GENMSC-L Archives

Archiver > GENMSC > 2001-07 > 0994520546


From: Robert Heiling <>
Subject: Re: Has RootsWeb Review gone berserk?
Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2001 08:42:26 -0700
References: <9i4vmu$6ra$1@slb2.atl.mindspring.net>, <3B46105F.B401E9DA@qwest.net>, <9i6fr5$nh2$2@slb7.atl.mindspring.net>


"Richard A. Pence" wrote:

> "Robert Heiling" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> <snip>
> I can confirm what I told you in my first message. As much fun as
> you are having blaming Jake Gehring and his people, he has nothing
> to do with the ML and RWR mailing lists. No changes have been made
> recently in how the mailing lists for these two publications are
> handled.

They're in good company.

> I have posted separately a message containing an article from
> RootWeb Review last October about the possible reasons for
> receiving multiple copies. The last paragraph is pertinent to our
> discussion:
>
> --- quote ----
> On even rarer occasions,

Rarer, but apparently common enough to deserve mention.

> a problem will develop in the e-mail
> delivery system at the recipient's end,

"at the recipient's end" and not the sender's eh? If that's known for a

fact then they should give the explanation or list some possibilities.
They did in the other cases.

> resulting in multiple
> deliveries -- sometimes dozens or hundreds of copies. It is
> unlikely that you will experience this, but if you do, keep the
> copies and forward maybe a half-dozen of them to the system
> administrator at your ISP so that person can analyze the routing
> information and perhaps identify and resolve the problem. If that
> person needs help finding the problem, s/he can send an SOS to
> .
> ---- end quote ----

If the problem is with the ISP, then how is Rootsweb to help? curious
statement!

> Obviously the anomoly both Bill and Patrick experienced this week
> has happened before and has been investigated.

I don't accept that there is "the" i.e. "one" anomaly.

> > I call them as I see them. Price isn't a factor in that.
>
> All I can say Bill

The name is Bob.

> is that if you are unhappy with what happened,
> perhaps you should demand your money back. <g> Whenever people
> complain about something that hasn't cost them anything - and
> presumably has been helpful to them or enjoyable - I always
> remember the lesson my mother taught me when I was about 5 or 6.
> The local co-op creamery was having its annual free ice cream day
> at the park. When the volunteer dished up my free cone he sorta
> missed a full scoop and I began to complain that I didn't get very
> much. I got a quick ride home and was grounded with these words:
> "When someone gives you something free, you smile and say thank
> you. You don't complain."

You don't suffer from a lack of poor analogies. What if your mother had
observed an impurity in that ice cream? or broken glass? Should she
have remained silent? What if a company were handing out dangerous toys

to children. Should nobody say anything?

Besides! There's a buck in it for Ancestry/Rootsweb or they wouldn't be

doing it. What you are talking about is not "free" and there is
competition in the field. But that's another whole topic.

> But, hey, I guess this week is the anniversary of our nation's
> birthday and as an American you have the right to bitch all you
> want, huh?
>
> Maybe so, but I consider it bad form.

I see. My observations (or those of anyone who doesn't agree with you)
are bitching & bad form. Rather insulting, but I thank you for the fact
that at least you didn't hurl vulgar obscenities at me.

> Regards,
> Richard

Bob




This thread: