Ancestry trees

[california dreamin]

Well, sorry guys I've got tough feelings about his.  I suppose initially it's funny, but when people are making 'public' statements about their families (i.e. online trees, websites, sharing information with other family members) for posterity I think you need to be as accurate as you can about connections.

And, I'll say it again these big organisations have a duty - they are presenting us with a phenomenal amount of information and minimal guidance to make £££.  The very least they can do is put some restrictions on the automatic sharing of trees to provide some checks & balances.

What it has done for me is to make me mean about sharing.  I am particularly wary about Ancestry but use it out of necessity. I assist many beginners and have to remind people time and again that the 'shaking leaves' are suggestions ONLY and may not apply and don't take online trees as accurate.  Honestly I see this as a nightmare for future family history researchers.  You will be untangling other people's mistakes for years - add that to your "brickwall"  .  I also think the SOG should stand up and champion some guidelines.

Sorry my opinion only.  I'll  up now.

CD

[groom]

And, I'll say it again these big organisations have a duty - they are presenting us with a phenomenal amount of information and minimal guidance to make £££.  The very least they can do is put some restrictions on the automatic sharing of trees to provide some checks & balances.

Why? They are there to make money, so they aren't going to impose any restrictions, they want it to seem easy.  The very fact that some of the adverts state things such as, "With one click of a button you can take your family back hundreds of years" shows that. It is up to every individual who uses these sites to use their own judgement. If they decide they just want to copy trees without checking that is their decision. People who are really serious about genealogy only use these sites as a starting point.

[jettejjane]

Well, sorry guys I've got tough feelings about his.  I suppose initially it's funny, but when people are making 'public' statements about their families (i.e. online trees, websites, sharing information with other family members) for posterity I think you need to be as accurate as you can about connections.

What it has done for me is to make me mean about sharing.  I am particularly wary about Ancestry but use it out of necessity. I assist many beginners and have to remind people time and again that the 'shaking leaves' are suggestions ONLY and may not apply and don't take online trees as accurate.  Honestly I see this as a nightmare for future family history researchers.  You will be untangling other people's mistakes for years - add that to your "brickwall"  . Sorry my opinion only.  I'll  up now.

CD

Hi CD.

For fear of being outspoken yet again (I will never learn to shut up)  I agree with your  comments above.  I am not  sure how I stand on Ancestry having a duty to provide correct information,  that was never in the equation when I was moaning about incorrect information, however, perhaps some sort of disclaimer on the site about the trees to the effect that you should not take anything at face value but do your own research. Not so much standing as sitting on the fence on this one!

This is your opinion and yours alone and please do not feel that you have to shut up. I am sure all views are welcome in any discussion on this site.   If I felt like that I would never make a post on here, I do have to bite my tongue at times but always qualify my controversial comments with "this is my opinion only"!

Jane

[groom]

The disclaimer is already on Ancestry:

For User Provided Content, we are merely hosting and providing access as well as providing tools to post and share content, and we cannot accept any liability whatsoever with regard to such material (including with respect to its accuracy)

So they cover themselves and it is up to the user to check.

[StevieSteve]

when people are making 'public' statements about their families (i.e. online trees, websites, sharing information with other family members) for posterity I think you need to be as accurate as you can about connections.

And a different "Why?"

Just because a tree is public doesn't mean it's been put up there for posterity. Sometimes I find it's useful to try things out to see if a connection "works". If it doesn't, then whether I spend time deleting my workings is, frankly, none of anyone's business.

[jaybelnz]

I have sometimes put a "theoretical" person into my tree if I am unsure about someone.  I actually put the name and a few details but add a couple of question marks in the suffix box!  Then I add a fact, "Theoretical only for research purposes". It works well in the searches, still bring up records for the name! Or not!  I can then investigate it more thoroughly. If it turns out to be ok and I can confirm with further research and good evidence that it is indeed mine, or leads me to mine, I make the appropriate changes.  If not, I leave it for as long as it takes, or try someone else!

It also can serve as a reminder to me to get on with that particular search, especially if I haven't done anything in that family for a while!

Jeanne 😄

[iluleah]

Hi CD.

For fear of being outspoken yet again (I will never learn to shut up)
.................. Not so much standing as sitting on the fence on this one!


Jane

Oh Jane don't sit on the fence, all you will get is splinters in your bum

[rayard]

One of my ancestors appears to have given birth two hundred years before she was born herself, and again five times after the age of sixty five!
rayard.

[jaybelnz]

Bit like the tree on Heritage that has me married to my father, and my brothers as our children! My poor Mum.   

Jeanne