I have to say, when I first started my internet genealogy, I did not understand the need for all of the "Livings." But then I did a search and came up with the names of my sisters and I, with our residences, birthdates, and my marriage date and ex-husband's name. I did not recognize the name of the person who posted it, and when I contacted her to ask her to suppress some of it, she had no idea who I was-apparently she had received the information from the former in-law of a distant relation (a 10yo doing a genealogy project)! I was pretty mild about it, but she really launched back at me. Apparently, I was not the first to contact her, and she was very angry beyond proportion. So, I went back to look at the rest of her tree and found all sorts of personal information about people in the comments-i.e. bad childhoods, substance abuse problems. When I looked again a month later, I was relieved to find that she had removed everything. It occured to me at that point that, though I was only mildly disturbed about the information being there, I was very concerned about this person's judgement and glad she didn't know more about me. Also, now that there are babies in my family, I am more sensitive. The possibility of someone learning enough details about the family to convince one of my nephews to go with them may seem far-fetched, but children are stolen from their parents frequently enough that I don't want that out there. I figure that I can usually get 4-5 generations on my own- by that point I can make a link with another tree and contact that person directly to swap info-I usually get a lot more than info that way anyway. One person had my gggggrandmother's spinning wheel, which would not show up in a gedcom:) Lisa McDonald Is it possible that some programs will convert everyone without a death date to "Living?" ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 4:28 PM Subject: [VA-SOUTHSIDE-L] "Living" Persons, Privacy, ramifications > Would Paul Drake and some of you legal eagles point out the liability > involved by giving genealogical information on living descendants? I personally > don't have anything to hide and anyone is welcome to publish anything about me > personally, my ancestors or descendants. Likewise, I do not welcome any > information considered by some as "private". Most of us are trying to record > information for posterity, escpecially for our, hopefully, future interested > descendants. What difference will it make to us or them 100 years from now?? > > What really ticks me off on the internet is to find some ancestor born in the > 1700s or 1800s with all of their children listed as "Living". > > Bev Brooks Cavender > Lake Placid, FL > > > ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== > The USGenWeb Project http://www.usgenweb.org > Do Not Post Chain Letters, Virus Warnings, etc. to this list. > This list is for Genealogy, History and Related Topics. > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > >

Mr. Drake would have to come out of retirement to defend me if I caught the varmint! Mickey -----Original Message----- From: Margaret Driskill [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 6:53 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [VA-SOUTHSIDE-L] "Living" Persons, Privacy, ramifications Dearest Friends, cousins, and fellow researchers, My dearest friend Paul answered you absolutely correctly, but did not caution that to add private information is "usually not the custom" on the Internet because of safety concerns. Your worries about liability should be minor compared to the worry about someone knowing your grandchild's name, birth date, sex and parent's names... If I saw the private information about my living children and grandchildren on the Internet, God help the person who posted it....Mr. Drake's shingle would have to go back up from retirement to catch the varmint! Fondly, Margaret ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== USGenWeb Archives http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb Do Not Flame other Members on List. If you have problems or concerns with list posts, contact the List Administrator. [email protected] ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

Paul and All, My understanding is that the current concerns regarding privacy ramifications have to do not so much with legal liability per se, but with "identity theft", the use of mother's maiden names by credit card companies as a "proof", etc. The concern is that, yes while the information is public, generally speaking, persons can easily access or assume identities with knowledgte of name, birthplace, birthdate and parents' name. That in fact these pirates do go to genealogy websites and harvest the information. That the more clever among them can get access to credit card numbers and work backwards. Apparently employees of companies that do a big credit card business (stores, restaurants, etc.) have done this (copied down numbers from credit card receipts.. The issue is to NOT do things that make it easier for there to be credit card/identity fraud. Such Information available on the internet with simple searches is therefore a particular problem. So, yes you can legally put the information out there as identified by Paul on the internet (and searches do hit posts on rootsweb lists), but you have to ask yourself if you want to put others at risk. On one list I belong to, the list administrator is so sensitive to this that she discourages complete transcriptions of obituaries with living descendants. The issue of just "Living" and no name being given for people long dead in gedcoms, is one that I can't answer but have also encountered. I think it has to do with how the information is entered, coded, presented. Some others who may have information at worldconnect in a gedcom would be better able to answer that. I think it is unintentional, but, I know there are people that submit gedcoms that then change email addresses and can't be contacted or are unfamiliar with whatever mechanics that lead to the listing of children born 1780 as "Living". Best Regards, Janet Hunter

Bless you! My feelings exactly! Lorri ----- Original Message ----- From: "Margaret Driskill" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 4:52 PM Subject: [VA-SOUTHSIDE-L] "Living" Persons, Privacy, ramifications > Dearest Friends, cousins, and fellow researchers, > > My dearest friend Paul answered you absolutely correctly, but did not caution that to add private information is "usually not the custom" on the Internet because of safety concerns. Your worries about liability should be minor compared to the worry about someone knowing your grandchild's name, birth date, sex and parent's names... If I saw the private information about my living children and grandchildren on the Internet, God help the person who posted it....Mr. Drake's shingle would have to go back up from retirement to catch the varmint! > > Fondly, > Margaret > > > ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== > USGenWeb Archives http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb > Do Not Flame other Members on List. > If you have problems or concerns with list posts, contact the List Administrator. [email protected] > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > >

Dearest Friends, cousins, and fellow researchers, My dearest friend Paul answered you absolutely correctly, but did not caution that to add private information is "usually not the custom" on the Internet because of safety concerns. Your worries about liability should be minor compared to the worry about someone knowing your grandchild's name, birth date, sex and parent's names... If I saw the private information about my living children and grandchildren on the Internet, God help the person who posted it....Mr. Drake's shingle would have to go back up from retirement to catch the varmint! Fondly, Margaret

Hi, Bev. You may write anything you wish about anyone IF - IF - the info you give is or ever was a matter of public record ANYWHERE. So, marriages, births, deaths, all court records, all land records, all divorces, adoptions, and criminal files open to the public, all school, public office, and mortgages or financing information records, all voting records that are open to the public, all public offices, all political party affiliations that are on the record, and even all church records if the person has said or held themselves out as a member or follower of that discipline. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected] To: [email protected] ....Would Paul Drake and some of you legal eagles point out the liability involved by giving genealogical information on living descendants?....

Would Paul Drake and some of you legal eagles point out the liability involved by giving genealogical information on living descendants? I personally don't have anything to hide and anyone is welcome to publish anything about me personally, my ancestors or descendants. Likewise, I do not welcome any information considered by some as "private". Most of us are trying to record information for posterity, escpecially for our, hopefully, future interested descendants. What difference will it make to us or them 100 years from now?? What really ticks me off on the internet is to find some ancestor born in the 1700s or 1800s with all of their children listed as "Living". Bev Brooks Cavender Lake Placid, FL

[email protected] writes: > Ever heard of data migration? As new media formats come available, > the data should be copied to them. > David, in an ideal world that's what would happen. I take it you have never worked for a government agency. At the archives for which I work we get by on a shoe string budget that covers building maintenance, utilities and salaries. Monies for equipment comes from outside our budget and it rarely happens. The whole world of digitizing was about to pass us by. We couldn't get funds to buy a $500 scanner, not because thecounty had no money but because it was deemed unnecessary. The scanner that we use at the archives was purchased for us by a "friends group" to digitize our print, negative and slide collection. We do use it to scan douments also. We are limited as to what we can digitize as the scanner will not scan larger than 8.5 X 14. Much of our collection is in the form of large minute books. We continue to microfilm so that we have a backup of all the records that we store.

I am not referring to igitalizing the images, including scanner. I am referring to transferring data from floppy discs (5.25 to 3.5, to CD-R, to DVD-R). And you're right I never worked for government agency BUT I've been in microfilm business long time to know what you are talking about. The large scanners are quite pricey to try to scan in bigger than 8x14. Best to microfilm these oversized books first. Then from the microfilm, you can scan images to CD-R or DVD-R with galling ease. The Family History Library has 3 such Microfilm to CD scanners for the public now. Best thing that have ever happened! Saved $$ when photocopying film to paper. David [email protected] wrote: > > [email protected] writes: > > > Ever heard of data migration? As new media formats come available, > > the data should be copied to them. > > > > David, in an ideal world that's what would happen. I take it you have never > worked for a government agency. At the archives for which I work we get by on > a shoe string budget that covers building maintenance, utilities and salaries. > Monies for equipment comes from outside our budget and it rarely happens. > The whole world of digitizing was about to pass us by. We couldn't get funds to > buy a $500 scanner, not because thecounty had no money but because it was > deemed unnecessary. The scanner that we use at the archives was purchased for us > by a "friends group" to digitize our print, negative and slide collection. We > do use it to scan douments also. We are limited as to what we can digitize > as the scanner will not scan larger than 8.5 X 14. Much of our collection is > in the form of large minute books. We continue to microfilm so that we have a > backup of all the records that we store. >

In a message dated 5/29/03 7:01:19 AM Central Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: > Obsolescence could come sooner than one thinks. Archival plastic, tape, > and > acid free paper are probably best. Office supply houses carry such archival > > materials. Very true. I work for a county Archives. We microfilm collections such as this. Microfilm has a very long shelf life and it doesn't take a lot of know how to construct a viewer. Although space is a problem at this point we also keep the original record stored in an acid free environment. We also digitize records and store them on CD's but there are lots of questions among archivist as to the shelf life of CD's and when the equipment to read them might be phased out. Remember those big floppies that were used 10 or more years ago? I haven't seen a computer with a drive that could read those in ages. My sister recently purchased a new computer that does not have a floppy drive at all. It had a DVD drive and a CD writer.

Ever heard of data migration? As new media formats come available, the data should be copied to them. David [email protected] wrote: > > In a message dated 5/29/03 7:01:19 AM Central Daylight Time, > [email protected] writes: > > > Obsolescence could come sooner than one thinks. Archival plastic, tape, > > and > > acid free paper are probably best. Office supply houses carry such archival > > > > materials. > > Very true. I work for a county Archives. We microfilm collections such as > this. Microfilm has a very long shelf life and it doesn't take a lot of know > how to construct a viewer. Although space is a problem at this point we also > keep the original record stored in an acid free environment. > > We also digitize records and store them on CD's but there are lots of > questions among archivist as to the shelf life of CD's and when the equipment to read > them might be phased out. Remember those big floppies that were used 10 or > more years ago? I haven't seen a computer with a drive that could read those > in ages. My sister recently purchased a new computer that does not have a > floppy drive at all. It had a DVD drive and a CD writer. > > ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== > VAGenWeb http://www.rootsweb.com/~vagenweb > Please contact List Administrator if you experience problems > getting unsubscribed from this list. [email protected] > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

In a message dated 5/28/2003 12:48:19 PM Central Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: > though. format obsolescence could also be a problem over many years. Obsolescence could come sooner than one thinks. Archival plastic, tape, and acid free paper are probably best. Office supply houses carry such archival materials.

I would suggest that the woman who wishes to deposit her research first try a local genealogical society or a county library in an area where the family was concentrated. I know of several cases where this was done. One of our researchers deposited her research in the TN State Library. However, it was quite extensive and well organized, as it was being prepared for a book. I would suggest also that her family first scan the materials into files with Adobe Acrobat. The full program (as opposed to the free Reader) is expensive, but very useful for genealogical work. Many researchers now keep all files on their computer and CDs, as they are much easier to organize and use. Paper files take up too much space. Of course, it is wise to keep several backup CDs. One should be placed at another location in case of fire. Adobe allows for easy insertion, deletion, etc., so the organization does not have to be correct initially. She can then easily make several CDs to give to family members and other researchers.There may be businesses who will scan the materials. I haven't heard any information about the lifetimes of CDs burned on a home computer, though. format obsolescence could also be a problem over many years. However, PDF seems to be the one most likely to survive. A local depository might actually prefer the data files over the paper copies. However, it is necessary to ask first. Bob Stafford

Marietta asked about whether anyone was researching Tamar Byrd. Suggestion: do a <A HREF="www.google.com">www.google.com</A> search for Tamar Byrd [lower case OK] but put her name in quotation marks. There were a couple of hits--at least you can try to communicate with the person who posted the information and see if you can collaborate on doing the research. Try this google search with your ancestors who had rather uncommon names--don't try it with John Williams or John Smith. You will be on the internet for many hours!!! And you may find, as I did, that a person by the name I was searching was on death row and awaiting execution (headlines). Others are athletes and more headlines! Of course, you have to recognize that much of the genealogy that is on the internet is terribly flawed. Try to get some documentation--where did the correspondent get his/her information? You want to find that source, through a film from Salt Lake City, if possible, or an interlibrary loan. Happy hunting!! E.W.Wallace E.W.Wallace

Thanks to all of you who responded to my query concerning Tamar Byrd. She seems to have a lot of descendants, but no parents nor siblings !! Neither do they agree as to her dob.

There are problems with this: They will microfilm the collection on ONE condition - the collection must be organized and catalogued first so the microfilm evaluators and cataloguers can process the microfilms. Otherwise they will NOT accept the collection. Solution: Find volunteers who live near HER! and help with organization and translation from her brand of shorthand to full transcriptions BEFORE colletion can be microfilmed or donated. Depending on where she lives, there may be microfilm operators nearby. W. David Samuelsen, Salt Lake City [email protected] wrote: > > The lady who can not see might get some help from the LDS since they have > been storing geneology records in Utah longer than most of us have been > researching. Nancy > > ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== > VAGenWeb > http://www.rootsweb.com/~vagenweb > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

Have any of you "Byrd watchers" run across Tamar Byrd ( dates of birth vary from 1677 to 1691 ) who married John Holmes abt 1710 ? I'm looking for the proper dob as well as her parents /siblings/

The lady who can not see might get some help from the LDS since they have been storing geneology records in Utah longer than most of us have been researching. Nancy

PLEASE, make sure that any data you collect concerning your ancestors is passed down to the next generation.  I have been told by so many people that when their grandparents died, records were destroyed by whoever cleaned out the house, not understanding the importance of the data.  When a family goes through their parents records, they tend to throw out old notes, old letters, photos they can't identify, etc.  These records can mean so much to anyone who is interested in their family history.  They should boxed up, properly marked and added to by the current generation, put in a safe place and passed down to the next generation so that when someone decides to research their family, these old records are available. Most people are not interested in their ancestors until the reach maturity.  I know that I was not interested in my grandparents stories when I was younger, but when my father died and I hit 50, I looked back and realized that I had missed a lot of my ancestors oral history because I "wasn't interested in old stories".  My mother and I went through old photo's that belonged to her mother, my father, her sister and identified each person and made a note on the back of the photo in pencil as to their name, approx date and location.  I then scanned these into my genealogy program and entered the noted data.  I set up a file on my computer and also in my file cabinet.  After I scan these photos I then file them by ancesteral lines.  Thank goodness I did this before my mother's Parkinson's diseased progressed.  If I had waited much longer, I wouldn't have had the pleasure of watching Mom go through these photos and hearing her stories.  Mom is now unable to do this because the dementia caused by Parkinson's Disease has robbed her of those precious memories, but I can now remind her of those stories and help her jog her memory and once again see smile as she recalls a moment in her history. Pat C. Johns in Va.

Hello Everyone, I am trying to document my doubts that the Mary Baugh, who many folks seem to say married (1) John Crowley, (2) Thomas (or maybe John) Howlett, (3) Henry Ascough; and (4) Thomas Byrd, could be the mother of any of the often cited sons of Thomas Byrd (brother of William Byrd I). To wit: Thomas, William, Andrew & Abraham. My interest in this is double. First I have Tennessee Byrd (probably Robertson Co) ancestry that appears to trace back to Franklin Co. VA, where there was a healthy mix of folks with old Virginia roots along the Chesapeake (maybe my Byrds) and those who came down the Shenandoah Valley and passed through the Blue Ridge to what is now Rocky Mount and points primarily east, west & south. Second, my maiden name is Baugh and I've been trying to figure out the early Virginia Baughs, including a number on the Eastern Shore, and this attribution of children to Thomas Byrd and this particular Mary Baugh has bothered me greatly given the above lineup of Mary's husbands, and the simple fact that she probably didn't marry Thomas until 1705, died in 1710, and she was probably at least 60 years old, and had been busy with the three prior husbands. This does not mean, however, that there might not be another early Mary Baugh, which is quite possible due to the loss of all the early Henrico Co. records and the presence of two, possibly three, adult male Baughs in 1638 -- John & William (father of Mary of the four husbands who died April 1687), possibly still Thomas from the early records in West Sherlow Hundred 1623/4. To complete my documentation on the Mary Baugh/Thomas Byrd-as parents question, I very much hope one of you has one (or both) of the following books and can provide me with the passages in the Adventures of Purse & Person. page 558 (thanks Linda!) that are cited as documentation for Mary Baugh and Thomas Byrd below: Source A (and of greatest interest to me): "The Correspondence of the three William Byrds of Westover, Virginia, 1684-1776." Ed. Marion Tinling. Charlottesville: UP of Virginia, 1977. (two volumes). Passage here from Purse & Person is cited as Source A above: Volume II, page 826, and the footnote is the first one after these two passages. I hope that it identifies Thomas Byrd's wife Mary by a previous married name. "Mary Ascough held 633 acres in Henrico County, 1704. She married (4) Thomas Byrd, son of John Byrd and Grace (Stegge) Byrd, brother of Col. William Byrd I" Janet Hunter note: I assume that the first sentence on land holdings is taken without reference from the 1704 Quit Rent Rolls and was not cited in Tinling's book, although I suppose it's possible the brothers wrote to each other and Thomas described his bride's landholdings <smile> over a breakfast of boiled milk. On the Quit Rents I believe she appears as "Ascoutch Mary Henrico County, 1705", indicating to me that in 1705, when the Henrico lists seem to have been taken, she was still not married to Thomas Byrd. Source B: "The Great American Gentleman: William Byrd of Westover in Virginia, his secret diary for the years 1709-1712." Eds. Louis B. Wright and Marion Tinling. NY, Putnam, 1963. This source is cited twice, pages 152 and 153, and is a continuation of the sentence above and I assume refers to the death information. [She married (4) Thomas Byrd, son of John Byrd and Grace (Stegge) Byrd, brother of Col. William Byrd I], "who died 12 March 1709/1710. She died four days later 16 March 1709/1710." Thank you very much in advance if you can provide me with the relevant passages from the above sources that are cited. I wouldn't be asking this, but I am for the moment in sunny Long Beach, California helping my elderly mother, not Northern Virginia so I can't just pop over as I had become used to to one of about three libraries that I'm sure would have the books, within ten miles. (Sure wish the question came up two weeks ago when I was in Salt Lake City, although I my patience level had reached almost zero on my chosen research -- I defy anyone to find the page numbers on most of the early Henrico Co. microfilms, not to mention the Philadelphia Co., PA Will Books.) With my best regards, Janet (Baugh) Hunter