Re: Census Lookup Offered


"kindredhearts" <groups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1188608778.782122.175130@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Aug 29, 7:55 pm, kindredhearts <sa...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I am willing to look up census records for a limited time if anyone
needs help! Please give as much information as possible to enable
me
to use my time sensibly :)

Sacha
Kindred Hearts

www.kindredhearts.co.uk

I have actually been quite deflated with the response I received
from
both Don Moody and Roy Stockdill (amongst others) as I had actually
been entirely truthful in offering help with the census lookups.

Attack is only the best form of defence when you are defending solid
ground. You were not 'enitrely' truthful. In your own words above
there is no mention of charges. Those of us who went to your
kindredhearts site then found there is mention of charges.

Saying at a later date, as you have done, that you intended to offer a
free service only swaps the untruth from your words above to your
site. Now nobody can know what they are letting themselves in for
because you yourself have said both that you charge and that you don't
charge.

On
further research, it seems that I am not the only one that has had
such a setback from comments from such people... it is not my place
to
point others in the right direction. It seems that they are just
interested in more people voicing their opinions against theirs.

I couldn't care less what your opinion is on matters of opinion. The
moment I care about anyone else's opinion will be the moment I
sacrifice my own right to have and express whatever opinion I wish on
what are matters of opinion. I am not prepared to give up that
freedom.

What I am about are matters of fact and logic, where opinion is
irrelevant and whether where you like or dislike the facts and logic
is also irrelevant. So read again what I wrote above. Your position is
illogical because you claim both to charge and to not charge. If you
don't like me, or anybody else, pointing out the illogic the remedy is
not to attack the people who have pointed out the illogic. It is to be
logical in your postings.



In truth, yes, I am Sacha Buttle, Sacha Trusler, groovekitten, etc.
etc. etc. I am on the verge of changing my name back to my maiden
name. However, I don't understand why this important as to whether I
am capable in offering a service.

Do try reading what I posted. 'Reading' includes 'with comprehension'.
You picked your 'brands', I didn't. You won't be the last, by a very
long way, to pick a 'brand' which has a disastrous effect on business
even though the choice makes no difference whatever to fitness for
purpose. Other people have given you other examples. If Hugh sees this
and has a long memory he may tell you the disaster, which cost
millions, when 'no carbon required' paper was taken over by Wiggins
Teape and launched worldwide under the brand name Capsil, and with the
by-line that it made reproduction easy. The ads even used pictures of
rabbits in great number. The phone rang in London from Sweden about a
microsecond after the announcement. The entire world stock of paper
had to be withdrawn, all the boxes scrapped, new boxes made, and the
stock re-boxed by hand. All the advertisements had to be pulled and
redesigned. That is how Idem came to be the brand. It didn't make a
ha'porth of diference to any forms printer or any forms user in terms
of functionality. I've deliberately picked a non-genealogical example
to show that it is a matter of perception by others. Picking your
brand name is not a matter of what you fancy. It is a matter of what
the punters perceive, and their perceptions are based on their
cultural experiences. If you don't want to take the advice, don't. The
only person who will lose business is you.

I am entitled to my privacy and in no way does my personal life
infringe upon my business life.

Wrong. In one-person businesses there is no separation betwen personal
and business life. Not in law, not in bank accounts, not in doing the
work, not in delivering as promised. If you don't accept that you have
but two ways to go. Get out of business altogether; or grow the
business so that you have staff in a limited company so organised that
it des not depend on any one heartbeat.

But of course you put your foot in it again with the same illogic. You
say you offer freebies but you say immediately above that you have a
'business life'.

They really should refrain from making
these offensive comments. I could consider it slanderous.

You can consider what you like but whether it is slanderous is
something on which you should take legal advice.

It isn't slanderous either to say that claiming to have some private
sources but dodging the question of what they are tends to give the
impression that you are some sort of con artist. Your offer was to
look up censuses. You mentioned nothing else. Censuses are not private
sources. They are available to all the public or not at all. Access
may be free or charged. If it is free, your offer adds up to nothing.
If you are offering free access to a charged service then two sets of
problems arise. First you'll go out of business quickly because you
are picking up a bill which will not be reimbursed. Secondly, if you
decide to do that as a charity you can afford, you are almost
certainly going to be in breach of the contract you will have with the
provider the moment you pay their charge.

So this points to more illogic. Either you are offering to search
censuses or you are offering to search something else. If it is
censuses the offer makes no sense as a freebie. If it is something
else, people would want to know what the source is before they put in
a question, freebie or charged. Without knowing the source it is
impossible to judge the reliability of the information. There are
circumstances where the source of information really must not be
disclosed, but those circumstances don't apply in genealogy. If you
have started lurking and looking at archives of sgb, have a quick skim
to see how often the issue of completeness and reliability of sources
comes up. How often folk are told to record their sources for the
benefit of their own future research and for anyone who comes after?
No source? It's just gossip. Valuable as a clue, useless as
information.

As far as I am concerned the foregoing analysis shows that your offer
is still 'untrustworthy'. We don't know what you do, where you do it,
or whether you charge.

Don


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: more EE Times nonsense
    ... Johm likes to think that since his business makes money, ... allocated a tiny slice of reality. ... declare your opinion imprimatur. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Richmond CORPS Expo
    ... I certainly take everyone's opinion, whether positive or negative, ... I am new in this business, ... hobby for another 50 years, but just as in the previous 50, ideas have ... pipe smoking around for those that enjoy it. ...
    (alt.smokers.pipes)
  • Re: Richmond CORPS Expo
    ... I certainly take everyone's opinion, whether positive or negative, ... I am new in this business, ... hobby for another 50 years, but just as in the previous 50, ideas have ... pipe smoking around for those that enjoy it. ...
    (alt.smokers.pipes)
  • a lot of recent contents reproduce Allahdad, and they enormously sack Karim too
    ... We glance once, hear nearby, then scream because of the ... allegedly in charge of shames. ... Lots of popular rounds amount Edna, ... Hala chews the business out of hers and etc. obeys. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Kansas throws the book at Planned Parenthood
    ... that abortion is the one great accomplishment of mankind. ... topic and by the same token, neither am I allowed an opinion; ... War kills young people. ... Abortion is legal because it's big business. ...
    (rec.motorcycles)