[ANSTHRLD] online OP

[tmcd at panix.com]

On Wed, 14 May 2008, Jay Rudin <rudin at ev1.net> wrote:
> Daniel de Lincoln wrote:
>
> > I think that registration information should not be in the Roll of
> > Precedence.  If maintained religiously, it's a duplication of
> > effort with the on-line Armorial; if not, it's out-of-date and
> > unreliable.
>
> I used to agree, until I was told what the entry is actually used
> for.
...
> Similarly, the code of "Yes" doesn't mean "This person has a
> registered name," but rather "You can stop here and not check the
> Armorial, because this is the registered form of the name."  That's
> always up-to-date except for the relatively few people who change
> the registered form of their name.

In December 2007, there were 11 name changes (including
reconsiderations of registrations and corrections)
out of 75 primary name actions total.

November 2007: 6 name changes out of 64.

Daniel de Lyncoln
-- 
Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: tmcd at panix.com