There is absolutely no question that these papers are important. And should be preserved. I have absolutely no objections to people who do this work receiving due credit/any money/copyrights derived from any sales of this work. This subject was brought to the attention of a rootsweb list, contributions to the cause seem to be gladly accepted, to say that money shouldn't be discussed is not right. If this is to be a totally private matter the subject should be discussed only privately and stopped on this list. My concern is that I thought the original intent was to provide this information for all researchers. The best way to do this where it benefits all is Genweb. Many private respected authors have given their permission for their works to be cited at Genweb. I'm sure people still buy their books. No matter how expert the author is, mistakes happen in transcribing. That is why people are always told to use abstracts as a guide, use them as a source for getting a copy of the original document. In a lookup, I found two books abstracting South Carolina Marriages. The same names appeared in both books with them having completely different dates. Day/month/year, nothing matched. Originals are vital. I have seen many well thought out ideas on this list and have great respect for all concerned with this project. There is much work to be done and a variety of ideas that are great. But if Genweb is not an option to even consider at all in addition to private enterprise, then any further discussion on the list is in my personal opinion, should be halted. Margy Bousman Sorry if this sounds trashy, where do we go from here? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Drake" <martee@citlink.net> To: <VASURRY-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 8:12 PM Subject: Re: [VA-SOUTHSIDE-L] Loose Papers > I am not atall interested in any participating in any discussion as > to who does and who does not profit from any efforts that are > advanced. That said, we must all full well realize that there is > MUCH to be done over and above filming those records. > > To paraphrase Socrates, if one is to build a boat, he/she should > consult a shipwright and not seek the advice of the trash collector. > So? To accomplish the intellectual effort needed, needed are no > small measure of talent, many years of experience in the "doing" of > such work, and a great depth of knowledge, even as to the identity > of a particular documents, not to mention the exertion required for > ordering, numbering and the accomplishing the terribly tedious > indexing of such material. I can't do that, nor can many others > among us. > > To merely copy this enormous quantity and variety of early > writings - literally written by hundreds, if not thousands, of > different folks, most of whom had a "writing hand" that differed > from the others - and then to put that film on-line with no aids to > interpretation, abstractions, or indexing surely is but a sorry use > of whatever money is forthcoming from good people. So, how to do > it? > > As at the inception of the idea, when some of us suggested that a > researcher and abstractor of talent and experience be permitted to > undertake this incredible task for whatever profit - IF ANY - he/she > might derive, I now again suggest that such a course is the proper > one. > > There is a middle ground for the Society to consider, as follows: > IF - IF - the Society/County is willing to oversee and administer > the funds and activities needed, and if Steve and his wife do or > direct the photography effort, then those two parties should enter > into dialogue with Mrs. Haun (OR some other person of equal skill, > if one is known) to the end that she/he profit from the publication, > that the photography be compenstaed as is agreeable, and that the > Society do so also, all by some division that equates to the > relative exertions. > > For the moment, assume that Steve and his wife are to do the > photography, that Mrs. Haun will accomplish the abstracts, etc., and > that the Society is to do the administration. It is not rocket > science for reasonable, sensible and talented folks to evaluate the > worths of those separate tasks. Within that very evaluation will > rest the answer to the division of such profits - IF THERE ARE ANY. > > Parenthetically, as a published author of several genealogy related > books, I can assure you that the pie to be cut up won't feed many > folks, no matter how well done. There will be no bearded fellow > there with the fishes and loaves. Paul Drake > > > ==== VASURRY Mailing List ==== > Don't forget to check out the Surry County, Virginia, Historical Society > http://www.rootsweb.com/~vaschsm/Index.html > List Mistress is Eve Gregory egregory20@earthlink.net > > > ============================== > Visit Ancestry's Library - The best collection of family history > learning and how-to articles on the Internet. > http://www.ancestry.com/learn/library >

Hi Margy, Forgive the snip-snip of your email. We left three points that we wanted to comment on. Please don't take offense because we take absolutely no offense. we just wanted to comment. First would be "sure people still buy their books". We have a website for Virginia County tax lists. We copy, scan, index and post original tax lists for "1790" and "1800", each being an approximate year due to image quality. This is an attempt to recreate the missing censuses. Each year has an index like the books you find at the libraries and images of the originals like the microfilms you can view. We also offer high resolution image CDs for sale. In one year we have sold 8 CDs to 1 individual. We find that when too much is offered we are sure no one buys anything. Just our observation. That hasn't stopped us. We still continue to get tax lists, index them and post everything just as you find with GenWeb. By the way, we posted our first index for Brunswick, the 1789 Personal Property Tax List A index, tonight. Second, I would never think of eliminating GenWeb from any benefits. I think GenWeb has been a tremendous benefit to those searching their roots. Just how far to go with GenWeb content would be a decision made by the powers to be. Personally I think GenWeb could do a better job in some areas but as a nonprofit group of true volunteers their accomplishments have been outstanding! Lastly, where do we go from here? That remains to be seen. As a group of email list members we can do absolutely nothing. But wish and hope. I have written to the Surry County Historical Society and sincerely hope they accept an offer to join this discussion. We compromise a group of raw energy and desire. This needs to be focused and planned. I believe that will have to come from the Society. They may already have a plan but need a driving force to conclude that plan. We could very well be that driving force. So let's hope to hear from them soon! Steve and Bunny ----- Original Message ----- From: "Margy Bousman" <mbousman7@home.com> To: <VA-SOUTHSIDE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 9:44 PM Subject: Re: [VA-SOUTHSIDE-L] Loose Papers >...... > My concern is that I thought the original intent was to provide this > information for all researchers. The best way to do this where it benefits > all is Genweb. Many private respected authors have given their permission > for their works to be cited at Genweb. I'm sure people still buy their > books. >..... > I have seen many well thought out ideas on this list and have great respect > for all concerned with this project. There is much work to be done and a > variety of ideas that are great. But if Genweb is not an option to even > consider at all in addition to private enterprise, then any further > discussion on the list is in my personal opinion, should be halted. > Margy Bousman > Sorry if this sounds trashy, where do we go from here? > --------- Subscribe to BINNS-L surname email list: mailto:BINNS-L-request@rootsweb.com?subject=subscribe&body=subscribe American Binns Families and Individuals: http://www.yspcbdesigns.com/americanb/index.htm 1790/1800 County Tax Lists of Virginia: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~ysbinns/vataxlists/index.htm