General Musings and questions

Hola Primos,
I am sharing some observations and opinions, feel free to comment or not.
•The searching is painstakingly tedious.
Q: Do I hear a no scheisse?
•The church records are as frustrating as they are informative. There are notations by the visiting Bishops to the parish of Nuestra Senora de Los Dolores, where they state their disappointment with the sloppy record keeping by the parish priests. The priests failure to follow the standards for record keeping included failure to register events within a set number of days, so I have found incorrect surnames and genders. They also abbreviated entries omitting maiden names and names of paternal and maternal grandparents, essentially ending any further progress along that family line.
Q: Has anybody else encountered the same problem? Did you overcome it?
•Although the church indexed entries by first name in alphabetical order, starting with the first name, the entry number rarely, if ever, corresponds to the photo image number created by FamilySearch.
Q: Does anybody read the indexes to find a relative?
•Photocopied books are listed by groups of years, but it’s all trial and error trying to find a relative that isn’t already in the Fam.Search system.
Q: Anybody have a simple systematic way to find a relative? (Duh!)
•There are multiple copies of the same data, copies either due to the poor state of the originals or bad penmanship, ?Quien sabe?. It is frustrating to search the same data twice.
Q: No question, just whining.
•The older archaic entries are heavily abbreviated and often lack the year, which you will need to locate in the beginning of the year or month.
Q: Is there a list or a tutorial to help read and translate these archaic entries?
•I’ve noticed there was a lot of emphasis on class, individuals were listed as: Espanoles, Indios, or Mestizos. I know there are about 12 different class names, like Lobo. Some women were listed as Donella, but not all.
Q: Does this mean virgin or is it a class distinction?