More surnames

[malphillips1]

Just wondering why you don't have Trevorrow, Baragwanath, Sisley, Care - or indeed Phillips, Toman, Stevens, Thomas, Richards and Veal etc.- in your surnames category?

All those family names (with their variants) are found (in considerable numbers) in the Penwith area - and there are many others which could also claim a place.

Are there technical problems which stop you including them? Is it simply that no one has asked before? Or is there some logical decision based on the percentage of the surnames recorded in the Penwith area during a certain period (e.g. is your current listing the top seven 'popular' surnames in the 1700s)?

Perhaps you are simply being pragmatic (just choosing surnames you know about). Fair enough - that might be a sensible approach.

However, the noticeboard could arguably be relevant to a wider range of people if you were to expand the number of surnames you include in that category (maybe the 20 most common if you need to put some limit in place).

[zibetha]

Hi, Mal, I am starting with a clip from an old post:

"When the forum was initially created back in 2007 it was thought that a fairly small group of people would become involved. The names in that section are those that Kathie selected at the time as the most prominent amongst the those of us who were in contact back then."

I guess we could make the board really big and appoint CT as CEO-- just kidding.

Zib

[trencrom]

Mal, I think you will find that a number of the surnames you mention have in fact been discussed on the board, such as Baragwanath, Phillips and Thomas. But they are discussed within the context of the parishes that they were living in. This makes sense because many of these surnames are quite common in Penwith and a discussion of the Richards family in, say, Zennor is not likely to be relevant to someone searching for Richards in St Levan. There may be exceptions, such as families that were principally located in just one or two parishes. Also it would be determined in part by what families are being discussed in an extensive way on the board by posters. That said, if someone wants to discuss a particular surname then they can create a new thread about that surname in whichever parish board it is that their interest in that family lies.

Trencrom

[malphillips1]

Sorry for the late reply - have been away for a bit.

I was simply wondering why certain surnames are given their own 'boards' while others are not.

Clearly you would end up with a very lengthy front page if you tried to give every surname a 'board' in the surname 'category' (using Proboards terminology) - so you need some sort of policy.

More generally, I suspect there are limits inherent in using the Proboards system.

Trencrom. You are absolutely right that many of the surnames have been covered before. I recently did a search for Trevorrow - and there is indeed a lot of material.

If you strictly follow the logic imposed by the Parish-based system you refer to, the dilemma which anyone might face in future is where should they try to put any new Trevorrow post. I would argue that most surnames and many posts cover several parishes. They should probably post in each Parish which they believe to be relevant if they follow the Parish-based logic.

Equally, if they posted something about (say) the Trevorrows and their connections by marriage, should they repeat the posting for each of those other surnames (if, of course, it happened that they had their own 'board' in the surnames 'category')?

Some postings should arguably go into both the Surname and the Parish categories.

My feeling is that the Surnames and Parish Categories don't work together particularly well - they are pulling in different directions. Arguably they will always be incompatible.

Zibetha has pointed out that the current choice of surnames with their own 'boards' was made about a decade ago - and seemed to be right at that point. But things have changed over the last ten years and so the choices made might be different now.

Incidentally, Zibetha, I would add my support to CT being World President etc - but I doubt he has the time.

In my view, the ideal system would be for every user to be able to create their own 'boards' based on the criteria of one or more searches. For example I could have a Trevorrow board (if I wished to do so) which only showed items found in a saved search (I had previously devised) for the surname Trevorrow. Maybe I could have one for Sisley and Care too. They could all be in my own user 'category'.

They would simply be 'views' on the database table of postings.

OK, reality check. I've been looking through some of the Proboards documentation this morning. I can see the basic options for creating 'boards' are quite limited. Views don't seem to be supported, sadly.

However, I haven't yet worked my way through the manual which explains how you can write new widgets to customise your site. I don't hold out a lot of hope, though.

So it is back to pragmatism! At the end of the day there is probably some sort of pragmatic balance to be struck between Parishes and Surnames (given what the Proboards software can support).

So far as Penwith Genealogy is concerned, I suspect that would involve some sort of updated policy, tweaking the number and selection of names with their own 'boards' in the Surnames 'category'.

Zibetha says that, when the site first started, it was expected to be for a relatively small group. The current selection of surnames suggests it is still the case - and I'm not sure the site benefits from that impression.

But - hey - it is YOUR site.

Mal

[Cornish Terrier]

Mal - this forum was initially created and set up by 'Zenobia' way back in 2007 at which time there were only about 3 of us involved. The focus then was on 'Penwith' Genealogy (hence the name) and as such a board was set up for each of the Penwith Parishes.
The Surname boards were another product of that time with only the few man surnames of interest to the limited members back then being considered. Unfortunately it gradually became apparent that the surnames boards were not a good idea but it was a little late to do too much about it.
You will notice that there was provision made for queries outside the Penwith area but I think it was decided to leave that as a 'condensed' version rather than creating a real monster given there are more than 230 Parish in Cornwall!

Some postings should arguably go into both the Surname and the Parish categories.

This is exactly what happened and it is probably the main reason that many conversations in the forum got so messed up. People ended up posting the same query in sometimes up to about 5 different areas - Welcome New Members, Queries, Surname Interests, the Parish of interest AND the Surname of interest! And as a consequence of that different people were responding to the same query in different sections of the board making it near impossible at times to follow the conversation!

I have many times posted a request for people to think about their query before posting and to then post it in THE appropriate place. In the case of a family across several Parishes then the query should be placed in the Parish board for the place the family is believed to have originated OR where the family is most prolific. (If a Trevorrow family originated in Ludgvan then perhaps the query should go there but if a particular Trevorrow branch was seated at e.g. St Ives then that might be the appropriate place to post)

In many cases I was able to merge scattered posts into the appropriate primary thread but I also have commitments outside Penwith Genealogy - primarily during the Summer as a volunteer firefighter with the CFA here in Victoria.

I should also add that when this forum was set up I was not one of the Administrators. That came later after Zenobia had to move back to her home State in the US and could no longer afford the time to participate. It took some time for me to get back in contact but once that happened I was afford Administrator privileges and then able to 'look after the shop'.

Cosmetically this is perhaps not the best forum in the World and because of the habit of people to post anywhere and everywhere it is not the most functional but confusing or not many people have been helped through brick walls that even paid researchers had not been able to penetrate!

And I will take this opportunity to help all those who have been regular helpers whether or not I have been available at the time. That includes but is certainly not limited to Sue, Londoner, Zibetha, Trencrom, Spikeharwood and Glazin2018.

CT