Now that really made me upset not to mention sick in my stomach. Cheryl Jackson Malone

Try Ancestry.com again. They took us off. My son has a security clearance that required it to be off.

I too am a researcher that has had another researcher take my family history and put it on the Internet without caring about leaving my family open for Idenity theft and other harm and when I contacted Ancestry .com about taking the information off I was told that the information is the property of the submitter and they could do nothing about it Now I am getting in contact with a large group of senators to get a bill passed to keep information like this from being put on sites like this for at least 25 yrs after the person has died I too am a Genealogy nut and love looking for information about my ancesters but when a researcher puts you and your family at risk like some are doing something has to be done Sorry if I make anyone mad but My family comes first and I will fight to keep them safe MJ Petty in NC

Hello, I am looking for the Gibbs that were in Monongailia,Co. early 1800. I have a James Gibbs,& looking for his parents. Any help would be appreciated. Emolene Lynch

Can you please give me the correct e-mail address to unsubscribe? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana P Thomas" <jpthomas7@juno.com> To: <VA-Harrison-Monongalia-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 10:57 PM Subject: Re: Fw: [VA-Har-Mon] Fwd: [VAPITTSY-L] Immediate Need To Email and Phone VA Legislators > Gary, you aren't unsubscribing to the correct e-mail address. > > On Sun, 9 Feb 2003 22:46:38 -0500 "Gary Hall" <hallgb@wirefire.com> > writes: > > > > UNSUBSCRIBE PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jana P Thomas" <jpthomas7@juno.com> > > To: <VA-Harrison-Monongalia-L@rootsweb.com> > > Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 10:17 PM > > Subject: Re: [VA-Har-Mon] Fwd: [VAPITTSY-L] Immediate Need To Email > > and > > Phone VA Legislators > > > > > > > Hi Susi, > > > You are right they could do that, it's a good suggestion. > > > I have received quite a few emails already complaining about this > > and the > > > Santmyer woman. > > > > > > Why couldn't the Virginia counties donate these to each counties > > > historical societies or library's > > > I know most would love this if they have the storage. > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 9 Feb 2003 22:06:59 EST SusiCP@aol.com writes: > > > > I am having it announced in our forum and posted on all the MID > > > > Atlantic > > > > boards so far. trying to get it announced in the chats. > > finally > > > > have four > > > > helping me. Thanks for all you can do. Susi > > > > > > > > > > > > OLD Documents are historical what is wrong with there thinking? > > > > they could > > > > sell them and make money DUH > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Gary, you aren't unsubscribing to the correct e-mail address. On Sun, 9 Feb 2003 22:46:38 -0500 "Gary Hall" <hallgb@wirefire.com> writes: > > UNSUBSCRIBE PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jana P Thomas" <jpthomas7@juno.com> > To: <VA-Harrison-Monongalia-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 10:17 PM > Subject: Re: [VA-Har-Mon] Fwd: [VAPITTSY-L] Immediate Need To Email > and > Phone VA Legislators > > > > Hi Susi, > > You are right they could do that, it's a good suggestion. > > I have received quite a few emails already complaining about this > and the > > Santmyer woman. > > > > Why couldn't the Virginia counties donate these to each counties > > historical societies or library's > > I know most would love this if they have the storage. > > > > > > On Sun, 9 Feb 2003 22:06:59 EST SusiCP@aol.com writes: > > > I am having it announced in our forum and posted on all the MID > > > Atlantic > > > boards so far. trying to get it announced in the chats. > finally > > > have four > > > helping me. Thanks for all you can do. Susi > > > > > > > > > OLD Documents are historical what is wrong with there thinking? > > > they could > > > sell them and make money DUH > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

UNSUBSCRIBE PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana P Thomas" <jpthomas7@juno.com> To: <VA-Harrison-Monongalia-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 10:17 PM Subject: Re: [VA-Har-Mon] Fwd: [VAPITTSY-L] Immediate Need To Email and Phone VA Legislators > Hi Susi, > You are right they could do that, it's a good suggestion. > I have received quite a few emails already complaining about this and the > Santmyer woman. > > Why couldn't the Virginia counties donate these to each counties > historical societies or library's > I know most would love this if they have the storage. > > > On Sun, 9 Feb 2003 22:06:59 EST SusiCP@aol.com writes: > > I am having it announced in our forum and posted on all the MID > > Atlantic > > boards so far. trying to get it announced in the chats. finally > > have four > > helping me. Thanks for all you can do. Susi > > > > > > OLD Documents are historical what is wrong with there thinking? > > they could > > sell them and make money DUH > > > > > > >