RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => The Lighter Side => Topic started by: SharonK on Friday 31 July 09 13:12 BST (UK)
-
Hello all :)
I have a tree on GR that I have allow others access to if it turns out we have common ancestors. A while back I had contact with a lady with whom I share ancestors quite a long way back (late 1700s are our common ancestors). I allowed her access to my tree and we swopped a few messages. I used her tree to check what information I had to see if we agreed etc and tweaked a few things because she obviously knew her 'branch' better than I did. I didn't copy any people to my tree further than those directly related to mine and her common ancestors, ie just the next generation down. I don't consider those beyond that to be direct enough relatives especially given the distance back on the tree.
Recently I was searching on ancestry for a totally unconnected surname on my tree from a different branch and was delighted to see that someone had an ancestor of mine so I eagerly clicked on it to see what they knew. I was excited to see it as it was quite a 'close' relative of mine, a great grandparent I think, and I thought I might find a close cousin. I was staggered to see lots and lots of detail both 'down' the tree to my living relatives (uncles) and back as far as I knew for that surname (around 1800). It turns out that this was the SAME person who had seen my tree on GR in connection with another surname! She had copied all the way down from our common ancestors to my father's generation and then back 'up' my paternal grandmothers line back to 1800!!
Firstly I don't 'get' this as they are not her relatives at all and I am rather annoyed that she has copied all this very detailed information to a public site that I have as private on a different website. Whilst I totally understand all these genealogy websites are about sharing and swopping information (and I do - lots!) and we all wouldn't get half as far if we didn't, this was done without asking and without her having any connection to these relatives at all!? If anyone was to contact her about them (like I tried to!) then she wouldn't be able to offer them any help because she doesn't 'know' them IYSWIM. I think she must do this a lot and is a 'name collector' because her tree has nearly 6000 names on it.
I wouldn't have minded at all about her copying down to my grandparents (both decd) on that line but it seems madness to copy my whole tree?!
Does this happen to others and if so how do you feel about it ? Am I wrong to feel a bit cross?
thanks
Sharon
-
Hi
This happened to me a while ago now. Imagine my surprise when my 'hot matches' showed ME! and a number of other living relatives. I contacted the person but received no reply so I contacted Genes Reunited and they acted very quickly and all the living relatives were removed.
Soo
-
Mmm I think someone else added me and other living relatives to GR so if they will remove I might ask them to. Thanks for that info, its good to know.
The lady who is on GR and Ancestry I have contacted and asked her to remove but I don't think she will. Thankfully there aren't many actual living relatives on there but I'm still annoyed that all my research has been copied and quite unnecessarily really!
Sharon
-
Hi Sharon,
Yes it happens to people all the time including me. They have even taken my photo`s and put them on their tree. :o
I contacted a person about my Isaac line as he seemed to have the same ancestors from the 1500`s up till the early 1800`s. I thought great he must be a long lost very distant cousin and would be able to give me a bit of information on my Isaac ancestors. I gave him my line from the 1500`s which he did have and then gave him more details up till late 1880`s which he didn`t have. He let me access his tree. It had 23,000 people in it :o It would not download properly and kept freezing at a certain point .I couldn`t view his tree. ::)I reckon it was too overloaded with dead rellies most of which I reckon were not even one bit related to him. I went back later onto GR and found that his name was now connected to my ancestors that I had given him in a PM on GR.
I had given him a few more names to add to his collection of names :o ;D
Johngirl
-
Hi
I was very, very angry when it happened to me but all my husband said was"if you put it into the public domain, what do you expect". After nearly commiting murder and being in a mood for a few hours, I sat down and rationally thought about what I really want from it being out there.
I now have my tree on Ancestry, Genes and Tribal Pages, but with only their names along with the dates and place of their bmds. No photo's, sources or notes are attached. I work on a private database where I include everything and then just export a gedcom over to them every so often, which only takes about 5 minutes in total. Luckily TMG allows you to choose what you include on the gedcom.
If genuine people contact me [and a lot have] through these then I am more than happy to share the information they need or want, but I choose who, what and how much I give.
It seems to be, as in a lot of things, the minority spoil it for the majority.
Regards
Half Pint
-
Hi Johngirl
I had one person who opened her tree to me. She was 17 years old and had over 80,000 names on her tree. Now I have spent a lot of time working on my tree over the last 10 years and have just under 4,000 names so she must have either inherited the work or is just a number collector!!!!!!!!!!
I didn't open up mine.
Regards
Half Pint
-
Yes, Sharon, know how you feel. I actually had an person (not known to me) send me an attachment on my direct relatives including their individuals life stories. It was fantastic information, as it should have been - it was my own attachment I had sent another researcher several months previously. What irked me was, there was no reference to me having originated this attachment, nor had anyone the decency to amend my original spelling/typing mistakes.
I know the information is open to the public i.e.BDM's, but not in story form, the way I wrote it. At least if I am given some information I retain the facts but change the way it is presented.
I only deal with direct blood ancestors, their siblings, and siblings' immdiate families - that's enough for me.
Les
-
I think in these days of easily available information on the net, whether its emails or web-sites, Facebook, blogs ... we need to remember when we press the 'enter' key ... its anyone's information !
-
I know this might be shutting the stable door so to speak but I have all living rellies as living, its a tick box on GR. that way should I share info they can only see people who are deceased.
As has been said on similar posts if someone needs some info I ask them for which branch and send me an email and I send them a report in pdf form and they then get what they want and I safeguard my info
Barry
-
Slightly off topic but what do you think of the message below that I received yesterday. Does he think I'm a miracle worker? No dates, no places!
Any thoughts, sorry I missed staines.
hi i may be a missing link contact me , my grandfarther was reginald green , his farther was ernest james green , his farther was a james green , i think i had been going down the wrong road and found details of james green in staines who's farther was a john green and susan green .
-
Don't answer; you'll be led farther afield.
-
I have my tree in the public domain. In fact I had done it before joining this site and coming across the `problem` of name stealing. It made me consider how I would feel if it ever happened to me and I decided it was a risk I would take.
And to quote what I said in a post on a similar topic: http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,389432.msg2613057.html#msg2613057
I have my tree on the web and am happy for any one to view it. If someone finds they are related and wish to copy my tree - fine, after all I got 99% of the information for free! If they then copy people and get it wrong that's their problem. Would I be upset? possibly - most likely probably - but having chosen to make my tree available to the public that is something I will have to face.
-
I have a public tree on Ancestry and I don’t mind if people acquire my information per-say, but what irks me is when the information they do obtain from it is then transcribed incorrectly – including surnames.
My other observation is there are two trees on Ancestry that have taken my information, but for the life of me I cannot begin to find the link as to why they are on there. Quite frankly I don’t have the time to wade through the 34,000+ names(!) that they have on their trees! I could contact them, though I doubt they’d know the connection either! I don’t get it! (I know the family history equivalent of gathering the names for the cast of Ghandi has been a frequently raised topic on RC in the past.)
Call me sentimental fool, but I like to ‘get to know’ the people I put on my tree, be it the one in the public domain or the one on my hard drive.
It seems to me that even if you put a welcoming message on your profile inviting people to get in touch it seems people are too shy to communicate with you remotely – but aren’t that shy about lifting your information.
As you say Wildtech (I've just seen your input as was I getting ready to post this), it’s their problem, but where they get their enjoyment or ‘job satisfaction’ from mystifies me!
I feel better now getting that lot off my chest – it’s been one of those days!
Pip
-
Don't answer; you'll be led farther afield.
<snort>
-
Slightly off topic but what do you think of the message below that I received yesterday. Does he think I'm a miracle worker? No dates, no places!
Any thoughts, sorry I missed staines.
hi i may be a missing link contact me , my grandfarther was reginald green , his farther was ernest james green , his farther was a james green , i think i had been going down the wrong road and found details of james green in staines who's farther was a john green and susan green .
Don't answer; you'll be led farther afield.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
I'd ignore anyone who can't use capital letters or spell 'father' !!
-
I could contact them, though I doubt they’d know the connection either!
Pip
I had this happen a few years ago, was searching for information online on my DORANS (DORRANS) and came across them in a tree on Rootsweb.
The owner kept insisting she didn't have any DORANS in her tree.
When I was finally able to convince her that she did, she came back with no idea why they are in her tree and no idea who they are
I would rather my public tree wasn't copied. I do accept it has in part and will most likely be again.
Mick
-
I don't have a tree on Ancestry - just use the site for the databases - though they do keep sending me emails encouraging me to 'get started'. They're about 10 years too late for that!
I have an outline tree only on GR - names, years and counties for events - enough to determine a connection but not enough to pilfer. Oddly enough the contacts I have had the most success with I've never needed to exchange trees at all. It becomes obvious from messages that both parties know who they are talking about and missing info can be exchanged without the tree being seen.
Christine
-
Quite agree Lydart! He/she received a sharp reply from me,
Abiam
-
After reading this and other discussions on RootsChat, I have decided that the tree I have on Ancestry will only contain birth, marriage, death and census information that is already in the public domain, plus the sources.
It is very easy to build the tree this way and I can then download it as a gedcom file to import into the software on my pc, where I keep all the anecdotal details.
If anyone wants to 'steal' the information on Ancestry, rather than doing the work themselves, I'm really not bothered!
By doing this I have already made contact with a (previously unknown) first cousin once removed, who kindly sent me some photo scans.
As has already been mentioned on RootsChat, I would never accept anything from someone else's tree without checking it out myself!
But we should all take Lydart's comment
we need to remember when we press the 'enter' key ... its anyone's information !
to heart.
If we don't want other people to have the information, don't put it on the web :D :D
Linda
-
I have my tree on Ancestry but its private and people wishing to view it have to contact me and so far have had no problem with it.
On another note, I can't understand why some people just want as many names as possible in their tree
Fiona
-
I've got two trees (both private !)
One is the real one ... with everything proven with documentation ..
... the other (and thank goodness its private !) is my hyperthetical tree which extends the real one with all sorts of possibles ... which I cant prove but might, just might, be true and proveable one day ! That one includes Catherine Howard (she of the lost head), various French/Norse noblemen back to the 6th century ( ! ), and even William the Conqueror ... and no, I'm not sharing it with anyone ! We all need a bit of fantasy, as long as we remember it is fantasy ! Which, sadly, is what a lot of people with 50,000 names on their trees have ... just fantasy !!
(Just occasional, very rarely, a little bit of the hyperthetical one gets moved to the real one )
-
Beware of ignoring people! A couple of years ago we had a bit of a run of bad luck, owing to illness and a family bereavement. We also had some problems with our home computer at the time and couldn't get it fixed straight away, what with everything else going on, so I was unable to get online for a few weeks. When I eventually was able to check through all my emails, I found several from a particular older "gentleman" who had tried to contact me about a name I had on my GR tree. The emails had started off pleasantly enough but, as he had not received his anticipated reply, each subsequent email became increasingly irate. The final one I read informed me that I was an extremely rude and horrible individual (or something to that effect)! :o
I really didn't know what to do - I was so shocked, and not really in the mood for any confrontation at the time. I figured that after his final outburst he would just leave me alone, so I did nothing. A couple of weeks later I went to check my emails one day and discovered that this man had started a new tactic of flaming my inbox with messages! This continued for a few days wth up to 70 emails a day from him, until I snapped and completely removed my tree and account with GR. I've not dared to use the site again!
I suppose I really should have reported him. I did however speak to a cousin and fellow genealogist about it. She had also been in contact with this man and thought he seemed very pleasant and helpful (!), but my opinion is that this man is clearly a complete fruitloop! ::)
-
I'm fairly recent to all this and apologise if I sometimes miss normal conventions - and don't get answers as a result! I started with 2 inherited paper trees from my father's and my wife's father's families which made for a good start. I keep my tree on GR and have contacted a number of others either by following up Hot Matches, picking up on individual Tree Links, or by replying to messages. I have assumed everyone was basically on the same mission as me (even the 2 contacts with over 30,000 names in their tree) and have opened my tree where the match was obvious. On one of the "big" trees, I couldn't find how the relatives linked in as there seemed to be no join at top or bottom, but it wasn't an issue. I have made a couple of good contacts where we have been able to collaborate to make new progress and my tree now exceeds 500 names.
When I started I found FindMyPast and after a spell of payg eventually opted for a subscription. I realise that more info is available on Ancestry, but I'm certainly not paying for 2 lots, and as one of my contacts has an Ancestry sub, we can work together.
My gripe is that I got a message from someone who appears on my Hot Matches with several names in common who claimed to have a picture of my wife's GG (or GGG depending which line you follow) grandparents and asked for an e-mail to provide further details and access. It seemed genuine and she claimed the relatives as her GGG grandparents so I replied with a chatty e-mail describing progress and the interesting research we were currently undertaking. The reply I got I would almost describe as Ancestry spam, seemingly designed to encourage me to take up the free trial or subscribe. There was no personalisation and it really p...ed me off, especially as she didn't even open her GR tree to me. Do others have experience of this? Is it an Ancestry tactic, or am I reading more into an unfortunately worded e-mail than was intended?
-
I was recently contacted by a distant relative through GR. Having proved we were related we accessed each other's trees. This was the first time he had put anything online and he had uploaded his own file. I noticed that there was a great deal of personal information including his life history and current address. Also the details of his daughter and young grandchildren were entered. I emailed him and advised him to remove this information. I also became concerned that he might accidentally pass on my information and so I decided to remove my tree from GR. I have not reinstated my tree. The chap decided to remove everything from GR and cancelled his subscription. Unfortunately he had allowed a man to access his tree and that man copied all the personal information into his own tree. I have emailed the second man asking him to remove the information but he has not replied. They had not exchanged personal emails and so my relative cannot contact him. I presume the only thing he can do is contact the site.
I cannot understand how people can enter another's personal details without asking. It would never occur to me.
-
Like most people on here I keep a tree on Genes and Ancestry, but I do not keep any detail on them, just names, year and place of birth. I have had made friends, some on the otehr side of the world, and obtained some useful information from contacts on both sites, with joint efforts in some areas helping clear up the grey areas BUT all the detail is kept on my own software on my home PC. I did initially start to keep some detail (nothing too personal, DOBs for deceased ancestors) but having had some issues with people taking details from my tree without asking (including details of living relatives) I decided the safest thing was to hide living relatives on both sites and only put the bare minimum of information for everyone else. One person who had about 300 names in their tree did actually ask if they could copy all the details of all my living relatives onto their tree even though their link was via a marriage 3 generations back, so not very close at all. I asked them not to copy details of living relatives and they weren't too happy and sent me a very sharp email saying that in that case I should remove any reference to their ancestor from my tree ( a member of my direct paternal line married their ancestor) - it was at that point I made the decision to change to change the way i post my info on the net. That person now has over two thousand names in their tree!
Anyway, at least now, through email contact I can determine how genuine someone is, and how close their link is, and ultimately how much or little information I share.
I like everyone else am amazed at people who name collect - I don't understand what it achieves. My aim is to learn about my ancestors lives, their history, which is why i only have some 700 names in my tree at the moment. I could have thousands if I simply wanted to list every single person who could possibly be related, but what is the point because then that's all they'd be - just names.
-
I had the same problem from GR to Anc & I was livid & couldn't
send a message to the person concerned, obviousley on GR, but I got a certain amount of satisfaction when I found out that I had followed completely the wrong line in my Carter famil- generations in fact (pain in the bot for me!) but it has upset her tree as well !! ;D
-
I'm quite lucky in the fact that I found this site before I had given anyone access to my rather meagre tree (been at this for 3 months and only have 180 genuine names so far) but I would have shared these without hesitation believing everyone to be as honest as I would be with their tree.
I've had really nice, genuine people and we have shared knowledge each way, but then again I have had the "can I have access to your tree" messages without anything to verify that we actually share common ancestors. The last message I got was actually the wrong person totally and when I replied to tell them, I got a message back saying "but can I still have access to your tree?"
The mind boggles :o
-
The reply I got I would almost describe as Ancestry spam,
You've made me think. When I found my tree (complete with a branch I'd added by mistake) on a public site I knew it was the result of opening it to a GR contact, and was angry because she'd copied all the research I'd done on inlaws and children's partners, which couldn't possibly be of interest to her. It had never occurred to me that this could be a marketing tactic by one of the genealogy sites.
Well, we live and learn!
-
I help out a bit on GR - as and when I have time - and I never cease to be amazed at the number of new folk who want to share trees! For some reason, because I have replied, they seem to think we are related ::)
However, on the original note, when I have opened my tree for someone who has mutual relatives on it, I really don't mind what they copy because if I can find those details, so can anyone if they have a mind to. There's nothing ultra personal on it. The fact that granddad Daniel was a naughty old so and so is best left for my FTM 8)
Mind you, by copying what's on a tree I do feel they miss out on the fun of searching for oneself ;)
As for large tree numbers - well, some folk are just plain greedy ;D
-
because if I can find those details, so can anyone if they have a mind to.
Well, you could argue that 'finding those details' has cost me many hundreds of pounds over the years (I'm discounting the time taken as that was enjoyment) - in certificates and other documents, in travel and in employing researchers. I'm VERY happy to share all of this with others researching the same family, but I do feel resentful that someone took all my research, published it online, and in return provided absolutely no evidence that they had even the remotest connection to my family.
-
Point taken :'(
I have been very lucky on two main branches of my tree because I was forwarded very helpful info. I have bought some certs but cannot afford as many as I would like. Much has been gained from online sites, the kindness of others and hard graft. I know someone has my family on Ancestry but haven't a clue where else it is online. :)
-
Yawn. Same old, same old. Over and over again people put their genealogical data out in public and then complain that it has been taken and used in some way they don't like. To console themselves, they then dismiss the thieves as mere "name collectors" who have missed out on the real rewards of research.
This comes so often that RC should have a board specifically dedicated to the topic.
-
Sorry to rattle your cage Erato...I don't get on here as much as I used to so haven't seen any previous discussions. The point I made was that my info WAS private( not as you said
people put their genealogical data out in public
)and I shared it in good faith only to find it replicated elsewhere on a public tree without any sort of permission or discussion with me. I understand that info is taken from public trees but those people have CHOSEN to make their tree public. I often give tree access to found 'relatives' but the overwhelming majority are very appreciative and ask before they extract info and don't just copy everything and never ever make contact again, which is what this lady has done. And I am not "consoling myself" - I genuinely don't understand the need to put a TOTALLY irrelevant branch onto their tree just for the sake of it. She is related to me via my paternal grandfather and she has put my whole paternal grandmothers line on too!
-
I have to agree with Erato on this :)
Private or public, once your information is passed on, there is little that you can do about other people putting it up on the web. We can ask for it to be kept private but that's all we can do.
We can only hope that people to whom we do give information privately behave ethically by not putting names of living people on their trees but, if you pass on the information, then it's already in the semi-public arena.
All you can do is ask for information about living relatives to be removed. If they don't, you don't pass on this information again and learn that this is the wicked world :-\
Gadget
-
Yes well I am learning that there are some less genuine people out there so I will have to be more careful in future but isn't that a shame that it makes you more wary and less able to trust people. Same as a lot of things...the minority spoil it for the majority.
-
It happened to me about 7 years ago. I was horrified but then sent a firm e-mail to the cousin in-law and asked for the details of living members and my parents be removed.
Luckily, my e-mail was firm enough to get the response that I wished for.
I've never passed on such information since.
added - the only person that I share a tree with is my sister. After that, my tree is shared with more and more cousins. It's nice to think that it's my tree, as I've done a lot of work and spent a lot of money working it out, but it's not. It belongs to all the descendants of my ancestors.
Gadget
-
about a year ago someone contacted me via Ancestery and then i saw he had my grandparents
and my Dad and siblings and his link was that he had added a sister to my father ::)
i told him and he said thanks etc, a year later he still has this "sister"
i had abviously looked at the person he had added in case it was a secret sister lol,
then found the person he claimed, was born and died the same year, he had her born married and dying,
so all i have done now is added comments to his public tree, so anyone looking will see the info' is wrong,
i havn't been nasty about it, although miffed he would think he knows better than my family,
so would be a good idea if you do find info and can't get any joy from the tree holder, add some comment ie
JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THIS PERSON IS NOT BLAH BLAH
HAVE TRIED TO CONTACT YOU, BUT IN CASE YOU HAVE NOT SEEN, AND YOU AND ANYONE ELSE
MAYBE FOLLOWS THIS WRONG INFORMATION ETC ETC
and if needs be attach it to all you think is wrong
the annoying thing is he must have gotten that information from someone who has the links
and then for some reason added "his" person >:(
-
I think les_looking's response is probably the way forward. At least then you disassociate yoursef from the 'duff' infomation and give anyone looking at the offending tree the chance to make their own decisions
We have to accept that some people just don't care enough to check their information - but we can try to discourage them from spreading the problem :D
Linda
-
I'm not too fussed if somene steals 'my' tree and adds the people on it to their own. My ancestry.co.uk tree only contains basic information anyway. Sure, if someone was to write a book and/or financially profit from 'my' information that I have amassed then I would be a bit peeved, but, if it's just copying names then I've got bigger things to worry about.
The thing I value about my tree is what it's contents it means to ME[/b]. 1,000 people could copy it, bits of it or all of it, but that wouldn't affect it's intrinsic value to me, which goes beyond the time invested in it or the cost of an ancestry subscription.
-
Sometime ago a cousin did a lot of research on a branch of our family and put on a tree on ancestry, but she made the mistake of not getting a birth certificate for our gtgrandmother and assuming that the only marriage that shows up on bmd search was the right one, although 8 years after the childrens birth.When I found a document with the real mothers name, all the research/names were removed from the ancestry tree. Now I keep finding these names being linked on other trees with the present , correct people, but they just add it, they dont check it. it is growing out of control, and will present a problem to anyone who connects to it. My problem is the hints I get. I am happy for others to use my information, I just wish they would get it right.
-
Yawn. Same old, same old. Over and over again people put their genealogical data out in public and then complain that it has been taken and used in some way they don't like. To console themselves, they then dismiss the thieves as mere "name collectors" who have missed out on the real rewards of research.
This comes so often that RC should have a board specifically dedicated to the topic.
Yes, I couldn't agree more !
Maybe we could have a "sticky" containing some pertinent information ?
Like....
- You don't own your ancestors
- Don't put online what you don't want to share
- People research family trees for all sorts of reasons, and in all sorts of ways
- You only see stuff on Ancestry and GR because other people gave up their time (often for no reward) so you could view it online
I do get really fed up with this sort of selfish stuff month after month. I'm happy to share what I know with anyone who wants to know, and I don't really care what they do with it. However, if we all took a selfish attitude, and didn't share what we know with others, then sites like Ancestry, FindMyPast, and GR would not exist, and this forum would have to close.
I'm not worried about people who have 80,000 names in their tree. I'm more worried about people who want to get stuff from everyone else, but who don't want to share it with others.
-
I was miffed when someone copied and pasted my tree which I had opened to them, not because of the work I'd put in, but because they never even bothered to mail back once they'd seen it, to say thankyou or to offer any more info to me.
Had they done so, I'd have been happy to share lots more about our mutual ancestors - photos etc - after all those ancestors don't belong only to me! And I like helping people with their research just as I have benefitted from other people's generosity in helping me.
It's not about ownership, rivalry or even about including living relatives since I've hidden those. It's about plain bad manners, and sometimes it's about people being so idle they can't be bothered to check anything for themselves. And I don't appreciate bad manners.
-
As a few have said if you have a tree the minute you give some one else access to it,
whether you have it private or not then its open to whoever, as the person you gave access you may think is like minded, then they may give their treee access to joe bloggs then etc etc,
so not a lot of point in getting stressed over it, it is annoying when wrong info then finds its way onto it, but its a bit like thousands watching a football match you know that they will all have a different view, and then read different papers and you wonder if it was the same game you watched, the most important memory/view is the one you have,
Family history is the same, you add your information add your notes mostly for your own benefit, and then sooner or later someone else will have their own interpretation and hence posts on here start to appear.
Some people do get fixated with numbers others have and think they can't be right, for example One of my Grandmothers was one of 20, and then if you follow her siblings etc believe me that soon mounts up,
not that i have thousands, but that line alone could add about 100+ people, others just add parents grandparents and leave it there, but if you look at a tree and think because someone has say 6 thousand names it can't be right you maybe missing out on loads of helpful info'
MY opinion is someone who has a couple of thousand, maybe like myself has gone via the cousins and grandparents siblings and found brilliant information that otherwise would be lost forever, yes if you find wrong info' try and let them know it's wrong, if not move on and don't let it colour your view of the vast majority who do it for the right reasons ;)
-
Perhaps some should consider that the end of the family history community will not come with a lack of sharing or "selfishness" when it comes to information, but rather a certain rudeness when replying to peoples' posts on forums. Of course there has been similar threads on the subject but with a forum so large and diverse as this one, do we really expect everyone to have seen them before posting their own experience or query? I'd suggest that if we "yawned" at every post we didn't agree with or had seen before, new members to the hobby would abandon it and move onto something else.
hume :)
-
Since there is a post along the same lines just about every month, I don't see how anyone could miss them.
-
I too have experienced this, via Genes Reunited after replying to a contact without realising that permission to view your tree is automatically selected, and that you have to deselect it yourself.
I thinnk this is wrong, and that you should have the option to enable them to view...it should not be automatic.
The person who pilfered my tree is nothing more than a name-collector, with in excess of 24,000 ‘ancestors’ in his tree. He contacted me initially over two years ago when I was just putting together my first attempt at the family tree, and before I knew it, thanks to the inadvertant access he'd been given, he’d incorporated all of my information into his tree, even the likes of my grandfather’s parents….who are of no biological link to him at all, as his 'link' is on my grandmother's line.
His ‘link’ to our line is at best remote, with the link being something like ‘his aunty was the three times removed cousin of my Great, great, great grandmother'.
Ridiculous.
Furthermore, recent discoveries I’ve made would even seem to cast doubt on this link, as I have discovered that there were two people of the same namem from the same area, born within 5 years of each other, both with similarly named siblings and both with fathers of the same name and trade. My ancestor's death record indicates she’s the older of the two, but her age on all other records ties in with the younger one.
As such, there really is no way of determining which of the two families our lot descend from and their supposed link predates this. So, as far as I am concerned, my direct line ends there, until such time, if ever, that we are able to verify which person is ours.
Another name-collector now seems to have inherited this information too, with another who's link is also very remote. This person seems to just link any information sharing a same name together. For instance, he seems to think that one of my grandmother’s aunties died in America! I know she didn’t, as I’ve found her grave…
If that's their bag, fair enough...I've done some serious research on certain lines, and it would seem more so than most others who are researching them, which gives me a buzz in turn!
As such, the internet is now full of very basic, of out-of-date and mutated information that came from my tree in the first place, and is of no use to anyone really!
I am now more careful about who I pass my information on to, but am happy to do so where a valid, no-so distant link is clear.
Paul
-
well, well, well............
I've just seen the daftest tree on Ancestry concerning one of my ancestors so far:
A person born in Bulloch, Georgia in 1830 has for his father my 3 x great grandfather who was born and died in Denbighshire, Wales.
This ancestor of mine seems to have been a trigamist (wives in Denbighshire, Somerset and Georgia) who regularly crossed the Atlantic and travelled around the UK to visit his wives, who subsequently had his children. He also appears to be in 1841 and 1851 censuses in Wales. I've not checked for him in the USA or Somerset!
His eldest daughter was somehow born in Burgundy, France while I have her birth/baptism in Denbighshire!
I've e-mailed the owner of said tree, pointing out that her info might be slightly wrong ;D ;D ;D
Gadget
-
dont hold your breath, I emailed someone who then asked what I meant, after I provided the information they just ignored it. john.
-
Sharon
I thought it was only me that felt like that. I contactedthe GR site - no luck there, did not renew membership! The gentleman who took ALL my tree only connected loosely throught maternal side 4 generations back. I was told we are all related!!!
I was invited by another person to see their tree on Ancestry.com and guess what.....he was there too!
Alba
-
I guess I must be a bit odd, because I really don't mind what anyone does with my tree. Apart from close living relatives and my grandparents, I don't feel any "ownership" of the people in my tree, and if I can find the info then others can as well.
It matters not one jot to me whether I've spent months of time and lots of money trying to find some long missing ancestor, and then another researcher comes along and copies my work. I get enjoyment out of solving the puzzle, not out of keeping the result secret.
To my mind, they are losing out, not me. The fun is in the search. Its a bit like picking up a paper on the bus or tube and then copying the answers to the crossword! They may get it finished, but where's the excitement?
If someone wants to collect names, then I'm totally fine with them wholesale copying large chunks of my tree. In no way does it diminish the research I've carried out, and if they feel the need to change facts and dates and names and places, then so be it. Their loss.
I guess I could even be accused of name collecting myself. I have over 3000 names in my tree, but as my ancestors mostly had rather unique surnames in the localities they lived it's been rather easy to do. I've spread out in all directions and followed siblings forward several generations and they all add up. (Just a quick question. What is the maximum allowable size of a tree before one gets called a name collector?)
I've been in contact with lots of people wanting info on ancestors, and never heard from them again. I don't feel slighted or hurt, just mildly intrigued as to their reason for doing this hobby.
In fact, the way I look at it is the more places my tree turns up the better. If I got hit by a bus and then coincidentally my house went up in flames tomorrow, large parts of the tree would still survive for anyone in the future to use as a basis for proper research, if they felt the need. So my hard work (okay, so I've been known to cut an odd corner here and there!) would carry on.
Just my two-penneth worth.
I'll be off now...
Glen
-
I'm all for ACCURATE trees being shared (though conversely, I haven't shared mine except with family) ... but whats the point of wholesale copying other peoples 'work' which they in turn may have copied from someone else, and without checking anything ??
-
I'm all for ACCURATE trees being shared (though conversely, I haven't shared mine except with family) ... but whats the point of wholesale copying other peoples 'work' which they in turn may have copied from someone else, and without checking anything ??
Goodness knows, Lydart!
I only know that I had the best laugh for a while reading about my very solid Methodist ancestor being a trigamist with 20 + children all born in different countries within months of each other. The poor bloke was a coal miner and was probably working too many hours a day to travel very far and couldn't have possibly afforded the fares from North Wales to Somerset to France to other places in the UK to the USA and back ::)
What amazed me was how could the person (it said educated to graduate level) could have really believed any of it ;D ;D ;D
Gadget :)
PS - She's on Facebook as well :)
-
Ugh ! Face Book ... that says it all, really !
-
I was checking out my connections via my Ancestry family tree and there is one person who has copied my tree for somewhere so no matter what name appears on my tree it appears on his. I don't even know who our common ancestors are now, but I do know that 95% the people he has copied from me are not related to him via ny obvious way. I really don't know why people do this as I only want relatives in my tree and not lists of names that I am not connected to.
-
but as my ancestors mostly had rather unique surnames in the localities they lived it's been rather easy to do. I've spread out in all directions and followed siblings forward several generations and they all add up.
I've done this as well. I'm also 'collecting' other families with the same name in the same area, but until I can show a link, I keep them on a separate tree.
It doesn't matter whether they are close family or not. I just find it interesting to follow the families through the generations.
The other thing I enjoy is finding an 'unusual' occupation. In a long line of Ag Labs and miners it makes a nice change to find a 'house painter' and a 12 year old 'Boots' in a pub :D :D
Linda
-
I use the Heritage programme but don't publish. However, the other day my tree escaped and got uploaded so I thought I might as well see if I had any matches.... and found a duplicate tree which I recognised belonged to an am. researcher who must have shared before his death a few years ago. The new 'owner' had obviously added more information which was totally incorrect; such as migrating my mother to a grave in a foreign land :o
-
As far as I can see, you put your tree online and have to put up with namegrabbers and idiots hijacking bits of it, or you choose (as I do) NOT to have your tree online.
I did have a tree on Ancestry years ago, and I can still find those people added to trees with which they have no connection. Some are trees of >5000, and there are no links between my known ancestors and anyone in their tree.
Personally, my best info has been from message boards and this site. I am part of an ONS for a rare name, and ALL of the info for this name on Ancestry trees is WRONG. I contacted a couple of people with suggestions for correct info, as well as sources for my data, but only one person replied (to say "you are probably correct"), but no tree has been altered as a result.
Anything you put on the Internet is in effect public property, whatever you may prefer to think. It is cached and repeated and linked to, and once the genie is de-bottled, there is nought you can do.
-
just spotted this;- http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,398080.0.html
-
I think that it is a general point, post personal info on the web and it is public, simple as.
I think that there is a danger, a real danger, that people could use living people info in ways you wouldn't think. It's a case of fool me once.... Learn from the mistake I guess is all I can say.
I also think there is an awful lot of rubbish trees, click and add, I admit it I've done it, but public info is exactly that. Why shouldn't I do it? If I want a flight or a holiday, I search and click, I know I miss the joy of going to a travel agents - like I do!
Rubbish trees - garbage info - I think Ancestry is full of it, flooded with it infact. I don't really see anything wrong with that. What's the point of a family tree? I really think we delude ourselves if we believe they are absolutely accurate.
Here's one reason why... I was looking for an ancestor called John Richmond, born in Radcliffe, in 1825 - that's what the census said. I found him (1) In other people's trees, (2) In ancestrys hints. I added him and his mum. Trouble was, when I went to check the baptism registers in the archives there was no record of a John Richmond born in 1825, there was one in 1823, and another a bit too late - what do you do? (I did sort it out by following brothers and sisters). But most people would click and add. Most people would not live close enough to go and view the records. That's just one example of a mistake.
So what is the probability in going back one generation that you make an error? 1 in 10? 1 in 20? I think somewhere near that. So the cumulative effect must mean that distant relatives may well be errors, propogated from earlier ones... we only know it when we stumble across them.
Getting back on the point... What is the point of having a tree? I think that there are probably many reasons. I think that the boom now is obviously due to the ease of tracing ancestors on the Interenet. I think I like telling stories of ancestors who are a bit special, yes I go up a tree and down a tree, but so what? If it makes me feel better, my relatives more proud / intreesting... so what? If someone stole my research, again it's public info anyway, I hope it makes them happy. If someone wrote a book based on my tree I'd be very surprised, I can't see whay anyone would be that interested -- and yes I have several Kings and Queens, Criminals, Sportsman, Politicians and Original Thinkers and so on.... OK it's a bit tenuous (I think they are right though) but hey, isn't this supposed to be fun?
Errrr thems my thoughts.
-
if you dont want to share information thats up to you but then its not advisable to put it on the internet where it can be accessed, maybe get yourself a book write it down and put in your library where it becomes covered in dust and can be passed down to generations some of whom probably arent interested in the family tree.
i think GR works both ways you want to share info. and other people would like to share info with you, give and take
frustrating might be the right word, if someone copies your work but atthe end ofthe day if you are connected through whatever remote link, youa re still connected and they could have found (the majority of) this information any way.
or would you call it copyright theft (a very grey area) in which a case maybe you should get a solicitor to take a look.
-
frustrating might be the right word, if someone copies your work but atthe end ofthe day if you are connected through whatever remote link, youa re still connected and they could have found (the majority of) this information any way.
or would you call it copyright theft (a very grey area) in which a case maybe you should get a solicitor to take a look.
The only thing that could be copyright on your family tree would be stories or notes that you have composed yourself, and not copied from a book or someone else's notes. Old photographs over 50 years old are not copyright, and even photos less than this age might not be your copyright, if you didn't take them. As for the tree itself - well, all you have really done is to write out a bunch of names from the public domain, which you can't copyright, because they're already in the public domain.
-
Whether you like it or not, there are many people who use their online trees as a kind of dumping ground for anything that might turn out to be useful, whether or not they have yet verified it all. That's their privilege, no one is forced to look at their tree.
And it's probably worth bearing in mind that it's easy for mistakes to creep in as more bells and whistles get added to the online apparatus. I'm talking about the "hints", and the annoying way suggestions are filled in for you before you've even finished typing. (Searching on GR is a real pain now - I often find that though I've typed in the spelling I want, it has been changed to an alternative in the nanosecond it takes before I click 'search' - so I have to start again). I am sure most of the "buried in the wrong country" examples are a result of this sort of thing. There are many pitfalls, especially for people who are not very experienced in using computers.
I do wish people wouldn't be so judgmental.
-
Well, they had better check out my material first as I'm forever finding new directions.
PS
YoungTug.... Baston Cox Berkshire.... 8) ... what should we do to check out our trees then folks.
-
Whether you like it or not, there are many people who use their online trees as a kind of dumping ground for anything that might turn out to be useful, whether or not they have yet verified it all. That's their privilege, no one is forced to look at their tree.
Wel, I wouldn't call it a "dumping ground" exactly, but I can see where you're coming from. Now, I like to put in untested people into my Ancestry tree, because it seems to make searching that much more effective, but because my tree is public (I firmly believe in sharing), there is the danger that others may take my untested people as tested (yeah, I know they should check themselves, but that's now these unfounded hints start). So, what I now have is a public tree for all the people that I'm reasonably sure about, and private trees for the relatively untested branches. The downside of that is I get hints from my private trees appearing on my public ones ! Ho hum ! :)
-
what I now have is a public tree for all the people that I'm reasonably sure about, and private trees for the relatively untested branches
Hi Nick
That's what I've been doing but ....
how do you merge the untested stuff into the public tree when it's been tested and found to be ok??
Linda
-
The only way is to do it manually. Ancestry tree editing is very poor. I don't have very large "test" trees.
-
The only way is to do it manually
Oh good - thought I was missing something.
Thanks Nick
-
I've just read most of this thread. Yes you should be cross and you are not over reacting.
I have found plenty of second cousins and nearer actually on both Ancestry and GR.
It is distressing to find photos and gravestones of loved ones third hand on someone's tree who is only related via X marriages. Looks like it's the name of the game.
I have made my Ancestry Tree private and like some earlier poster said, if someone wants to get in touch then they can.
It is difficult as you don't want to 'hide' all living relatives otherwise you might not find them!
I don't know.
Regarding the number crunchers (who always copy wrong), it's a hobby for them, like doing a puzzle. People seem to do family trees for all sorts of reasons. Mine is has quite a few people now, over a thousand, but I do try to keep to direct descendants, but there are so many of them!
Think I'll calm down and make my Ancestry Tree public again at some point.
Steven - bed time
-
It is difficult as you don't want to 'hide' all living relatives otherwise you might not find them!
its not difficult to hide living relatives on GR there is an option to do so and in that case all relations born within 120 years that do not have a death date are hidden, however if you search other peoples trees for me for exampel i would still come up as a match.
-
I live in hope
Steven
-
I have been collecting my husband's and my families since 1980. Little bit here and there. Found it easier when things went on the internet. I have just started posting my tree on Ancestry. Details about source documents, actual text's etc. I only place information on this tree that other people can find and gather for themselves, if they wished. All can be accessed over the internet. If someone asks for further information not on line I e-mail them direct, judge their connection to my line, then decide if I am going to forward personal details I have collected. I do expect something from them which I don't have. Descendants of a sibling etc. I also inform them that as I am producing a book containing this information I am placing a copyright on what I have written and ask they agree not to place this information on-line without asking me and obtaining my permission. If they wish to use anything, it's best to ask first.
At the moment I have not struck any problems. That does not mean they are not around the corner.
Wendy
-
I'm afraid that part of the "problem" (if you choose to see it as one) is that Ancestry make it so easy to put other people's photos on your tree. It takes only one mouse click, and there's no warning that you should ask first, although Ancestry's guidance pages say that it's wrong to use photos without permission.
From my own point of view, I've been using Ancestry a fair while now, and I'm in contact with most of the people whose trees overlap mine, and we "borrow" each others pictures, and there's no problem. I've no objection to people using my stuff, as long as they use it respectfully. Even nicer when they acknowledge the person who it came from (as I do) :)
-
Even nicer when they acknowledge the person who it came from (as I do) :)
I agree and my information has just been acknowledged, even though it was not quite what I expected!
I was delighted to find a tree, which matched one of my family lines, so I contacted the owner and outlined my connection. I waited impatiently for a reply and I didn't have to wait too long... I eagerly opened the message to read 'Thank you, I'll update my tree'... and they have! ???
justmej
-
Dear Justmej
The very same thing happened to me quite recently. No answer to my questions, either. I did get another message from this person thanking me for the information!
It's not the same 'cousin' is it? ::)
-
It's not the same 'cousin' is it? ::)
It could well be! ;D Most annoying, but their loss, as I have lots of information I could have shared with them.
justmej
-
I agree with what some people have said already about the fact that you have done the research, and you KNOW that it's you who put all the hours/months/years in, and you have achieved something wonderful for your efforts, but I'd feel a bit precious about mine too... ;)
I have to add 'fair play' to all of you who have the patience to add thousands of tree members, I'm only trying to do direct links (at the moment) and nobody seems to share my tree, boo hoo! ;D
-
I have to add 'fair play' to all of you who have the patience to add thousands of tree members, I'm only trying to do direct links (at the moment) and nobody seems to share my tree, boo hoo!
That happened to me - which is why I started to expand sideways. I couldn't get any further back with my direct lines, so I started to research siblings and the marriage partners. The amazing thing is I started to get contacts much more often from these 'distant' relatives, and gradually added information to my more direct ancestors. Also it does build up a fuller picture of the lives my ancestors lived. I expect the scandals that affected my distant relatives in Yorkshire also affected my direct ancestors - my great-grandmother's cousins all ended up with criminal records - she must have known them as they lived very close. I'm glad I did that research because it explained an awful lot.
So while you're waiting for the 'important' information you need, it's well worth while looking at cousins and inlaws. Finding out about the people isn't the same as just adding the names - it really does add to the enjoyment of the research.
Lesley
-
Yes, that's exactly what I do Lesley. Sometimes researching the branch lines can bring clues which may not break down the wall, but might put some cracks in it :)
-
Well I answered a little while ago about how I had been lucky about my information not reaching the internet without my knowledge. Well it has happened. I don't know if I'm cross, angry or just upset. While posting another message about my husband's ancestor in the 39th Regiment of Foot, someone suggested a site with information on him. Quite excited I went straight to the site and found all my research on this ancestor there. Even mention of an aunt (95) who remembers her family talking about this soldier. Now this aunt (Matriach of the Family) turns 98 today so this has been there for the past 3 years. My annoyance was that I had only distributed this information within the living cousins (7) and told them some facts had to be proven yet. Now all the wrong information has been put on the internet. The authors e-mail address is now invalid, so I still don't know where it came from. Am contacting everyone just to satisfy my own curiosity. It did make me CROSS, but then as everyone said 'We are researching for our own personal reasons and our own enjoyment.' If people want the glory, without the research then they are missing out on meeting new people, getting help from others and enjoying the pleasure of finding something that happened to people they have never met. Over the years many, many people from all different backgrounds have helped me in all different ways. I know that if I wish to retrace any steps they would be very glad to help me if they could. That is what I think its all about. Looking, finding, solving, proving and all the other ings.
So now I have written this I feel better. If people look at this information and take it as gospel without checking then that is their problem not mine. I did contact the site owner and explained I would be willing to furnish correct information with source documents if they were interested. Haven't heard back yet.
Wendy
-
Thanks Lesley & Nick, oh believe me I want the juicy bits from my family, lol!! ;D
Cassofromdyers - I totally agree, having help from intrested people no way detracts from the excitment of piecing the puzzle together, but just copying other people's info must be incredibly dull! I've just found a distant family member on this board tonight, I'd never have known if I hadn't got stuck searching :D
-
There's a branch of my tree on Rootsweb. They seem to have descended from my 3xg grandparents but goodness knows how they've managed it as they think they descend from a son who died in childhood. The whole thing is a mess and I did wonder whether to try the email address and tell them but I decided not to. I doubt they'd thank me for it! ::)
-
You could be sly Jellis - email them and say you're pleased to have found the info and ask them where they found it out... if they don't reply you've lost nothing, but if they do - they might be grateful for the truth ;)
-
That is a very clever idea! I shall have to think about the wording, though, as if they do start to correspond I shall have to come clean about the death of the son. I have his death certificate. I'm still wondering how they linked these people up so I shall have do something about it ;D
Edited: I have written a carefully worded email to the poster. Now I shall have to wait and see! I have told them that I descend from the younger son without mentioning the death of the elder one. If they prove to me that there was another son I shall be amazed!
Janet
-
Well done Jellis! Let us know how if they reply!
-
Still waiting...bet they're at work ;D
-
While you're waiting..........
Mrs. Hat did not want her tree on the 'net, for personal reasons. However, I did find one of her direct ancestors in someone else's tree, with the wrong parents and husband attached.
I thought I'd do the "right" thing and politely point out the error (I have all the certificates and can match them with the census entries), and offered to supply the proof, if necessary.
The website still displays the wrong data, but they've added my name and email address, as a contributor.
Not happy..............
'Hat.
-
I'd be hopping mad! >:(
There's loads of trees on Genes all copied from me. NOT boasting, it's just in the early days I used to give access to any Tom, Dick or Harry. Not any more, though. :-X
-
I have had many contacts over the years from people 'connected' one way or another.
Two stick in the mind
One was from a third cousin who contacted via GR and established that we were indeed related. He furnished a now treasured photograph of my great great grandparents and 10 of their 12 children,including my great grandfather.
We of course exchanged information.
The second was from a second cousin who wanted to know every detail of the tree. When I asked her to reciprocate, she flatly refused saying the information was private.
Needless to say I didnt pass on the info
-
Words fail me, Gensleuth, but I was a bigger fool. I had a similar experience with a Genes member. We exchanged email addresses and I sent scans of documents and gave access to my tree etc. Information flowed from my computer to hers. Eventually I asked her a few questions. The silence was deafening. I asked for access to her tree. I got the curt message; 'Why, how are we related?'. I mentioned the information I had sent her but got no reply. I closed my tree, but sadly, it was too late. She'd filched all my tree.
Lesson learned. Treading softly nowadays! ::)
-
Jaysus - there's some tight gits out there!! :o
Maybe I'll just do my tree private now I have a ton of ancestors on it - I have one or two I've got a couple of names off, (and checked them too) and have connected with them to share info which I will gladly do - but that must be really annoying, Gensleuth & Jellis I'd probably see red and send them an email with big sweary words in, lol!! Roger - did you tell them to remove your info? That's outrageous!!
A fair few people on this forum have been so kind & helpful to me (and I know it goes on all the time here), I don't understand how some people can be so tight as to not return the favour :-\
-
I don't understand how some people can be so tight as to not return the favour
I think that's what causes all the aggro. I'm happy to provide all the information I have with others, and even if they're new to fh they can often add family stories in return which can be more valuable than hundreds of certificates. And it's exciting discovering a distant relative.
But what happens quite often on Genes R in particular is that someone asks for access to your tree, saying they've opened up theirs to you. So you give them access, only to find they only have half a dozen names on their tree, with no clue as to how they might be linked to you. These people never reply to letters once they've accessed your tree.
-
Dear Lesleyhannah
I got one of those the other day. The trick is to look at their tree first!
A few weeks ago I had a go at my sister in law's tree. I saw the name 'Alice WRIGHT' on Genes and asked if it was the same person; married so and so..the answer was yes, and I did receive some useful information for which I sent my grateful thanks. I was able to tell him where Alice's parents married. The chap asked several times to view my tree even though I repeated several times that the WRIGHT family wasn't mine and no connecting lines were on it. I felt mean about it but my tree is no use at all to him.
-
Hi Jellis
In that situation I offer what information I have about the family, that's not on the tree. Often I have a BMD certificate, where I can share the information , or maybe other documents or photos of that branch. Just to show I am genuine. Sometimes you learn more from the email info than the trees.
However you do get people who even when you send all the info you have on a person still keep asking for access to your tree (even when, like you, you tell them that particular branch isn't included in your tree).
Lesley
-
we once let some one get acess to my wifes tree this person was not related at all they were a step son of one of her uncles so no blood ties they didnt just copy my wifes tree they done mine to .then there was the person who had my grandfather married to who ever but had my dad and his brother and sister as their kids i contacted them they said that they were wrong they said they were right untill i pointed out i think i would know who my nana and granda was .i reckon they just got hold of some half baked reserch and put it on their tree.
neil
-
Even on this forum time and again i see the same people asking for look ups,
which is no problem, but it is pretty obvious that their only research is what other people are doing for them so they are only seeing info' that Roots members are finding for them, i saw the other day the same person posting about 5-6 look ups for different census, now at the best of time we know that cenus information is a guide and not enough to call it fact
lol back to the original question how are people who then view their tree to know how much information is 2nd hand or that info' is the only thing that they have found and is now fact because it's on a tree,
i know myself info given means nothing and doesn't stick until you have researched it yourself,
anyone who just adds data from a tree they have seen or information obtained from here is asking for trouble
-
Even on this forum time and again i see the same people asking for look ups,
which is no problem, but it is pretty obvious that their only research is what other people are doing for them so they are only seeing info' that Roots members are finding for them, i saw the other day the same person posting about 5-6 look ups for different census, now at the best of time we know that cenus information is a guide and not enough to call it fact
I'm not sure you can ever call it fact with absolute certainty - I recall reading some while ago that at least 40% of the population have a father who is not the man mentioned on their birth certificate (I think I have the correct number), so you can't even totally rely on certificates. What you need to do is to compare the information obtained from various sources, and determine how likely it is to be correct. The further you go back, the less you have to work with, so the possibilities for error become greater.
-
yep Nick, might not have explained what i meant properly lol
i noticed the person i mentioned who was asking for info, when told what was found then commented
"ok thanks i'll delete such and such a person" just on the say so of what was found on a census,
and without themselves having seen the original or doing some research themselves,
Roots is brilliant for like minded and knowlegable people but i would not on someone finding some info' for me then rely on it,
some subscribe to different packages for different reasons, i assume most do to get the best information available, and knowing that they are doing everything possible to get it correct, others do it via the free versions (and i do NOT knock that) but my opinion is your % rate of getting it right drops, then taking data from a tree and accepting it is even lower.
Having said all that if we all did it the same way then Roots etc would be redundant.
-
I think it's a bit harsh to assume everyone asking for lookups is just too mean to subscribe. I DO subscribe to ancestry and findmypast - with other occasional sites as and when - but when I ask for lookups it's because I just can't find the person I'm looking for myself. In my experience RCers are brilliant at finding people who've been transcribed under the most unlikely names - I owe thanks to many people on this forum who've discovered individuals or families I couldn't find.
My pay-back is that I always report mistranscriptions to ancestry, in the hope it helps others.
-
I think it's a bit harsh to assume everyone asking for lookups is just too mean to subscribe. I DO subscribe to ancestry and findmypast - with other occasional sites as and when - but when I ask for lookups it's because I just can't find the person I'm looking for myself. In my experience RCers are brilliant at finding people who've been transcribed under the most unlikely names - I owe thanks to many people on this forum who've discovered individuals or families I couldn't find.
My pay-back is that I always report mistranscriptions to ancestry, in the hope it helps others.
not sure i said that or meant it lol, i have asked for look ups myself,
i said that SOME rely wholly on look ups and then take that as read,
and then that info finds it's way onto trees,
ie Lesley if a Roots Member found something you couldn't find i am pretty sure you would not then either go and check it or confirm it by other means ;)
-
Point taken Les! Didn't mean to sound critical - just thinking out loud! (And wondering whether I've asked for too many lookups!)
I think when I first started I could hardly find anything for myself, even though I had subscriptions, so I've learnt a lot from people who've done lookups for me. Maybe the person putting all the requests on the site is just very inexperienced and enthusiastic?
As for checking other people's findings, well I suppose I do. If someone finds a person I couldn't find, then I'll look up their suggestion, because if it's my family I may be able to pick up other clues that would help. But when I first started my research I think I did take what other people said as 'gospel' because everyone seemed to know loads more than I did. I learnt from experience when I realised some things didn't 'add up' and I had to go back and do loads of deleting and checking.
-
Point taken Les! Didn't mean to sound critical - just thinking out loud! (And wondering whether I've asked for too many lookups!)
I think when I first started I could hardly find anything for myself, even though I had subscriptions, so I've learnt a lot from people who've done lookups for me. Maybe the person putting all the requests on the site is just very inexperienced and enthusiastic?
As for checking other people's findings, well I suppose I do. If someone finds a person I couldn't find, then I'll look up their suggestion, because if it's my family I may be able to pick up other clues that would help. But when I first started my research I think I did take what other people said as 'gospel' because everyone seemed to know loads more than I did. I learnt from experience when I realised some things didn't 'add up' and I had to go back and do loads of deleting and checking.
no problem Lesley ;)
luckily i think, i didn't find my way onto Roots until i was well into my reasearching so did a lot of digging myself,
otherwise as you say when new you may assume others know best, at least as you say you had to do some deleting etc, whereas some trees stuff is added and then that's it, no alterations, hopefully as the online trees/programmes evolve, one day a pop up will come on saying THAT'S WRONG lol or wishfull thinking :o