How cross would you be, or am I over reacting?

[danuslave]

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 

Linda

[Rena]

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 

[pjbuk007]

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.

[youngtug]

just spotted this;-  http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,398080.0.html

[Underbelly]

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.

[toni*]

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.

[Nick29]

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.

[Sloe Gin]

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. 

[Lesanne]

Well, they had better check out my material first as I'm forever finding new directions.
PS
YoungTug.... Baston Cox Berkshire....  ... what should we do to check out our trees then folks.