APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 1999-01 > 0916163121


From: "Chad R. Milliner" <>
Subject: Re: Net Detective Software
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 10:45:21 -0700


I did not get the idea that the original message regarding Net Detective was
a sales pitch -- and besides, if it was, so what? This list is supposed to
be for professional genealogists to discuss issues of mutual concern.
Certainly, software of potential genealogical value is something that should
be discussed, so that I can get other people's opinions, even if they are
sales pitches. (I do hope that anyone who has a financial interest in
anything they are discussing would reveal that fact, but they still should
be allowed to speak.)

Let me toss out something that has been on my mind regarding software. I
often get asked what genealogical database software I think is best. Maybe
I just like making things complicated, but I can never give those people a
simple answer. I explain that I professionally use Personal Ancestral
File -- not because it is the best software available (far from it), but
because it is the "lowest common denominator". In other words, I can create
a database for a client using PAF, and send the client a GEDCOM of that
database, and expect that that client's database program will be able to use
my GEDCOM file without any problems. If I used the program that I think is
best (The Master Genealogist), and then sent a client a GEDCOM file of a TMG
database, I would not be sure that their software would be able to fully
translate the GEDCOM file into that software's database structure without
getting things mixed up. In other words, I would rather send a client a
file with no bells and wistles that worked than one with bells and wistles
that did not work. What do all of you think?

Chad R. Milliner, MLIS, AG

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Mavrogeorge <>
To: <>
Date: Tuesday, January 12, 1999 10:21 AM
Subject: RE: Net Detective Software

>
>On Monday, January 11, 1999 5:59 PM,
>[SMTP:] wrote:
>> Is anyone familiar with new web software called
>> Net Detective?
>
>Being of a somewhat libertarian bent, I'm inclined to say the best rules
are
>"no rules". When I moderated a couple of conferences on the Fidonet system
>that was my credo. When I trusted the adult readers to police themselves
>they did.
>
>Some people have asked why the original message about this software
appeared
>as they suspected (and I do) that it was a not so subtly disguised sales
>pitch. My answer is that from time to time messages will appear here of a
>commercial nature that we wished did not. I am willing to accept the
>occasional poster's lapse of good manners. And, I am loath to institute any
>sort of filter or pre-review of messages.
>
>It is sort of like having an interesting conversation at a party and
>noticing that another guest brought their Amway brochures. You don't call
>attention to the problem, continue the great conversation, and look for an
>opportunity to privately let the guest know about the inapproppriateness of
>the behavior. <smile>
>
>
>--Brian
>the virtual chair of the virtual chapter
>
>
>==== APG Mailing List ====
>
>
>
>

This thread: