Agneta - My apologies.
I quoted the full sentence, plus the one before, and thought the following sentence was an aside. I honestly did not read that sentence as only talking about emigrants from Sweden. There is a period at the end of the statement I quoted, and I would say technically, the sentence does not refer only to Sweden. The following sentence and other info in your post did seem to suggest that Sweden was your major focus, but the sentence as written applies to all immigrants to the USA from Europe. I have no idea how many folks reading it in your original post read it as I did. I now know that clearly this was not what you intended. We all have times we state things that can be interpreted differently from what we meant.
I refered to the a swedish migration era 1860-1910 that almost took about 10% of the swedish population. It was the same i Finland, Denmark, Norway, Ireland, Italy and Greece. You name it. There are too many different languages so to fix it by ourselves. We can't just chatt about every profile, but have to trust each other and collaborate. I can find somebody or something I think is wrong and could send a question to one who have the rigth language. I don't speak finnish at all. But many Geni-users speak both finnish, swedish and english. I dont need to have a personal deeper interest than "is this maybe a person from Denmark or Norway?" or "Do you know the swedish name of this village?". If the profiles are closed be sure there/here is enough to do. I most often just pass the closed profiles. Nothing can be done to solve any genealogy problems.
In US there are swedish/european living people who are interested in swedish ancestors who went to US. Who shall they look for? One has to have some form of efficiency to not do, redo and redo and redo. With the privacy rules that you are comfortable with redoing is what's the genealogy thing for every researcher.
At the moment I'm looking for a man who left northern Germany at the end of 1800:s. His brothers left for Sweden and Denmark. He went to South-America ! And now after about a week of research I've found in swedish sources that he most probarbly kept close contact to his family in Sweden. He did not leave for escape from starving. He went to develop industries in South-America. He succeeded. Is that a thing to keep as a secret on Geni but public in the swedish internet sigths?
I know some sad stories about what happended to some of the immigrants in US. We have letters from them home. They could not afford to come back to Sweden. They had money sent from Sweden to not starve i US too. But some were really succesful. Of any interest for Geni-users? (Look for example on one industry named Texas Instruments and it's history. I find that interesting.)
I have also refered to the New Sweden era, when Finland, Norway and Sweden was one kingdom and sent people to build a swedish colony in America (that not was USA at the time). That's the period 1647-1658 and one has to collaborate across nation boarders from both europea and american vue. The US-geni managers are maybe interested of their roots here. We can help. We migth be intrested what happened to the ones that left? In the case the profiles are closed we cannot write to everyone who thinks it's dangeours to have those profiles Public.
I have also mentioned the "Mormon Project 1847-1858". About 6 000, danish mostly, people from Scandinavia. Many of the Geni-profiles are made by amercian relatives. I don't speak danish but had to learn to read it when I was a child. I live i aeras that were danish until 1658. Our church here was built by danish people. In the Mormon project i can spontanousely se what names are wrongly spelt and how they ougth to be spelt if possible to find in the nordic countries. But if all the Profiles are non-public due to the time rules you states is static tell me one reason to even look at the project?
Agneta. This is going in circles, but I'll keep repeating it. If profiles of recent memory were publicly viewable, but changed only with collaboration (the same as it used to be) you don't have a problem.
Either that, or Geni provides revisions for all material - which they have stated they will not be doing.
On a related subject, I've watched some 'wars' regarding names. As I'm not directly involved I've left it alone and just watched - fascinated.
For many immigrants, they changed the spelling of their name in their new country. Someone from the old country will insist on the old spelling and someone from the new country the new spelling. Even putting in an appropriate notation doesn't seem to stop the conflict.
Collaboration would obviously help, but both sides just change the data back. Human nature, I guess. Fascinating.
Yes Ken, I've noticed the "circles".
One problem with Geni is maybe they in markerting says it's about 100 miljon profiles here to take part of. There is only about 60 miljon in the tree. As far as I can understand here is a great number of duplicates in either number. Geni has to do some kind of revision and major changes. Some will be feeling fooled or betrayed. Some will be satisfied. It's a question of what parts of 'human nature' we and Geni will accept. The requests has to be directed to the goals of the overall of Geni.
I've even met "wars" about naming within the same language. Some like to have the titles in the name boxes or att least show the titles. Some have relations (Cousins. Illegitimate) . Som have the lifetime. Some have the lifestories. Maybe it's a rest from when Geni was new? My feelings about that is "Well, let people figth til they die. It's their life." Problems like that could be solved by "I change this profile for a while when I'm working with it. If it's important to you I understand if you change back to Lady, Sir, Captain.... when I'm finished with the mergings."
If of interest to find people/profiles in the "old countries" it's impossible if with the "new countries" spelling. It's not even for sure that the old spelling is stable in the "old country" over time. If people are more interested in research from the day people arrived to America and up til now it's no problem at all. At least not big ones I belive.
The people I collaborate most closely with have an agreement to use the spelling that is documented in the churchbooks (official spelling). Even if later on "changed" in another document as moving-documents and things like that. One way to decied and accept a change is the thombstones since people normally is burried under their used name. Anyhow analyzing the spelling could help to find the origin for a specific person. And that migth be seen as a major issue to Geni users, doesn't it? I don't lnow if it would be fruitful for Geni to import our agreement as a "rule".
The AKA fields a very often closed areas even if you are a collaborator to someone. I have written alternative spellings for the same name in the "new country" in the "About me"-field. I guess the people at the time in question were not very used to writing. And so people within the same family could get several new spellings in the new country, due to different officers in the customs and a new priest in the parish when the next baby was born. But for computers one need to make a choise. That's computer nature.
Regarding the millions of profiles, the c. 60 million figure only includes profiles connected through the "World Family Tree", aka. "Big Tree", "Världsträdet", whereas the even greater number that is sometimes used also accounts for profiles without any connection to the big bush. So, it's not pure marketing fiction ;)
Erica. Revisions are not particularly important when working with a team of collaborators known to each other. When the thing is open to change by the whole world they are vital.
The profiles were eventually made Private so I never found out who won the war. Disappointing - I was enjoying that. Now the info is lost to everyone.
Agneta. Other sites use the Soundex system so that the spelling of the name is not as important as it is in Geni when searching.
I'm presuming that searching is the most computer-intensive part of Geni, and as the tree grows it will become more so - more people searching over an ever-expanding tree. To have comprehensive searching would require an incredible outlay in computer resources, so I'm presuming that limiting the search functions is saving us from increased membership fees. If this is the case, I can live with the existing search.
Ken, I belive a Soundex system for spelling needs one sound for one letter. Acctually that's the problem today. You and I most probarbly don't pronounce the alphabet in the same way. As I know the english pronounciation I can quite easily understand how e.g. swedish names are pronounced in english. My familyname is spellt Åhrberg i Sweden. If a dane here me say that he would write Aahrberg. If you read that you will say Ejburg in my ears and if I would like you to say in a way that I will react on I would spel Orbaerj. Just to make everyone aware of one problem in language. (God is said to be responsible for this lot of different languages among humans. He git angry with the humans and gave us different languages to struggle with.)
In Korea they have a written alphabeth with letters copying the tounge place in the mouth. In China their spoken word has no alphabet to use for the sounds. I have a friend who learnt english as a "sign"-written language. she was very surprised you in english write CAR while I in swedish write BIL or even car and bil, Car and Bil and more over even in fluently writing. She found it very odd and ineffective since it's one thing that we don't speak the same language (sounds diffenrent). We ougth to use one sign only. E.g. the italian word "auto". That's a nice sign! she told. isn't it. She found it well balanced also as Auto and AUTO. "Why don't they use that in english?" I cannot sound as she when she said car or bil.
I think Ericas proposal to use the original first naming documented and if changed tell in the timeline. It's all ready a possibility to that in Geni. For making searching easier the "extras" (titles, birtyears, lifestories etc) must be moved from the nameboxes. As US-history is it's war-history the title/job-box ougth to be moved closer to the nameboxes and become searable. Captains, reverends, bishops ...
We'll see what will happen.
Francis@ ?? Isn't that a thing / a person / a managerial action you ougth to tell to Geni-Team or the curator in the field. In this disussion tread we speak about different view on the values in Private vv Public profiles. If you are concerned about something in a specific managers doings don't acuse him/her like this.
I am attempting to communicate via PM with Mr. Deane to understand his allegations, which appear to involve edits performed in Dec. 2010 and Jan. 2011 to profiles that he manages. The profiles in question are currently private and I am not in their Family Group, hence I do not have edit rights to them. There is no relationship between Mr. Deane and me, and until today I had never heard of him or his family. I have requested that he e-mail me screen dumps of the Revisions tabs of the affected profiles, in order to help him decipher this issue.
As I say above: I do not like outing of any kind. If you are afraid something is made wrong then 1) take contact with the person that has made the wrong thing IN PRIVATE. 2) If the person is not polite and answer and explain then you have the possibility to contact Geni Team
In this case it seems as someone has started a kind of Fake Account. As there most probarbly are Fake Profiles. As Philip explained to you he is not in your Family Group and your profiles are Private. Then he cannot do the updates you present above.
As I understand you can as a degree of having your Profiles open put a securaty level where there is only small things other managers can change. Anyhow it's only Geni Team that can solve your problem and you have to deal with the "Outing" -question by yourself.
As to your specific problem in the profiles connected to this actual diskussion tread is: I have met several very old profiles that are Public and who are noted as living. But if they have given birth or become a father in 1725 I think it's a mistake to keep people alive. Some managers seems to have missed the button for living status only now and then. Others "keep people alive" for decades more systematically and they are then impossible to search for if one search for dead only.
But that is something else puting the discussion back to the tread.
Thank you, to yourself! Good to see you got on speaking terms. And good to read about that the wrong that upset was an "errant programme".
What of my "facts" are wrong? It was mostly opinions from me. Except from "living" persons born 1725 or att least given birth in those days. I do dare to change into "Living false" in thoses cases.
Recently added a grandchild of a 3rd cousin -- Geni defaulted this person to living AND created it as a Public Profile. I noticed it and changed it -- but it is annoying (at the very least) to see Geni still forcibly creating Public Profiles of people there is every reason to believe are living. It really should not be difficult for Geni to tell the grandchild of my 3rd cousin is a younger generation than myself, and respect the privacy of the likely Living by defaulting it to Private.
I do not know if it is the Programmers, or the folks giving the Programmers their directions who are responsible for this refusal to have someone default to Private if of a younger generation than the person adding that profile.
If I can remember the previous discussions, living people are not made Private as it would cause problems with famous people. Not much point putting Mr Obama in the tree if he becomes Private to an individual member.
Your family group becomes Private.
I suspect that the 1600 example has been there since the days of the gedcom imports (when much was imported as Private), and has become apparent because of merging.
Ken - Geni could still DEFAULT the grandchild of a 3rd Cousin (and others who can easily be calculated as likely to be living) to Private - and allow that to be changed -- without in any way limiting the possibility of making famous folks Public.
Think you are remembering a slightly different discussion - 'Famous Folks' was, I believe, one reason they gave to refuse to Force all living folks to be Private. But does not explain the Default.
I agree with Lois that living profiles should be automatically private regardless of distance on tree from person creating the profile.
It is very unusual that a living profile would be public on Geni without first being claimed (there are only so many Obamas and Madonnas) the exceptions to the rule should not be the focus of the rule.
It's very easy for a PRO or curator to change a private profile to public and they will be aware of the need, it is much more concerning that a BASIC user might make a living profile and not realise that it is public and needs to be made public. Lowest common denominator needs to be considered here.
I totally agree - the privacy option is important for many people.
My personal "pro-forma" is dead=public: living=private, however, everyone entering and managing profiles should be allowed to select their preferred privacy/public option and have it respected.
I have long thought that it would be great if their was a button on the initial entry point for profiles, so that you could select privacy options without having to re-enter the profile and wait for it to load before making it private. It would save alot of time for those entering profiles.
Also, with regard to the naming protocols, I think it is fairly obvious that a single "aka" field that not everyone can access is not sufficient to cover the reality of names recorded in several different languages.
For example, in Croatia we may have people who have lived through several changes of political rule, with church and public records describing them in several different languages. Sometimes the first and last names are very different once translated (eg: Sorkočević=Sorgo) (Cvita=Flora) so that you would really need the aka to be registered in order to find a match.
I believe the simplest option would be to have two aka fields - one for first names, one for last, and allow multiple entries using (say) a : ; or / to separate entries would allow many searchable options to be entered.
I am very angry over the people who have attached their tree to mine, and therefore acknowledge we are distant relatives, but who keep all their family profiles private for five or six generations! Many times it is obvious their attached relatives are identical to mine but because the profiles are private, I can't merge the duplicates and now have a tree full of duplicate, invisible garbage. Many times their reseach is also sloppy and grossly incorrect but they won't respond to my attempts to contact them. I am prepared to end my subscription if I can't clean up the mess they have made of my tree.