1
Lancashire / Re: Ethel Quin
« on: Wednesday 21 October 20 12:56 BST (UK) »
I've read the thread many times, the comment mentioned was not made in the thread, it came in a message via Ancestry.com.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, we can all read different things into the way people communicate online. I'm not on a witch hunt to destroy anyone's character and this is indeed a wonderful site.
---
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, we can all read different things into the way people communicate online. I'm not on a witch hunt to destroy anyone's character and this is indeed a wonderful site.
---
Jamie
Please will you highlight where in this thread Carole told you that there was 'no birth' for your grandmother? I've read back through, and indeed Carole told you she appreciated your joining and summarised the findings to avoid your having to re-read the whole thread.
I can find nowhere here any lack of manners, indeed you have been welcomed and thanked and you and I had a jovial exchange where you'd not spotted the facility of moving across the photo you'd posted and I told you many people fell into this trap.
And as for your describing respondents here speaking to people 'like ignorant school children', I'm afraid I greatly resent that implication.
This is a wonderful site, and I have received enormous help here, as well as trying as best I can to answer other people's challenges, to sometimes great and often less helpful effect.
I'm happy to leave this enquiry to Derek to try and see if he can get the certificates we need to move forward, from Ethel's daughter. If not, so be it.