|
JFMF –
WHAT NOW?
Pennington Research Association
Submitted by
Gene
Pennington, Research Director
February 3, 2003
Introduction.
Recommendations.
What Are the Problems Today with the JFMF?.
What are Some Solutions and/or Options?.
Accuracy of Online Genealogy Information.
Group Leader Comments & Suggestions.
I have been working for some time on this issue (since
1998) and at the request of the Board at our July 2002 meeting, I am submitting
this report on the JFMF, the problems associated with it and recommendations.
I sent a draft of this document to all of the Group Leaders
on January 15, 2003. We had a very good response (12 of 24 Groups with a Leader
responded). I have modified my draft report based on their comments and
suggestions. This is the final report and makes specific recommendations.
Return to Top of Page
1.
The PRA adopt a new version of what we (PRA) are trying to accomplish
with the JFMF.
New Purpose for the JFMF: The JFMF is a working
database for research purposes -- not a database that we will try to keep as up
to date and as accurate as possible.
Reason:
- We think this will give us a better chance to be
successful and meet our mission statement, goals and objectives.
2.
We place the JFMF on the MyFamily.com website and make it available
to PRA members only.
Positive Reasons:
·
This will make the JFMF available to all PRA members by sharing
the genealogical information contained in the files.
·
Group Leaders will be responsible for the data in their own Family
Group. It will be up to them to solicit data and information from their Group
and to evaluate the information and then to add it to their gedcom file.
·
Group Leaders can work at their own pace to examine their own
gedcom file and when an error is spotted, or when a source has to be added or
corrected, or some other comment noted, they can immediately add it to the file.
·
This will speed up the process of making changes, additions and
deletions to the JFMF – no petitions will need to be submitted EXCEPT
for Group name changes, merges, etc.
·
This will be easier and simpler
·
Members can search all of the JFMF, however, they will have to
search each individual gedcom file themselves to do a complete and through
search. Now when I do a search of the JFMF, I can search the entire database.
·
Members can create reports themselves
·
Group Leaders will be able to upload and download gedcom files to
share with other members.
·
Members can post information, have discussions (chat) online, use
an address book and post calendar events.
·
The Board can charge a fee for members who wish to use the
website. This could help generate funds to offset any potential costs (see
below).
There are three (3) types of members for the MyFamily.com
website.
- Site Guests: Guests can log into the site
and view all content but they are not allowed to add or change anything.
This will be the category for most PRA members.
- Site Users: These members have login
privileges as well as access to add content and files to the site. This will
be the category for Group Leaders.
- Site Administrators:
Administrators have all the above privileges, and the
responsibility for management of the site. You can allow other members of your
site to have administrator status. This is my category now but if the site is
moved to a new location and setup exclusively for the PRA, then we can, if the
Board approves, add other site administrators.
There may well be some problems associated with this
change. I’ve tried to identify some of the more serious ones.
Potential Problems:
- A PRA member must have Internet access in order to use
the MyFamily.com website.
- I will have to break the JFMF into several gedcom
files. Each file will be for a specific Family Group. I will have to learn
how to then put the other individuals who are not associated with a Family
Group within the JFMF into a separate gedcom file and upload it to the
website.
- The only other way to do this is to create one big
gedcom file containing ALL the persons and upload it to the website. This
is not, in my opinion, a good idea for a number of reasons, some of which
are listed below. These potential problems will be greater and have more
negative impact if we put just one big gedcom file on the website than if we
put several smaller gedcom files there.
- Cost – Right now the website on MyFamily.com is paid by
me for my subscription to Ancestry.com and MyFamily.com. At the moment, I
have used about 3% of the 102.1 MB available (personal and PRA data). Given
the size of the gedcom files I’ll have to upload for all of the JFMF, I
estimate we will need about 300 – 400 MB of disk space. This year
MyFamily.com charges $109.50 per year for 500 MB. This includes other
features which would be of value as well. I can increase the size of the
storage space available on my site in smaller increments as needed until I
feel the cost has exceeded the amount I am willing to donate to support the
website.
- There will not be any checks and balances in place for
any data added and/or uploaded to the website. Somebody can add data that is
inaccurate, or worse yet, fictional, and we may not discover it before it is
viewed and/or distributed to our members.
- We will not be able to enforce any type of standard for
the submission of data. This includes adding sources and/or evidence as well
as the format of new data added or for changes made.
- There will not be any checks and balances in place for
any data deleted from the website. We will probably never know if someone had
deleted the data. I can setup some type of backup of the data files but that
will add more time and expense.
- The possibility exists that at some time we may want to
move all of the data from the MyFamily.com website. This will present us with
issues that will become a greater problem than we now face. For example:
- Size of data to be moved will take a long time to move
from one web server to another.
- Ownership of the data that has been added and/or
changed. We will NOT have a method of ensuring we have consent to publish
forms for everybody who can add/change/delete data. We might be able to
devise some sort of consent form and require the Group Leaders to sign it
before they are given the ability to make those changes. This is not an
issue on the MyFamily.com website because a user has to accept the terms and
conditions before they are allowed access.
- It is possible during a gedcom file upload by a Group
Leader for them to “accidentally” check a box to allow their gedcom file to be
uploaded into the “public” domain area of MyFamily.com and Ancestry.com
websites (they refer to it as “Ancestry World Tree”. This could be cause for
concern but there is no way at this time to prevent this from occurring.
If you're interested in seeing how this works, let me know
and I'll add you to the PRA's MyFamily.com website members list.
Background
As stated in my report to the Board and Membership at our
July 2002 meeting, "The John French Master File (JFMF) has continued to be a
major hurdle. While it is true the JFMF has
the potential to be of great value to our members and other Pennington
researchers, it has certainly been the most challenging."
Since that meeting, I have held several meetings and had
many communications (phone, e-mail and online meetings) with Carmen Johnson (ARD
responsible for the JFMF) and Rene'e Davis (ARD responsible for our Family
Groups and Group Leaders).
I continue to believe that the best method to address all
of the problems associated with the JFMF is to meet with as many of our Group
Leaders as possible and have a through discussion and to identify some positive
solutions. However, I don't think such a meeting will happen given all the
other problems associated with having such a meeting (travel costs, time, etc.).
I also believe we could use the Internet to discuss the
JFMF and its’ problems by holding online meetings. While some of us (such as
Carmen and Rene'e) have been able to do this, the majority of our Group Leaders
have not "signed on" to participate in these online meetings. There are many
problems associated with online meetings and they are not easily solved so I no
longer hold out hope that we will see a much expanded use of online meetings as
a method to discuss the JFMF and to develop solutions.
So, where are we today? Rather than take up lots of space
summarizing what's happened to date, please visit the PRA's website and review
the pages containing the Research Committee's reports (since 1998), our plans,
the pages on the history of the JFMF and the pages on how to make changes to the
JFMF.
Return to Top of Page
I think we can put our problems into a few specific
sections:
- We use volunteers to collect, retain, submit and
review genealogical data. We rely heavily on volunteer Family Group Leaders.
Very few of our volunteers are trained genealogists and the information
submitted frequently lacks sources and/or evidence. Their skills in
performing computer data entry and working with databases are limited.
- We have seen many Group Leaders "fade" from the picture
and their participation has been very little compared to some of our more
active Group Leaders. It is my opinion, and that of some Group Leaders, that
this lack of participation and dedication by some of our Group Leaders has
perhaps been one of the biggest reasons we cannot successfully resolve some of
these problems associated with the JFMF.
- Some Group Leaders have an attitude of “Give me
everything you (PRA) have but I’m going to be very selective when it comes to
sharing anything with the PRA or other researchers”. This is not, in my
opinion, a willingness to share. To share successfully, it has to work fairly
for all parties. When there is a specifically expressed commitment to share
when a Group Leader accepts the job, they must honor that commitment.
- We have set a high standard in our mission statement
of "We strive to be the most comprehensive source of accurate genealogical
information, material and events concerning the Pennington Family." While
this is not impossible to achieve, we've found that to date it has been very
difficult for us to achieve or even come close.
- At the direction of previous PRA Boards, we have kept
the genealogical information in the JFMF from being widely disseminated to the
general public. Yet at the same time the Boards wanted to share the JFMF as
much as possible with our members. This debate of keeping the JFMF to
"ourselves" vs. making it open to the public has gone back and forth with no
one argument being overwhelming accepted by the Research Committee and by the
Board.
Return to Top of Page
- We can continue with the current process and procedures
and work to make them better. Exactly how we can make it better is not clear
to me at this time. Without more effort by our Group Leaders and support to
do the data entry of new information as it is approved to be added to the
JFMF, I don't know how this solution will be successful.
- We can raise funds and hire some college students to do
the data entry for the PRA on all of the pending information as well as any
future data entry that will have to be completed in order to keep the JFMF
current.
- We can stop trying to update the JFMF by changing the
existing data. Rather we can add any new gedcom files directly into the JFMF
and try to "clean up" duplicate entries as they are identified.
- We can make the JFMF available to the public by posting
it on our website (I'm not sure what this would accomplish but it has been
suggested).
- We can make the JFMF available to our members only by
posting it on our website but in a restricted member’s only section. Then add
any new information by using the process identified in #3.
- We can make the JFMF available to our members only by
posting it on a website that is restricted to members only but Group Leaders
are able to modify (edit, add, delete) the information and to upload and to
download gedcom files whenever they wish. These new files will then be
accessible by the other Group Leaders and our members who can also post
information and have discussions, etc. This has been tested on the website
called MyFamily.com and it does work.
Carmen's preference is to leave the JFMF as it exists today
and to use it strictly as a research file. Any new information (family reports,
gedcom files) will be held and sent directly to the Group Leaders for their
action. We would then set time limits on when they have to review the new
information and then to return it to her for addition to the JFMF.
It is not clear to me what this would solve, nor how it
will work any better than the process we currently have in place but I wanted to
be sure and include her suggestions so you can read her suggestion.
I believe the future of the Pennington Research Association
is very bright. We know there will continue to be challenges to face and
obstacles to overcome, but with hard work and dedication, we can overcome these
challenges and obstacles.
I continue to believe strongly that we must continue to
explore new ways of making our information available in printed and electronic
media and on the Internet.
This will pose a number of significant challenges.
·
Security of the data
·
The ability to make it available to members only
·
The cost to provide this service
·
How to make it available for updating by Family Group Leaders
All of these challenges and others yet to be identified
must be carefully examined.
The purpose of an association such as the Pennington
Research Association is to foster the exchange of genealogical information and
to embrace others in our extended family.
As an added comment to help give you a broader perspective,
I've copied a section which discusses online genealogy information. It came
from Dick Eastman's Newsletter. This is posted at the end of this document.
I have added comments and suggestions made by the Group
Leaders at the end of this document. I think you will find these insightful and
of value. I have edited them as needed.
Return to Top of Page
The following article is from Eastman’s Online Genealogy
Newsletter and is copyright 2003 by Richard W. Eastman. It is re-published here
with the permission of the author. Information about the newsletter is available
at
http://www.RootsForum.com.
This week a newsletter reader asked if I might comment on a
series of messages posted to a mailing list server that attacked Ancestry.com. I
read through the mish-mash of statements and found a number of comments painting
Ancestry.com in a negative light. The various messages all claimed that you
couldn't trust the information found on the company's Web site, and that you
still had to verify the information elsewhere. The general theme was that this
particular online site was not a good place to find genealogy information.
My favorite line was, "Searching the records at NARA is
more reliable and still necessary."
Duh! Where have these people been? Of course you still have
to verify information elsewhere. You always do that with every piece of
genealogy information you find, whether it is from an online site or from a
published book or other printed genealogy publication. That is a basic in
Genealogy 101: "Always check your sources."
Anyone who thinks that this is an issue only with
Ancestry.com or only with another online genealogy database is misguided. The
same issue applies to Ancestry.com, RootsWeb.com, Genealogy.com,
FamilySearch.org, GenCircles.com, OneGreatFamily.com, books you find at the
library, messages receive in e-mail, and even this weekly newsletter. It is true
of all secondary sources and even occasionally of primary sources. Whatever you
read, check it out!
I consider Ancestry.com to be valuable. I consider the
other online resources I mentioned to be valuable. I also consider genealogy
books to be valuable. I also solicit e-mail assistance from other genealogists.
But I never, ever believe anything I read until I can verify the claims.
I also hear people moaning and groaning about the quality
of genealogy information to be found online. There are claims that much of the
online genealogy data is worthless. These comments seem to insinuate that people
shouldn't place information online until they have verified it.
You know what? I don't care. I want to see the claimed
information anyway. Yes, I even want to read the inaccurate information. When I
am looking for the unknown parents of one of my "end of the line" ancestors, I
want to see every possible clue, accurate or not. If someone else thinks he or
she knows the parents of Washington Harvey Eastman, I want to know what that
person is thinking. No, I don't care if their information is accurate or not
because I am going to check it out anyway. If possible, I'll contact the person
who created the information and ask, "Where did you find that?" I'll find out
later if the information is accurate or not when I verify it in primary records.
All I want is ideas and hints of possibilities.
In fact, this is all you ever find online or in print:
ideas and hints of possibilities. Remember that nothing is ever a "fact" until
you personally prove it.
I will also point out that genealogy information found
online today is no different from information published in books before the
invention of the Web. Walk into any major genealogy library and grab a bunch of
books written 50, 75 or 100 years ago. You will find some books that were
carefully researched, while others were not. I can show you some old genealogy
books that are true fairy tales. In short, the same is true of the data you find
today on the World Wide Web. The only things different about the Web are speed
and convenience: it is easier and faster to publish accurate and inaccurate
information alike. However, the percentage of inaccurate information doesn't
seem to have changed much in the past 100 years.
In summary, the e-mail messages attacking one particular
online database missed the point. This is not an issue with Ancestry.com, nor is
it an issue with RootsWeb.com, Genealogy.com, FamilySearch.org, GenCircles.com,
OneGreatFamily.com, or the information found on some distant cousin's personal
home page. It is an issue dealing with conducting genealogy searches.
Quoting from Ancestry.com's own site at
http://www.gale.ancestry.com/learn/learning/gedcoms.htm: "You
verify and corroborate every single detail. Never assume that someone else did
all the research and did it correctly. Even if their research is documented with
sources and citations, recheck every detail before you accept it as fact."
To discuss this story further, please visit the newsletter
message board at
http://www.RootsForum.com
and click on "Message Board."
I have prepared a summary of
the comments and suggestions sent in by the Group Leaders. If you would like to
read them, please let me know and I’ll send them to you.
Page Last Updated:
05/12/2008
Return to Top of Page
| 
