Unless someone knows different

[John915]

Good evening,

The demolition squads other grandfather has his own web site. This contains his family tree to which he added ours when his son, my daughter started a family. I have no idea how many there are on his actual tree but his data base of Mitchell's, and spelling derivatives, comes to about 12,400.

The most telling thing is that he doesn't deal with the sideways movement, or the lines coming back to the present. Only the direct line back. If he did his tree would be just as huge as some of these others.

You end up not so much with a tree but more the whole b ;y forest.

John915

[snowqueen]

Although admittedly some large trees  are a joke obviously run by name collectors, I wouldn't discount a tree just because it's large.  I have over 40,000 people in my database because it's based on a village and the people who have lived there through the ages.  It has taken many years to put together using all sorts of different records and each person has been researched to the best of ability

[joboy]

Although admittedly some large trees  are a joke obviously run by name collectors, I wouldn't discount a tree just because it's large.  I have over 40,000 people in my database because it's based on a village and the people who have lived there through the ages.  It has taken many years to put together using all sorts of different records and each person has been researched to the best of ability

I think that is a very good approach ..... keeping them in a database rather than your tree ......... someday you may/will find a link or two to add to your tree.
I have a similar method by keeping all possible items in a spreadsheet that contains specific entries of name variations 'over time' which relate to my surname (which is uncommon).
Some of these go back to early 1500's but will not be added to my tree until I can verify.
Joe

[a-l]

Reading this thread makes me wonder if I'm odd . It has never occurred to me to count mine and neither do I have the inclination to do so lol.

[LizzieW]

a-l
Most of us don't actually count the number of ancestors we have, the number is just shown on our family tree programs - well at least it is on mine,  Legacy.  It shows me how many individual ancestors and how many families I've added to my tree.  Unless the program did that, I wouldn't bother to count them and I guess most other people wouldn't either.

[a-l]

Lizzie thankyou for explaining that , I thought it was strange people counting their ancestors lol.                                         kind regards Sue                                           who doesn't have her ancestry online.

[Treetotal]

I can't believe how often this subject comes up and how it is always met with expressions of smug superiority.  People are different.  Some have interests that are different from yours and, for that matter, different from mine.  There are people who like forests and people who like trees.  So what?

I agree...It's personal choice...lots of people take hobbies to the extreme and there are a lot of lonely and housebound people out there for whom it is a pleasurable pastime. Each to his own. You can put as much or as little into your family research as you like.

Carol

[lizdb]

Reading this thread makes me wonder if I'm odd . It has never occurred to me to count mine and neither do I have the inclination to do so lol.

You are not at all odd.
I have no idea how many I have, nor have any wish to know.
But I do know that each one has been/is being/or will be thoroughly researched so that the info about them is correct and that I find out absolutely everything I possibly can about them so I 'know' them, they are not just a name in a list.

[a-l]

I so agree with you lizdb ,people not numbers.