Charles, You stated the point correctly and if the complainers would take the time to read the site they would find a warning to that effect. How can anyone expect a repository putting millions of records out there for them to browse through freely, without paying a cent, and expect the information to be always accurate and well documented. I read so many of the same complaint.
Nan Charles Apple wrote: > Kath, > > What you say is very true, and an excellent Caveat for any careful > researcher. Most repositories that I have seen lack in documentation that is > carefully verified and sourced, and many are outright plagerized. I think > the point is that like any other depository they are a source of leads and > clues, that need further research, verification, and accurate source > citations. > > Charles > Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
