Ancestry Messenger

[ggrocott]

Totally agree pheno, but I think the 'absolutely wrong' was aimed at the advice not to send more messages, it is always worth another try, as Zaphod says life sometimes gets in the way of dealing with messages.

[PrawnCocktail]

I have a very large tree - but it's not my own, it's a one-place study. It's got nearly 50,000 people on it.

It's the result of 30 years research, and is as solid as it can be, to the highest standard possible. There are no hints from other Ancestry trees.

If you want to have a look, here's a local schoolmaster:
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/family-tree/person/tree/162804729/person/232614112999/facts

or maybe the bigamous workhouse matron:
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/family-tree/person/tree/162804729/person/232676929551/facts

Or the plumber who lived with someone for years, only for their lack of a marriage to be revealed when his "wife" died. Her death certificate gives her "married" name - but the vicar buried her under her maiden name!
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/family-tree/person/tree/162804729/person/232122044260/facts

You see all sorts doind a one-place study!

If you had relevant family, you would miss out if you ignored it. And yes, I do reply to messages!

[rosie17]

Absolutely wrong.  Keep trying but always politely.  It's so easy to miss one or be busy,   A temporary crisis at home always comes first.  I've had replies after 4-5 tries

Zaph

Agree with Jebber about people ignoring them in that case I wouldn't send any more messages 

Rosie

Good for you being successful and for trying I'm afraid one message would be enough for me

Rosie

[LizzieL]

Does anyone else think that the Ancestry system of sending you an email if someone has sent you a message is sometimes at fault? On many occasions the first I've known of a new message is if I notice a red dot on the messages tab, when I log in to Ancestry. (Not in Spam either). So I think it is worth while resending a message.
As to large trees, like many people on here I have been researching since the 1980s and was lucky enough to have inherited sound research by rellies (no longer with us) for a quarter of my tree. My tree has also expanded a lot when trying to prove or disprove a DNA  thrulines match. It's got a lot wider, but not much taller, very few lines back before 1700. I wouldn't refuse to contact people just because they have a large tree. 
 

[ggrocott]

Yes, with the DNA stuff my tree has got a lot wider, and a bit taller.  It has also developed quite a few 'hanging trees' where I have groups of DNA matches that link to  each other but which I cannot, as yet, link to my tree.  I hope that one day they may lead me to the fathers of Annie Marie Hayward and Amelia Pinnell and the parents of Mary Ann Waddington, who I have been searching for for over 30 years.  :-)

[garden genie]

Lizzie has a point about Ancestry's system. Over the years I have seen many people complain that they had been sent a message that they did not know about. There can be many reasons of course. (including the old faithful forgetting to tell Ancestry your new email address) Emails don't even bounce these days so how can they know if there is a problem?
Another problem that often gets overlooked is that Ancestry have been hosting trees for a very long time now. How many of those earlier genealogists have already joined their ancestors? Like Farcebook, there is no way of telling.

[LizzieL]

Lizzie has a point about Ancestry's system. Over the years I have seen many people complain that they had been sent a message that they did not know about. There can be many reasons of course. (including the old faithful forgetting to tell Ancestry your new email address) Emails don't even bounce these days so how can they know if there is a problem?
Another problem that often gets overlooked is that Ancestry have been hosting trees for a very long time now. How many of those earlier genealogists have already joined their ancestors? Like Farcebook, there is no way of telling.

I definitely have three DNA matches who have passed away - I only know because I was told by other relatives. There are probably many others who I haven't heard about.

[ggrocott]

Yes, I have DNA matches who have passed away, in several cases I have added them, as a result of doing research, and realised they had already died.

[Brenshaw]

It's very disturbing when you know these people do have direct links to your DNA and many are the missing link in progressing your research any further. 

I have now realized there is a function button that tells you your message has been sent and "READ", that was interesting to know.  At least now i know they got my message and that they cared to ignore it, how selfish !!....so much to why we all get on here to do our family trees and research.

Today I received a reply message from someone I sent a message to 2 years ago.... he is a direct relative, but he has since been sick

I'm near finished on finalizing my family tree right up to my GGGF on my mother's side, more thanks to DNA direct links than posted messages.

All is good, will wait for more advanced DNA technologies to do some of my leg and research work.