BOARDS-ADMINS-L Archives
Archiver > BOARDS-ADMINS > 2001-08 > 0996656163
From:
Subject: [BD-ADM] Re: Surname variations
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2001 04:56:03 -0400
In-Reply-To: <200107312035.f6VKZf729814@lists2.rootsweb.com>
Kathleen,
Joan actually says exactly what I am saying: The problem is WHO
decides. I think we all agree on that.
There should be a place for surname variations that a newbie would
see. Personally, I don't think making boards for every variation and
adopting them is the answer. For those like yourself, with hundreds of
variations, a single board to register the minor variations and direct
newbies to the major boards would achieve the same purpose. And on a BOARD
newbies can still respond with "new" variations. Nothing is lost.
Unless, "He who dies with the most boards, WINS." <VBG>
I guess I'm just tired of seeing the topic beat to death every three months
or so. It'd be rather nice to see the ADMIN admins say, "Take it to the
'Surname Variation Board.'"
And in that spirit, this is my last post on the topic;-)
,
Patrice
At 7/31/2001 04:35 PM, you wrote:
>From: "Kathleen Woodside Freiburg" <>
>
>Ahh . . . and just *who* is to decide which of us knows the surnames best, I
>ask? No, I have to side with Joan Young and RootsWeb on this one. Seems I
>constantly run into two problems with surname variations . . . and heaven
>knows I speak from experience because I have a *lot* of Surname Boards.
>
>1) Every time I think I have known variations of a name, I run into a new
>one I didn't.
> [Note: I have some that literally have hundreds of variations . .
>. not all
> of which I agree with or even recognize because they are so
>farfetched.]
>
>2) Some surname variations are a matter of interpretation depending on who
>you talk to or the source used.
> [Note: I consider this to be a major problem especially in cases
>where two
> or more surnames claims the variation to be a derivation of their
>own.]
>
>No. For my vote, leave things be as they are and let we admins adopt,
>manage and coordinate the surname and/or its alleged variations. Let's
>*not* make things any harder on our users, many of which are not as
>experienced at either genealogy or computers as we are. No rocks please.
>This is just my humble opinion to which we are all entitled. :O)
>
>-- Kathleen
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <>
>
>
>> > In a message dated 7/31/01 6:21:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
>> > writes:>
>> > > The only problem I have with a LIST of variations is that there is
>> > > no room for rebuttal. And who decides? From all the talk over the
>>years,
>> > > I've come to the conclusion that there ARE differences of opinion. Let
>> > > those who know the surnames best be responsible for posting the
>> > > variations.
> > Patrice-
> >
> > Personally I feel that this 'ONLY' problem you mention is a major one, and
>it
> > is THE major reason we've never implemented any standard list of surname
> > variants (other than Soundex which isn't really a variant list but which
>is,
> > at least, impartial).
> > Joan
This thread: