I see there is some misconception about my thoughts on sources. I faithfully
record my sources; I just don't share them with but one person. We both
theorize based on facts but carefully distinguish between the two. A
conclusion, even when based on a preponderance of evidence, is not a fact.
Before I continue, let me emphasize RECORD YOUR SOURCES so that you can
EASILY return if a fact is challenged.
I think any competent person had rather do his own research. I really prefer
not to be hampered by another's work until I've done mine. Doing the
research takes talent - checking the work of another is common labor. And,
stealing the genealogy of others, instead of doing it or paying a
professional is lazy and cheapskate in my opinion even though we all
probably started that way.
This quote is particularly amusing: "A source you find from someone, that is
well documented, is still a lower surety level -- until you view that
documentation yourself". I wonder if she touches every place that says "Wet
Paint", too. Some of us are capable of much more than checking the work of
others.
I agree with the point that genealogy should be a collaborative effort.
However, the way to prove a point is to compare independent discoveries. If
you do nothing but check my sources, you haven't proved anything in spite of
how great a job you might think you've done. I'll bet you 2 to 1 that you
didn't find any errors (I can use the money).
I also like this line: "If what we do does not make the journey easier for
those that come later then we have failed in our responsibility to others".
WOW! My responsibility to you ended when I posted the wet paint sign; I
don't have to leave a copy of the invoice from the paint store, too. My
responsibility to me is to paint so well that others want to know who did
the painting - not what brush I used.
One lady gave an example of a person making a stupid assumption as
justification for checking sources. Find the fact for yourself and you don't
have to rely on stupid assumptions.
I appreciated Larry's comments but this is already too long for a single
posting. By stating the methods I prefer, my purpose is not to change minds
that are already closed. Rather it is to give my viewpoint on
differentiating between time valuably spent and time wasted. If there are no
conflicting facts, my time is wasted if I only check the facts of others. I
don't seem to find conflicting facts - only conflicting conclusions. I
resolve that by being interested in facts, not conclusions.
Finally, I'm glad the Legacy folks occasionally let us run with posts that
are important to genealogy but not specifically directed toward their
program. I, for one, expect to have my hands slapped when I go too far
afield. But, perhaps, it has the fringe benefit of creating interest beyond
the crashing of computer programs.
Hugh
To unsubscribe: http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp
