Re: DNA at Ancestry
- From: Richard van Schaik <f.m.a.vanschaikREMOVE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 22:37:28 +0200
Hugh Watkins wrote:
John Cartmell wrote:
Chris Watts wrote:
..and what would be the quality of that information?
I have no confidence in the standard of Ancesty's transcription and indexing work. Nor am I impressed by the quality of trees submitted to them. All based on a foundation of sand, I fear. Needs a great deal of checking before being accepted as anything but conjecture - but then we all check the validity of our sources, don't we?
That is, indeed, one worry. ;-(
whilst I am a self acknowledged ancestry evangelist
(because I wanted more UK data)
Do treat all this kind of stuff as a secondary source or worse
ancestry has a market saturation problem
they built on expansion but when there is no more census data to upload
how are they to attract new customers and retain the old?
Reducing prizes? Just an idear from a outstander amazed about how much you are willing to pay. When I go to an archive it is free of charge (and can view originals or fiches therefrom). Just have to pay for realtime costs if I print some copy. But I can photograph as much as I like (some restrictions however, about privacy and using utensils (including flash)). Total costs of any visit ammounts to some gasoline mostly.
But well I'm dutch, better to be compared to the scottish ....... <vbg>
Richard van Schaik
- Prev by Date: Search of Name
- Next by Date: Re: Diplomatic Question
- Previous by thread: Re: DNA at Ancestry
- Next by thread: Re: DNA at Ancestry