Genealogy Chat

Siobhan I apologise in advance for the length of this post! I am still a relative newbie, but I agree with your sentiments about people's attitudes. Unfortunately, I am not sure that a thread such as this actually helps. The first problem I see is that it will not be read by the right people, ie the offenders themselves who are too busy on the Records Office Board. The second problem I believe is that it causes some degree of bitterness or unfriendliness to some. One solution would be not to read threads entitled 1837 or 1901 look ups. This way you wouldn't be offended by what you didn't read. The people who respond to look ups that cost money are quite entitled to do so if they so wish and if they get some responses they don't like then I hope they will stop providing help to those that have offended, which is quite a small proportion of people. One of the main issues here is that newcomers don't know what they are asking for or what is actually available, so in some cases it is just misunderstanding, so we have to be careful not to tar everybody with the same brush. Therefore I would like to suggest some practical solutions as I agree there is a problem and I would prefer to see this kind of public upset minimised or eliminated as well. At the bottom of this post is an Important Note. Perhaps this should be expanded specifically for the Records Window. Additionally, some expanded guidance on conduct on all Message Boards should be provided - something that only GC can do probably. Appoint a moderator. Perhaps someone should volunteer. And maybe with or without GC help. Changing the user name to Moderator or Administrator might be a way forward. Write a thread on the Records Office Board entitled something like "Look Up Requests - A guide for newcomers". Include in this thread something along the lines of the post by Irene Dredge but expanded a little to explain what can be achieved. For instance, a clarification of Irene's thread has been offered already, but the key point is the image and therefore the address is not possible to obtain on 1901 unless you pay. This could be nudged up every day, which means it could be on the first couple of pages of the Board for days. In fact, anytime someone saw something they didn't like they could just nudge it up even anonymously. Some of these solutions may not be possible, it would for instance need a volunteer for a moderator or even to post the suggested thread in the first place - a brief change of user name might just provide some anonymity. But I'm sure this would be a far more practical solution. Siobhan, I mean absolutely no offence whatsoever, I just don't see the situation changing as a result of this kind of thread. At Christmas there were several such threads and the problems have not gone away - one might argue they have actually increased. I'm sure there are many more practical solutions, so I would invite others to post any suggestions here too. If we take constructive action then I'm sure these boards will remain a pleasant, informative and helpful place to be, which for the most part they already are. Regards Simon in Munich

Simon, I agree with you. Maybe the best solution would be for GC administrators to head up the records board with an explanation that sites such as 1901 census and 1837 can cost money and that people should wait until an offer appears for these sites and not ask first. On the subject of general look ups, can I say that I spent most of last week doing look ups for the hampshire Burial and the Norfolk, Devon, warwick 1851 census. Without fail I received thanks from everyone plus offers of help with my research. I find in this life that you reap what you sew, you help others they help you. Those that get their fingers burnt by certain people wont offer help to them again and those that take advantage will soon learn when they don't get lok ups done for them. I don't agree that these threads don't work though, most people are curious and read most threads so it will have pointed out to those who didn't know that there is a cost involved. ann glos