LONDON-L ArchivesArchiver > LONDON > 2002-07 > 1027768781
From: "Kate Martinson" <>
Subject: RE: [Lon] KILLINGLY/KILLINGLEY
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 12:25:28 +0100
David Lonergan wrote:
>If you can't provide a constructive answered to a question in a polite
>manner then don't bother answering, its as simple as that.
And nobody did. What breached the List etiquette was the poster
querying why nobody had answered her. She is merely being answered. As
far as I'm concerned, if somebody posts a question along the lines of
"looking for John Smith, born about 1850 in London - info from 1881
census, no further details", and if I have the time, I will happily
search in my collection of sources. Between the thousands of
expereinced genies on this List, this can often lead to a breakthrough.
If the query merely asks for connections to a name, with no details and
no indication that the poster has done any research for him/herself it
is unlikely to obtain a response - nobody wants to waste my time doing
research that has been done before and receiving a reply along the lines
of, "thanks, but my John Smith was carpenter and the one you sent me was
a dock labourer".
|RE: [Lon] KILLINGLY/KILLINGLEY by "Kate Martinson" <>|