Do you like Genealogy & Free Stuff?

[Gjest]

Hi Gang,

I was surfing the net and found this great site that has a little bit
of eerything for genealogy. They are trying to reunite people with thir
family heirlooms. What I think is neat is they list the items by tha
last name of someone's family.

They also have a great Forum that has the following:

*Surname Heirlooms Site Updates
*General Genealogy & Heirloom Board
Place for people to chat about genealogy and heirlooms.
*Who Are We?
Vintage photos of unknown people
*Heirloom Auction Items
Heirlooms found online at auction sites.
*Family Heirlooms - Wanted
Heirlooms people are seeking
* In Memory
A place to write about your loved one who has passed on. You can also
add a photo of the person and/or a photo of their gravesite. Others who
have the same genealogy can also posts replies to your entry.
*Genealogy Resources
Helpful genealogy resources
*S.H. Visitor Specials
Freebies, Contests & Special Offers for our visitors. If you know of a
free offer, you are welcome to post it here. There is already more than
300 listings right now!
Vintage Ephemera For Sale
If you are looking for vintage ephemera, then you have found the right
place. We have just about everything collector's want!
*Vintage Postcards for Sale
View wonderful postcards from the past!

I really like the site and wanted to share ! It is at
http://www.surnameheirlooms.com

[Dave Hinz]

On 25 Feb 2005 13:18:42 -0800, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Gang,

I was surfing the net and found this great site that has a little bit
of eerything for genealogy. They are trying to reunite people with thir
family heirlooms. What I think is neat is they list the items by tha
last name of someone's family.

Does anyone else smell a shill?

(snip feature list / ad copy)

I really like the site and wanted to share ! It is at

Yeah, sure smells like it to me. Am I out of line here?

[Jeff]

"Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

On 25 Feb 2005 13:18:42 -0800, [email protected]
[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Gang,
Does anyone else smell a shill?

Small print of their Privacy P{olicy is interesting

" Some of these arrangements include the sharing of some of
your personal information with our partners in order to
extend these services to you. "

[Dave Hinz]

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 21:53:00 GMT, Jeff <[email protected]> wrote:

"Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On 25 Feb 2005 13:18:42 -0800, [email protected]
[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Gang,
Does anyone else smell a shill?


Small print of their Privacy P{olicy is interesting

" Some of these arrangements include the sharing of some of
your personal information with our partners in order to
extend these services to you. "

In other words "Sign up and we'll sell your address to any spammer
we want to". Good find, Jeff.

When will these people ever learn...

[Andrew W Applegarth]

Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in news:389n9cF5kmv0bU2
@individual.net:

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 21:53:00 GMT, Jeff <[email protected]> wrote:

"Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On 25 Feb 2005 13:18:42 -0800, [email protected]
[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Gang,
Does anyone else smell a shill?


Small print of their Privacy P{olicy is interesting

" Some of these arrangements include the sharing of some of
your personal information with our partners in order to
extend these services to you. "

In other words "Sign up and we'll sell your address to any spammer
we want to". Good find, Jeff.

When will these people ever learn...

Come on, Dave. You can't judge a company by the terms they make you
accept. At least, that's the line you've been pushing in another thread...


- Andrew W Applegarth

....won't be accepting these terms either...

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 05:11:31 -0000, Andrew W Applegarth
<[email protected]> wrote:

Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in news:389n9cF5kmv0bU2
@individual.net:

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 21:53:00 GMT, Jeff <[email protected]> wrote:

"Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On 25 Feb 2005 13:18:42 -0800, [email protected]
[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Gang,
Does anyone else smell a shill?


Small print of their Privacy P{olicy is interesting

" Some of these arrangements include the sharing of some of
your personal information with our partners in order to
extend these services to you. "

In other words "Sign up and we'll sell your address to any spammer
we want to". Good find, Jeff.

When will these people ever learn...



Come on, Dave. You can't judge a company by the terms they make you
accept. At least, that's the line you've been pushing in another thread...


- Andrew W Applegarth

...won't be accepting these terms either...

....which makes it appear the you also judge the company by the
terms...

To their credit they warn you so any takers prove the philosophy of P.
T. Barnum IMO.

Hugh

[Jeff]

"J. Hugh Sullivan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
\

To their credit they warn you so any takers prove the
philosophy of P.
T. Barnum IMO.

You have to look pretty hard to find that warning.

You also have option to opt out - but that is equally
buried.

[Andrew W Applegarth]

[email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) wrote in
news:[email protected]:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 05:11:31 -0000, Andrew W Applegarth
[email protected]> wrote:

Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in news:389n9cF5kmv0bU2
@individual.net:

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 21:53:00 GMT, Jeff <[email protected]> wrote:

"Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On 25 Feb 2005 13:18:42 -0800, [email protected]
[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Gang,
Does anyone else smell a shill?


Small print of their Privacy P{olicy is interesting

" Some of these arrangements include the sharing of some of
your personal information with our partners in order to
extend these services to you. "

In other words "Sign up and we'll sell your address to any spammer
we want to". Good find, Jeff.

When will these people ever learn...



Come on, Dave. You can't judge a company by the terms they make
you
accept. At least, that's the line you've been pushing in another
thread...


- Andrew W Applegarth

...won't be accepting these terms either...

...which makes it appear the you also judge the company by the
terms...

To their credit they warn you so any takers prove the philosophy of P.
T. Barnum IMO.

Hugh

I apologize for dragging this into this newsgroup. The thread I was
referencing was in alt.genealogy where Dave and I (plus others) were
discussing my aversion to the terms of Ancestry's free trial offer.

When I saw Dave talking a stance in line with mine regarding basing a
decision on the outs a company gives themselves in their terms, I was
unable to resist temptation and had to make a comment.

Once again, I apologize. I did not mean to imply any sort of support
for the site in question.

- Andrew W Applegarth

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 14:59:13 GMT, "Jeff" <[email protected]> wrote:

"J. Hugh Sullivan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
\

To their credit they warn you so any takers prove the
philosophy of P.
T. Barnum IMO.


You have to look pretty hard to find that warning.

You also have option to opt out - but that is equally
buried.

When an offer is posted as this was, I probably don't need to read the
small print - I know what it's going to say.

And I'm pretty sure opting out is a lot tougher than opting in!

Hugh

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 15:20:30 -0000, Andrew W Applegarth
<[email protected]> wrote:

[email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) wrote in
news:[email protected]:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 05:11:31 -0000, Andrew W Applegarth
[email protected]> wrote:

Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in news:389n9cF5kmv0bU2
@individual.net:

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 21:53:00 GMT, Jeff <[email protected]> wrote:

"Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On 25 Feb 2005 13:18:42 -0800, [email protected]
[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Gang,
Does anyone else smell a shill?


Small print of their Privacy P{olicy is interesting

" Some of these arrangements include the sharing of some of
your personal information with our partners in order to
extend these services to you. "

In other words "Sign up and we'll sell your address to any spammer
we want to". Good find, Jeff.

When will these people ever learn...



Come on, Dave. You can't judge a company by the terms they make
you
accept. At least, that's the line you've been pushing in another
thread...


- Andrew W Applegarth

...won't be accepting these terms either...

...which makes it appear that you also judge the company by the
terms...

To their credit they warn you so any takers prove the philosophy of P.
T. Barnum IMO.

Hugh

I apologize for dragging this into this newsgroup. The thread I was
referencing was in alt.genealogy where Dave and I (plus others) were
discussing my aversion to the terms of Ancestry's free trial offer.

When I saw Dave talking a stance in line with mine regarding basing a
decision on the outs a company gives themselves in their terms, I was
unable to resist temptation and had to make a comment.

Once again, I apologize. I did not mean to imply any sort of support
for the site in question.

- Andrew W Applegarth

I didn't view your post as needing an apology.

I have subscribed to Ancestry for years because I am willing to pay
for the services they offer vice having to do the footwork for myself.
If I had to do it I couldn't afford me.

I agree that most companies are very mercenary especially considering
they can't vouch for the accuracy of the data they offer. Even the
indexes for the census records (Ancestry and HQ) contain errors which
are only discovered by viewing the actual record.

Hugh

[Dave Hinz]

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 05:11:31 -0000, Andrew W Applegarth <[email protected]> wrote:

Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in news:389n9cF5kmv0bU2
@individual.net:

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 21:53:00 GMT, Jeff <[email protected]> wrote:

"Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On 25 Feb 2005 13:18:42 -0800, [email protected]
[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Gang,
Does anyone else smell a shill?


Small print of their Privacy P{olicy is interesting

" Some of these arrangements include the sharing of some of
your personal information with our partners in order to
extend these services to you. "

In other words "Sign up and we'll sell your address to any spammer
we want to". Good find, Jeff.

When will these people ever learn...

Come on, Dave. You can't judge a company by the terms they make you
accept. At least, that's the line you've been pushing in another thread...

If you don't see the distinction between "spam me alot" and "please
auto-renew my subscription", trying to explain it to you would be a waste
of my time.

[Dave Hinz]

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 15:20:30 -0000, Andrew W Applegarth <[email protected]> wrote:

[email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) wrote in
news:[email protected]:

...which makes it appear the you also judge the company by the
terms...
To their credit they warn you so any takers prove the philosophy of P.
T. Barnum IMO.

When I saw Dave talking a stance in line with mine regarding basing a
decision on the outs a company gives themselves in their terms, I was
unable to resist temptation and had to make a comment.

Might I suggest that you (1) get over it, or (2) take it elsewhere.

[Andrew W Applegarth]

Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 05:11:31 -0000, Andrew W Applegarth
[email protected]> wrote:
Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in news:389n9cF5kmv0bU2
@individual.net:

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 21:53:00 GMT, Jeff <[email protected]> wrote:

"Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On 25 Feb 2005 13:18:42 -0800, [email protected]
[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Gang,
Does anyone else smell a shill?


Small print of their Privacy P{olicy is interesting

" Some of these arrangements include the sharing of some of
your personal information with our partners in order to
extend these services to you. "

In other words "Sign up and we'll sell your address to any spammer
we want to". Good find, Jeff.

When will these people ever learn...

Come on, Dave. You can't judge a company by the terms they make
you
accept. At least, that's the line you've been pushing in another
thread...

If you don't see the distinction between "spam me alot" and "please
auto-renew my subscription", trying to explain it to you would be a
waste of my time.

SPAM is a controllable annoyance of minimal effect. Financial losses
hurt my entire family either directly or through the loss of time when I
have to find a second job.

Maybe it's just me, but I protect my account numbers more than any of
my e-mail addresses.


But, as to the real point here. In the other thread, you belittled me
for taking issue with a site's terms of use. Here, you take issue with a
site's terms of use and belittle me for calling you on it. There's a
word for people like you, and it (at least the polite one) is hypocrite.

- Andrew W Applegarth

[Andrew W Applegarth]

Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 15:20:30 -0000, Andrew W Applegarth
[email protected]> wrote:
[email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) wrote in
news:[email protected]:

...which makes it appear the you also judge the company by the
terms...
To their credit they warn you so any takers prove the philosophy of
P. T. Barnum IMO.

When I saw Dave talking a stance in line with mine regarding
basing a
decision on the outs a company gives themselves in their terms, I was
unable to resist temptation and had to make a comment.

Might I suggest that you (1) get over it, or (2) take it elsewhere.

If you hadn't snipped the rest, you would have seen (1) I regretted it,
and (2) I apologized for it. If you had any reading comprehension, you
would have known that (1) I was over it, and (2) I wasn't taking it
anywhere. However, as usual for you, you ignored the parts that were
contrary to the abuse you wished to hurl.


With that, I'm done with you. I will no longer reply to you, in any
thread or group. It's just not worth the time or aggravation.


- Andrew W Applegarth

[Dave Hinz]

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 04:46:04 -0000, Andrew W Applegarth <[email protected]> wrote:

Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

If you don't see the distinction between "spam me alot" and "please
auto-renew my subscription", trying to explain it to you would be a
waste of my time.

SPAM is a controllable annoyance of minimal effect.

A self-renewing subscription is a non-annoyance of favorable effect.

Financial losses
hurt my entire family either directly or through the loss of time when I
have to find a second job.

Digging through spam effects my entire family either directly or through the
loss of time that I can spend doing other things.

Maybe it's just me, but I protect my account numbers more than any of
my e-mail addresses.

Maybe it's just me, but I choose my battles and base my decisions on
the actual behavior of sites, rather than what another site somewhere
else acts like.

But, as to the real point here. In the other thread, you belittled me
for taking issue with a site's terms of use.

Actually, I invited you to feel free not to subscribe, but questioned
your judgement and logic in arriving at your (unsupportable) decision.

Here, you take issue with a
site's terms of use and belittle me for calling you on it.

No, I'm pointing out that a straightforward auto-renew mechanism is
distincly different from "if you sign up, we'll spam you and sell your name
to any spammer we feel like".

There's a
word for people like you, and it (at least the polite one) is hypocrite.

From you, that's a compliment.

Dave Hinz

[Dave Hinz]

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 04:52:41 -0000, Andrew W Applegarth <[email protected]> wrote:

With that, I'm done with you. I will no longer reply to you, in any
thread or group. It's just not worth the time or aggravation.

Wonderful! That saves me the several seconds of making a killfile
entry.