Genealogy is no different from other forms of communication
and information storage. If you place incorrect balances in your
check book than you expect that that information will impact a
number of other areas!
Recently, an initiative was implemented to place older genealogy
posts from earlier Carman Forums online via web publishing and the
reposting of the information via archiving mail lists. This is
not a bad idea at first glance, but it does have several
ramifications in the pursuit of the family history.
In my example let's take a look a recent posting of an old
message.
Patricia Tidmarsh, "HSArchives - Notes WSCarman
Original WSC from 1974 Mss.," email message from
<patricia(a)echonyc.com> to the Carman-Roots
Mailing List, 18 May 1999.
The same post was placed online:
Rootsweb Archives, online <http:http://searches.rootsweb.com/
cgi-bin/ifetch2?/u1/textindices/C/CARMAN-ROOTS
+1999+157197765+F>, post downloaded 20 May 1999.
The topic of this post provides information originally posted
in 1992 (7 years ago).
As in the checkbook, the first question, is the balance accurate??
In this case, much of the information has disproven, corrected,
or identified as uncorroborated through new references or
discussions held in the past 7 years on the subject.
Did the original post get taken out of context? An important
point and there are a number of views on the archiving of
email. Mail Lists are not considered a formal publishing
media. For the most part they are informal working groups
for discussion. It is unfair to the poster, in my opinion, to
pull his or her posts of the past without proper consultation
on the continued validity of the content of the original post.
In this particular case, much of the information has been
invalidated. By posting the information without comment
as to the new relevations, an unspoken credence can be placed
on the information.
By the reintroduction of this material via an archiving list
and web site. The incorrect information have yet another
opportunity to be entered in over a thousand databases.
We all must take great care on what information we
pass via the Internet and we should try at all times to
qualify our information.
Now for some particulars regarding this post.
William Stillwell Carman was by far the most prominent
19th Century Carman Genealogist. However, he was not
immune to all the normal pitfalls associated with genealogy.
The greatest contribution of his manuscripts were interviews
with living family members of the time. This is known as
first hand information or a primary source. He also included
a great deal of information from secondary sources. Many
of these secondary sources have been unsubstantiated or
disproven in regard to the facts that were recorded.
Here are a few corrections to the subject post:
There is no proof of two Caleb-2 Carmans with one
dying young.
There is no proof that the Rev. James Carman was
a son of Caleb-2 nor that he was born at Cape May, NJ
or Jamaica, Long Island.
There is no evidence to support a marriage of Caleb-2
in 1661.
Other children of Caleb-2 not mentioned in the post
include: Caleb, Daniel, Abigail and Elizabeth.
This information has been widely discussed on several
forums in the last 7 years. It is important to judge the
value of posting old information since this is the primary
method that promotes inaccurate data and myths about
the family history.
Hope this helps, Dan