Suggestions

If genes reunited maintain that the site will not be moderated - unlike sites such as rootschat - I would strongly urge that, like the success board, the posts are moderated in the find living relatives board.

It should not be up to the members to report threads for review but, since the inception of this board, many have had to be reported. Also, once reported for review, several have had a name and precise date still visible to public view.

I have just had an email from the corporation, in response to my attempt to draw attention to a *series* of posts on that board that, together, constititute the same kind of privacy violation as the poster's initial post combining the information did (and was removed).

In it, the staff member said that if I thought anything was missing from the guidelines at the top of the board in question, my feedback and suggestions of what else they could add would be welcomed.

I think any comment I could make on that would be overkill.

http://www.genesreunited.co.uk/boards.page/board/suggestions

There are roughly 20/30 posts on 'Living relatives' per day... surely it is possible for GR to have each of these posts sent to them for 'pre-post moderation' ?

Even I with my limited capabilities managed to open a blog wherein posts were sent to my inbox for moderation...that would take only one part-time member of staff to do the job.

Looking at the boards summary, the number of threads in the success stories and the find living relatives boards, it has to be possible for the latter to be moderated in the same way as the former.

I have just reported yet another thread in the find living relatives board because it gave far too much personal information.

It would be a good idea for any posts made on that board to be ok'd by GR first.

It seems to be the first time posters who are the worst offenders regarding personal infomation.

I have just reported one also

jax

I don't use this board myself but can fully appreciate JaneyCanuck's concerns. It seems that there are two main issues (a) the validity of the person making the enquiry and (b) the provision of the information requested.

Imagine the scenario where person A posts a query about a living person B (for whatever reason) which is then read by person C who happens to know person B. There need not be a family connection,it could just be that person C knows person B as a neighbour, work colleague etc.

Information about person B could innocently be provided to person A by person C who is just trying to be helpful.

How would the identity or whereabouts of person B be protected? Could it be protected before person C provides details on an "open" site?

I agree with previous comments and feel that this is a potential minefield.

Heh, I'm more concerned that Person C looks at it and says

What?? My neighbour Person B had (or fathered) a child 40 years ago and never told anyone?? Well now I'm going to have to tell Person B's employer and vicar and spouse!

But yes, Person A may well be a stalker of some variety, that is the other concern. There isn't much can be done to prevent that on this sort of site -- but where other members can post in the thread, concerns can be voiced and if not answered reasonably, reports made. (I'm thinking of non-custodial parent and former-spouse situations in particular.)

The regular members at this site keep a careful eye out for other members answering queries in thread by posting personal details about living people in the thread -- we do report them, and point out that they should be sent privately.

Almost all regular members will get a feel for the query first, then note in the thread that they are sending info privately, like "found marriage and sending info about births privately". That way privacy is protected and everyone knows not to do the same research over again.

Oh dear,the use of Norcap services isnt free to anyone.!

a high registration fee is payable upfront,,,,then it goes on a sliding scale,,,,, a charge is made for each step which can run into £100s+.....SS have been using referals to them for a long long time because SS do not have any search facilities at their disposal or the funding of staff for it.....some areas of SS can interact and gain results but their time is limited and so leads to a long drawn out process of accessing, processing and completion.