Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm conflicted over leaving my tree public. My primary reason, however, is so that others might find a common ancestor among mine. I have African American ancestors as well as ancestors from India. Needless to say, there a great number of unknowns. I'm having difficulty filling in some blanks past a certain point. On my Indian side, I know nothing about my g.grandparents except their names. On the AA side, going beyond 1870 has been nearly impossible. And if only the 1890 census were available, I'd be able to fill in some gaps. I'm hoping that one day, someone stumbles across my tree and recognizes a name or two so that I might be able to answer some questions. Until then, I'll keep researching . . .
I keep my tree private but I am not sure its to keep it accurate or to keep others from seeing its inaccuracy.
The thing is, everyone is responsible for the accuarcy of their own trees. I do have info posted to my tree that I'm not 100% sure of, but if someone uses that info without checking, double checking, and then checking one more time for accuracy, that's on them.
I'm conflicted over leaving my tree public. My primary reason, however, is so that others might find a common ancestor among mine.
You can allow your tree to still show in search results even if you make your tree private, so that people can still find your tree. They won't be able to see details, they'll just see that you have an individual by the name that they searched for in your tree and then it will give them the option to contact you and get more details. This gives you control over who has access to your tree but still allows people to find common ancestors.
...Last week I "took" a copy of a letter written by an ancestor from someone's tree but it looks like it was there for the taking because about ten other people have grabbed it too. I see that some people have taken some of my pictures of people and I'm glad to share them. You can tell because Ancestry lists the names of people who have added this item to their tree.
Yep! I've seen this too...more specifically, someone had posted a photo of a man who the poster claimed was my husbands gg-grandfather and posed with two younger individuals who she also identified. But the way he was dressed in the photo...the way the younger people were dressed bothered me. I knew for a fact that my husbands gg-grandfather had died in March of 1885 (located the court records while on a research trip). But these people were dressed like it was the early 1900's. And there was another thing that bothered me...there were very faintly printed names under the people in the photo and they didn't match up with what she posted. So I went on a research trip of my own...through all the family trees that had saved that same photo...and there were LOTS of trees with that same photo.
Sure enough...I finally found the original tree, with names and dates that matched up perfectly. So I went back to the person who had erroneously published the photo and attempted to initiate a conversation. Y'all can guess where I'm going with this right?...Yep...a HUGE mistake...
Suffice it to say that all those people who saved that photo and copied information from that tree are now following a line that never existed and are looking at a photo of someone who was never a part of their lineage. And the truly sad part?...the person who posted this tree gives genealogy lectures and is looked up to for her...ahem...expertise
I have become much wiser in my old age and as such, I pick and choose my battles and I now never, NEVER challenge anyone's information. I only offer information to those that are missing obvious people in their trees. I find it is much safer that way... And in the event that I find it necessary to 'copy' from someone's tree, I send an email explaining my connection, asking for clarification on sources, requesting permission to use their information and offering information in exchange for their assistance. I have been fortunate to get many answers, but there are also those that don't respond and that's OK. I note the source, research it on my own (to the best of my ability) and make an informed decision as to whether I add it or not. I'm good with that.
Mine is PRIVATE with a few close and distant relations researching able to access and edit my tree..but we share info!
It can still be found on a search but they would not be able to view any of the info, would have to contact me.
... I bet they got tired of the lazy guys who pull every single record from their tree to their own
I am new to Ancestry and am sincerely grateful to the couple of people that have done the work to build trees of their relatives that coincide with my tree. Ancestry is the tool of choice, for me, because it identified the correlation, which I verified by seeing that it matched the records at three levels of the relationships that my mother provided shortly before she passed on. I sent a comment thanking the women that had built their trees for making my work easier.
In response to your rant, I have to wonder at your chagrin. Using your later analogy to someone looking over another's work on a test doesn't hold gives a better understanding to your thoughts. In my view, I still need to verify work I copy to my tree from another's because I cannot be certain that they've done the verification themselves. Any true research requires such validation.
No, I believe it is possible that you are just exhibiting fear that someone else is enjoying something for nothing, and I have to ask: Why do you care? If you don't do the work for the joy of doing it, why do it at all?
If you like ice cream and make some for a party, and the guests eat it without having helped make it, are you angry at them, too?
I am new to Ancestry and am sincerely grateful to the couple of people that have done the work to build trees of their relatives that coincide with my tree. Ancestry is the tool of choice, for me, because it identified the correlation, which I verified by seeing that it matched the records at three levels of the relationships that my mother provided shortly before she passed on. I sent a comment thanking the women that had built their trees for making my work easier.
In response to your rant, I have to wonder at your chagrin. Using your later analogy to someone looking over another's work on a test doesn't hold gives a better understanding to your thoughts. In my view, I still need to verify work I copy to my tree from another's because I cannot be certain that they've done the verification themselves. Any true research requires such validation.
No, I believe it is possible that you are just exhibiting fear that someone else is enjoying something for nothing, and I have to ask: Why do you care? If you don't do the work for the joy of doing it, why do it at all?
If you like ice cream and make some for a party, and the guests eat it without having helped make it, are you angry at them, too?
Yeah. Whatever
I still regard it as laziness and akin to cheating, to merely take everything from another's tree and proclaim that you've "researched" your family history.
FWIW, I've looked at other trees and noted names that may not be in mine, or incongruous dates, which lead to more research on my part that proved them wrong or showed them right. In most cases, I'll likely send them a note to either request further details on what lead them to think such information is correct, when I have proof it is wrong, or to say "oh boy, THANK YOU for finding this other person!" It seems embarrassing, at times, to have left people off your tree. Almost like forgetting to include them in an invitation to a gathering, when everyone else has been invited
Most of all, several years after having taken up the research and found myself closely or distantly related to so many interesting people, I consider it a tribute to them to create a family tree. They lived and died and, for the most part, were forgotten. Yet, I am the product of the life they lived. They made decisions (not likely considered in such a way by a particular ancestor) that ultimately played a part in who my parents would be, where I was born, and - to some extent - the life I lived. I have a fascination to find out as much about those people as I can. And, believe me, my bookshelves and hard drive are stuffed with county histories, news articles, birth and death records obtained from court houses, etc.
If other people want to take that accumulated information, I now just *shrug* about it. They can claim that as their family history, but does it create a sense of connection to those long gone people? I don't see how it can. They haven't sat for hours, pouring over scanned copies of hand set newsprint, or very faded, crabbed and stilted penmanship, exclaiming "you SOB, so that's where you went!" when tracing an ancestor who arrived on the American shore as an indentured servant yet, three decades later, was found as a tobacco planter in eastern Maryland.
I've done the work for those other people who don't want to bother, but they've missed out on some awesome (sometimes loathsome, considering the miscreants I've dug up) emotional moments in discovering the history of our common family.
Last edited by silverwing; 01-17-2013 at 12:49 PM..
I still regard it as laziness and akin to cheating, to merely take everything from another's tree and proclaim that you've "researched" your family history.
FWIW, I've looked at other trees and noted names that may not be in mine, or incongruous dates, which lead to more research on my part that proved them wrong or showed them right. In most cases, I'll likely send them a note to either request further details on what lead them to think such information is correct, when I have proof it is wrong, or to say "oh boy, THANK YOU for finding this other person!" It seems embarrassing, at times, to have left people off your tree. Almost like forgetting to include them in an invitation to a gathering, when everyone else has been invited
Most of all, several years after having taken up the research and found myself closely or distantly related to so many interesting people, I consider it a tribute to them to create a family tree. They lived and died and, for the most part, were forgotten. Yet, I am the product of the life they lived. They made decisions (not likely considered in such a way by a particular ancestor) that ultimately played a part in who my parents would be, where I was born, and - to some extent - the life I lived. I have a fascination to find out as much about those people as I can. And, believe me, my bookshelves and hard drive are stuffed with county histories, news articles, birth and death records obtained from court houses, etc.
If other people want to take that accumulated information, I now just *shrug* about it. They can claim that as their family history, but does it create a sense of connection to those long gone people? I don't see how it can. They haven't sat for hours, pouring over scanned copies of hand set newsprint, or very faded, crabbed and stilted penmanship, exclaiming "you SOB, so that's where you went!" when tracing an ancestor who arrived on the American shore as an indentured servant yet, three decades later, was found as a tobacco planter in eastern Maryland.
I've done the work for those other people who don't want to bother, but they've missed out on some awesome (sometimes loathsome, considering the miscreants I've dug up) emotional moments in discovering the history of our common family.
I have to agree and disagree.
I have had those moments of connection that you describe when handling the primary source documents, too, such as when I looked at estate records from two hundred years ago and found that provision had been made for the education of one of my female ancestors, that her widowed mother spent a lot on whisky, and her parents had both been kicked out of church! Mom got let back in, Dad did not, and I wonder if whisky paid a part! Or I read handwritten entries in court documents made by an ancestor who was the county ordinary. Or I looked at the signature of my father's earliest known male ancestor on a court document and saw he spelled his last name with one "t" on the end, not two.
But time and distance will prevent all of us from having access to all of the original documents that are out there. Without the contacts I have made over the internet I would have no photographs of anyone other than my most immediate family. To me, those pictures create even more of a sense of connection than dusty documents.
And it was ancestry.com that helped me break down the brick walls I have managed to breach so far.
For some of us, it's the hunt that is important. Others are just name collectors. If that is their goal, fine with me.
Any trees I've put online are public. I became tic'd off early on to see people taking credit for my work, but I got over it. Lesson learned. A few relatives wiped out all easily found online memory of their stuff for the same reason. I didn't. I do good work in some areas not easily accessed. Philosophically I look at it as giving back, and also encouraging research and accessibility to those records. Not everyone does more to my stuff than I've done myself,and that's fine, but I really can't count the number of people who have contacted me to share their lines and connections. Some places I research have very few written records, and others' enthusiasm for sharing family stories and memories are invaluable to me.
It doesn't really matter to me if some are 'sloppy' or 'lazy'. I do what I do and feel content that what I pass on is the best I could at the time. It's been returned in many ways.
I was vaguely peeved that I was researching for Ancestry to make $$ off of in CD etc, but I cynically accepted it. I admit that I haven't added a lot more to my original few trees. My contact info is there and am glad to share, but prefer it to be on free sites and through personal contact.
I was a little flustered when an Aussie cousin sent me my work which had come to her 3rd hand as something that I might find interesting :+} I had done the work maybe 10 years ago and welcomed it home. Wish the people in between had found something new though!
I still regard it as laziness and akin to cheating, to merely take everything from another's tree and proclaim that you've "researched" your family history.
How do you know that they are claiming they "researched" it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm hoping that one day, someone stumbles across my tree and recognizes a name or two so that I might be able to answer some questions. Until then, I'll keep researching . . .
And in the event that I find it necessary to 'copy' from someone's tree, I send an email explaining my connection, asking for clarification on sources, requesting permission to use their information and offering information in exchange for their assistance. I have been fortunate to get many answers, but there are also those that don't respond and that's OK. I note the source, research it on my own (to the best of my ability) and make an informed decision as to whether I add it or not. I'm good with that.
