Michelle Elena Kempner - is someone working on helping both the original poster and the next poster here? (If not, could you help, or get help for them?)
Also - see
You might find some of it a helpful suggestion.
On the other hand - there are at least 7 other Bug Reports about Birthday Messages no longer being able to be sent by Basic Users - if your Default was "Recent" instead of "Popular" they would probably have seen the complaint had been made, and "Me too"d and/or commented in an existing Bug Report, instead of so many separate Bug Reports for this same issue.
And - having just spent some time trying to look thru Feature Requests and Bug Reports - will mention again - once you get below first page (ie click 'More") - it is a major pain to keep going and also looking at the items - each time you finish looking at one, you have to go all the way down, click "More", and continue down again to get back to where you were. Most folks will not do this, so this means items keep getting lost / ignored / not seen even by most who look. You need a Platform that uses Paging here, not this horrible system.
In http://help.geni.com/entries/20633086-for-free-users-if-the-tree-is... - Bjorn apparently states, in comment dated March 1, that Basic Users have for a week, as of then been allowed to add 100 profiles, regardless of size of tree invited to or merged into.
Next comment in this thread/topic, same date, asks: “where are you seeing these "update" news? It's not in the Geni Blog (I just looked).” The Blog announcement of this Change (see next paragraph) is also dated March 1, no time stamp – so best guess is it was after the 4:42 am of this comment – and likely entered in response to this comment/question – yes?. - and after this, with no comment or answer or response given, this Thread was closed, marked “Topic is closed for comments”. Does this make any sense at all?? Do you folks have any grasp of good User Relations?
On March 1, 2012, this Blog Geni http://www.geni.com/blog/enhancements-for-geni-basic-members-373014... announced that Geni had changed its rules so all Basic Users could add 100 Profiles, and so Basic Users could freely send Birthday and Anniversary Greetings and Gifts.
I am guessing the reason both Birthday Greetings and Gifts were included in this Blog/these changes was an attempt to appease all the folks who were violently upset when the Birthday Greetings again became unavailable to Basic Users on (or about) Feb. 23, 2012. But, if so, why again was it not included in Announcements in the Help Platform – and why no comment made in the many complaints over in the Help Platform, including these under "Bugs"
http://help.geni.com/entries/20449397-impossible-to-send-a-birthday... - this one has “Done” from when they changed back to allowing sending greetings in the fall; no response to Feb. complaints
1) Was the change allowing Basic Members to Add 100 Profiles (regardless of size of their Family Tree) made about a week BEFORE the March 1 announcement in the Blog? And if so, why no announcement about it anywhere until March 1st?? Or was there an announcement Curators saw, a week before March 1st??
2) Am I correct that the inclusion of free Birthday (and Anniversary) Greetings and Gifts for Basic members was to appease them after all the protest following the removal of their ability to send free gifts starting on or about Feb. 23, 2012? If not, why was the ability to send Free Birthday Greetings eliminated for about a week, and then reinstated with the ability to send Free Gifts as well, no announcements of either change in Announcements or on Home Page or etc.?
3) Why in heavens name have these changes (as of now, over a week AFTER March 1) never been announced in the Announcements section of the Help Platform? Again -- Does this make any sense at all?? Do you folks have any grasp of good User Relations? Are you trying to shoot yourself in the foot?
Another poor / incomplete answer with now, the "Topic is closed for comments". It is always very frustrating when I see this. This one is in Community Help. Specifically:
The poster, in Community Help, said she had added information thinking it was a free website and wants to know if she will be billed for a subscription or needs to remove information. The answer (entered Mar. 21, 2012 by Hiromimarie Iha Admin) tells her "There is a Basic Free membership where you can grow your family tree up to 100 people, upload ... " --
WHERE THE ANSWER/RESPONSE FAILS IS - it does not assure her that if she had already added more than 100 folks, these can remain, and she can still edit these, view these, etc. without having to upgrade her subscription. Since it is closed to comment, I cannot mention that there either.
For "Community Help" - I strongly suggest either
1] You simply direct folks that have questions they want Help on from the Geni Community to enter them in Public Discussions - personally, I think this would be the simplest solution, and cannot fathom why you choose to have a section supposedly for it on your Help Platform.
OR 2] change at least Community Help (and preferably all of Help) to a different platform from the one you are using for it (possibly to the same one used for Public Discussions) - and make sure the Platform addresses the following:
1] The paging problem I have mentioned before: once you get below first page (ie click 'More") - it is a major pain to keep going and also looking at the items - each time you finish looking at one, you have to go all the way down, click "More", and continue down again to get back to where you were. Most folks will not do this, so this means items keep getting lost / ignored / not seen even by most who look. This means folks have much less chance to have their answers seen and answered by the rest of the Geni community, and also have less chance to see the same question was asked before by others.
2] There is no way to to message the person directly, which is sometimes quite useful. Both for private answers and to clarify and/or elaborate the problem, etc. Use a platform which allows this. Especially needed for Community Help.
3] Closing the Topic prevents elaboration, correction, etc
I also would greatly prefer
4] there to be a way to edit and/or delete a comment. Now, you have to enter another comment, for example, saying "oops, I meant to say 'not' " or whatever the correction is. And if you posted an email address (or something else) you realize you do not want publicly posted for eternity, there is no way to delete it.
And if you are changing Community Help or all of Help to another Platform, I would definitely prefer
5] Names of posters not be hard-entered as now in Help but handled as currently done in Public Discussions.
I can appreciate your frustration at seeing incomplete answers. But we believe the question has been answered when we close it for comments. We haven't always been correct in closing the the questions, but most of the times we have been.
In this case we know that the user has not entered anywhere near 100 profiles so she did not need to be reassured. If she had entered in over 100 profiles we would have reassured her.
In regards to the help platform. At this point we do not want to direct people to ask their questions in public discussions.
We have our own list of things that we would change. But we did not create the CRM software that we use. Geni like most companies have researched the numerous crm software providers (salesforce, zendesk, desk) and go with the one that best suits our business needs and then we have to work within the restraints of the software.
Thanks for responding. However - the question (above) is in Community Help, marked answered - so is one others, not just this specific person, may well read. You state, "If she had entered in over 100 profiles we would have reassured her." - don't you think it would be wise / prudent / kind to elaborate for those others who have the same question and look here for / at the answer - but they have added over 100 profiles?
Regarding the Help Platform - Community Help, as I understand it, is specifically for folks to post questions for the Geni Community, as opposed to the Help-Staff, to be answering. This is why I thought this section might more appropriately be moved / directed to the Public Discussions. Tho I am not thrilled with many of the characteristics of the Platform, I have assumed it has some characteristics which do suit the needs of the Help Staff - Yes?? (any possibility you could mention what some of these are?)
What is the advantage of "Community Help" being part of the Help Platform, rather than part of Public Discussions? And if there is a major advantage, can you elaborate on which topics / types of questions you see as more appropriate for folks to pose in Community Help as opposed to raising over in the Public Discussions? (And, why?)
Separate topic - but I never got a response to my question on Sept 25, 2011, so will re-ask:
Does the Customer Service Staff / Geni-Team see a date for when "Done" is entered? If so, does anyone look to see if there are complaints showing the problem was not fixed - complaints which came in after that date? Does anybody in Customer Service / the Geni-Team even look at the Bug Reports after they are marked "Done"? If a problem/Bug Report is mistakenly marked "Done" - how does one get the "Done" removed?
SUGGESTION - When a Bug Report is deemed done, Geni Help-Staff as well as marking "Done", enter a comment (date for the comment automatically provides a date for the Done) stating you/Geni believes it is fixed, and indicating what Geni-users who are still or again seeing the problem should do -- possibly one or more of:
1) add additional comments to that thread
2) start a new thread, possibly with suggested title, and suggest in the new thread also provide a link to the old thread, so Help Staff will perhaps be able to see what they already tried as a solution, other phrasings of the problem, etc.
3) start a new thread, since the old will not be monitored by Help Staff after "Done" entered, but in the old put comment with link to the new, so Users will know to continue reading and posting there.
This posted comment could, once decided on and perfected, be one the Help-Staff just pops in each time they are marking Done, and should not add much to their work/time, if I am correctly visuallizing how things work.
A very inaccurate New Help Topic Entry -- dated Mar 28 so Mar 28, 2012
it states "The profiles for your close relatives (third great grandparents and fourth cousins and closer) are private. Only you and people in your Family Group may view and edit these profiles."
Private User It is the second sentence I am referring to as inaccurate.
example 1] The private unclaimed profile of my 2nd cousin, John Doe, can be viewed edited by myself and by John Doe's other 2nd cousins who are no relation to me, so not in my Family Group. Yes? if so, then the above is false.
example 2] If Private User is one of the managers of the private unclaimed profile of my 2nd cousin, John Doe, then John Doe's profile can be viewed and edited by everyone in Private User's Family Group - regardless of whether they are in my (or John Doe's) Family Group. Yes? Again, if yes, then the above is false.
Since it is closed for comment, there is no way to make those comments there. Please fix the Help Topic. You are misleading folks (to put it mildly).
Also - Question -- is Geni no longer allowing us to make Private the profiles we add of living people outside our "close relatives' (as defined above) - for example, must my 3rd cousin's grandchild be Public now??
Private User - as I understand it, assuming there have been no changes over time which I missed, the following are all true:
1] I can choose to make private any unclaimed profile of my close relatives (third great grandparents and fourth cousins and closer), whether I am a manager of that profile or not.
2] I can choose to make private any unclaimed living profile of which I am a manager.
3] I can choose to make private any unclaimed profile, living or deceased where both i) I am a manager and ii) the profile is a close relative (third great grandparents and fourth cousins and closer) of a claimed profile which is a close relative (same def.) of myself.
Are these three all correct / true? If not, which one(s) are not, and when did it/they change? Or is this a question I should ask someone else?
1] Which is correct - "a Pro can merge any Profiles he/she manages, whether in Family Group or not." OR “only members of the same family group can merge together private profiles.” OR ?? See: http://www.geni.com/discussions/80793?msg=784894 for both statements.
2] If a Pro gets a merge request for a Private Profile he/she manages that is outside his/her Max Extended Family – can the Pro accept the merge request?
This info (answers to above) should be in Help. I could not find it, so am mentioning it here. However ...
3] I did find a Help Topic which should have been helpful with these questions and wasn’t:
http://help.geni.com/entries/516916-where-can-i-find-general-inform... - This simply refers us to a set of links – and those links are no longer accurate
The Tree Merging Blog goes to “Sorry – Page Not Found”
The Tree Merging Wiki was last modified January 2010 – many changes to the rules since then.
The Profile Merging Wiki was last modified January 2010 – many changes to the rules since then.
The Resolving Merges Wiki was last modified May 2011 - again, major changes to Geni's rules about Merges since then.
Please note - above in 1] by "a Pro can merge any Profiles he/she manages, whether in Family Group or not." - I do not mean those and only those - I understand a Pro can merge other Profiles as well - here just asking - If a Pro manages two profiles, can the Pro merge them, even if one or both are Private and one or both outside his/her Max Extended Family?
Private User -- with regard to your question:
"If a Pro manages two profiles, can the Pro merge them, even if one or both are Private and one or both outside his/her Max Extended Family?"
The answer to that is yes.
The key is being a manager. A Pro cannot 'touch' (modify) a Private profile without being a member of the "Family Group" of one of the managers of that Private (& unclaimed) profile.
Dan - actually, that is not quite true. Both a Basic User and a Pro can edit unclaimed Profiles in their Max Extended Family - even if the manager of those Profiles is not in the User's Max Extended Family Group (and yes, that is definitely happens sometimes).
So - I think we have:
A Pro can merge any Private unclaimed Profiles which are 1) within the Pro's Max Extended Family Group (old def.) and/or 2) are managed by someone within the "Family Group" of the Pro (including managed by the Pro him/herself) - and these are the only Private unclaimed Profiles a Pro can merge, approve a merge of, and/or complete a merge of.
Any Geni User (Pro, Plus or Basic) can edit any Private unclaimed Profiles which are 1) within the User's Max Extended Family Group (old def.) and/or 2) are managed by someone within the "Family Group" of the User (including managed by the User) - and these are the only Private unclaimed Profiles any Geni User can edit.
Does that seem right to you?
I think you are correct.
There is the "Max Extended Family Group" (aka "Family Tree) which is defined with respect to "me". I can edit private (unclaimed) profiles in that group.
When *any* manager of a profile is also a member of my "Family Group" -- whether implicitly because they are related to me or explicitly because we 'joined' Family Groups -- then I can also edit those private profiles the "added-on" Family Group member manages.
As you noted, a "Basic" (free) user cannot do merges. Period. So it is nice to have one paying member in one's Family Group.
That "add-on-to-Family-Group" is very helpful for Pro users to be able to assist others.
For example, I was able to assist someone in to whom I have no connection at all that had inadvertently ended up with two sets of parents. We joined Family Groups, they set their own profile's privacy to be able to be modified by Family Group members, and then I was able to "disconnect" the incorrect parents. Then, we "un-did" the relationship -- I removed myself from their Family Group (they could have 'kicked me out', too), and they changed their profile's privacy settings back.
Michelle Elena Kempner - in the above two entries, they forgot about a User's being able to set Profile's under age 13 that he/she manages to only be editable by that User.
1] With that exception, are they correct, i.e. are the following true
a] A Pro can merge any Private unclaimed Profiles which are 1) within the Pro's Max Extended Family Group (old def.) and/or 2) are managed by someone within the "Family Group" of the Pro (including managed by the Pro him/herself) - and these are the only Private unclaimed Profiles a Pro can merge, approve a merge of, and/or complete a merge of.
b] Any Geni User (Pro, Plus or Basic) can edit any Private unclaimed Profiles which are 1) within the User's Max Extended Family Group (old def.) and/or 2) are managed by someone within the "Family Group" of the User (including managed by the User) - and these are the only Private unclaimed Profiles any Geni User can edit.
and 2] how do multiple managers and the current Pro ability to edit Public Profiles affect the Profiles for those under 13? For all below,
assume my account settings for Child profiles is "Only Me" for who can edit under-13's
2a] If I am sole manager of a Private unclaimed profile of someone under 13, -- does this still stand, and am I the only one who can edit it?
2b] Same scenario but it is a Public unclaimed profile -- then what?? Am I the only one who can edit it, or can all Pro's also edit it?
2c] If it is a Private unclaimed profile and there are multiple managers - if I am Primary Manager, can the other Managers also edit it?
2d] If it is a Private unclaimed profile and there are multiple managers - if I am a co-Manager, and the Primary Manager has setting for child profiles allowing "our Family" to edit them (this could easily happen if there was a merge) - does my setting become meaningless here? Or would it matter at all if I was in the Family Group and the "Primary Manager" was not? Or ??
3] Does any of this restrict or affect who can merge Profiles of those under age 13?
Abandoned Tree - Help Topic needs updating, I think:
I now see "Abandoned Tree" listed as separate action under "Actions" when folks have gone long enough without signing in (I assume that is the criteria - yes?), rather than coming up under "Report" - as it used to, --- and as this still states.
In statement there - "Deceased profiles outside of the user’s Family Group are made public" - when click on the blue term "Family Group" - got the message "You do not have access to this topic
It may have been deleted." - NOT a good link, in other words!!
Also - pretty sure I saw a statement sometime within the past 6 months by a Curator that there was a new policy for what happens when a tree is reported as Abandoned -- but see no change in comments here. Is this still what is happening when a Tree is reported as Abandoned, or ??
And related - this one also should be updated:
- both drop "Abandoned Tree" from list, AND change "Spammer" to "Spam" to match the list when click "Report".
Charles - Still problems. For both they have been updated - BUT there is no comment on either that it was updated, and date is still 2011 date!
MOREOVER - for 'What is an abandoned tree' - still several problems. 1) it still says "users may report these inactive managers as Abandoned Trees." - with link on word "report" - even tho they are no longer using 'report" for this!! 2) the link to what is meant by 'Family Group' is still there and still NOT WORKING. 3) see next paragraph.
I would like to also suggest, for clarification, re: "For private profiles within the user’s Family Group, management is transferred to the nearest active relative in their Family Group"
- if that means the nearest active relative to the Primary Manager of the Profile (within his Family Group), you should perhaps rephrase it to explicitly say that because
-- others have read "nearest active relative in their Family Group" to mean the nearest active relative (within the Family Group) to the unclaimed profile -- which can be someone very, very different. (eg - My first cousin on my father's side may be the closest active relative to me, but not the closest active relative to an unclaimed third cousin on my mother's side.)
Or is it the latter which is meant??
Lois for "What is an abandoned tree". They are still reporting the managers as inactive and the link is on the word report because clicking on it will give you instructions on how to report the profile.
I'm not sure what you mean by the family group link is not working. Please send me a private message so we can discuss it.
Believe these out of date - Both were written in 2011:
Both seem to refer to the old definition of Family Group. The first states: "Your Family Tree are those included within your Family Group"
The second explicitly states:
""Family Members" for statistics is the same as Family Group. By default, this is your 4th cousins and closers, and your inlaws out to 1st cousins."
That used to be the Definition of 'Family Group" -- but now 'Family Group' only refers to those in the above category who also have claimed profiles. (Does anybody remember when it was changed?)
I believe at the time the definition of Family Group was changed, Geni also officially changed the definition of Family Tree to what Family Group used to be defined as.
Think Geni should either go back to the old Definitions or update those Help Topics.