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
In message <001301c1f05c$1dedb660$0100a8c0@ronan>
"Christopher Richards" <cmrichards(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> Which program do you use, Tim? I now use Family Tree Maker. I like the
> easy way of adding sources, with plenty of space for notes and easy to use
> family Pages. I used to use a French program called Gentree but the
> author seems to have stopped supporting it. Its great advantage was that
> the basic display was based on a tree, which showed relationships very
> easily - and you could get to the individuals by clicking on them. In that
> sense FTM is less flexible. I also don't like the way that as far as I can
> see the option in FTM to publish to the internet only works for their
> website and if you publish to their website you lose control of your data.
It does not matter what program I use. What matters is that you have
looked around and realised what features you want.
Have you looked at:
PAF from LDS (free)
The Master Genealogist
CyndisList has some links to offerein for the various genealogy
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim(a)powys.org
For a patchwork of bygones: http://powys.org
I didn't see any of the MIME rubbish Liz complains of. What I did get
however was an attachment which I didn't try to open - in any case my Apple
Mac probably couldn't deal with it. It was Ray.Smith.vcf - anyone else see
>From: Liz <pandora(a)dircon.co.uk>
>Subject: Re: [SoG] insults
>Date: Mon, Apr 29, 2002, 2:25 pm
>ray smith wrote:
>> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>> It seems that some people have to resort to personal insults to try and
>> reinforce their points of view. Bigot and racist usually go hand in
>> hand. I am neither.
>> Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>> Content-Description: Card for ray smith
>> Content-Disposition: attachment;
>> fn:Ray Smith
>Not wishing to continue any argument as we have been given the yellow
>card ...... but could someone more techy than me please tell Ray
>off-list and in a kindly manner how to spare us the MIME frills and turn
>of his v-card when responding in a Mailing List?
>It may just be me but I get really irritated by a screen full of rubbish
>.....and that's *before* I read the messages <vbg>
In message <002501c1efc7$8af7a3a0$8c6c87d9@eric>, Jeff Piper
>The following is an extract from Dick Eastman's Genealogy newsletter. The Times
>article makes interesting reading and raises the question. Who supplied the 7
>- Update On 1901 U.K. Census Fiasco
>I wrote last week about the problems of the Public Record Office
>in placing the 1901 English and Welsh census returns online. Lots
>of other people are asking similar questions. The morning after my
>newsletter was circulated, the U.K. Times carried an article about
>the myriad of problems.
>The Times states that QinetiQ, the government-owned corporation
>that oversaw the project, was awarded £7 million for the contract
>to digitize the 1901 census. That works out to about $10 million
>U.S. dollars. Was this money spent wisely?
The actual digitisation of the master census films to produce digital
images of CEB pages was very professionally done as far as all the
hundreds of pages I have seen or checked so far is concerned. However, I
think you'll find that the 7 million was for getting the whole Internet
project up and running by 0900 GMT on 2 Jan 2002, rather than just for
creating the digital CEB images. As I understand it the 7 million was
not paid up front, rather it will be the first 7 million of voucher
sales and credit card receipts they will receive, and after that all
income will be split between the PRO and QinetiQ. However, since the
government continues to regard the terms of the contract between the PRO
and QinetiQ as a state secret akin to the Queen's mobile phone number, I
guess we'll never know what the exact terms are.
At present of course QinetiQ is sitting on a lot of income from voucher
sales, conservatively estimated by some commentators at more than
150,000 GBP, and have yet to provide a service to an acceptable
standard, it is hardly surprising that there are cries of 'foul' and
'fraud' from some quarters. While for some reason the PRO continues to
think we are disappointed rather than angry...<g>
>You can read the U.K. Times' article at:
In message <d2a0f32e4b.tim(a)southfrm.demon.co.uk>, Tim Powys-Lybbe
>In message <IIS7yGA3vSz8EwRZ(a)tdrake.demon.co.uk>
> Barney Tyrwhitt-Drake <Barney(a)tdrake.demon.co.uk> wrote:
><snip of very valid points and questions>
>> Q2. Am I confident that the project will ever get up and running to the
>> standards laid out in the tender documents?
>Is there anywhere where we can still find this original standards?
><more snip of very valid points and questions>
Sorry, I've lost the URL, but it is on the European Gazette website.
We had a good and lively Internet study day at the SoG last Saturday, at
which it was good to see several overseas members contributing. I will
admit to getting confused every time my friend Jeanne Bunting pronounces
URL though. She says it as Earl, and I keep expecting the Wessexes to
> Isn't there some footballer, not sure which code, called Austin Healey?
> Shirley Arabin
> Mount Maunganui, New Zealand .
Rugby Union player, not sure which club he plays for but has appeared in the
England Squad several times
Salutations to all.
Is there anyone out there who has an interest in the local/family histories
of Cherington, Warwickshire?
I will cooperate on any aspect of the area's local history to our mutual
advantage although I have a particular interest in the NASON/MNASON/MASON
connections of the C18th in Cherington and surrounding villages. See my
monograph on the subject in 'Family Tracts' section at the SOG - subsequent
histories lead to the Chipping Norton area and antecedants may possibly be
found in the Wellesbourne/Stratford OA area.
Until the 2001 census when we were asked if we agreed to our forms being
retained, all NZ 5 yrly censusss (censi?) were destroyed after processing.
I think genealogists need to remember that the purpose was to gain current
statistics for use of the government of the day, rather than leave a
historical or social record for the future. The blood pressure of the
average NZ genealogist has risen since last October when the price of BDM
certs and photocopies has risen - resulting in people writing to their MP
and complaining that the standard of family research will decline - I can
imagine the reply Bart Simpson MP would give.
Mount Maunganui, New Zealand .
----- Original Message -----
From: "gilgen" <gilgen(a)ntlworld.com>
Sent: Sunday, 28 April 2002 04:00
Subject: [SoG] Fw: Destruction of Irish Census Records of 1861,1871,1881 &
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "gilgen" <gilgen(a)ntlworld.com>
> To: "SOGMAIL" <lists(a)sog.org.uk>
> Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2002 11:47 AM
> Subject: Destruction of Irish Census Records of 1861,1871,1881 & 1891.
> > From Dave Gilroy in St.Albans.
> > I have just begun my wife's Irish line & have been reading John
> > Grenham's book "Tracing your Irish Ancestors".
> > On page 12 under census records,he says "Those for 1861,1871,1881,&
> > 1891 were completely destroyed by order of the government"
> > Would any expert colleagues kindly tell me:-
> > 1)when did the destruction happen?
> > 2)where?
> > 3)on the orders of which government?
> > Best wishes from a dismayed Dave Gilroy.
> > 27 April 2002 at 11.45 BST.
> Isn't there some footballer, not sure which code, called Austin Healey?
> Shirley Arabin
> Mount Maunganui, New Zealand .
In the late 1960's I imported an old army truck on a personal basis into
Italy (long story don't ask). The paperwork was horrendous and took ages.
When I finally got the necessary forms back together with my passport I saw
that the vehicle had been described as Make: David - Colour: Squire and the
owner was Mr Austin Green. It had all taken so long to get wrong that I
decided not to complain but of such stuff is the raw material of genealogy
The following is an extract from Dick Eastman's Genealogy newsletter. The Times article makes interesting reading and raises the question. Who supplied the 7 million pounds.
- Update On 1901 U.K. Census Fiasco
I wrote last week about the problems of the Public Record Office
in placing the 1901 English and Welsh census returns online. Lots
of other people are asking similar questions. The morning after my
newsletter was circulated, the U.K. Times carried an article about
the myriad of problems.
The Times states that QinetiQ, the government-owned corporation
that oversaw the project, was awarded £7 million for the contract
to digitize the 1901 census. That works out to about $10 million
U.S. dollars. Was this money spent wisely?
You can read the U.K. Times' article at:
While meandering through some pages of the 1901 Census at the PRO today, the
normal guided tours were going on. The explanation of the Census area was
that the surname index was not available, that there was no official date,
and, that there was no mention even on their internal grapevine of any
suggestion of a date yet.
For what its worth
The email address postmster(a)sog.org.uk has been spoofed is being used by a
mail generator to send messages which have attachments which are likely to
be carrying a virus. Please make sure you delete these message before
opening either the message or any of the attachments.
In message <009c01c1eefd$69939220$9f3c70c2@dave>, Audrey Collins
>On a point of accuracy, checkers to work on the 1901 census transcription
>were largely recruited through the Blue Arrow employment agency, not the
>Jobcentre, though I have no idea whether that makes a difference.
This is absolutely correct, and I apologise for using what I intended to
be a generic term.
>Incidentally, if anyone cares to suggest to my daughter-in-law, a history
>graduate, that she did not not have to sit a test to get her job there, or
>that she was employed on the strength of her sex and physical attributes,
>they are welcome to try, but I wouldn't recommend it.
Far be it for me to make personal remarks about any individual, but it
might be interesting to hear her views on the skill levels, census
transcription experience, motivation, and the gender and age ratios of
the cohort of checkers she worked alongside, as well as her views on the
quality of the data she was checking.
Motivation is another important attribute for anyone checking a census.
I cannot and will not speak for your daughter-in-law, but my motivation
was to try and ensure that the quality of the 1901 census was as high as
possible for family historians. I remain to be convinced that this was
so for all the other checkers who were there.
When I was checking the entries for Rochdale and Littleborough (and from
1972 to 1975 I lived in Halifax Road, Rochdale), I felt sufficiently
familiar with local surnames such as Clegg, Stott, Butterworth and
Ashworth, and knew many of the local placenames from visitations to
their hostelries. The one set of surnames which inevitably was often not
local, was that of the Church of England clergy. Why was I the only
checker who, despite my physical disability, took the time to travel
next door to the Library to cross-check all of these against the 1901
issue of Crockford's Clerical Directory? Because I had the experience
and motivation possibly?
Why was I, a mere Chemistry graduate, one of the very few who insisted
on checking against an A3 printout of the entire enumeration sub-
district? Could it be that I realised that the *only* way to check a
doubtful/difficult script as thoroughly as possible is to compare it
with other examples of the same enumerator's manuscript where the
meaning is clear. Attempting to scroll around the screen using the awful
Sopheon software, which someone probably paid a fortune for, was the
officially recommended PRO method, but it was *not* the best method.
These days we hear endless blatherings from government spokespeople
along the lines of "Judge us by the results.": I would love to be able
to do so. However, the only measurable benchmark I can sift from all the
spin was that this system was promised to be available online to the
world continuously from 0900 GMT on 2 Jan 2002. On that single criterion
alone the whole project falls flat on its face, and I leave you all to
make your own judgments and vote accordingly in future elections if you
And to try to pre-empt the next whines:
Q1. Do I believe that a government led by any other political party
would have made a substantially better job of it?
Q2. Am I confident that the project will ever get up and running to the
standards laid out in the tender documents?
Q3. Am I confident that the PRO will meet its stated deadlines of
getting the index and facsimiles of the 1881 and 1891 censuses of
England and Wales online by the end of 2002?
Q4. Has Barney Tyrwhitt-Drake offered his services free of charge to the
PRO to try and find a constructive way forward?
Q5. What was the PRO's response?
A5. Paraphrasing, it was "Make love elsewhere.".
Q6. Am I surprised by the answer to Q5.?
A6. No, and I remain willing to help find a way forward.
Q7. Do I have anything good to say about the whole project?
A7. Yes, it was a brilliant idea with three particular worthy features:
a) the linking of an index to accessible facsimiles of the
b) the facility to improve the index over time by submitting
online corrections for errors. I remain disappointed however that I
still have not received any acknowledgement of the submission I made on
1 Jan 2002.
c) the idea of removing the tyranny of time and travel by using
the Internet as the main means of access.
Q8. Do I doubt the PRO's integrity throughout this whole project?
A8. No, all of the PRO staff I have met on this project have struck me
as dedicated and full of good intentions. However I would ask readers of
this mailing list to remember that Boswell recalled the great Doctor
Johnson saying on 16 April 1775 "Hell is paved with good intentions.".
Anyone is free to copy the parts of this message which I have written in
their entirety as they see fit, however they should check with Audrey
Collins before copying any of her statements.
Can anyone tell me how to get technical support for the LDS 1881 census. Am
trying to install Viewer 3 in NT4 without success. Have emailed the address
given on the disc set several times over the last few months but have had
no reply. Hve looked at their website but the email gif does not lead
Apologies if this is off-topic but can't think who else to ask.
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
It seems that some people have to resort to personal insults to try and
reinforce their points of view. Bigot and racist usually go hand in
hand. I am neither.
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
Content-Description: Card for ray smith
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Billfirth(a)cs.com [mailto:Billfirth@cs.com]
> I can't resist the opportunity to mention an elderly neighbour who died
> recently who was Minnie Cooper.
Wasn't it she who left a grandson Austin, seven, who later became a Maestro,
even though his father Morris was a miner?
>>>>Nor about Kiwi fruit in case the New Zealanders would mind?<<<<
I take it you mean Chinese Gooseberries ?
The last ones I purchased came from Italy, the previous ones were from
BTW I used to work on Saturdays as an errand boy for Israel's greengrocery,
just up the road from Hendon Central Tube Station (Northern Line) in 1944
And very good employers they were too !
On a point of accuracy, checkers to work on the 1901 census transcription
were largely recruited through the Blue Arrow employment agency, not the
Jobcentre, though I have no idea whether that makes a difference.
Incidentally, if anyone cares to suggest to my daughter-in-law, a history
graduate, that she did not not have to sit a test to get her job there, or
that she was employed on the strength of her sex and physical attributes,
they are welcome to try, but I wouldn't recommend it.
Many thanks for your email. Sorry to bother you but I got through to the
second item but I couldnt get the lyrics - I just got the first line which
led to links to Yorkshire Rugby League. What am I doing wrong?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 9:03 PM
Subject: Re: [SoG] Yorkshire ancestry
> I've just done a Google search for "Yorkshire girl" and immediately found
> lyrics in the second item listed.
> Pauline Holmes
Welcome to the SOG-UK mailing list!!
PLEASE SAVE THIS INFORMATION so you have it for future reference.
PLEASE BE CONSIDERATE of your fellow list members. Some folks are beginners at computers and some to genealogy. The world is a better place when we are all patient with each other. Personal attacks, criticism, or flaming are never permitted.
HOW DO YOU POST? Send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org
WHAT SHOULD YOU POST?
1. Questions about your ancestors. Give as much detail as you can.
2. Interesting history that is relevant to the list.
3. Genealogy and family history conferences, even if they charge for admission.
4. Genealogy societies should feel free to post about their society and their websites.
5. Book reviews of genealogy books are reasonable to post. A list of books is not, but sharing a good genealogy book you've found is a good idea.
6. Links to personal blogs that are about genealogy. They can be your blog or another. Even if the blog has ads, that is not a problem.
7. New collections on various genealogy sites that are relevant. We don't want advertisements, but if you find an interesting collection on Ancestry, FamilySearch, Library of Congress, or some other site that has relevance to the list, let people know.
WHAT SHOULD BE IN YOUR POST?
1. An informative but concise subject line.
2. When replying to a previous message, be sure to check that the intended recipient's address is showing in the Send To box of your email BEFORE clicking on SEND.
3. Proofread and be sure you want your post public. All posts go in the archives!
WANT TO UNSUBSCRIBE?
Send an email to email@example.com and put unsubscribe in the subject and body and nothing else.