GRO Records

After a fruitless couple of hours (bogband) I've given up. Mainly searched deaths Mallow in late 1800s but no joy, too many NRs, no images and a few where my refs from Familysearch (I have name, Pg, Vol, year, and DED) were not found. If the GRO puts material in the public domain they should communicate and manage it, not let the taxpayer do it for them by trial-and-error. We're on your side, talk to us.

pinkypinky wrote: »

Where did you hear that? Wonder if that means they'll take them down first.

It makes sense. I tried to post the following earlier in response to Hermy but kept getting frozen out in the captcha loop.
>>

I thought the last line ( of my post (#392) made it clear?

It’s a project management issue. As the data belongs to the GRO, issues are identified as ‘their’ problem even if the development side and launch are outside their direct control. The GRO should have made that clear to the developers at the outset, it’s their image, after all, even though some minister is right now havingspeeches drafted to claim the credit and say what a great job s/he has done.

When a firm has a revised software product under development it would be standard industry practice to run it in beta mode for a while, and include some trusted users as ‘testers’ to help identify any bugs to be ironed out before launch. However, ‘best practice’ is unheard of in our government circles which already has developed a hodgepodge of IT systems almost all of which are unable to talk to each other.