On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 08:55:32 -0600 Carolyn Trim <ctrim@pdq.net> wrote: > [snip] > My regret is that for generations to come, > decendants will be led down the wrong path. We > think finally we have sorted out the ordeal, > and it is not like published. This experience > soured me so. > [snip] > > Carolyn Williams > Hi, Carolyn: Sloppy (or fraudulent) genealogy has been around as long as there has been genealogy. It can be found in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, it can be found in the Gilgamesh Epic, it can be found in the records of the Daughters of the American Revolution (although the latter, at least, are making an attempt to clean up their act). It is not a new thing invented by the Internet.... This does not bother me at all. I take the position that the best antidote for bad genealogy is not *hiding* the good genealogy; it is *publishing* the good genealogy. Use the best tools and standards available, and GET THE GOOD STUFF OUT THERE. Give some credit to those people who want to know the truth (whether today or in the future); they will not be impressed by name after name, date after date, place after place, with no supporting documentation, no proof, no evidence of careful research. It is the well-documented and carefully presented material that will be seen as a gold mine, and given credit. Those who don't care will *always* be able to find junk that fits their own pet theories, or their desire to "fill in one more blank". Rather than be soured, continue to do the best job that *you* can, and be content. Maybe you'll live a bit longer that way, perhaps even long enough to see the junk discredited [grin]. But vindication is not the most important thing -- as sweet as it might be. My opinion. Darrell darrellm@sprynet.com