Beginning March 2nd, 2020 the Mailing Lists functionality on RootsWeb will be discontinued. Users will no longer be able to send outgoing emails or accept incoming emails. Additionally, administration tools will no longer be available to list administrators and mailing lists will be put into an archival state.
Administrators may save the emails in their list prior to March 2nd. After that, mailing list archives will remain available and searchable on RootsWeb
>Discussion about such things as James Cole and who his wife was should
>continue to be discussed, without anyone being right or wrong. No flames,
>no insults. I don't know about anyone else, I am subscribed to this list to
>research the Cole ancestry. Not to be told one way of thinking is right or
>wrong. When someone can prove who James Cole's wife was, then fine.
>Otherwise, make it healthy discussion and opinions. And if someone posts a
>question, either answer it nicely or don't answer it. All Alan did was
>inquire as to who might have sent him the file.
If the file was inaccurate, we have the obligation to say so. Nicely, of
course. Saying nothing would be a great disservice to everyone with this
immigrant James Cole in their line.
I feel the need to respond here again to "When someone can prove who James
Cole's wife was, then fine." That is exactly what happened. It has been
proved and it has been discussed here before. There are marriage and
baptismal records in Devonshire which are convincing documents to some good
researchers. This is no longer something where only "opinion" is involved.
There is proof. More discussion will not likely change that. Telling
others about it is a good idea.
I apologize to anyone who thought my initial response to Alan was a
criticism or that I did not answer nicely. I told him to look at the
archives. I told him what the new information is. I told him the other
information had been disproved. I did not make a personal attack - or I
didn't think I did. The fact that wrong information has been published in
the past does not mean that the researchers who read it are "wrong" or
"bad". One must be prepared, though, to learn and recognize new
information when it comes along, though, and to accept it even if it does
mean you have to prune the tree. We've all had to do that, I will bet.
Telling people to question critically the undocumented information they see
in places like the WFT and Ancestral File should not be taken as criticism.
It's darned good advice. We've all learned the hard way about it. Yes?
The correct information you find in those places needs to be questioned, too.
When a message has been repeated many times, telling people about the
archives is often the easiest way to pass on information. It does not need
to be reposted in its entirety as long as it does exist somewhere to be found.
One reason I (and others) have responded here, however, is that Alan's
message is now in the archives, and it is important that future searchers
see the replies which point to the newer research.
Margaret
who will now back off.
Dear Cole researchers,
I have many blanks in my Cole line, and if any one has
any comment or data, please share.
What I have: William/Thomas Cole was born about 1633 in
Devonshire, England. Think he was married to Hanna Galloway.
3 children were born in MD, John, Sarah and Thomas.
John married Johanna Garrett about 1690 in MD. John and
Johannah had 14 children, and one was Thomas, born about 1690.
Thomas was married twice; 1st Mary Richardson, 2nd Sarah
Price. One of Thomas' children, Broad Cole, was born Aug.12, 1725
in Baltimore. Broad Cole married Athaliah Dimmitt.
Broad and Athaliah had 7 children and one was Thomas, born
Mar.15,1757. Thomas married Elizabeth Steven on Sep.9,1778 in
Bedford Co.,PA, and they had 11 children in Bedford/Huntingdon Co.PA.
Thomas and Elizabeth had one daughter, Elizabeth, who married
David Barnhart on Dec.20,1807 in Fairfield Co.,OH......thus my
Cole line ends. If anyone has anything new about this line, please
let me know. Thanks. Tim Mattingly gtm3(a)indy.net
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------93D1EED5C1C1F7C1005D1020
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
All of my cole that are still living are in Rocky Mountain House
Canada. I am still working on the early generation, so I have not spent
any research time in Canada. My Cole line went to Canada after 1930's.
mkp
--------------93D1EED5C1C1F7C1005D1020
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Received: from bl-11.rootsweb.com (bl-11.rootsweb.com [204.212.38.27])
by eagle.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA26762;
Tue, 31 Aug 1999 06:20:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from slist@localhost)
by bl-11.rootsweb.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA15347;
Tue, 31 Aug 1999 06:15:55 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 06:15:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19990831132051.008c142c(a)pop.tiac.net>
X-Sender: jhall2(a)pop.tiac.net
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 09:20:51 -0400
Old-To: COLE-L(a)rootsweb.com
From: Betty Proper <jhall2(a)tiac.net>
Subject: Any Canadian Cole?
Resent-Message-ID: <q46iiD.A.jvD.KW9y3(a)bl-11.rootsweb.com>
To: COLE-L(a)rootsweb.com
Resent-From: COLE-L(a)rootsweb.com
X-Mailing-List: <COLE-L(a)rootsweb.com> archive/latest/1620
X-Loop: COLE-L(a)rootsweb.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: COLE-L-request(a)rootsweb.com
Hello,
Does anyone know of a Cole that went to Canada? Our Cole came into the
states from New Brunswick at the end of the 19th century. Since we have not
had success-to-date in tracing back, I wondered if anyone on this list knew
of a loyalist (or other) Cole family that moved to New Brunswick (or any
other eastern part of Canada)?
Betty Cole P
==== COLE Mailing List ====
If you are unsubscribed from the COLE list unintentionally, simply
resubscribe. A full mailbox, computer error, or spam may cause you to be unsubscribed.
--------------93D1EED5C1C1F7C1005D1020--
Two messages were posted this morning that should have been sent to me in
private. The questions are valid, but they pertain to policy and -- I
REPEAT -- this is NOT an acceptable topic of public debate.
First:
> could someone provide
a relatively new researcher with the parameters of free speech on these
lists? I understand offensive language, and I think I understand the
meaning
of "flames", but I am very, very unclear as to what the qualitative
difference is between a complaint which should be posted to the listowner
only - and an opinion or dialogue which is in the group's domain. I also
didn't get a copy of the rules, and what it means to become an offender,
and
while I may seem cheeky, I do truly want to know the answers to these
questions. This is all rather unsettling, and I am confused. I don't know
if
this will be considered an "offensive" email or not. It is not meant to be
one. I figured others might have similar concerns and that this was an
appropriate time to address these questions.
<
This is not an offensive message in itself, but is rather an excellent
example of the type of question that should be sent to me OFF-LIST. It is
the public posting, especially on the heels of my explicit instructions to
the contrary, that is an "offense". It wastes the time and tests the
temperament of hundreds of people. If you have a question or suggestion,
contact me privately. I do listen. Whether it requires only a simple
e-mail response or calls for posting another "Netiquette" lesson to the
group -- I'll take care of it.
Now, as for the question of "free speech".....
Most people already understand that there is no such thing as "free speech"
on a mailing list. It is a place to exchange information and make
connections. I've been extremely flexible in managing this list, to
encourage discussion of GENEALOGY -- but that does not mean that "anything
goes". If there is any doubt in your mind as to whether the topic you want
to discuss qualifies as genealogy -- it probably does not.
To illustrate -- I was kicked off one list myself for posting a general
query like "COLEs in TN, early 1800s". The rules called for SURNAME, First
Name [Birth Date, Death Date] Location. I didn't have enough information
on that line to post such a specific query, but the time frame was early
enough that I hope to connect with others who had the same surname in that
time & place. That listowner didn't want the traffic cluttered with
anything but very specific queries -- and was completely within his rights
to so rule.
In managing this list, though, I choose to ENCOURAGE people to use specific
subject lines and include the most accurate known dates and locations in
messages but stop short of REQUIRING it because I don't want format
considerations to discourage newcomers from posting. We are extremely
flexible, as long as the discussion pertains to genealogy and concentrates
on the facts.
The line between fact and opinion is sometimes difficult to discern.
That's why you should always cite your sources.
Let's say, for example, that someone posted a query about COLEs who made
the Run of '89 and homesteaded in Lincoln Co., OK.
If I respond simply "No way!" -- that's just an opinion. It comes across
as rather arrogant, is certainly inappropriate for the list, and some would
even call it offensive.
If, however, I explain that the Run of '89 did not open Lincoln Co. to
homesteading, but that it was opened by the Runs of '91 and '95 that leads
to three possibilities. The COLEs in question could have:
1. made the Run of '89 but homesteaded somewhere other than Lincoln
County.
2. made the Run of '91 and homesteaded in northwest, northeast, or
southeast Lincoln Co. , or
3. made the Run of '95 and homesteaded in southwest Lincoln Co.
The answers lie in land records.
See the difference? The underlying opinion is the same -- something wrong
with the original data -- but by providing the additional background
information, I've taken the response out of the realm of just an opinion
and turned it into useful tips for finding the correct data.
The other message noted:
> All Alan did was
inquire as to who might have sent him the file.
<
No. If he had stopped there, I don't think anyone would have objected.
He went on to re-post the questionable data, then stepped over the line
into trying to make policy when things didn't go his way.
Policy is another matter entirely. We are simply too large to tolerate
public debates concerning what is and is not appropriate behavior.
Questions, opinions, or complaints concerning policy should -- WITHOUT
EXCEPTION -- be sent to me privately.
If it is a matter you would like to see posted to the list, just say
something like, "if you agree, feel free to forward this to the list".
That gives me the opportunity to endorse your idea and it becomes an
official policy statement rather than the opening shot in a verboten
debate.
Sharon McAllister
COLE Listowner
aka The Dragon Lady
73372.1745(a)compuserve.com
Please My brick wall just keeps getting bigger, I have been unable to
make any head way, I have a David Cole (Coal) b 30 Mar 1788; being
married 1805 in Fayette Co Pa . Please could he tying in with anyone's
family?
Hello,
I am new to the Cole list. Does anyone have information on the parents
of
Charles Cole who married Elizabeth Stoneman. I know they were in the
Grayson County, VA area around 1800. I descend from their son Joshua,
who
was born, I believe, in 1802. Joshua married Tabitha Osborne and they
finished out their lives in Watauga County, NC.
Also, can someone tell me how to get to the old copies of messages on
the
Cole list?
Thanks,
Sharon Williamson
Dear Fellow Cole's
If any of you have traced your families to Suffolk, England, please get in
touch with me,
I may be able to help you.
All the best
Jayne
UNSUBSCRIBE
>From a rookie genealogy enthusiast seems like about every 4 weeks somebody
gets bent about something
then it takes a week of junk mail for you all to settle down, frankly I find
it hard to get it?
guess its best to do it the old fashion way to find my Cole's and I just
started!
have a nice day
Douglas Doss
There was a question this morning about what can and cannot be talked about
on the list. I too am interested in the answer.
In Alan's latest letter, he brought up the "timid" who might be afraid to
post something for fear of getting flamed. That is so true.
Discussion about such things as James Cole and who his wife was should
continue to be discussed, without anyone being right or wrong. No flames,
no insults. I don't know about anyone else, I am subscribed to this list to
research the Cole ancestry. Not to be told one way of thinking is right or
wrong. When someone can prove who James Cole's wife was, then fine.
Otherwise, make it healthy discussion and opinions. And if someone posts a
question, either answer it nicely or don't answer it. All Alan did was
inquire as to who might have sent him the file.
I am not even close to being that far back as to be researching James Cole.
I have a Celia Cole who married Joseph Tompkins in 1818 or so in Carter
County TN. Trying to piece together her parents and siblings.
Don and Mary in Wyoming
I'm still searching for information on David C. Cole, who moved from Fayette
County, KY to Missouri in 1798 with his wife, Elizabeth Senate (Sennitt) and
two young sons, Robert and Jacob. Children born in Missouri were George W.,
Sarah, Jonathan Mark, David, Mary Ann Elizabeth, and Stephen, and possibly
two others. Jacob married Sarah Jane Ferqueran in 1821. I'd love to find
David's parents and siblings.
Jackie
socrmom901(a)aol.com
Hello,
Does anyone know of a Cole that went to Canada? Our Cole came into the
states from New Brunswick at the end of the 19th century. Since we have not
had success-to-date in tracing back, I wondered if anyone on this list knew
of a loyalist (or other) Cole family that moved to New Brunswick (or any
other eastern part of Canada)?
Betty Cole P
Hello,
I have not followed this...debate... or flap closely,not at all really, but
I feel compelled to ask the following question: given the message text
quoted below, or attributed to Alan Cole, and its characterization as
"criticism" which should be posted to the listowner, and not the entire
list, and given that this post was also characterized as "breaking the
rules" and that is stated "he has himself become an offender and given me
ample cause to eject him..." - given those statements, could someone provide
a relatively new researcher with the parameters of free speech on these
lists? I understand offensive language, and I think I understand the meaning
of "flames", but I am very, very unclear as to what the qualitative
difference is between a complaint which should be posted to the listowner
only - and an opinion or dialogue which is in the group's domain. I also
didn't get a copy of the rules, and what it means to become an offender, and
while I may seem cheeky, I do truly want to know the answers to these
questions. This is all rather unsettling, and I am confused. I don't know if
this will be considered an "offensive" email or not. It is not meant to be
one. I figured others might have similar concerns and that this was an
appropriate time to address these questions.
Sincerely,
Deborah Day Olsen
-----Original Message-----
From: caviness [mailto:caviness@conninc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 1999 8:54 AM
To: COLE-L(a)rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: ADMIN: The Latest Flap
Nothing squelches the life out of the research into geneology more, than
critisism, and nothing does more to find the truth than honest thought
producing debate. If everyone put what data they have , on this discussion
group regardless of how accurate ,we may be able together to sort out the
truth
caviness(a)conninc.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Sharon McAllister <73372.1745(a)compuserve.com>
To: <COLE-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 1999 5:42 AM
Subject: ADMIN: The Latest Flap
> Message text written by Alan Cole:
> >
> > Do those of you who have been hostile realize that you may stifle some
> > sweet, gentle person (not me) from posting some family gold nugget out
of
> > fear that she will be shot down?! She might have just the piece that
> ties
> > your line to another five generations, but you will miss it when she
> doesn't
> > post it because you made her fear riducule and personal attacks.<
>
> Complaints like this should be posted to the listowner -- ME -- not the
> entire list. But as Alan chose to take the matter public, I will also
> respond publicly this time.
>
> NO ONE should hesitate to post first-hand information to this list for
fear
> of ridicule. I read EVERY post to COLE-L, and assure you that anyone who
> publicly attacks another member gets a private admonition and a chance to
> back off and make amends. I don't, however, take the matter public unless
> the offense is public. As a last resort, I not only unsub the offender
but
> also put him/her on the reject list so that he/she can NOT resubscribe.
> That's why you don't see any serious flame wars here -- but it all happens
> behind the scenes.
>
> Of course I expect detailed discussions to move off-list. When cousins
> find each other, they usually have a lot of information to exchange. They
> don't want hundreds of eavesdroppers, and the other members of our list
> certainly don't care about the details of their line. Does that mean I
> wash my hands of the matter when exchanges go private? Of course not! I
> ask ANYONE who receives offensive private e-mail in response to a message
> posted to this list to forward the message to me -- NOT to the entire
list.
>
>
> As for this case....
>
> Alan posted a question to the list about a matter that had been covered
> extensively. Others, helpfully and correctly, suggested that he could
find
> the answers in the archives. I agree. There's absolutely no reason to
> subject hundreds of people to a rerun of this debate.
>
> I have set up the private MyFamily.com site for just this purpose. It's a
> place where members of the same line can compare notes and iron out
> discrepancies. Where it's easy to exchange private e-mail and people can
> debate to their heart's content without involving unwilling eavesdroppers.
> THEN, if the puzzle pieces fit together in such a way as to provide some
> new insight, they can post the news to the main List.
>
> Did Alan receive offensive mail off-list? Possibly -- but I don't know
> because he didn't forward any to me. Did he break the rules himself with
> this latest post? YES!
>
> So while he may actually be the injured party, by breaking protocol in
this
> manner he has himself become an offender and given me ample cause to eject
> him from our group. I choose, however, to give him the benefit of the
> doubt and another chance.
>
> To newcomers: Let this be a valuable lesson. Such behavior is
> unacceptable. Do NOT emulate it. Follow protocol. When in doubt,
write
> to me off-list.
>
> To our long-time members: I do appreciate all you have done to help keep
> the list running smoothly but -- PLEASE -- let this be the end of the
> current discussion. If you have questions or comments, direct them to me
> off-list.
>
> "Ah has spoke!"
>
> Sharon McAllister
> COLE Listowner
> 73372.1745(a)compuserve.com
>
>
> ==== COLE Mailing List ====
> Problems? Write the Listowner: 73372.1745(a)compuserve.com
>
>
==== COLE Mailing List ====
Visit our Web Site: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~cole/Cole.html
It has been a while since I posted this plea for help. Hopefully, there
are some new people on the list who might be able to offer assistance.
I am looking for Elizabeth W. COLE and I know very little about her.
Someone contacted me by email and said that they thought her father was
John Cole but there leaves a lot of options. They did not know any
dates of birth or death. The family did live in and around Jackson,
Madison Co.,TN. She would have been my g-g-grandmother. Any
information on her or her family would be appreciated.
Descendants of Elizabeth W. Cole
1 Elizabeth W. Cole b: Abt. 1822 in North Carolina d: Abt. 1873 in
Tennessee (?)
. +John M. Casburn m: March 24, 1846 b: Abt. 1816 in England d: Abt.
1855 in Tennessee (?)
...... 2 Caroline W. Casburn b: April 12, 1847 in Madison County,
Tennessee d: January 2, 1925 in Graham, Young County, Texas
.......... +Joseph L. Vaughan m: April 17, 1873 b: December 23, 1849 d:
February 16, 1919 in Graham, Young County, Texas
...... 2 Thomas R. Casburn b: 1849 d: Unknown
...... 2 William R. Casburn b: February 1851 in Tennessee d: October
31, 1926 in Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas
.......... +Ella Columbia DeLano m: August 27, 1887 b: September 24,
1865 in Galveston, Galveston County, Texas d: July 26, 1948 in Fort
Worth, Tarrant County, Texas
...... 2 John Clemons Casburn b: May 3, 1854 in Tennessee d: November
26, 1933 in Graham, Young County, Texas
.......... +Johnnie Ella Randolph m: September 6, 1881 b: April 25,
1861 in Tennessee d: June 10, 1947 in Graham, Young County, Texas
Nothing squelches the life out of the research into geneology more, than
critisism, and nothing does more to find the truth than honest thought
producing debate. If everyone put what data they have , on this discussion
group regardless of how accurate ,we may be able together to sort out the
truth
caviness(a)conninc.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Sharon McAllister <73372.1745(a)compuserve.com>
To: <COLE-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 1999 5:42 AM
Subject: ADMIN: The Latest Flap
> Message text written by Alan Cole:
> >
> > Do those of you who have been hostile realize that you may stifle some
> > sweet, gentle person (not me) from posting some family gold nugget out
of
> > fear that she will be shot down?! She might have just the piece that
> ties
> > your line to another five generations, but you will miss it when she
> doesn't
> > post it because you made her fear riducule and personal attacks.<
>
> Complaints like this should be posted to the listowner -- ME -- not the
> entire list. But as Alan chose to take the matter public, I will also
> respond publicly this time.
>
> NO ONE should hesitate to post first-hand information to this list for
fear
> of ridicule. I read EVERY post to COLE-L, and assure you that anyone who
> publicly attacks another member gets a private admonition and a chance to
> back off and make amends. I don't, however, take the matter public unless
> the offense is public. As a last resort, I not only unsub the offender
but
> also put him/her on the reject list so that he/she can NOT resubscribe.
> That's why you don't see any serious flame wars here -- but it all happens
> behind the scenes.
>
> Of course I expect detailed discussions to move off-list. When cousins
> find each other, they usually have a lot of information to exchange. They
> don't want hundreds of eavesdroppers, and the other members of our list
> certainly don't care about the details of their line. Does that mean I
> wash my hands of the matter when exchanges go private? Of course not! I
> ask ANYONE who receives offensive private e-mail in response to a message
> posted to this list to forward the message to me -- NOT to the entire
list.
>
>
> As for this case....
>
> Alan posted a question to the list about a matter that had been covered
> extensively. Others, helpfully and correctly, suggested that he could
find
> the answers in the archives. I agree. There's absolutely no reason to
> subject hundreds of people to a rerun of this debate.
>
> I have set up the private MyFamily.com site for just this purpose. It's a
> place where members of the same line can compare notes and iron out
> discrepancies. Where it's easy to exchange private e-mail and people can
> debate to their heart's content without involving unwilling eavesdroppers.
> THEN, if the puzzle pieces fit together in such a way as to provide some
> new insight, they can post the news to the main List.
>
> Did Alan receive offensive mail off-list? Possibly -- but I don't know
> because he didn't forward any to me. Did he break the rules himself with
> this latest post? YES!
>
> So while he may actually be the injured party, by breaking protocol in
this
> manner he has himself become an offender and given me ample cause to eject
> him from our group. I choose, however, to give him the benefit of the
> doubt and another chance.
>
> To newcomers: Let this be a valuable lesson. Such behavior is
> unacceptable. Do NOT emulate it. Follow protocol. When in doubt,
write
> to me off-list.
>
> To our long-time members: I do appreciate all you have done to help keep
> the list running smoothly but -- PLEASE -- let this be the end of the
> current discussion. If you have questions or comments, direct them to me
> off-list.
>
> "Ah has spoke!"
>
> Sharon McAllister
> COLE Listowner
> 73372.1745(a)compuserve.com
>
>
> ==== COLE Mailing List ====
> Problems? Write the Listowner: 73372.1745(a)compuserve.com
>
>
re the james cole Mary lobdell issue ,you can not take every published
item about an ancestor and think it is fact , people tend to think if it is
published it must be a fact well it ain't necessarily you should accept
only that work that can proven to your own satisfaction. No geneologist
is so good that they can't make mistakes ,and sometimes those errors are
repeated over and over until they become accepted as fact, then how sad to
have claimed the wrong grandparent for sometimes generations
caviness(a)conninc.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Margaret Olson <olson(a)shout.net>
To: <COLE-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 1999 12:53 AM
Subject: James Cole and Mary TIBBES (not LOBEL)
> Tom -
>
> Always optimistic Dave is right:
> >James COLE's wife was NOT Mary Lobell--it makes for a fascinating story,
but
> >it is not so. See "The Great Migration Begins" published by NEHGS
several
> >years ago. Volume I, pp 420-424.
>
> Believe us - you do not want Alan's information. It is incorrect. Most
of
> us who are descended from James Cole of Plymouth may have had this
> information in our files in the past - or in the notes for James. It was
> published in EB Cole's book (which Pam Thompson is updating) and it was
> published in a genealogy column in the Boston Transcript in the 1930s and
> has been placed in the Ancestral File and on the Familytreemaker site and
> on many web pages. Recent research has corrected this information in
> showing the parish information in Barnstaple, Devonshire for James Cole
and
> given Mary the correct surname and has the christenings of children - Hugh
> etc. Pam Thompson has posted good information to this list - and it is in
> the archives.
>
> There was a Mathieu d'Lobel - but if he had a daughter Mary, she did not
> marry "our" James. There was probably a William Cole (of Eniskillen, I
> assume) - but he is not related to our James, either - or at least it
> hasn't been proved and is unlikely. Pruning Mathieu d'Lobel and the
> Lobelia from my tree hurt just a little bit - but not too much. Getting
> new better information is much nicer.
>
> Now - if either you or Alan have some documentation to prove we are wrong,
> we'd love to have it posted here. James and Mary still need documented
> ancestors. And I have no idea how you would ever be able to let all the
> others who have that incorrect information from WFT know they are wrong.
> Too bad.
>
> Margaret Olson
>
> (PS - sorry about my "Digest # subject line in my previous message - I
> started using Eudora and am not used to it doing that and I forget to
> change it when I get in a hurry).
>
> >Alan,
> >I find this fascinating. I too have a Cole line that goes back to the
> >same James Cole amd Mary Lobel that you identified in your post. I
> >would be interested to see what information was included to reach
> >William Cole apparently the grandfather of James. I would also be happy
> >to share any Cole information with you that may be of interest.
> >
> >Tom Bautz
> >Lake Mary, Florida
>
>
> ==== COLE Mailing List ====
> Problems? Write the Listowner: 73372.1745(a)compuserve.com
>
>
As long as we're looking for all of those Samuel COLEs, let me add mine.
Samuel COLE, born 1839 VA, died 9 Nov 1909 Selma CA, buried Selma CA
married 1874 Tulare Co CA, to:
Mary Jane BATES.
Children of Samuel & Mary Jane:
William James COLE----------1875
Nathanial Joseph COLE-------1876
Martha J COLE------------------ 1879
Samuel COLE------------------- 1884
Siggie COLE--------------------- 1886
Thalia COLE--------------------- 1889
Ida Mary/Mae COLE------------ 1892
I am not a COLE descendent. Samuel just happened to marry the sister of one
of my ancestors in the BATES line. I have a photo of the family, and will be
glad to scan and send if you have this guy in your family line. Would also
like any information anyone might have on this man and his parents/siblings,
etc.
Marlene Bates Johnson
empori6573(a)aol.com
Mary Jane Cole (my grandmother) b. 1867 Ar, d. 1946 Wichita, Ks married
"Jim" Franks b. <1863 Ar. He died about 1900. She remarried William
Sparkman b.<1863 Ar. Mayme Odella Franks b.1899 (my mother), and Alvin
Ezekiel Franks (my Uncle Zeke) b.1893, (m. Sallie Lollis) were two of
the Cole/Franks offspring but there were a lot more. Likewise with
Cole/Sparkman. Does anyone have information on the children of Mary
Jane Cole including more specifics about Alvin Ezekiel?
--
OTHER SIDE OF THE ISLAND PHOTO GALLERY
http://www.myattphoto.com
email: myatt(a)myattphoto.com
--------
Message text written by Alan Cole:
>
> Do those of you who have been hostile realize that you may stifle some
> sweet, gentle person (not me) from posting some family gold nugget out of
> fear that she will be shot down?! She might have just the piece that
ties
> your line to another five generations, but you will miss it when she
doesn't
> post it because you made her fear riducule and personal attacks.<
Complaints like this should be posted to the listowner -- ME -- not the
entire list. But as Alan chose to take the matter public, I will also
respond publicly this time.
NO ONE should hesitate to post first-hand information to this list for fear
of ridicule. I read EVERY post to COLE-L, and assure you that anyone who
publicly attacks another member gets a private admonition and a chance to
back off and make amends. I don't, however, take the matter public unless
the offense is public. As a last resort, I not only unsub the offender but
also put him/her on the reject list so that he/she can NOT resubscribe.
That's why you don't see any serious flame wars here -- but it all happens
behind the scenes.
Of course I expect detailed discussions to move off-list. When cousins
find each other, they usually have a lot of information to exchange. They
don't want hundreds of eavesdroppers, and the other members of our list
certainly don't care about the details of their line. Does that mean I
wash my hands of the matter when exchanges go private? Of course not! I
ask ANYONE who receives offensive private e-mail in response to a message
posted to this list to forward the message to me -- NOT to the entire list.
As for this case....
Alan posted a question to the list about a matter that had been covered
extensively. Others, helpfully and correctly, suggested that he could find
the answers in the archives. I agree. There's absolutely no reason to
subject hundreds of people to a rerun of this debate.
I have set up the private MyFamily.com site for just this purpose. It's a
place where members of the same line can compare notes and iron out
discrepancies. Where it's easy to exchange private e-mail and people can
debate to their heart's content without involving unwilling eavesdroppers.
THEN, if the puzzle pieces fit together in such a way as to provide some
new insight, they can post the news to the main List.
Did Alan receive offensive mail off-list? Possibly -- but I don't know
because he didn't forward any to me. Did he break the rules himself with
this latest post? YES!
So while he may actually be the injured party, by breaking protocol in this
manner he has himself become an offender and given me ample cause to eject
him from our group. I choose, however, to give him the benefit of the
doubt and another chance.
To newcomers: Let this be a valuable lesson. Such behavior is
unacceptable. Do NOT emulate it. Follow protocol. When in doubt, write
to me off-list.
To our long-time members: I do appreciate all you have done to help keep
the list running smoothly but -- PLEASE -- let this be the end of the
current discussion. If you have questions or comments, direct them to me
off-list.
"Ah has spoke!"
Sharon McAllister
COLE Listowner
73372.1745(a)compuserve.com