Persons who have not been online for a year (Abandoned Trees)

Eldon time frames have been asked for before and the answer was they can't commit to it. And as noted a couple of times, the feedback system is new. There are I'm sure still some kinks to work out with it. I'm delighted it's been implemented.

Erica, I am glad the feedback system has been implemented also. It does need some improvement such as notification as to what action has been taken and time frames would be helpful. Just giving Geni a little nudge :-)

I will be adding profiles to this project, once it seems to be working.
I have had mixed results trying to contact other managers.
Most of my outstanding merges seem to fall into two categories:

1) the other manager/s left their/our profiles abandoned, due to the change in policy of basic/pro and life membership subscriptions. These were the folks that had many, many, profiles in the Geni system before the subscription notice. They seem to harbor ill will that something was free, they entered data, and refused to be willing to pay for their work. (I think I explained that correctly.)

2) I have conntacted other Geni members who even though we are Relatives, seem unwilling to merge as they tell me they do not 100% know me, or that I am who I say.

If this project were to start rolling, produce results, and not gather moss like some old stone, then I should like to be a part of it. I cannot see putting the effort into it otherwise.
I do think it is a splended idea to deal with an on going problem.

Well stated, Chris, thank you.

So what did the 10 notices say, Eldon?

I deleted them but basically they had a link to the reported profile and said the were being looked at

i too have had mixed results.. people ignoreing me when i contact them.. this whole merge issue seems to be a zombie that won't die.. most of who i've contacted would fall under V's #2 slot and i don't understand why many are unwilling to merge.. can some one explain that further.. to me it's easy we have stop and go lights at every allmost every corner and is it because we are as a socitity getting dumber? I hope not but it seems that way to me if they can't even under stand stoplights and green means go and red means stop and think or it may not be right etc etc.. at least that's the way i look at the merges,, and don't even get me started on the lack common courtesy. and then there are the complainers who complain about things even after you aprove somthing that you think is right and has a green sign.. at times i've had good people come and put it nicely jon doe did not die on this date or this data you've entered is not valid happened to me the other day with a document i posted for a source on a shared profile with a curator and she was nice about it but 7 out of ten times it brings out the nasties.. i mean what's the point of a tree if you can't delete your mistakes once you have added information editing isn't allowed in some sections so it's now not correct and is falsely written there are ways to change it yes it some respects but it just leads to more problemsif you accidentally delete profiles managed or co-managed by others, and in most cases they will un-delete the profile creating even more chaos.

yes i know we should stay on topic about abandoned trees but V and others have raised good points about why we have a high abandon and private profile rate and what we can do to improve and or reduce them.

I think the fact that their is no easy way to correct mistakes turns a lot of people off

Michael you are too non specific for me to answer, I am sorry.

Every issue brought to my attention in my "part" of the tree I've been able to fix.

Like Michael McCan - I have mixed feelings and mixed results - BUT GENI seems to be the better of most online (except for maybe TNG which you have to purchase your self, manage yourself, and find a "home" for if you do not already have website space; -

Profiles that are co-managed should not defintely not be deleted - they should be corrected and annotaed in the about me section as to why the change was made - documentation for such change if should should be provided in the about me also or as a source document and mereged the the matching profile -

Any doubles should be carefully meregd and data with in corrected from unders "Actions" and and resolve amy conflicts - again noteing why and possibly listing some of the 'Non-accetped" info in the about me - not everyone takes the time or effort to go and read all the revisions -

Clike CLE
.
Most of my outstanding merges seem to fall into two categories:

1) the other manager/s left their/our profiles abandoned, due to the change in policy of basic/pro and life membership subscriptions. These were the folks that had many, many, profiles in the Geni system before the subscription notice. They seem to harbor ill will that something was free, they entered data, and refused to be willing to pay for their work. (I think I explained that correctly.)

2) I have conntacted other Geni members who even though we are Relatives, seem unwilling to merge as they tell me they do not 100% know me, or that I am who I say.

But unlike CLE's attitude of "If this project were to start rolling, produce results, and not gather moss like some old stone, then I should like to be a part of it. I cannot see putting the effort into it otherwise."

I will continue to add profiles - I will continue to update and improve them - I will merge duplicate profiles that I find doing it very very carefully - -

Of my profiles I can not see having a sting of children who died as infants, children or are totally unknown - thus I lump them as X# of unknnown ; X# of unknow females or males - - those with dates of either birth, christening or death I do list individually and try to place dates after their names so hopefully they will not be merged into another with no information

The lack of the merging by other ruffles my feathers - it defeats the pupose GENI had started out with "ONE BIG TREE" their acceptance or allowing "PRIVATE and UNCONNECTED TREES" into the database has create dnothing but pure havoc - I still stand by the theory that ABSOLUTELY NO PRIVATE tree should exist after the 3-4 generation period - and if a GENI member intends to use GENI in such a manner that their should be a seperate contained within a very seperate data area and not withing the storage area for the so-called "BIG TREE" for these people and they should be forced into paying a higher membership fee in order to store their family data online - for only their own selected family group or "private group of users" - and this idea of attachiing "SOLE ownership" to profiles is absurb to me - we sure as heck did not do it back in the dark ages of typewriter, pencil, paper and xerox - we all freely and willing shared back then by snail-mail so why can we not take it back to the level in the "techincal age"? For me I have included living people but leave out all personal details, dates and locations - I have left all my profiles public so that I can find distant cousins those I lost contact with back in the earyl 1990's and that heaven forbide that if for health reasons - such as stroke, alzhiemers's and even in the event of death and so that there is not the battle of locked out profiles causing "Ill-will" amongest GENI users. I know there are those that condone me for this policy but I am tired of the nit-picking, the war between locked out profiles and the war of non merges this is to be a colloborative site amongst what are to be adult people who share a common interest and goal - preserving genealogy and making if freely accessible to all

Merging needs to be done very carefully - people need to read all data in the profiles birth, christening, mariage, death dates - -

One gripe I have is those who have used the christening/batpismal date as the brith date - I was taught that this was unacceptable practice - but yet it continues to exist - and also maybe a result of the GEDCOMS

The MP'd profiles should exist and especialy for those that are prone to constant miss information or a line that has been of a sboatage attack but as such those who curate them should be willing to keep them updated on a daily basis - cleaning up in the about me section - and replying to those who contact them with additional and new data if the profile is completely locked from being edit by common GENI useser such as non-pros, plus pros and pros.

There is a need to open up the abandoned trees and merge them into the nearest tree available or into a fmaily/surname project so that the tree can come together - that it can be added to without duplicate profilesmost generally there are very few people who were born in 1910 that are alive today yes there are the exceptions of those living several years after reaching the 100 year mark with so much information available open at the 50 (for death) and 70, 72 and 75 year level for census, death and other possible vital infromation and even to some birth records this bickering seems so determentaly to the outcome and preservation of family history/genealogy

I now that I will be totaly condone by some for my views - but i have worked hard on my family histories for the last 36+ years - I had those who willingly shared their information with me who are now deceased - 99.8% of my family is deceased leaving only distant cousins - my brother, and our children, grandchildren and my 2 1st cousins of whom only one has a childr and grandchildren and mothers sister who is unmarried and turned 90 if still living as she broke her hip 2 wekks before her brithday i this September.

Oh well off my soap box - someone privately asked me for my input - just hope I am not condoned for it

Judi if I may on one of your points

==

Of my profiles I can not see having a sting of children who died as infants, children or are totally unknown - thus I lump them as X# of unknnown ; X# of unknow females or males - - those with dates of either birth, christening or death I do list individually and try to place dates after their names so hopefully they will not be merged into another with no information

===

This is not a "best practice" as far as I'm concerned. We have members, for instance, who use Geni data to study infant mortality rates, multiple births, and other data.

In addition dates in name fields result in lack of matching. So an unknowing user is "duplicating" and without more sophisticated knowledge of the program will never know about it.

If you don't have specific data, don't enter it. But don't work around it by conflating multiple persons into one. You can make a notation in the parents overview instead.

If a person wants to have a totally private tree they they should pay extra for the service or not be on geni. I've run across trees with the families of cousins and their spouses, and someone in the spouses family has the entire tree in a non viewable mode, and does not reply to e-mails.. Its a bit frustrating to wait almost forever for a reply.

Erica Howton we all get by with a little help from our friends.. 90% if i encounter a problem i am not sure about i ask around and it gets fixed. I didn't imply that every problem was unsolveable on my part.

Then I'm not following your complaint, Michael. If there are no outstanding issues then .... ?

If they have birth and death dates I do list them individual Erica -
BUT in the instant of no data and the mutliple duplicates caused by the varcous gedcoms and the error that have cause I can not see listing 3-4 children and or infants that are known to be decease with absolutely no data in the profiles at all as single profiles as I have had many a gedcom I have cleane up with children of over 10 deceased that could not be properly merged - many of those children never really exist in the first place becaus no one has ever taken the time to clean up a gedcom file they have merged into their files and then keep passing along to others thus snowballing all the past errors - been there and done that no one couple has 10-15 deceased children and that many living - tho i guess it is not impossible beesides the occasional kind sole who has dumped all the existing children of a man into a single wife when he has possible had children by one or two or more wives No one can possible merge these children with no dates and no names properly so the just keep on multipling upwards through the sharing of gedcoms - I do this method within my PAF to eliminate all those bogus profiles that have been generated by gedcoms - and I enter my data to match my PAF files - this way I know just how may actual children there are that are no name and no date available to be accoutned for - as dates or a burial date comes available I seperate them out to individual children - I sure helps on the merging in in PAF esepecialy with common names in family groups and prevents merging into wrong familys the same as with dates bhind the names especialy if oo more that one child was named John or Mary - as I have had people merge children dying young and as infants into the living child and tired of the endless battle to keep John dying as an infant, John dying as a child and John finally living to adult hood as each their seperat profiles - if no dates I enter #1, #2 and #3 and will continue to do so because its discouraging and fustrating to have theese profiles merged together or assumed to be one in the same as many people do.

Even if some consider it a hinderance I do not i consider it a help in the merging process - and helps my tremendously manage my tree on all sites and in PAF and keep the number of correct children living and decased in proper order at a quick easy glance -

I guess it is to each his own

But I have seen how easy it is to merge children with no names and no dates in those field s into another family creating complete choas and with gedcoms how these children keep multipling with out being merged together -

and last of all no one will merge them together to eliminate the excess children to they just keep on multupling or did

I use this method in my own PAF/ Legacy / Family Tree computer programs and I am not about to drop the use of it as no one couple can up to ove 10 -20 deceased children with that many living some up to 5 John's etcl. tho I know it is not impossible - its what the choas here on GENI was created when GEDCOMS were allowed

I understand and I'm all for merging and consolidating ghost children.

However lets get them down to the actual list of actual children. And use legible naming conventions.

We have the MP tool to keep the tree clean in the future.

I so much appreciate your tree efforts Judi! If you notice, I only picked up on this minor point with a suggestion because I pretty much agree with everything else.)

Re: "There is a need to open up the abandoned trees and merge them into the nearest tree available or into a fmaily/surname project so that the tree can come together ..." -- I first did a family tree as part of an assignment in 8th Grade; it then sat till I graduated college, when I pulled it out and re-did with the new births, marriages, etc. plus additional info I had found; it then sat until I retired, when I pulled out the folder and started uploading the info on Geni and expanding it - For many of these "abandoned" Trees, it may just be that the owners entered everything they had then, and just as I did, may return to them many years hence.

Folks should realize that the goal of World Tree is a long-term project. Also, Geni never said there could not be separate Trees, just that creating one that was of the whole world was a goal. Folks with separate Trees, if not harassed or intimidated, may well decide eventually to merge -- or their children or other relatives who join their tree may decide to merge into the Big Tree.

There was a really nice comment from Fred Bergman explaining advantages he felt came from the Separate Trees on Geni (as opposed to those folks not entering their info on Geni) - unfortunately, the discussion I saw it in was deleted. Perhaps he would be willing to repeat it here.

Also - separate topic from above - not sure if everyone realizes somewhat recently Geni changed its policy on messages to Manager - they now go to ALL the managers of a Profile, not just the Primary Manager. So if you sent a message that only went to the Primary Manager, it might well be worthwhile to send another message that will go to all the managers.

This is definitely a change that should help with some of the problems of folks who have not been online for a long time.

Lois and that message also now includes curators, where there is one.

Frankly its a pleasure to see the collaborative spirit in pursuit of accuracy from being on these little threads,

My problem with the messages is that the person I designated to take over my profiles after I die is now getting all those messages including all the replies because of the reply to all setting. It is no big deal for me but it is for her.

Teach her the "mute" selection in Geni mail.

Isn't the Mute setting for one message thread only?

Yes. You have so many? I'm not that popular!

I get 3 or 4 a week I guess. I delete them but then the reply comes again.
I don't mind them, but she uses her work e mail.

She should be able to do something with her account settings. I turned off notifications to my email & just log on to Geni.

Eldon, - the next time she complains: Ask her to read the whole email she get from Geni.

Every email from Geni contains clear instructions on how to stop them.

Re: private trees --- I agree with what has been said here. It's counterproductive. Geni is collaborative.

Also with isolated private trees is Geni collaborative. You could also say, because Geni protects private familygroups in the Big Tree, Geni is not collaborative. Nonsense! Geni is open for all collaboration and Geni supports both, The Big Tree profiles and the Isolated Trees profiles. We don't bother about abandoned isolated trees, because we don't need the managers for merging because managers of principially isolated trees don't want merges with the Big Tree. There are a lot of managers of Isolated Trees who get all matches from Geni and can maintain, expand and update their trees by copy and paste. Also the managers of the Big Tree profiles can work the same way. They don't get mergeaccepts, but they can copy and paste all new information and relations from the Isolated Trees profiles. So it is worthfull to have both sections in Geni!

Fred Bergman, is it possible to explain this also in Dutch in our GGG-threads for Dutch users, please?