A**y has become our worst enemy

[franh1946]

But what exquisite penmanship, JM! Now this thread is well and truly hijacked as I go on to say that I heard someone from the Mitchell Library talking about the difficulty the modern researcher has in reading old documents written in copperplate and there is a fear that the ability of the person in the street to decipher them is fast disappearing.
Also, I have to say that as the child of a child migrant I am exceedingly grateful that by the use of Ancestry I have been contacted by previously unknown cousins in Britain and NZ. Fran

[majm]

Modern Cursive hand was introduced to NSW Primary Schools in the early 1960s.   Children born in NSW after about 1955 were taught this from the beginning of their schooling.   So very soon, anyone educated in NSW and who is under 60 years of age will have no working knowledge of the wonderful handwriting skills of my generation and of the generations of NSW schoolchildren who went before me.  I maintain that I can write as quickly and as legibly as my youngest siblings, and they agree, however, they get confused with my flourishes, and my capitalisations, and use of commas, and commas with 'and' and of course lengthy sentences, long paragraphs, and 'et al' especially when I commence a sentence or a paragraph with "And" "But" "So" or I write "got" .....

"That that that that man said was that funny that I laughed at that that that that man said"

Yes, the Mitchell Library staff were spot on Fran.    
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Wyndham

Cheers,  JM

[KGarrad]

But, I am quite quite sure that " Neutral" in the attached example was NOT written as "NEWTRAL' which is the spelling offered by Ancestry.   Yes, of course I have informed them, and yes of course I believe I have given them more than sufficient time to correct their error  (about six weeks ago)

Name and Shame ?  why not   

Of course, this spelling error is caused by a mis-read of the flourish, but as they were able to decipher "Harbour" then to me, it stands to reason they ought to have been able to decipher "Neutral" and  NOT read it as NEWTRAL....

Of course, anyone (particularly me) can get spelling muddled/confuddled and mismashed.  But surely any commercial website can afford to at least MEND the error, PROMPTLY, when it is politely pointed out.

As I understand things, Ancestry do not generally make corrections, simply offer different spellings as an alternative?

When they do make a correction, it can take longer than 6 weeks!

I have submitted many corrections to Ancestry over the years. Acknowledgments of a correction sometimes takes months!

[Jaznjjj]

Sometimes we have to accept the bad with the good.  Without Ancestry there would be much information and many contacts I would not otherwise have.  Putting information on Ancestry is a bit like going fishing - you will catch some good ones and some bottom-feeders.  If I find someone researching the same ancestors as I - mostly I make personal contact.  My advice?  Don't throw out the baby with the bath-water! 

[Periwhinkle]

Well said dgibbins, I totally agree.  As a professional genealogist I absolutely love Ancestry and believe it is probably the best search engine around, second perhaps only to Family Search...however, the public trees are mostly appalling.  Even when you find the original tree, there are no sources and the owner can never provide any either...so they are just a small clue sometimes when we hit a brick wall.

But truly, without some of these people sharing their knowledge and stories, and beautiful old photos...where would our profession be?  No...what is worse I think are those that like to promote how great their tree is yet won't share a branch of it because of the time and money it took them to complete it.  I understand the time and money, it's my day to day...but never, ever, would I not share my work with others (unless my client stipulates that they are against it...but to date not one of them has).

I have previously made comment that I don't treat online family trees (OFT) as gospel but as a pathway.

I understand the concerns of privacy that majm has and quite agree that it has never been easier to utilise identity theft.

BUT

I will take the opposite argument, and highlight the  one reason we are here on Rootschat... TO SHARE OUR KNOWLEDGE and to help others, so when I see a posted OFT I am glad because it gives me a signpost , it is someone sharing their knowledge , it is then up to me whether I follow that path with or without a light.

And if someone wishes to contact me and point me in the right direction, I will check and re-check , and then  amend if needed.

 

[majm]

Well said dgibbins, I totally agree.  As a professional genealogist I absolutely love Ancestry and believe it is probably the best search engine around, second perhaps only to Family Search...however, the public trees are mostly appalling.  Even when you find the original tree, there are no sources and the owner can never provide any either...so they are just a small clue sometimes when we hit a brick wall.

But truly, without some of these people sharing their knowledge and stories, and beautiful old photos...where would our profession be?  No...what is worse I think are those that like to promote how great their tree is yet won't share a branch of it because of the time and money it took them to complete it.  I understand the time and money, it's my day to day...but never, ever, would I not share my work with others (unless my client stipulates that they are against it...but to date not one of them has).

Welcome to RootsChat Periwhinkle, 

It is the best family history forum around.


Cheers,  JM

[lydiaann]

I agree with all your comments.  However, I am still of the opinion that you should always request politely of the 'original owner' of the information and, not only that, acknowledge their contribution when posting the same information in your tree.  Of course we should share, but someone who downloads information by the shedload, including the most private thoughts on recently deceased relatives (in my case, a personal bio about my beloved mum) just so that they can add numbers to their tree is wrong.

There, had my rant.  Have a great day!

[Periwhinkle]

Totally agree Lydia...and maybe some more rules around this too.  But you know what they say, here in Facebook land they tell us whatever is on the internet is anyone's!!!  I still believe we need to have ethics and morals around that...and that comes down to the individual.  Be careful with photos you don't want shared!!

I agree with all your comments.  However, I am still of the opinion that you should always request politely of the 'original owner' of the information and, not only that, acknowledge their contribution when posting the same information in your tree.  Of course we should share, but someone who downloads information by the shedload, including the most private thoughts on recently deceased relatives (in my case, a personal bio about my beloved mum) just so that they can add numbers to their tree is wrong.

There, had my rant.  Have a great day!

[pmgreen314]

I understand the concern of the contributors to this topic. However, another viewpoint is that I do not have a problem sharing my research. While it may cost me in actual dollars or time, I consider the point of it is to keep the family history alive for future generations who may be interested. I do strive to keep currently living family members private by not including their names, but the reality is the information is out there - anyone searching an obituary notice, for example, will find a list of relationships.  I am selective about what information I add to my tree, although I do find mistakes even then. It's all part of the process. Through Ancestry, I have made contact with new cousins in different parts of Canada and in England.  Some of them are now considered "friends" so an unexpected bonus. We have shared information and photos so the experience is very positive overall.