From roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com Sat May 6 15:27:02 2006 Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34]) by admin.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k46LR2jb029129; Sat, 6 May 2006 15:27:02 -0600 Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l.rootsweb.com [66.43.16.22]) by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k46LQvRn006195 for ; Sat, 6 May 2006 15:26:57 -0600 Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l [127.0.0.1]) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k46IrIFI031104 for ; Sat, 6 May 2006 14:53:18 -0400 Received: (from roots-in@localhost) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.8/Submit) id k46IrIap031103 for roots-approved@rootsweb.com; Sat, 6 May 2006 14:53:18 -0400 Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [66.43.27.41]) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id k46DRtFI030487 for ; Sat, 6 May 2006 09:27:55 -0400 Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) id k46G1OSp001781 for roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com; Sat, 6 May 2006 10:01:24 -0600 X-Envelope-From: Kith-n-Kin@cox.net Sat May 6 10:01:24 2006 Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34]) by admin.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k46G1Ojb001772 for ; Sat, 6 May 2006 10:01:24 -0600 Received: from fed1rmmtao09.cox.net (fed1rmmtao09.cox.net [68.230.241.30]) by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k46G0toN009228 for ; Sat, 6 May 2006 10:00:56 -0600 Received: from TOWER ([68.0.155.47]) by fed1rmmtao09.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20060506160051.SYTL24290.fed1rmmtao09.cox.net@TOWER>; Sat, 6 May 2006 12:00:51 -0400 From: "Kith-n-Kin" To: "'Edwin and Cornelia Moore'" , Subject: RE: [ROOTS-L] Major (maybe) errors on Ancestry's One World Tree Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 09:00:55 -0700 Message-ID: <010501c67126$452beb80$6601a8c0@TOWER> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 In-Reply-To: <010801c670b7$765250b0$5a331c40@your6bvpxyztoq> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Importance: Normal X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by admin.rootsweb.com id k46G1Ojb001772 Sender: roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com Cornelia I think you may have mis-read our replies -- at least mine. One World Tree (not One Great Tree) is *not* "a tree" but a bunch of linked trees "opportunities" with some *common* thread. As I recall, their goal is to eventually have every tree connect with every other tree. This works against what you want, but *no one* butchered anything of *yours*! That's just the way the website is designed. Since most of us whose families go back to Colonial times are related to each other, you could see how that could happen. You can't "fix" them all, as you have pointed out. Nor should you. You really should consider that someone more closely related to one of the 10,000 people just may know more about that particular branch than you do. Now, if you click on "your tree" (that is your cousin's tree) from the choices on OWT for a person, and find changes have been made there, and your cousin didn't do it, then you have a gripe. The *only* way to stop this proliferation is to remove a tree! Likewise with "Family Search" which is nothing but a compilation of trees sent in by individuals to the LDS shop. There is one fellow, George James RODERICKS (14853 Carnell Street Whittier, CA 90603) by name, who apparently took some of the CD's from the FTM early editions and uploaded them to the database, and now they are even in the FamilySearch Pedigree Resource File (4500 up to the letter "P"). Well, guess what. This guy is not related to me that I know of, and probably 1000 of the names came from "my" tree that he uploaded. How do I know? Because of a particular phrase I used in describing one of the relatives. Problem? Well, the FTM CD was #2. That was many years ago. Much of the information was undocumented, some of it was flat wrong! Do I care? Well, if it had my name on it instead of Rodericks', at least people could contact me for updated information. I wonder what he says when someone asks him? But, not my problem. Individual people like me, and including your cousin, likewise apparently, sent in good, bad, and indifferent information about *their* relatives to WFT or WorldConnect at RootsWeb. The fact that a machine inaccurately linked some of these to you is sad, but at the same time, irrelevant. None of this is "the word"; all if it is just "possibilities." Just what do you think is going to happen (bad) as a result of this linkage? Think about this. Maybe, just maybe, one of those connected trees will either (a) give you some evidence that you may have a error in your tree, or (b) give you some leads to some additional names to collect -- in-laws and such. If you want to "clean up" the inaccuracies, or unlink a tree, you don't have to "vote" by yourself. All you have to do is, hopefully, find the link, contact the "creator" of that tree and the two of you can "vote" together. Do you really think someone else wants to be connected to your cousin's tree when they aren't related? And, if the persons are actually related, don't you think they should have access to "correct" information? Maybe they will see the tree and fix theirs themselves, because they see what your cousin put up. If there is source information, of course. But, again, if you, and/or your cousin don't want her tree connected to any other trees, take it off of Ancestry/RootsWeb. Put it up on your own website, or another website that doesn't have the search engine and so on. I would direct you to one extremely good website, John Pritchett's "Virginians" at http://www.virginians.com/index.htm He not only has 86,000+ entries, not all of whom are related to him, he has done a masterful job of placing them in context, and identifying *his* source for the information. Not that it is all "correct" -- after all, there are frequently many different interpretations of documents, leading to different conclusions -- but he is always willing to entertain corrections that are valid. Sorry to go on and on here, but it seems this has been blown far out of proportion, sort of like my reactions when I haven't had my coffee in the morning. Regards, Pat (in Tucson) |-----Original Message----- |From: roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com |[mailto:roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Edwin and |Cornelia Moore |Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 19:48 |To: ROOTS-M@rootsweb.com |Subject: RE: [ROOTS-L] Major errors on Ancestry's One Great Tree | | |how many hours (make that days...weeks...perhaps months) must |I sit and |"vote" to have much of my more than 10,000 presently known |relatives filed |correctly in and by One World Tree? |are you crazy? this is an insane concept. I have more time on |my hands than |many, but not that kind of time. they have butchered my family |tree, and now |they expect me to make the corrections? literally thousands of |them? who's |crazy in this scheme, me for wanting my tree to be correctly |stored and |displayed (this goes for FamilySearch, as well, which also |butchered my |tree, worse than even One World Tree did), or them for |butchering it and |then expecting me to correct it? |I've already given them more than a piece of my mind regarding |this, and all |I got for it was a "so sorry, not our problem" type of reply. |in many ways they are a boon and a blessing, but in this they |failed on |every level. |it may work for someone who's research holds less than 100 |individuals, but |those of us who have been researching for 20 years cannot |possibly correct |all the errors in our files in one world tree. there just isn't enough |time....unless that is all one does....and I do mean ALL. |voting is NOT the answer. Cornelia | | |