Genealogy Estate Planning

[tomcat]

Hello,

I have desire to publish my entire family history - especially the
many old pictures I have collected over the years. I used 2010 FTM.
I hope that one of my children will carry on with my efforts - but
that might not happen, of course. I have everything at
ancestry.com, but I have slowed down an awful lot lately and am no
longer making updates - I have even let my membership drop, due to
the expense.

I have considered posting all my pictures at google photos in a
public album and tag every picture with names and create elaborate
caption on all that I know - that will aloow a wide audience a
chance to get photo copies while I have the account.

But other than sending electronic copies to my local genealogical
centers - what do people suggest?

Are there other good sites to send GEDCOM files to?

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated!
Tom

tomcat <thomas...@gmail.com>

[bob gillis]

On 12/14/2011 12:52 PM, tomcat wrote:

> I have desire to publish my entire family history - especially the
> many old pictures I have collected over the years. I used 2010 FTM.
> I hope that one of my children will carry on with my efforts - but
> that might not happen, of course. I have everything at
> ancestry.com, but I have slowed down an awful lot lately and am no
> longer making updates - I have even let my membership drop, due to
> the expense.

Is there a genealogy society or club in your vicinity? There may be
member willing to help you in keeping the family history records up
to date.

There was a thread on this subject in Mar 2010 on this list.


> I have considered posting all my pictures at Google photos in a

> public album and tag every picture with names and create elaborate

> caption on all that I know - that will allow a wide audience a

> chance to get photo copies while I have the account.
>
> But other than sending electronic copies to my local genealogical
> centers - what do people suggest?

What do you mean by "local genealogical centers"?

Don't send just electronic; send paper copies also. Put the photos
on CD or DVD and send with the paper reports.

> Are there other good sites to send GEDCOM files to?

Worldconnect at rootsweb. com and Pedigree Resource files at LDS.

bob gillis

bob gillis <robert...@verizon.net>

[knuttle]

> Tom tomcat <thomas...@gmail.com>


I started to think about that when through a cousin I learned of a
lady who had died and her children not knowing of her genealogical
database and all of the documents she had collected during in her
life time in the dumpster.

What stimulated me to act was when I inherited some document from
the first part of the 20th century for the family reunion. In those
document were family relationships that can not be verified in any
other place. In one incidence, a woman who was a dead-end in many
people search, was shown, through statements in those records and by
the fact that her descendants participated in the family reunion for
nearly 30 years; to be the sister to my second great grandfather.
When I received this KEY to the Family I knew I had to do something
so the information was not lost. (I scanned all of those documents
and have distributed them with my other genealogical data and
records)

My plan is the following (I have scanned everything so all copies
of all records are in electronic files as PDF documents)

Every chance I get I provide cousin researcher with a CD of all of
the documents I have on our common families.

I have posted to the surname forums (Ancestry, rootsweb, ect. ) each
time I pass through a dead end with the reference to the documents
that got me through or my logical for feeling comfortable arranging
the facts as I did to get through.

I have given all immediate family members a DVD with my database and
e-copies of all of the information on the family.

I am working to put copies of my data in the libraries genealogy
societies in the areas where each family lived.

In my research I have collected histories of some of the local
churches. I have given this information to the County Library, and
to the church archivist.

Lastly I freely provide documents that I have found or purchased to
cousins.

My last concern and I don't know how I will handle it is those
documents that are over 100 years old. I only have one original
that will have to go somewhere.

knuttle <keith_...@sbcglobal.net>

[Janey Joyce]

> I have desire to publish my entire family history - especially the
> many old pictures I have collected over the years. I used 2010 FTM.
> I hope that one of my children will carry on with my efforts - but
> that might not happen, of course. I have everything at
> ancestry.com, but I have slowed down an awful lot lately and am no
> longer making updates - I have even let my membership drop, due to
> the expense.
>
> I have considered posting all my pictures at google photos in a
> public album and tag every picture with names and create elaborate
> caption on all that I know - that will aloow a wide audience a
> chance to get photo copies while I have the account.
>
> But other than sending electronic copies to my local genealogical
> centers - what do people suggest?
>
> Are there other good sites to send GEDCOM files to?
>
> Tom tomcat<thomas...@gmail.com>

Send your gedcom to RootsWeb's WorldConnect. It is free and can
easily be updated.

[singhals]

It's an unfortunate fact of Genealogical Life that no matter how
many people you give copies, none of them are interested enough to
send theirs along to the one person they know in the country who
_is_ interested but not in your address book, whether that book is
electronic or smudges on paper.

Worse, a good half the time, no matter how interested your 2nd
cousin twice removed IS, their children aren't.

And, by putting it on-line you invite people to brush it aside with
rude comments about the reliability of information provided by some
researcher they don't know personally. More, unless you use the same
user-ID on every site you place it, people will believe that one of
you did it, and the others copied it feloniously.

Put ONE paper copy, accompanied by a plain-text digital version with
web-readable photos/images on a CD and on a DVD and on a stick/thumb/
flash drive, into your local historical Society's library. Create
new copies periodically and if you get a chance to put something
into one of those "Will be opened in a 100 years" things, pick the
stick/thumb/flash drive attached firmly to a tag saying it is a
portable data device to be plugged into a computer that uses USB-2
technology.

Not, she said sadly, that anyone will care in a century either, but
at least it'll still exist then. (g)

Cheryl
(pass the eggnog, please.)

singhals <sing...@erols.com>

[Wes Groleau]

> Send your gedcom to RootsWeb's WorldConnect. It is free and can
> easily be updated.
>

> Janey Joyce


It's free NOW. Ancestry just this week broke their RootsWeb promise
with regard to SSDI.


--
Wes Groleau

Teacher Tip: Organization
http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/russell?itemid=1568

Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org>

[tomcat]

On Dec 15, 8:37=A0pm, bob gillis <robertgil...@verizon.net> wrote:

> On 12/14/2011 12:52 PM, tomcat wrote:
>
> > I have desire to publish my entire family history - especially the

> > many old pictures I have collected over the years. =A0I used 2010 FTM.

> > I hope that one of my children will carry on with my efforts - but

> > that might not happen, of course. =A0I have everything at

> > ancestry.com, but I have slowed down an awful lot lately and am no
> > longer making updates - I have even let my membership drop, due to
> > the expense.
>

> Is there a genealogy society or club in your vicinity? =A0There may be

> member willing to help you in keeping the family history records up
> to date.
>
> There was a thread on this subject in Mar 2010 on this list.
>
> > I have considered posting all my pictures at Google photos in a
> > public album and tag every picture with names and create elaborate
> > caption on all that I know - that will allow a wide audience a
> > chance to get photo copies while I have the account.
>
> > But other than sending electronic copies to my local genealogical
> > centers - what do people suggest?
>
> What do you mean by "local genealogical centers"?
>

> Don't send just electronic; send paper copies also. =A0Put the photos

> on CD or DVD and send with the paper reports.
>
> > Are there other good sites to send GEDCOM files to?
>
> Worldconnect at rootsweb. com and Pedigree Resource files at LDS.
>

> bob gillis <robertgil...@verizon.net>


Bob,

Thank you for your reply. I will send my GEDCOM files to your
recommended site. I will search for the thread you speak of. As
for "local genealogical centers" I used that as a generic term to
mean societies and other like-minded organizations, etc.q

Tom

tomcat <thomas...@gmail.com>

[tomcat]

> > I have desire to publish my entire family history - especially the

> > many old pictures I have collected over the years. =A0I used 2010 FTM.

> > I hope that one of my children will carry on with my efforts - but

> > that might not happen, of course. =A0I have everything at

> > ancestry.com, but I have slowed down an awful lot lately and am no
> > longer making updates - I have even let my membership drop, due to
> > the expense.
>
> > I have considered posting all my pictures at google photos in a
> > public album and tag every picture with names and create elaborate
> > caption on all that I know - that will aloow a wide audience a
> > chance to get photo copies while I have the account.
>
> > But other than sending electronic copies to my local genealogical
> > centers - what do people suggest?
>
> > Are there other good sites to send GEDCOM files to?
>

> > Tom =A0 tomcat <thomas.p....@gmail.com>

>
> I started to think about that when through a cousin I learned of a
> lady who had died and her children not knowing of her genealogical
> database and all of the documents she had collected during in her
> life time in the dumpster.
>
> What stimulated me to act was when I inherited some document from

> the first part of the 20th century for the family reunion. =A0In those

> document were family relationships that can not be verified in any

> other place. =A0In one incidence, a woman who was a dead-end in many

> people search, was shown, through statements in those records and by
> the fact that her descendants participated in the family reunion for
> nearly 30 years; to be the sister to my second great grandfather.
> When I received this KEY to the Family I knew I had to do something

> so the information was not lost. =A0(I scanned all of those documents

> and have distributed them with my other genealogical data and
> records)
>

> My plan is the following =A0(I have scanned everything so all copies

> of all records are in electronic files as PDF documents)
>
> Every chance I get I provide cousin researcher with a CD of all of
> the documents I have on our common families.
>
> I have posted to the surname forums (Ancestry, rootsweb, ect. ) each
> time I pass through a dead end with the reference to the documents
> that got me through or my logical for feeling comfortable arranging
> the facts as I did to get through.
>
> I have given all immediate family members a DVD with my database and
> e-copies of all of the information on the family.
>
> I am working to put copies of my data in the libraries genealogy
> societies in the areas where each family lived.
>
> In my research I have collected histories of some of the local

> churches. =A0I have given this information to the County Library, and

> to the church archivist.
>
> Lastly I freely provide documents that I have found or purchased to
> cousins.
>
> My last concern and I don't know how I will handle it is those

> documents that are over 100 years old. =A0I only have one original

> that will have to go somewhere.
>

> knuttle <keith_nut...@sbcglobal.net>- Hide quoted text -


Thanks! Good information and ideas.

Tom

[tomcat]

> Send your gedcom to RootsWeb's WorldConnect. It is free and can
> easily be updated.
>

> Janey Joyce <jejo...@sbcglobal.net>


Thanks!

Tom

[JYoun...@aol.com]

> > Send your gedcom to RootsWeb's WorldConnect. It is free
> > and can easily be updated.
> >
> > Janey Joyce
>

> It's free NOW. Ancestry just this week broke their RootsWeb
> promise with regard to SSDI.
>

> Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org>


Wes-

How do you figure that? The entire nature of the SSDI has changed
based upon changes in Federal law and policy within the SSA.
Ancestry pays for the updates to the SSDI and it has long been
offered both on RootsWeb AND Ancestry. I don't ever recall any
promise about not removing a database from RootsWeb that has been
changed through external sources.

Joan

JYoun...@aol.com

[Ian Goddard]

tomcat wrote:

> I have desire to publish my entire family history - especially the
> many old pictures I have collected over the years. I used 2010 FTM.
> I hope that one of my children will carry on with my efforts - but
> that might not happen, of course. I have everything at
> ancestry.com, but I have slowed down an awful lot lately and am no
> longer making updates - I have even let my membership drop, due to
> the expense.
>
> I have considered posting all my pictures at google photos in a
> public album and tag every picture with names and create elaborate
> caption on all that I know - that will aloow a wide audience a
> chance to get photo copies while I have the account.
>
> But other than sending electronic copies to my local genealogical
> centers - what do people suggest?

Time is against the survival of any particular piece of writing.
This applies at least equally to electronic forms.

So the first consideration is to provide copies to as many places as
possible. Any individual copy might be lost due to any number of
causes e.g.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,611311,00.html
The more copies you start off with the better the chance of one
surviving and being used.

The next consideration, which applies to electronic media, is that
you need to think in terms of more than physical survival. A file
is only useful if you can read it. Obsolescence of both physical
media and file formats can be a problem. A good example is the BBC
Domesday project of 1986. The laser discs used to distribute it
became obsolete. Fortunately it was of sufficiently high a profile
that a rescue project was launched. In terms of file formats
proprietary formats are likely to be a bigger problem than open
formats although, of course, widely used formats have been
reverse-engineered. Nevertheless you need to consider whether you
can rely on FTM 2020 being able to read FTM 2010.

By all means provide your chosen archives with electronic copies but
also provide hard copy.

> Are there other good sites to send GEDCOM files to?

GEDCOM is probably the least useful form of your data. GEDCOM was
designed to record your reconstructed family history. Given your
evidence another genealogist should be able to duplicate your
reconstruction of your family history without the GEDCOM. With the
GEDCOM but without the evidence there is no indication of why you
put things together in that way nor how valid your history is. What
matters is the evidence you collected, including negative evidence,
e.g. the evidence of why you think this child is part of your family
rather than that child of the same name born at around the same
time.


--
Ian

The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang
at austonley org uk

Ian Goddard <godd...@hotmail.co.uk>

[Wes Groleau]

> (pass the eggnog, please.)
>
> Cheryl Singhals


Gladly. Get that (shudder) stuff away from me!

[Wes Groleau]

> How do you figure that? The entire nature of the SSDI has changed
> based upon changes in Federal law and policy within the SSA.
> Ancestry pays for the updates to the SSDI and it has long been
> offered both on RootsWeb AND Ancestry. I don't ever recall any
> promise about not removing a database from RootsWeb that has been
> changed through external sources.
>

> JYoun...@aol.com


My interpretation of "the promise" was that the stuff on RootsWeb
would always be free. Apparently it only means it will "remain free
as long as we keep it on RootsWeb"

So, when they decide WorldConnect is a redundant copy of the thing
on Ancestry (which actually IS the WorldConnect code repackaged)
.....


--
Wes Groleau

On not nodding to Black people
http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/barrett?itemid=1019

Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org>

[bob gillis]

> The next consideration, which applies to electronic media, is that
> you need to think in terms of more than physical survival. A file
> is only useful if you can read it. Obsolescence of both physical
> media and file formats can be a problem. A good example is the BBC
> Domesday project of 1986. The laser discs used to distribute it
> became obsolete. Fortunately it was of sufficiently high a profile
> that a rescue project was launched. In terms of file formats
> proprietary formats are likely to be a bigger problem than open
> formats although, of course, widely used formats have been
> reverse-engineered. Nevertheless you need to consider whether you
> can rely on FTM 2020 being able to read FTM 2010.
>

> Ian Goddard


The Domesday Project, videos was published in 1986 on 2 Laser discs
(LV-ROM) - the National Disc and the Community Disc. Probably very
few people had the hardware and software to view them at that time.
Probably if they just waited a few years, the current widely
available technology, DVD and Blue Ray, would, have been available.
And then when the new technology did arrive BBC had abandoned the
project and the hardware and software.

The technology that a genealogist would use today is commonly
available and when improvements are made they are usually widely
announced. Most software today is back compatible and developer
will tell how to convert if the new is not compatible with the old.

The genealogy program I am using, TMG Ver 5, is 8 years old and when
I upgrade to Ver 8 when it comes out I will have few problems with
the upgrade.

[tomcat]

On Dec 17, 2:33=A0pm, Ian Goddard <godda...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

> ... <snip>


Ian,

Thanks for your comments. Seems like GEDCOM is a fairly long-term
file format being LDS backed and especially since it's text based.
But none-the-less everything moves on and 100 years from now it
will, too. But this does cause me to consider other ways to
preserve things and I think I'll take your (and others) suggestion
about getting printed copies into other family members hands.

Tom

tomcat <thomas...@gmail.com>

[singhals]

> Ian,
>
> Thanks for your comments. Seems like GEDCOM is a fairly long-term
> file format being LDS backed and especially since it's text based.
> But none-the-less everything moves on and 100 years from now it
> will, too. But this does cause me to consider other ways to
> preserve things and I think I'll take your (and others) suggestion
> about getting printed copies into other family members hands.
>

> tomcat


Whatever bad you can say about hard-copy, the basic technology for
accessing it hasn't changed in a dozen millenia or so: the human
eyeball is fairly stable. Of course, the language went from
petroglyphs to cuniform to Roman and from Ur-Ugh to American, but
hey -- that's only ONE problem, not multiples as it is with, say, an
8-inch floppy.

Cheryl

singhals <sing...@erols.com>

[bob gillis]

> Ian,
>
> Thanks for your comments. Seems like GEDCOM is a fairly long-term
> file format being LDS backed and especially since it's text based.
> But none-the-less everything moves on and 100 years from now it will,
> too. But this does cause me to consider other ways to preserve
> things and I think I'll take your (and others) suggestion about
> getting printed copies into other family members hands.
>

> Tom tomcat<thomas...@gmail.com>


tom, Ian said

> By all means provide your chosen *archives* with electronic copies

> but also provide hard copy.

In addition send them laser printed reports not ink jet printed.
The life of laser printed document has been shown to be much longer
than ink jet.

[D. Stussy]

> Thanks for your comments. Seems like GEDCOM is a fairly long-term
> file format being LDS backed and especially since it's text based.
> But none-the-less everything moves on and 100 years from now it
> will, too. But this does cause me to consider other ways to
> preserve things and I think I'll take your (and others) suggestion
> about getting printed copies into other family members hands.
>

> "tomcat" <thomas...@gmail.com>


Apparently true, but as things evolve, they will convert it for you
eventually....

I really don't think that the LDS Church will disappear overnight
even though they're only about 180 years old.

[Wes Groleau]

> Thanks for your comments. Seems like GEDCOM is a fairly long-term
> file format being LDS backed and especially since it's text based.
>

> tomcat


Not quite. LDS has pretty much abandoned GEDCOM. But it is going to
last a long time because "it's good enough" (for the genealogical
hobbyist) and those of us dissatisfied with it don't have enough
numbers to influence the software makers.


--
Wes Groleau

Cage Fights at South Oak Cliff High
http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/russell?itemid=1458

Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org>

[singhals]

>> Ian,

>>
>> Thanks for your comments. Seems like GEDCOM is a fairly long-term
>> file format being LDS backed and especially since it's text based.

>> But none-the-less everything moves on and 100 years from now it will,
>> too. But this does cause me to consider other ways to preserve
>> things and I think I'll take your (and others) suggestion about
>> getting printed copies into other family members hands.
>>

>> Tom tomcat<thomas...@gmail.com>
>
> tom, Ian said
>

>> By all means provide your chosen *archives* with electronic copies

>> but also provide hard copy.
>

> In addition send them laser printed reports not ink jet printed.
> The life of laser printed document has been shown to be much longer
> than ink jet.
>
> bob gillis

True to a point -- if you stack a couple dozen laser-prints on the
desk and they get buried under new print-offs, the toner WILL
eventually transfer to the back of the sheet above it. Whether that
is better or worse than the ink from an ink-jet fading or being
washed away probably has a lot of variables. :{

And if you cleverly put on a "plastic" cover to pretty it up or to
protect it, it'll transfer to the plastic instead. (And if this
happens to a piece of plastic you care about, carburetor cleaner is
the magic charm).

FTR, since both the laser and the Exrock used heat and pressure to
make the toner adhere to the paper, an Exrock copy of any brand will
do the same blasted thing. How long? eh, I've had it happen in under
a year, but usually about 2 years of being undisturbed.

It's not that I'm /trying/ to be pessimistic, it's just that I've
been in this a while. Why, I even remember when computer printers
used ribbons like an old manual typewriter and 17-inch wide paper
with green stripes. (g)

Cheryl

singhals <sing...@erols.com>

[Wes Groleau]

> And if you cleverly put on a "plastic" cover to pretty it up or to
> protect it, it'll transfer to the plastic instead. (And if this
> happens to a piece of plastic you care about, carburetor cleaner is
> the magic charm).
>

> Cheryl Singhals


I have seen plastic that does not stick to laser toner.

If you don't mind leaving it on there, clear plastic might be OK.
Since it sticks to the toner, it doesn't move to make shadows.

[bob gillis]

Cheryl Singhals wrote:

> <snip>

>
> FTR, since both the laser and the Exrock used heat and pressure to
> make the toner adhere to the paper, an Exrock copy of any brand will
> do the same blasted thing. How long? eh, I've had it happen in under
> a year, but usually about 2 years of being undisturbed.

I guess FTR is For the Record but what is Exrock? all that Google l
turns up are music sites.

> It's not that I'm /trying/ to be pessimistic, it's just that I've
> been in this a while. Why, I even remember when computer printers
> used ribbons like an old manual typewriter and 17-inch wide paper
> with green stripes. (g)

The IBM Selectric and our Panasonic electric typewriter use ribbons.

[Wes Groleau]

> Cheryl Singhals wrote:
> > <snip>
> > FTR, since both the laser and the Exrock used heat and pressure to

> > make the toner adhere to the paper, an Exrock copy ....

>
> I guess FTR is For the Record but what is Exrock? all that Google l
> turns up are music sites.
>

> bob gillis


My guess is she doesn't want to say Xerox. The generic term,
Cheryl, is "dry photocopier."

[singhals]

> > And if you cleverly put on a "plastic" cover to pretty it up or to
> > protect it, it'll transfer to the plastic instead. (And if this
> > happens to a piece of plastic you care about, carburetor cleaner is
> > the magic charm).
> >

> > Cheryl Singhals
>
> I have seen plastic that does not stick to laser toner.
>
> If you don't mind leaving it on there, clear plastic might be OK.
> Since it sticks to the toner, it doesn't move to make shadows.
>

> Wes Groleau wrote:


If you use those 3-ring-binders with the clear sleeve on the spine
and front for "spine" and "cover" info, you may wish to move to a
large binder and use this one for something else. Carb-cleaner and
long cotton tip swabs are your best friends for that.

Cheryl

singhals <sing...@erols.com>

[singhals]

bob gillis wrote:
>
> Cheryl Singhals wrote:
>
>> <snip>
>>
>> FTR, since both the laser and the Exrock used heat and pressure to

>> make the toner adhere to the paper, an Exrock copy of any brand will
>> do the same blasted thing. How long? eh, I've had it happen in under
>> a year, but usually about 2 years of being undisturbed.
>

> I guess FTR is For the Record but what is Exrock? all that Google l
> turns up are music sites.

Say it aloud again. The company doesn't need more PR.

>> It's not that I'm /trying/ to be pessimistic, it's just that I've
>> been in this a while. Why, I even remember when computer printers
>> used ribbons like an old manual typewriter and 17-inch wide paper
>> with green stripes. (g)
>
> The IBM Selectric and our Panasonic electric typewriter use ribbons.

Well, true 'nuff, even if my Selectic did use mylar-backed carbon
single-use ribbon, but I've noticed several folks much younger than
me'n'you lately, so I wanted to be sure they got the idea? (g)

Cheryl

singhals <sing...@erols.com>

[bob gillis]

Cheryl Singhals wrote:

> bob gillis wrote:
>>
>> Cheryl Singhals wrote:
>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> FTR, since both the laser and the Exrock used heat and pressure to
>>> make the toner adhere to the paper, an Exrock copy of any brand will
>>> do the same blasted thing. How long? eh, I've had it happen in under
>>> a year, but usually about 2 years of being undisturbed.
>>
>> I guess FTR is For the Record but what is Exrock? all that Google l
>> turns up are music sites.
>
> Say it aloud again. The company doesn't need more PR.

Is far as I know an initial X is pronounces Z in English. The
name of the copier company is pronounced Zerox as is the emperor
Xerxes is pronounced Zerxes.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

> > Cheryl Singhals wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > FTR, since both the laser and the Exrock used heat and pressure to
> > > make the toner adhere to the paper, an Exrock copy ....
> >
> > I guess FTR is For the Record but what is Exrock? all that Google l
> > turns up are music sites.
> >
> > bob gillis
>
> My guess is she doesn't want to say Xerox. The generic term,
> Cheryl, is "dry photocopier."
>

> Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org>


What about Coke and Kleenex?

Hugh

[Richard Smith]

> I have desire to publish my entire family history - especially the
> many old pictures I have collected over the years. I used 2010 FTM.
> I hope that one of my children will carry on with my efforts - but
> that might not happen, of course. I have everything at
> ancestry.com, but I have slowed down an awful lot lately and am no
> longer making updates - I have even let my membership drop, due to
> the expense.
>
> I have considered posting all my pictures at google photos in a
> public album and tag every picture with names and create elaborate
> caption on all that I know - that will aloow a wide audience a
> chance to get photo copies while I have the account.
>
> But other than sending electronic copies to my local genealogical
> centers - what do people suggest?
>

> tomcat


I've spent quite some time over the last fortnight reading the other
responses to this post and thinking about it, and I'm coming to the
view that there is specific hole in the genealogy marketplace for a
service that does this. What follows is quite a long summary of the
sort of service I could envisage someone providing quite easily, but
so far as I know, no-one is currently doing.


DIGITAL DATA

The most reliable way of ensuring that something still exists
several centuries in the future is to make sure that as many copies
as possible exist in different places. Losses can happen in even
the most secure of archives, but with many copies, if some get
destroyed, others still stand a chance of surviving. Publishing
research in book form is one way of achieving this, but this can be
costly, take a lot of time, and many people are reluctant to publish
things they consider still to be works in progress. What is needed
is an easier way to publish research: a way so easy that every
little breakthrough can be published.

Almost all our research can be converted into digital format:
speculation, inferences and deductions can be written down; texts
can be transcribed; photos and certificates can be scanned;
memorials, statues, paintings and medals can be digitally
photographed; audio and video are often already digitised these days
and can be made so if they're not. Digital information can easily be
shared over the Internet, and it does not degrade as it is copied
and recopied. (There are problems when formats become obsolete, and
serious though they are, I don't want to dwell on them in this
post.) Putting digitised research online seems easiest way of
publishing it.

Online data, however, often has no permanence. If you publish on a
personal website, who will pay the hosting costs long after you've
died?

If it's a free hosting provider, will it still exist in twenty
years' time? In the mid-90s geocities.com was the most popular free
provider, but sites created there then no longer exist. What about
ancestry.com?

That has a better chance of surviving because has an obvious,
viable business plan. But its ultimate aim is to make money, not to
preserve your data. You have no guarantee that they won't delete
your data, and even if they don't they might start charging
prohibitively to access it.

Trusting the preservation of your research exclusively to one
company is a bad strategy. (Throughout this post I use ancestry.com
as an example of a commercial genealogy site. My comments about it
could be equally be considered as general comments on an arbitrary
commercial genealogy site.)


A GENEALOGICAL COMMONS

The best way to ensure the long-term preservation of digital data
has to be to make sure it is continually being copied to new places,
and not tied to fortunes of a few present-day companies. When a new
genealogy company sets up, you need them to be legally free to
import your research onto their site. That freedom to copy in
perpetuity is essential. If I download someone's research from
ancestry.com, I find it marked with ancestry.com's copyright
statement and I am seemingly not free to publish it elsewhere. (In
fact, my understanding is that copyright typically remains with the
original researcher, despite the notice seemingly to the contrary,
but either way, I do not have permission to publish research
downloaded from ancestry.com.) If the original data had been
clearly and unambiguously made available under a "share-alike" or
"copyleft" licence, such as the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA licence,
this situation couldn't arise. If you publish your research under a
licence like CC-BY-SA, a company like ancestry.com would be free to
import the data on to their site, but not free to prevent their
competitors, current or future, from copying it from them.

However, the licence is only one part of the problem, and a copyleft
licence introduces problems of its own. We still need to find a
place to put copies initially. A company like ancestry.com will not
collate research from individual websites as it does not have the
resources, and, to the best of my knowledge, most of the existing
genealogical websites do not allow copyleft uploads -- rather they
require you to accept their licence conditions. What is needed is
an organisation whose primary objective is to collect researchers'
work and make it easily accessible. In a word, what we need is a
*commons*, a collected body of research that is accessible to all,
hopefully in perpetuity.

The idea of a vast, online commons has already been used extensively
by the Wikimedia project, in the form of the Wikimedia Commons, a
collection of over 11 million media files (mostly images), free for
use by anyone, providing they acknowledge the original creator.
What we need is a genealogical version of that: a well-indexed,
freely-available repository of research. And in the short term,
that needs an organisation to manage it and website to access it.

It is worth clarifying, lest there is any doubt on this point, that
this genealogical commons would not be managed remotely like
Wikipedia. The original, unmodified version of your research would
always be there, and other people would not be modifying it. Others
may cite your research, may quote it, may produce research derived
from it, or even produce a new version "correcting" what an errors
that the later researcher feels you may have made, but your original
research is always there, separate from any derivative work.


FINANCING IT

The Wikimedia Commons exists thanks to donations from users and from companies
who wish to support it. Another model is to make people pay to access the
research in the commons. (This is not necessarily incompatible with a
copyleft licence, depending on which one is used.) But I don't see that either
of these models will work for genealogical research because a lot of research
will probably get accessed very infrequently. However, I think it is quite
feasible for the organisation running a genealogical commons to provide
indefinite storage of research for a single, fairly modest up-front fee. Some
rough calculation suggest that 20 pounds sterling per gigabyte (25 euros,
$30US) could be enough, which seems good value to me. This assumes two
things: first, that there will always be more researchers coming along wanting
to store their research, and second that storage continues to get
cheaper. Specifically, we are assuming that the cost of storing data forever
is finite because the unit cost of storage is falling exponentially, and that
cost of making this ever-increasing body of research available to the public
(e.g. the electricity and bandwidth costs, administrative overheads, and so
on) can always be met by the up front fees from the current generation of
researchers.

"Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a
finite world is either a madman or an economist", or so the saying
goes. On the face of it, this is what we are doing. However, we do
not require it to go on for ever: merely for long enough that the
commons is well enough known to have been incorporated into other
companies' databases. If it survives after then, so much the
better; if not, it's still served it's purpose. The key is that it
does survive that long, and that its content is tempting enough that
it does get combined into other databases. In this case "tempting
enough" means large enough -- a large commercial site like
ancestry.com are not going to go to the hassle of incorporating data
from a single person's research, but if they can include many in a
single go, they will.


--
Richard Smith <ric...@ex-parrot.com>

[Wes Groleau]

> Is far as I know an initial X is pronounces Z in English. The
> name of the copier company is pronounced Zerox as is the emperor
> Xerxes is pronounced Zerxes.
>
> bob gillis

Some of his subjects preferred Jerkses.


--
Wes Groleau

“A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature, and as a
firm and unalterable experience has established these laws,
the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact,
is as entire as could possibly be imagined.”
— David Hume, age 37
“There's no such thing of that, 'cause I never heard of it.”
— Becky Groleau, age 4

Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org>

[Wes Groleau]

> Online data, however, often has no permanence. If you publish on a
> personal website, who will pay the hosting costs long after you've
> died?
>

> Richard Smith


archive.org ?


--
Wes Groleau

Angry disruption in class
http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/barrett?itemid=1455

Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org>

[Wes Groleau]

>>> Cheryl Singhals wrote:
>>>> <snip>
>>>> FTR, since both the laser and the Exrock used heat and pressure to
>>>> make the toner adhere to the paper, an Exrock copy ....
>>>
>>> I guess FTR is For the Record but what is Exrock? all that Google l
>>> turns up are music sites.
>>>
>>> bob gillis
>>
>> My guess is she doesn't want to say Xerox. The generic term,
>> Cheryl, is "dry photocopier."
>

> What about Coke and Kleenex?
>

> J. Hugh Sullivan


What is the application to genealogy? Using them to clean
gravestones?

"Carbonated cola-flavored beverage that no longer contains cocaine"

"Relatively soft cellulose product used for miscellaneous cleaning"

Oh, all right: "pop" and "tissues"


--
Wes Groleau

Be spontaneous … today
http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/BlindDog?itemid=3984

Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org>

[Lisa Lepore]

> > > Cheryl Singhals wrote:
> > > > <snip>
> > > > FTR, since both the laser and the Exrock used heat and pressure
> to
> > > > make the toner adhere to the paper, an Exrock copy ....
> > >
> > > I guess FTR is For the Record but what is Exrock? all that Google
> l
> > > turns up are music sites.
> > >
> > > bob gillis
> >
> > My guess is she doesn't want to say Xerox. The generic term,
> > Cheryl, is "dry photocopier."
> >

> > Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org>

>
> What about Coke and Kleenex?
>

> Hugh


I think you use those products to clean the toner from the Xerox
copies off the protective cover sheets after they have been stored
too long.

Lisa

"Lisa Lepore" <lle...@comcast.net>

[cecilia]

> [...] In the mid-90s geocities.com was the most popular free

> provider, but sites created there then no longer exist.
>

> Richard Smith


While agreeing with the point you make, I have a comment about the
example:

Some geocities sites have been moved elsewhere - see

http://www.geocities.ws/archive/

my...@ic24.net (cecilia)

[Ian Goddard]

%><

> I've spent quite some time over the last fortnight reading the other
> responses to this post and thinking about it, and I'm coming to the
> view that there is specific hole in the genealogy marketplace for a
> service that does this. What follows is quite a long summary of the
> sort of service I could envisage someone providing quite easily, but
> so far as I know, no-one is currently doing.

%><
>
> Richard Smith


For anyone who hasn't already seen it there's a similar post which
has now grown a long thread on s.g.computing.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

>>>> Cheryl Singhals wrote:
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>> FTR, since both the laser and the Exrock used heat and pressure to
>>>>> make the toner adhere to the paper, an Exrock copy ....
>>>>
>>>> I guess FTR is For the Record but what is Exrock? all that Google l
>>>> turns up are music sites.
>>>>
>>>> bob gillis
>>>
>>> My guess is she doesn't want to say Xerox. The generic term,
>>> Cheryl, is "dry photocopier."
>>
>> What about Coke and Kleenex?
>>
>> J. Hugh Sullivan
>
> What is the application to genealogy? Using them to clean
> gravestones?
>
> "Carbonated cola-flavored beverage that no longer contains cocaine"
>
> "Relatively soft cellulose product used for miscellaneous cleaning"
>
> Oh, all right: "pop" and "tissues"
>

> Wes Groleau


And I had thought I was ahead of everyone. Mea culpa.

Hugh

Ea...@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan)