Discussion Forum for EOGN.COM: Readers Vote "Yes"

In the September 27 newsletter I wrote, "I have received suggestions from a number of newsletter readers to add a discussion board (some people call it a "forum") to the Eastman's Online Genealogy Newsletter's web site. I am not sure if this is a good idea or not and would like to obtain your opinion. If enough people think it is a good idea, I'll do it." I then set up an online survey and asked newsletter readers to give their opinions.

You can read my original article at http://blog.eogn.com/eastmans_online_genealogy/2008/09/a-possible-disc.html.

The survey results are in. I want to thank the 430 newsletter readers who took the time to respond. Your input makes a BIG difference.

I asked five questions. I'll list them below with the responses:

1. If I create a new Discussion Board (some people call it a "forum") on www.eogn.com, would you use it?

Only 8.8% answered "Never." The other 91.2% stated that they would use the forum. Specifically:

31% said they would use it occasionally
16.6% responded that they would use it frequently
The overwhelming majority (41.3%) stated that their usage would depend upon the content. In other words, if it is interesting, they will use it.

12.3% replied with "Other" and offered specific comments, such as "If I found useful content and relevant topics on the discussion board, I would be inclined to visit more often" and "It depends on the content just how often I would view. If interested in content, I would view at least once a week. Thanks!" and "IF the discussions stay relevant and on-topic and do not digress into personals, complaints or rambling editorials." One comment I especially agree with was, "This is a good idea. And you can use it to get ideas for columns, too."

On the negative side, there were a few comments such as "Dick - You put out a NEWS LETTER! If people want a forum, they can join their local Genealogy group which has lots of forum discussions." Another comment also warns, "I'm afraid it will become yet another venue for the anti-Ancestry crowd and the ‘I'm not posting my family tree on the web’ dinosaurs. You'd have to keep the discussion elevated and focused on genealogy resources, techniques and events."

2. Do you think it is a good idea to have a message board (forum) on www.eogn.com?

26.9% replied "No" while 73.1% replied "Yes" or "Probably."

There were many comments posted to this question, but I think this one sums up most of them: "I am in favor of anything that would help EDUCATE would-be researchers as to what constitutes REAL RESEARCH, with emphasis on PROBATE records, DEEDS / LAND RECORDS, and COURT CASE FILES. The idea of SOCIAL NETWORKING has gotten out of hand and has misguided many people into thinking that is how research is done -- find someone who has already identified THEIR ancestors for perhaps 10 or 12 generations. IT SIMPLY DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY AND THOSE WHO THINK IT DOES ARE NAIVE!!!!!"

3. Possible topics:

12.5% of the respondents stated they were not interested in any topics. The rest responded with a wide-ranging list of interests. The biggest response (68.1%) was for "Genealogy Web Sites."

I was a bit surprised when 51.8% listed an interest in "Digital photographs and scanning."

4. Should the discussion board be open and available to all users (Standard Edition newsletter) or restricted only to those who subscribe to the Plus Edition?

The response was overwhelming: 61 % prefer it to be free and open to everyone, 9.9% felt it should be only for Plus Edition subscribers, and 29.1% stated, "No preference."

5. Would you be interested in being a "Section Leader?"

78.5% selected "Not at this time." Of course, we only need a few Section Leaders, so that response is OK with me.

You can read the responses for yourself at http://www.surveymonkey.com/sr.aspx?sm=4KJxOvQ84jdTkN0gGDIc6_2bwigy4lBxrIp7asx2QhDfA_3d.

Comments

[Bobby]

Pity the people from africa are considered 'other'. Whilst South Africa was mentioned in the Poll as to which country are you from, the rest of the continent gets no mention.

Those of you that dont know - and there are many, Africa is a continent, and South Africa is a country in Africa, and represents a small part of that.

How on earth is nearly a whole continent considered 'other'?

[Cedric]

Dick,
While I didn't answer the survey, if I had I would have indicated interest in digital photography. To explain the connection to genealogy, my family has generated massive amounts of paper records, including photos & portraits, over many centuries. But few of them are into the digital age, so my prime object is to get these into a form where copies can be scattered around, indexes can be created, & backups can be made, before too many records are lost, ie I am doing relatively little primary research, & my records mostly rely on unreliable sources, but once all the facts are collected & arranged someone can go through them, evaluate conflicts, compare to primary sources, etc.
That detailed research is a long way down the track, I still have years of work scanning & indexing, photographing & transcribing hand-written documents, etc.

[Dick Eastman]

---> While I didn't answer the survey, if I had I would have indicated interest in digital photography.

The Discussion Forum is now in operation and you might want to check out the several messages that have already been posted in the digital photography section.

- Dick Eastman

[Dick Eastman]

---> How on earth is nearly a whole continent considered 'other'?

New message sections will be added as soon as a demonstrated need is shown. We will not be adding new sections simply because we THINK they might be used. However, as we see messages being posted by different people that do not fit smoothly into present message board sections, we will add appropriate new sections.

- Dick Eastman

[Mary Lou Bevers]

Thank you, Dick, for quoting my survey response to question #2 in which I addressed the need for EDUCATION among would-be (wannabe) "researchers".

A forum titled something similar to "RESEARCH BASICS" would probably attract many who are SERIOUS about wanting to learn who their ancestors were. The big problem, however, lies in getting the ATTENTION of all those "name collectors" who consider themselves "EXPERIENCED RESEARCHERS / CERTAINLY NOT BEGINNERS", because this is what they have done for perhaps years, and they simply do not understand that without EVIDENCE to support their data, they have NOTHING OF VALUE. They do not know that they need to learn WHAT research is, and HOW it is done.

Finding records to SUPPORT data means beginning with one's parents, and STUDYING the records pertinent to one's PROVEN ANCESTORS, such as VITAL RECORDS, ALL APPROPRIATE CENSUS, plus PROBATE RECORDS OF ALL TYPES including various types of ESTATE RECORDS, GUARDIANSHIPS, ORDER BOOKS, etc., in addition to WILLS, DEEDS, COURT CASE FILES including EQUITY CASES, DIVORCES, ETC., CEMETERY RECORDS, and MANY OTHER GOOD SOURCES.

It is a FACT that ERRORS often exist in even "official" records --- that is why it is so important to do THOROUGH research and EVALUATE one's findings in order to form conclusions on which to base additional research. IT IS VERY EASY TO MAKE MISIDENTIFICATIONS AND THEREFORE CAUSE A PEDIGREE TO BE WRONG!!!!!!!

Sound like "too much work"? Ask yourself whether you want a genealogy based on EVIDENCE, or a collection of meaningless names. Don't confuse the two.

Anyone interested in developing their pedigree should learn HOW to research by taking advantage of the many opportunities to do so --- both online and in local communities. For a start, some might want to read the articles on our Indiana Genealogical Society website at www.indgensoc.org (click on RESEARCH, then on ARTICLES. Most articles apply to research ANYWHERE. Also read GUIDELINES TO TRACING FAMILY TREES at www.rootsweb.com. Many excellent BOOKS are available to assist with research.

As for "social networking", if the parties are knowledgeable researchers exchanging information about "real people", that is GOOD; however, if they are just collecting names without EVIDENCE, and seeking information about non-existent "people", then they are wasting their time. Just understand that such activity is NOT genealogical research.

Let's promote true genealogy for the enjoyable activity that is, and discourage misleading the multitudes.

Mary Lou Bevers