As someone once said...
"Moderation in all thngs- *even moderation*!"
;)
--- On Wed, 1/14/09, RobinH wrote:
> From: RobinH
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Apple
> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Date: Wednesday, January 14, 2009, 7:58 PM
> Any forum is a cross section of society, slanted
Bill...
Repeatedly posting is *not* a small infraction- it is, rather, a gross assault
on the list and the members thereof.
--- On Wed, 1/14/09, Bill Wilson wrote:
> From: Bill Wilson
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Apple
> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Date: Wednesday, January 14, 20
nsure if I am responding in
> the correct manner to this post but I am sure I will read
> about it if I have not followed the guidelines correctly.
>
> Gail Dyer
>
> Wynthner wrote:
> > Look Lady- either get an e-mail address you can set to
> ALWAYS send in plain text or
My appologies to the list. I meant to send that private.
btw- the appology is for sending it public- not for what was said.
--- On Wed, 1/14/09, Janis L Gilmore wrote:
> From: Janis L Gilmore
> Subject: [LegacyUG] Rudeness to the list
> To: "LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com"
>
> Date: W
Look Lady- either get an e-mail address you can set to ALWAYS send in plain
text or quit posting- got it?? !!
PS- And I don't care how olds you are- age is no excuse for stupidity!
--- On Tue, 1/13/09, momalo...@aol.com wrote:
> From: momalo...@aol.com
> Subject: [LegacyUG] Apple
> To: Lega
Dell's early power supply connectors were non-standard... and a few other
connectors if I recall correctly.
--- On Tue, 1/13/09, Mike Fry wrote:
> From: Mike Fry
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Survey: Error 91
> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Date: Tuesday, January 13, 2009, 2:07 PM
>
It really ought to be a cardinal rule for all computer users that any PC should
have a cold boot after any update. You'd be amazed at the little problems it
prevents.
--- On Sat, 1/10/09, ronald ferguson wrote:
> From: ronald ferguson
> Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Error 91
> To: legacyusergroup@
It may have something to do with those two items having some 16 bit code in
them.
While 32 bit Vista can handle old 16 bit code 64 bit Vista can't. There is
another program on the market that has the same problem in one of its modules.
--- On Fri, 1/9/09, Sherry/Support wrote:
> From: Sherry
Ibid should ONLY used if the source IMMEDIATELY preceding it is exactly the
same in ALL respects.
If there is an intervening source other standards apply.
--- On Tue, 1/6/09, ronald ferguson wrote:
> From: ronald ferguson
> Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Ibid feature and unknown spouse
> To: legacy
Perhaps, then again, perhaps not...
But until a full explaination of just why the feature was pulled and the
warning issued one is left to wonder.
--- On Tue, 1/6/09, Elizabeth Richardson wrote:
> From: Elizabeth Richardson
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Merging Basic Sources into Sourcewriter
> T
Amen!
LUG should do like rootsweb and strip HTML befor it ever gets to the list-
anything else is pre-neanderthal.
--- On Sun, 1/4/09, Ron Bernier wrote:
> From: Ron Bernier
> Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Newbie questions
> To: "LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com"
>
> Date: Sunday, January 4,
Source it just like that... "Unidentified Newspaper Clipping".
You could say when/where you obtained it but that is about it.
--- On Sun, 1/4/09, Bernard Doddema wrote:
> From: Bernard Doddema
> Subject: [LegacyUG] how to source unidentified newspaper clipping
> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamil
One works backwards only to a point-say your great grandfather and then you
want to add his descendants( your cousins)- then you start working forward so
sooner or later everyone might well encounter this "bug".
--- On Sun, 1/4/09, Elizabeth Richardson wrote:
> From: Elizabeth Richardson
>
I *always* enter a 'name' for a marriage partner- even if I don't know it!
A spouse with an unknown name would be entered as:
Given Name:"_"
Surname:"~"
Then I chnage it when I get the real name.
--- On Sat, 1/3/09, Elizabeth Richardson wrote:
> From: Elizabeth Richardson
> Subject:
My personal opinion is that the "someone" shouldn't be added at all. It should
simply read " married." The mere fact of a marriage indicates that there
was another someone involved.
When/if other information is found then it should be entered a another marriage
with full details and the ori
If your birthday was 1 jan 1900 then on 1 jan 1901 you would have entered your
2nd year.
--- On Wed, 12/31/08, Mike Fry wrote:
> From: Mike Fry
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Legacy Home Tab Problem
> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Date: Wednesday, December 31, 2008, 7:33 PM
> RICHARD
The thing is the end-user should NOT have to re-configure anything-period.
Preventing this type of situation is clearly the responsibility of the mailing
list owner...
besides, who in their right mind makes a "rule" that they have no way of
enforcing??
--- On Sat, 12/27/08, Hope Bagot Bees
Jill,
Just my personal opinion but my feeling is that flash drives should only be
used to transfer files between computers and never used as a long term storage
device or to actually run files from a flash drive. Too many chances for
something to go wrong. Better to backup to an external drive,
They *really* need to do something about their maillist software and/or their
servers to prevent just this sort of thing- even if it means raising the price
to pay for it!
--- On Sat, 12/27/08, Carl Cox wrote:
> From: Carl Cox
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Need a Gedcom from Ver 7
> To: LegacyU
I think what she is saying is that she has a v.7 family file but has
uninstalled version 7 and only has v.6 on her machine- thus she can't open the
v7 file to gedcom anything out.
--- On Fri, 12/26/08, Rachel Alliston wrote:
> From: Rachel Alliston
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Need a Gedcom f
I'd go with one-I just find it easier in case I find a person that would link
to two different files. No duplicate sources, etc to set up or special
customized items to remeber in which set.
--- On Sun, 12/21/08, Howard Mathieson wrote:
> From: Howard Mathieson
> Subject: [LegacyUG] one fil
The *only* Golden Rule I've found for merging is...
DON'T DO IT!
(grin)
I'm like you- it always seems to create more problems than it solves.
--- On Tue, 12/16/08, Hope Bagot Bees wrote:
> From: Hope Bagot Bees
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Updating file after reversion to old copy
> To: Lega
I've been convinced from the beginning that the source conversion feature was
unworkable. Considering how unique each person does their sources I fail to see
any way all those variations can be taken into account and rendered into one
"standard" source.
--- On Fri, 12/12/08, JLB wrote:
> Fro
It has always been my belief that *any* database should be both searchable
*and* sortable on any field in said database... otherwise why bother to build
one?
--- On Wed, 12/10/08, ronald ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: ronald ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: [LegacyUG]
I fully agree!
Just as one shouldn't try to paint the Mona Lisa with a chain saw, neither
should one try to sculpt a David with a paint brush.
Perhaps what is really needed is a third party full bodied, fully customizable,
user friendly report generator
--- On Tue, 12/9/08, ronald ferguson <[
In other words... dumb it down; the same solution that has led to the collapse
of the american education system.
Standards are standards because they do *not* change. One either tries to meet
standards or one doesn't.
Those who try to meet the standards are called serious genealogists, those w
As Sylvester the cat would say...
"Exaticaly!"
--- On Thu, 12/4/08, Dennis Kowallek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Dennis Kowallek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Listserv spam/HTML issues (Was: Legacy Question)
> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Date: Thursday, D
I can't see a biography as an event or as a note. I'd make the biography a
source (relative A being the source of the source) and then add the events in
the biography with whatever additional notes were needed.
--- On Thu, 12/4/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: [EMAIL
Rootsweb uses the Mailman Mailing List program which is a commercial program
and has, in fact, restricted a lot of the bells and whistles it allows.
--- On Wed, 12/3/08, John B. Lisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: John B. Lisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Listserv spam/HT
Then I *strongly* suggest you get new Mailing List Software.
Just corious but what Mailing List software do you use?
--- On Wed, 12/3/08, Sherry/Support <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Sherry/Support <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Listserv spam/HTML issues (Was: Legacy Questio
Sorry, but ALL users ahould have their e-mail client set to send ONLY in text.
HTML should never, Never, NEVER, be used in e-mail-for *any* reason-period.
Truth be told, Emails clients shouldn't even recognize HTML. Browsers yes-
E-Mail clients no.
--- On Tue, 12/2/08, Steve Voght <[EMAIL PROT
If you now do the exact same thing using the SourceWriter that should tell the
tale.
:)
--- On Sat, 11/29/08, Dennis M. Kowallek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Dennis M. Kowallek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Citing a Source multiple times
> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamil
There was a Frenchman who produced such a program (Geneweb). Google will find
it. IIRC, there were even a couple of websites that specialized in displaying
its output.
--- On Fri, 11/28/08, ronald ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: ronald ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: [
I just have two questions for list members...
Of all the people you have shared your genealogy information how many have gone
thru the trouble to actually check your sources?
Do you check the sources of all information you recieve?
My feeling is that unless you are preparing to actually publish
Wouldn't the easiest way be to just create another Master Source
"Correspondence, Joe Bloggs<->Fanny Adams"
--- On Sun, 11/23/08, Jenny M Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Jenny M Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Sourcing emails
> To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyFamilyTre
Imho, for what it is worth...
The Website is the repository and the particular webpage is the source (and
hopefully cites its source).
--- On Sat, 11/22/08, Jennifer Trahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Jennifer Trahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Sourcing a family associa
--- On Tue, 11/18/08, Jenny M Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It all depends entirely on what you mean by
> "record" doesn't it. I could say I have over
> 2,000 records in my family file: (meaning over 2000
> individuals) but I could also say I have several records for
> each person, mea
As I was once told by a rather well-known genealogist...
"A source is that which records the occurance of an event".
--- On Tue, 11/18/08, Dennis M. Kowallek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Dennis M. Kowallek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Tagging/Events was ([LegacyUG] Searching Location
You won't see it because it isn't there.
A link is nothing *but* text arranged in a certain way so it doesn't matter as
far as list mail goes.
--- On Fri, 11/14/08, Elizabeth Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Elizabeth Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] web pa
It depends on the context/how you use it. The full form is "The United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland"
--- On Thu, 11/13/08, Michele Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Michele Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [LegacyUG] another question about locations
> To: "Legacy E-M
Good luck with England!
There are several overlapping jurisdictional systems that can lead to utter
confusion depending on civil district, registration district, etc.
--- On Thu, 11/13/08, Michele Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Michele Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [LegacyUG]
Ah!! An FTM Upgrade!!!
*GRIN!*
--- On Sun, 11/9/08, Ron Bernier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Ron Bernier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Legacy 8 rumours
> To: "legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com"
>
> Date: Sunday, November 9, 2008, 1:08 AM
> Maybe they feel they messed
It is purely a guess but
several "features" that people have asked for have resulted in a "this would
take a major re-write of the entire program" type answer- this may well be in
this catagory.
--- On Sat, 11/8/08, Mary Fowler Leek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Mary Fowler Leek <[EM
Ah.. so that would make the husband's children by the previous marriage and the
wife's children from previous marriage Siblings-in-Law!
*grin*
--- On Wed, 10/29/08, Jan Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Jan Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Sorting children and 1/2
Err... if you sort it by cemetery, county, state then what happen to cemeteries
with same name in different counties and/or states?
Wouldn't it be better to sort by state, county, cemetery to keep them all
together?
--- On Wed, 10/29/08, JLB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: JLB <[EMAIL PROT
Now *that* is just plain silly!
To have a database with unsearchable fields is, to be blunt about it,
unforgivable in the extreme.
--- On Tue, 10/28/08, ronald ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: ronald ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] looking for cems
> To: legac
Too many people fail to understand the difference between "personal"
information and "private" information.
Names, dates of birth, etc are personal information but they are *not* private.
Bank account numbers, Soc.Sec. Numbers, credit card numbers, etc are "private"
information.
*ANY* persona
Ancestry has a copy of the original two indexes- note plural but they then
combined those into ONE database and indexed that database so yes- Amazon did
create the database that allows you to view the original pages of the original
two indexes.
--- On Fri, 10/24/08, Elizabeth Richardson <[EMA
One can not derogatorize Microsoft since, than it, there is nothing lower than!
;)
- Original Message
From: Elizabeth Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2008 8:04:53 PM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] TIF images attached to sources
Numbers associated with a person aren't important unless those numbers are
serving multiple purposes (like also serving as document numbers, etc.). As to
pedigree numbering, there are several numbering systems in use around the world
so trying to keep them in order is like re-arranging deck chai
We have recently run into the same thing. My nephew is in the divorce process
now. Since he has formed several close relationships with his soon-to-be-
ex-wife's siblings and their children we have decided to just enter the fact of
the divorce but to keep updating the info on all of her her othe
AMEN!
Luckily, the program I use has an ID number for each individual you can
change.. but thankfully that does *not* change the internal record number
- Original Message
From: Johnny V <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 7:
You can have all the beta testers you want...
but if the programers and management don't listen to them...
you wind up with a FTM 2008 or a Legacy 7.
(sigh)
- Original Message
From: Bob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 2
A ream is approx. 1.75-2.0 inches so 2 3-inch binders would be a tight fit for
1500 sheets.
Better to figure 1 three inch binder per ream.
That was what we used in our lab for our procedure manuals (which we constantly
being updated!).
- Original Message
From: Ruth Nerud <[EMAIL P
I would beg to differ...
If I buy a certain software package because of a particular way it does a
certain thing and it works properly and then I buy the next upgrade and find
that it has changed the way that certain function works I have a perfect right
to feel somewhat less than warm and fuzzy
TMG=The Master Genealogist
- Original Message
From: M Stowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Monday, September 1, 2008 7:46:46 PM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] TMG
Guess this is a strange question but was is TMG?
M.
Legacy User Group guideline
There is also the use of witnesses.
The witnesses in TMG do not transfer to GEDCOM and if the cousin has used them
to a great extent it would be a major work to re-do them somehow in Legacy.
I do like one report Legacy does better than the same TMG report...
The Kinship /Relatives Report in Al
Joseph,
You can. All you have to do is go to one of the National Archives Regional
Offices- but the NA has a LOT less online than Ancestry.
- Original Message
From: Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 7:56:42 AM
Subject:
All I can say is that if someone is not really into genealogy then they are
*very* unlikely to get any type of report from me- lengthly or otherwise..
- Original Message
From: Syble Glasscock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 8:1
A case can be made that the conflicting genealogies of Jesus are on topic if
the question is how does one enter completely different genealogies for the
same person.
- Original Message
From: Elizabeth Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Thursd
The first thing I would do is submit a correction on the image page at Ancestry
so that Magyari also show as an alternate name in the Ancestry Index. I've
submitted several and they seem to get them entered pretty quickly.
- Original Message
From: John Magyari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Better yet- just complain to Sherry et al in an off list message and then let
them handle it.
- Original Message
From: GeoSci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Legacy User Group
Sent: Sunday, August 3, 2008 12:59:43 PM
Subject: [LegacyUG] Off Topic posts on LUG
A suggestion - if you do not thi
To the best of my knowledge there is no softwware package that allows
individual sourcing of the day, month, and year of a date, in the same vein
there is no package that allows individual sourcing of street number, street,
city, county, state, and country. I've never understood just why all pac
Until the major national and international genealogical Societies and Journals
agree on one style of sourcing there will be no "standard".
Such agreement is about as likely as Rev. Phelps or Osama Bin Laden being
elected Pope.
- Original Message
From: Kirsten Bowman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think first you have to decide what you mean by "tree".
My earliest ancestor with my Surname only goes back to 1812 but my maternal
line goes back to 1708.
If I am doing a SURNAME tree then earliest means one person.. If I am doing
Direct ancestors it is a different person.
Any person in you tr
If you have the actual clipping in your possession just make a source "News
Clippings-unsourced"
If you have a copy provided by someone else then they, of course, are the
source and you quote the clipping.
- Original Message
From: PHILLIP O HUSBAND <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: legacyusergr
I think we have to distinguish between a marriage and a wedding as they are not
the same thing.
There can only be one Legal marriage ceremony (that which the State recognizes
as granting the legal benefits of marriage) but there can be an infinite number
of wedding ceremonies.
- Original
Imho opinion, the *only* reason to use HTML in either e-mail or Newsgroups is
the sudden onset of complete senility.
HTML was devised for the World Wide Web and should remain there. OIthers, of
course, differ.
- Original Message
From: Jenny M Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Personally, I be
I'd use the cousin and the census for whatever they said about the info your
cousin sent (name, dates, etc.) and the census only for whatever the census
showed that your cousin didnt (occupation, own/rent home, etc.)
- Original Message
From: Christina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUse
Somehow, I don't think Mr. Velke is rich...
;)
- Original Message
From: Dave Naylor
If you can come up with program code that will sort records by date
and still keep records with blank dates in their "correct" place then
you'll make a fortune! ;-))
Cheers, -- Dave
--
David Nay
IMHO, they are doing the right thing... you *ARE* their source; they didn't see
your sources for themselves and therefore shouldn't claim them as sources in
their files. It might be nice if they had something like "Source: Tracy Skaggs
(citing "Ancestral Anthologies" by Gilbert Blabbermouth, Big
I have a cousin who did this.
What he did was to produce his own unpublished manuscript for each ship and
then used the appropriate manuscript as his source.
He used a spreadsheet and had a column for the original source in addition to
the other info. He'd then run a report "Voyages of _", sc
Adding the photos you took would be fine...reproducing the photos from the book
is most likely a violation of copyright and I wouldn't advise using them except
for your personal use (i.e. not passed along to family or put on the web).
- Original Message
From: Gorski Ian <[EMAIL PROTEC
Just my opinion but...
You should only cite as a repository the place where you saw the information-
no matter how many other places that information may be available.
If you had information from a book at your local library would you cite every
library that may have that book?
- Original
Jane,
I've found it best to always enter a birth and death date for anyone I
don't personally know is alive.
Even if I don't know the actual dates one can come up with valid estimates.
A real life example:
My cousin's mother and father were divorced when she was very young and she had
no contact
y view, that leaves you
with only one witness, the enumerator.
Elizabeth C
Wynthner wrote:
> In actuality the US census creates a minimum of two witnesses, one of which
> is recorded on the census.
> Witness #1 is the person giving the information to the enumerator. That
> p
In actuality the US census creates a minimum of two witnesses, one of which is
recorded on the census.
Witness #1 is the person giving the information to the enumerator. That person
witnesses the recording of the information he/she is giving by the enumerator.
Witness #2 is the enumerator, who wi
Jane,
At one time I stumbled across a website that had county creation dates and
details for each state so I know one is out there- unfortunately I didn't save
it [sigh]
- Original Message
From: Jane Sarles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Friday, Jul
Is there a fairly easy way (other than running a 7 generaion ancestor report on
each person) to determine which people in my database (17,000+) have all 64
gt-gt-gt-gt-grandparents accounted for?
I want to give each such person a special event so I can recognize them.
Any thoughts?
Le
Exactly!
- Original Message
From: david <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 7:45:54 PM
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Relationship Calculator
I think it's reasonable in that Legacy is showing non-blood people who are
married to a blood
e 29, 2008 7:35:58 PM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Relationship Calculator
OK, then Legacy should return the relationship as nephew-in-law.
but it returns "no relationship" which is wrong.
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 6:32 PM, Wynthner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Your uncle is the brother
Your uncle is the brother of your father or mother. The husband of your aunt
(your father's or mother's sister) is yoru uncle-in-law.
You are the nephew-in-law, not the nephew, of the husband of your aunt.
Imho, it is not a bug.
- Original Message
From: Chick Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
T
True, except in the case of planning to publish your work in one of the
professional journals.
If that is the case, it then behooves one to determine the formats said journal
requires before hand and enter data accordingly rather than have to re-do
everything later.
- Original Message ---
I use "~" for unknown Surnames and "_" for unknown given names and then
in the suffix I add "Spouse of [insert spouse's name]"
- Original Message
From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 2:47:01 PM
Subject: [LegacyUG] Dealing
It should be noted that a certain school of thought considers the GEDCOM to be
the worst thing ever to befall computerizsed genealogy!
In concept it was great but in implementation by the various companies
(including the LDS itself) it was more than somewhat lacking.
- Original Message
Yes, please; and the sooner the better .
*GRIN*
- Original Message
From: Geoff Rasmussen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:59:27 AM
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] V7: Accessed date for lumped US Census Entries - for
Geoff
Your experien
States Steamship Company was using the term into the early 70's.
- Original Message
From: Allen Prunty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 2:46:21 PM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Standardization
I delete Mr. Miss. Mrs. as its redundant as
David,
In doing royal genealogy it is considered proper to use the highest rank or
title a person attains rather than their rank at birth. I have tended to use
this in my everyday genealogy as well.
I also tend to have a different outlook on married names. If Mary Smith marries
John Doe then upo
If that is the case then what is Mrs. short for??
- Original Message
From: Gene Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 6:40:50 AM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Standardization
Mary Young wrote:
> NB why would anyone, anywhere in the wo
Considering what happened with V7 I'd be surprised if Legacy *ever*, even
vaguely, committed to a certain time frame again- for anything; I'd certainly
not blame them!
- Original Message
From: music-line <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Monday, June 16
You could... but there might be a better way.
What format is his info in now?
It might be better for him to send you his info in the present form and then
you enter it into Legacy.
You could then have him download Legacy and send him a copy of you family file
to put into his legacy program.
This
I do something of teh same thing excepot I use "_" for given names and
"~_" for surnames and then in the suffix I put "w/o Smith, Peter #"..
All without quotes. This allows the entries to sort at the end of the Surnames
index by spouses surname.
- Original Message
From: D
I'd even go so far as to split the Street address into at least three fields:
House Number
Street Name
Street Type [Street, Avenue, Parkway, Lane, Blvd., etc]
Thus, 1234 Apple Pie Lane would be entered:
[House Number] 1234
[Street Name] Apple Pie
[Street Type] Lane
- Original Message
Fro
Ron,
Thanks for the info, it explains a great many things about the different
perspectives.
- Original Message
From: ronald ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Monday, June 9, 2008 4:23:06 AM
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Non-US Censuses in v7
Interes
Ron,
Just as a matter of interest, who are some of the people in the UK who are
considered authorities on genealogical sourcing? Could any be enticed to help
Legacy with UK Source Templates?
- Original Message
From: ronald ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytr
Have you checked the Legacy Message Board at Rootsweb?
- Original Message
From: Judith H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Saturday, June 7, 2008 9:25:42 AM
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Email list for legacy solutions only?
I too would prefer that type of li
I'm curious as to UK practices. Is there a person in UK genealogy similar to
Mills; or a licensing body of some sort; or something on the level of the New
England Genealogical Society?
I'm not saying these are "better" but just wondering on the state of
"organizational" differences.
- Orig
Now there is a new idea.. a la cart pricing depending on which special features
you want!
I think I like it... and would hope the cable companies would follow suit.
:)
- Original Message
From: Pat Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Wednesday, June
It is my understanding that the "Source Converter" is to be added at some yet
to be determined future date...
let's just pray they don't say "soon"
;)
- Original Message
From: Jim Keener <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 4, 2008 7:23:26 P
n $20-20 at todays rates - just pick up that many
pennies in a parking lot somewhere! Get real!
Keith
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Wynthner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jan, sorry about your problems but
> If I purchase something and the charge hits my account today then I shoul
1 - 100 of 190 matches
Mail list logo
