Adopt a Collaborator

David... I could definitely use some help!

I currently have 2407 merge issues.

Jason P Herbert

Jason, got it. I see all 2,407. I'll get to work!

Jason, how many merge issues do you show with the "Include Collaborators" box NOT checked?

David, 2,407 is the "unchecked" number, because I am currently only looking at his merge issues. I would assume the "checked" number is in the 10s of 1000s....

I could use some help with my merge issues. Not only do I havwe 508 merge issues, but my health is bad right now, so I'm really struggling. Any help much appreciated.

@David K: "Jason, how many merge issues do you show with the "Include Collaborators" box NOT checked?"

That *IS* the "Not Checked" number.

When it's checked... the number is: 38834 (which is actually down quite a bit since I last checked).

@Judith: I've very surprised to see that Stacey dumped her tree. That's quite unexpected.

Jason P Herbert

Addendum: David: the number is actually 60229... I forgot I'd sent the "merge pending" filter.

Jason P Herbert

Gwyneth, I think I would be able to help you with your merge issues a whole lot if only we could get Cindy Marie CLARK to accept someone else besides just you to be a collaborator. Do you know Cindy?

I'm currently at 136 of my own, which jumps to 61158 when I include collaborators. The lowest I've EVER had mine was about 90; I've got a whole lot tied up in the hopeless tangled mess in the European royal lines.

@Jason P Herbert

@Judith: I've very surprised to see that Stacey dumped her tree. That's quite unexpected.

She dumped it about 2 weeks ago - there is still major issues with the english branches - i think i have about all the others cleaned out - but still coming up with double, triple and quadruple entries at time - anything with an "X" and not connected to the big tree i have eliminated - from here tree - which brings it down to manageable view , and working with

Okay now one Q - how does this work - do I have to have a collaborator - to make this work

i am very cautious - with loosing my Smith-hinckley line in less than a week after allowing only collaboration

I do not want to loose what I have gain back -

Judith "Judi" Elaine (McKee) Burns,

You won't loose access to your tree. What we need is for you to open up to more collaborators. The only one that you have in common with most of us is David Embrey.

Cindy also collaborates with Heather Fachet Bond.

Judith - those trees you have inherited from abandoned accounts can easily be transferred to another user if you don't want to be the manager.

Just send a request a request to help@geni.com with the link to the managers (see below) and ask them to transfer the profiles so a specific user, - I can take them since that would give most people access, and I usually also remove the close family in respect of their privacy.

Private
Private

The transfer will NOT affect your own profiles.
http://forum.geni.com/topic.php?id=63241#post-586251

The Stacey Lynn Kohl account should however probably be transferred to a family member of her, at least the family profiles, - she is listed with 6 invited users.

But someone active! We don't want another Rulene Ames Walk situation. I'm related to her within ~6 generations and a marriage. I would be happy to take them if no one else wants them.

Oh, yeah. I forgot to comment on adopting a collaborator! I would be happy to adopt someone. I have less than 700 issues of my own. Most of my merge pendings are with Stedall and Sparks, and most of my conflicts are in the historical trees. If I include all collaborators, though, I have 99,807 issues!

David,

I don't know Cindy personally, but I am approaching her from every angle I know possibly to see if I can raise a response of any sort from her - or someone close to her in the tree who might know her. I'll let know know if/when I have news.

I find it remarkable that this intertwined group of collaborators while having many of us as common collaborators still have unique collaboration partners. I'll almost at 1200!, when I look at the list to decide where to send a request some have only a couple, others have around a 100. I can't discern a pattern to how people's collaboration trees intersect. I guess that goes to the whole concept of "we're all related".

Judith, merging profiles causes your profile and the the other person's profile to become one and the same. The information from yours and the other person's are combined into a composite of both original profiles. When you open a profile in Profile View and see several managers listed under "Managed By", that usually means that each of those people once had their own profile for the person in question, but they are now all combined into one.

I have never seen an instance of a profile merge causing someone to lose access to the combined (merged) profile.

Judith, merging profiles causes your profile and the the other person's profile to become one and the same. The information from yours and the other person's are combined into a composite of both original profiles.

THANK YOU so in plain ENGLISH - we/I loose our original profile from our personal tree and FORCED into the "Big Tree"

BUT

if we/I refuse to merge with another - we/I are still FORCED into the "Big TREE" because the profile we/I chose NOT TO MERGE with is placed into our/MY tree so we/I even tho we/I are not choosing to join the "Big Tree" are being forced to - so in essence it is a no win situation the outcome no matter whether we/I choose to merge or NOT merge is we end up in the "Big Tree" against out will when we REFUSE to merge

Judith, if you end up in the big tree but have NEVER accepted a merge request, then one of two things must have happened: 1) You accepted one or more collaboratorts at some point and THEY did a profile merge with your tree, or 2) you have invited one or more of your family members to claim their profile (by entering their e-mail address into their profile) and THEY accepted a profile merge or collaborator request from someone.

In other words, the only possible way for your tree to end up being connected to the Big Tree is if you, or someone you have granted permission to, accepted a merge request. It just can't happen in any other way.

The ONLY way to absolutely guarantee that your tree will never end up merged/connected to the Big Tree would be if you NEVER invited ANYONE else to join, view, collaborate or merge. Clearly this would defeat the purpose of building a tree in the first place- which is precisely why Geni is not a good place to attempt to keep an isolated, protected tree.

Gwyneth, whatever you do, don't bug Cindy to the point where she gets irritated and removes you as a collaborator! That would doom us to NEVER be able to clean up that part of the tree.

I guess I end up tearing my tree apart - I collaborated with one person I did not think it would destroy my profiles - or I would lose control of -

I regret coming to Geni - it is not explained that you are forced into the big tree if you collaborate till its to late

And that in essence you can be a part of Geni unless you do merge with people -

I am very disappointed in what Geni is -

SO I guess the only this to do is start deleting my profiles one by one that I own with the "X" as I will not dump the tree in its entire -

Judy, why would you want to do that? You have done a lot of work and have been very helpful to the rest of us to this point. What good would deleting profiles do?

Judith, if you are intent on leaving Geni altogether (and I do wish you would stay), there is an easy way out. Just click on this link:

http://www.geni.com/account_settings/close_account

It will give you the opportunity to name any other Geni user to take over management of the profiles that you abandon.

OK...so I guess I would like an update from anyone who might know what is going on. Two days ago, my name was mentioned as a collaborator with Judith Elaine Burns, and now today, I am no longer her collaborator. I've read subsequent posts, and I understand she is frustrated, and that she doesn't want to collaborate, but she somehow unknowingly got sucked in with the rest of us black sheep. Hopefully, she will reach a logical conclusion with her decision with respect to "her" tree here, and that the conclusion is graceful for all involved.

Hi David,
It sounds like Judith is frustrated with the "one big tree" concept of Geni. Geni is a great program for those who want to learn as much as they can about their ancestors. But it is a terrible program, totally the wrong choice for someone who wants only his/her own information included in his/her tree. There are better choices out there -- Ancestry.com, the LDS program, etc., to name two.

Judith, I second David Kaleita's remarks wishing that you would stay. If you are firm in your decision to leave, that would be sad for the rest of us. If you feel that you must leave, then please don't delete any profiles except those still living. You have done valuable work for the "big tree" by adding your ancestors. Please allow us the privilege of getting to know them.

Whatever your final decision, I wish you well.
Happy ancestor-hunting!
Maria

I really think geni needs to make it very clear to the unaware what will happen if someone merges their tree into other trees. It should be part of the initial geni education. Allow people to choose one way or another, whether to always stay separate or decide to merge, and take on collaborators. Too many people end up like Judith did and it isn't good for geni's reputation. If I had known how many thousands of hours to would take of my life to merge trees, I would never have started. I feel for those who had no idea what was in store for them.

Private User
I couldn't agree more. I have run into several people who do not understand these concepts. I have received hurtful messages from several people, including a fourth cousin, accusing me of stealing their family and pretending to belong to families for evil reasons.

I wasn't wild about the "big tree" concept when it first became prevalent on Geni. Then I started finding "lost" relatives and I was able to fill in blanks that I thought would never be filled. Now I am a whole-hearted supporter of the process.

I agree that there needs to be better education for new users. I don't know if there is a tutorial for getting started. If so, the subject of collaboration certainly needs to be included. If not, a tutorial would be a valuable tool for all Geni users, of any experience level.

What irks me is although I have merged with people, that others think it's ok to DELETE profiles when they can just detach and move the person to the right place. If I took time physically writing in a profile, I don't appreciate it if you delete something and NOT tell me why.

I wish the detach option was easily seen like the REMOVE option is. It ticks me off. Just because YOUR tree looks one way to you, and you don't like that I merged with you or someone merged our profiles together, do NOT think it's ok to just start deleting things because you are an editor.