General Chat

Hi how do people feel about members copying data from family trees, when they are not really related in any way? I have found these are usually people with hundreds of people on their trees, and once they get information, you never hear from them again. I have been contacted by people in the past, only to find one of their distant relatives was married to a distant relative of mine, so in reality they are only gathering names to add to their tree. :-S

They may be collecting data for the 'one world tree'

Strikes me as a bit pointless, but it does depend on how distant they are.

I have my grandfathers sibs on my tree, and that made me add details about their marriages...which lead me to add snipets about the wives family, more because they all evolved from a small village.

also added a few side lines because Mum is the last of her line, so others that are attached with the same surname are those that will carry it on, so they are of interest.

So am I a name collector? possibly- but for a reason, not for the sake of it

It does niggle a bit if they take and don't ask. But others would say, if you open your tree to somebody that could imply an invitation to take any names they feel relevant.

I have only complained once when somebody took lots of names of recent, but not living, people who were not related to them directly. But they weren't removed and I didn't bother about it any more. Not worth stressing over really. :-)

you've double posted Mavis ;-)

Is there a way I can copy my relatives from another tree. We knew nothing about my father-in-law family, and have now found them in another tree dating back to 1650, there are so many of them it will be a marathon to do it manually
Thanks Cheryl

Cheryl, are you concerned at all that the information on the other tree is all correct. If not then i think there is a way you can download it, but not sure how, as not a whizz at that sort of thing.

I think that siblings are relevant, and they give a bigger picture of families as a
whole. So that is what i have done throughout my tree. I dont consider that i am a name collector, as i really enjoy the research.

So, not everyone can be called a name collector, just because they have a large tree.

Sometimes i have a little laugh to myself, as on a nother site, people copy all sorts of information, that is obviously not correct, but hey, no matter. !!

Sue :-)

I guess I'd be classed as a name collector.

I have a big GR tree, but my the tree I have on my own software is huge.

I love finding my ancestors, but I'm fascinated by the "cousins" ~ they went all over the world. They might be 10th cousins 100 times removed, but they're still my cousins!

btw ~ I didn't get all the information from GR trees.

Its possible that some people are just Number Crunchers i/e I,ve got xxxxxxx number of people on my tree.If it pleases them so be it, :-D Myself, Direct decendants Only, Inlaws/outlaws not interested.**M**.

I'm with you on this, Scozz. I love to explore the lives of all the branches of my family tree, no matter how far removed. There are some fascinating stories to be uncovered, and still quite relevant to the family as a whole.

That's all fine if you have permission, but it is not cheap buying certificates, and sitting for hours searching archives, maybe miles away from your home, for someone to come and steal the whole information. Yes I put it on Genes Reunited, (MY fault, my mistake) but have also taken it off again, so now no-one can see my tree. I particularly objected because some details of living relatives were taken without permission.