Chat | Daily Search | My GenForum | Community Standards | Terms of Service
Jump to Forum
Home: Surnames: Battles Family Genealogy Forum

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

Re: Another Compounded Battles Mistake
Posted by: Richard Russell (ID *****6774) Date: September 22, 2005 at 12:58:41
In Reply to: Re: Another Compounded Battles Mistake by Grace Thornton of 923

Dear Grace: Hello. How are you? Remember to stay loose, and have fun, while doing your research efforts. Yes, we both agree that we should always admit our mistakes, and correct them when/if possible. I always place that request in all of my books, and "main" communications; for anyone who disagrees to PLEASE notify me, and to PLEASE tell me why/what/etc. I have never seen/read any document, record, court record, book, family Bible flyleaf, LDS record, family story, prestiege County History, etc., etc., that did not have a chance of error, or an error, along with all of the correct info/data. Even the internet messages sometimes contain incorrect info. After receiving a few messages today, I now "see" the "Rest of the story", as per the listing of Rhoda (Winton) Battles as a "Rhoda" (somebody). Anyone can make such a mistake, and it is not your fault that some of the "readers" took it down. If I understand correctly, you were sort of "sore" for the incorrect data that this guy was putting out, so was just making it clear not ot trust him. Thus you were more interested in that and him, than other things. Good for you! Maybe when that other gal gets back on her feet, you can see just where she went wrong on the Hopper/Hooper/Harper stuff; it's not that far from your abode to hers. Apples and Oranges, apples and oranges, Grace; - - - - it is not what Webster say about "spinster", - - - or even the word "spinster", - - - that I was filling you in on. Remember Genealogy #101, it is what certain and various counties/states/provinces/etc., and their courts/governing bodies/local sherriffs/etc., used/required, for bondsmen/relatives/somebody to be legally responsible for gals marrying, and even men in some cases, - - - - -- according to areas/eras/etc, involved, - - - - and according to all of the reasons, and more, that I gave you in last message. I have even found a "couple" of incorrect items in the US Census, and that is no bunk.
You take care, now, and head for the high ground. Regards, Dick

Notify Administrator about this message?
No followups yet

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message
Search this forum:

Search all of GenForum:

Proximity matching
Add this forum to My GenForum Link to GenForum
Add Forum
Home |  Help |  About Us |  Site Index |  Jobs |  PRIVACY |  Affiliate
© 2007 The Generations Network