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
The GenConnect server is back online.
Thanks to all for your patience.
Debbie Jennings
debbiej(a)iquest.net
"Following the footprints through time"
Researching in IN,KY,TN,NC,PA,NJ,VT,NY,MA,MD,
VA,CAN,GER,ENG
I've been a subscriber to both Ancestry and GenealogyLibrary. I don't
think it's fair to say one is better than the other, they are different.
For example, GenealogyLibrary has many vital records for Indiana. These
are the official county records that were transcribed as part of the WPA
project. Those marriage records were very helpful to me. The 1850 census
was disappointing for me, though, because they still don't have Ohio.
Ancestry says they will have all the census records by the end of March.
Also, Ancestry is only 59.95 for the regular subscription, then another
39.93 for the census subscription.
Shelley
>This statement came from a fellow genealogist::::I do agree with her!
>
> I have a membership for Ancestry.com. I started with a quarterly
membership
> and then renewed again. I love Ancestry because as I get info on family,
I
> discover surnames all the time. Then I can go to many databases in
> Ancestry and generally will find some info I can use, or at least a clue
to
> area they came from.
> I have not tried family tree maker so can not comment on them.
--- Carolyn Earle
--- cjearle(a)earthlink.net
--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.
Larry,
I have to agree with the ancestry.com supporters. I've been a member for
over a year and have been very delighted with the site. I am also a member
of FTM, but find that I frequent ancestry 90% more than FTM as I've found so
much more information (resource wise).
Obviously you don't want to depend on someone elses research, but you can
view Gedcom's for free with ancestry. There is a wealth of resources there
also. Not to mention that they are attempting to upload census images of
all census' 1790-1920 (only the 1790 and part of the 1920 is up thus far).
To me it's worth the extra cost to have access to any census!
My pet peeve about FTM is that their CD's are costly and they do not freely
share information that other people have researched. I'm not willing to put
all the work into my research so that another company can profit from it.
As I said, I'm a member of both but if your going for one, I would recommend
ancestry.
Vickie Johnson
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Copley" <moses(a)stlnet.com>
To: <INOWEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 6:51 AM
Subject: [INOWEN] Fee Sites
: Hi All
: I'm considering joining one of the fee sites. Can anyone give me the
: relative merits of Ancestry.com versus FamilyTreeMaker.com?
: Thanks.
: Larry Copley
: moses(a)stlnet.com
:
:
:
: ==== INOWEN Mailing List ====
: Contact the listowner at
: debbiej(a)iquest.net
:
:
I too agree...I found these fee sites worthless unless you are willing to
purchase what they are offering as a come on.
Beverly McNaught Penick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray W. Justus" <rwjustus(a)qwest.net>
To: <INOWEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 8:00 AM
Subject: Re: [INOWEN] Fee Sites
> I'll second Debbie's comment. Also, the quality of the images is vastly
> better at the GenealogyLibrary.com (Family Tree Maker) site. One thing I
am
> concerned about, however, is Genealogy.com's commitment to support the
> Family Tree Maker and GenForum sites since they took over in November.
> Their online support has been less than stellar. Because of this, I just
> passed over after $49.95 renewal offer that ended yesterday. You may be
> able to still get this one if you ask. Some companies are lax on
extensions
> if they haven't met their expected quota. Also, they did not add the 1900
> Census to this subscription but instead made it a separate offer.
>
> Ray Justus
> Chandler, AZ
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Debbie Jennings" <debbiej(a)iquest.net>
> To: <INOWEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 5:59 AM
> Subject: RE: [INOWEN] Fee Sites
>
>
> Larry
> I would personally go with the FamilyTreeMaker site. Reason being that
> although the Ancestry.com site has the census images, it is a separate fee
> to view them over and above the one for membership.
> Both sites are great with info,but the census images would be a big draw
for
> the Ancestry site and to have to pay an additional 99.95 for them is just
> too much.
> FamilyTreeMaker has the 1850 census images inclusive in their pricing with
> access to other items.
> That's my two cents worth.
>
> Debbie Jennings
> debbiej(a)iquest.net
> "Following the footprints through time"
> Researching in IN,KY,TN,NC,PA,NJ,VT,NY,MA,MD,
> VA,CAN,GER,ENG
>
>
>
>
> ==== INOWEN Mailing List ====
> MISSED A POST??
> Check out the mailing list archives at:
> http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl
>
>
>
>
> ==== INOWEN Mailing List ====
> MISSED A POST??
> Check out the mailing list archives at:
> http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl
>
Ancestry.com has transcriptions of the original documents on line so you
can go to the source for your information, not rely on someone else's
information which may or may not be based on fact.
At 06:51 AM 2/1/01 -0600, you wrote:
>Hi All
>I'm considering joining one of the fee sites. Can anyone give me the
>relative merits of Ancestry.com versus FamilyTreeMaker.com?
>Thanks.
>Larry Copley
>moses(a)stlnet.com
>
>
>
>==== INOWEN Mailing List ====
>Contact the listowner at
>debbiej(a)iquest.net
>
Peg Adams
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Hills/3052/ Adams Home Page
Researching: ADAMS, ATWATER, BERGEY, CODY, CRAVEN, CUSTER, DECKER,
EBERHARD, FRENCH, GONSER, HACKENBERG, HAINES, HARBSTER, HENRICKS, KEEFER,
KENESTRICK, LOGAN, LONG, MACHAN, McCLEAN, PARKER, PRESTON, ROW, SCHMIDT
http://www.geocities.com/Broadway/Alley/5802/ Home page for the River Bend
Chapter of Sweet Adelines, International
Good morning,
While reluctant to weigh in on this query, you have given me an opportunity
to mount my soapbox - and being powerless to resist I succumb <grin>
I have been a paying member of Ancestry.com for several years. I also was a
donor to Rootsweb before it was acquired by Ancestry - or it's parent. I
elected to support these two entities for no other reason than as a protest
of Family Tree Maker/Broderbund - or whatever ilk - policy of soliciting
individual researchers efforts to publish in their WFT product.
I was an early implementer of Family Tree Maker - when it was the only
Windows based genealogy software. I was also an early subscriber to the FTM
web site. As a result I was also one of the first to be solicited for my
family research. For whatever reason I was not ready to publish my work at
that time. Sadly I soon realized that FTM had no idea of making the works
of my colleagues freely available to other researchers at no cost. Indeed
not only was there a charge - but a ridiculously exorbitant charge for
nothing more than collection and indexing of the collected data.
Contrast that approach to that taken by Ancestry.com - and Rootsweb. It has
always been the stated policy of Ancestry to always make available - at no
cost - any data submitted to its family tree. Indeed - I have routinely
downloaded gedcom data published at either of these sites; and have yet to
be charged for the information. My paid membership at Ancestry.com allows
me access to an ever growing library of data - data which as someone else
has pointed out - shows me where to go and locate the documentation to
support my assertion that C was the son of B who was the son of A. Contrast
that to the often inaccurate and spurious "facts" published by FTM in its
published product.
<smile> see I told you I would hit the soapbox. In closing I imagine that
you will be satisfied with either product. You now know why I make the
decision to remain with Ancestry!
@W@
At 06:51 AM 2/1/2001, Larry Copley wrote:
>Hi All
>I'm considering joining one of the fee sites. Can anyone give me the
>relative merits of Ancestry.com versus FamilyTreeMaker.com?
>Thanks.
>Larry Copley
>moses(a)stlnet.com
Hi Larry, My personal opinion is you can't beat Ancestry; I just renewed my
membership for another year.
----- Original Message -----
From: Larry Copley <moses(a)stlnet.com>
To: <INOWEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 4:51 AM
Subject: [INOWEN] Fee Sites
> Hi All
> I'm considering joining one of the fee sites. Can anyone give me the
> relative merits of Ancestry.com versus FamilyTreeMaker.com?
> Thanks.
> Larry Copley
> moses(a)stlnet.com
>
>
>
> ==== INOWEN Mailing List ====
> Contact the listowner at
> debbiej(a)iquest.net
>
In response to some recent queries:
The Genconnect boards are down for maintenance. One of the main components
needed rebuilt and they are backing up all data and it is unknown exactly
when they will be back online.
This means that the "Boards" - Query, Obit, Will,Deed,
Pension and Bible will NOT work!
Debbie Jennings
debbiej(a)iquest.net
"Following the footprints through time"
Researching in IN,KY,TN,NC,PA,NJ,VT,NY,MA,MD,
VA,CAN,GER,ENG
Larry
I would personally go with the FamilyTreeMaker site. Reason being that
although the Ancestry.com site has the census images, it is a separate fee
to view them over and above the one for membership.
Both sites are great with info,but the census images would be a big draw for
the Ancestry site and to have to pay an additional 99.95 for them is just
too much.
FamilyTreeMaker has the 1850 census images inclusive in their pricing with
access to other items.
That's my two cents worth.
Debbie Jennings
debbiej(a)iquest.net
"Following the footprints through time"
Researching in IN,KY,TN,NC,PA,NJ,VT,NY,MA,MD,
VA,CAN,GER,ENG
I'll second Debbie's comment. Also, the quality of the images is vastly
better at the GenealogyLibrary.com (Family Tree Maker) site. One thing I am
concerned about, however, is Genealogy.com's commitment to support the
Family Tree Maker and GenForum sites since they took over in November.
Their online support has been less than stellar. Because of this, I just
passed over after $49.95 renewal offer that ended yesterday. You may be
able to still get this one if you ask. Some companies are lax on extensions
if they haven't met their expected quota. Also, they did not add the 1900
Census to this subscription but instead made it a separate offer.
Ray Justus
Chandler, AZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Debbie Jennings" <debbiej(a)iquest.net>
To: <INOWEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 5:59 AM
Subject: RE: [INOWEN] Fee Sites
Larry
I would personally go with the FamilyTreeMaker site. Reason being that
although the Ancestry.com site has the census images, it is a separate fee
to view them over and above the one for membership.
Both sites are great with info,but the census images would be a big draw for
the Ancestry site and to have to pay an additional 99.95 for them is just
too much.
FamilyTreeMaker has the 1850 census images inclusive in their pricing with
access to other items.
That's my two cents worth.
Debbie Jennings
debbiej(a)iquest.net
"Following the footprints through time"
Researching in IN,KY,TN,NC,PA,NJ,VT,NY,MA,MD,
VA,CAN,GER,ENG
==== INOWEN Mailing List ====
MISSED A POST??
Check out the mailing list archives at:
http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl
If you would like the complete biography please let me know and I will send it to you.
Jackie Penrod Thomas
grayston(a)comteck.com
History of Owen Co.Indiana, 1884
GEORGE R. BABBS, ALEX AND LUCINDA (CARTER) BABBS, NANCY J. THOMAS, WILSON AND POLLY THOMAS,
FRANK T. BATTERTON, DAVID AND AMANDA (TILFORD) BATTERTON, DOROTHY L. SCHELL, DR. AND ELIZABETH SCHELL.
HENRY BAUGH, CHRISTOPHER AND HANNA (LANGUELL) BAUGH, LETHA BOLES, HAWKINS AND TAROBY BOLES.
DAVID E. BEEM, LEVI AND SARAH (JOHNSON) BEEM, SAMUEL H. BUSKIRK, MAHALA JOSLIN, DR. AMASA JOSLIN,
DR. J.T. BELLES, JOHN J. AND SARAH (TARLTTON) BELLES, DORCAS SANDERS, DR. COOPER BAKER, JULIA REID, ARCHIBALD O. AND LAVINA REID, AMANDA J. TULL, SAMUEL AND AMANDA McCURDY.
MARION F. BRANAM, JONATHAN AND NANCY(BOKER) BRANSON, SARAH FRANKLIN, WILLIAM AND SARAH FRANKLIN, ALLIE M. BRANAM.
JAMES CAMPBELL, JOSEPH AND MARY (GRAHAM) CAMPBELL, ANN REEVES, FRANCES DUNAGAN, MARY J. CAMPBELL.
Do you have the address for the Wabash Valley Obituary Index? I think
several of us would be interested in it.
Janice
INOWEN-D-request(a)rootsweb.com wrote:
> Part 1.1Type: Microsoft MHTML Document 4.0 (message/rfc822)
>
> Part 1.2Type: Microsoft MHTML Document 4.0 (message/rfc822)
>
> Part 1.3Type: Microsoft MHTML Document 4.0 (message/rfc822)
>
> Part 1.4Type: Microsoft MHTML Document 4.0 (message/rfc822)
>
> Part 1.5Type: Microsoft MHTML Document 4.0 (message/rfc822)