Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

The British Newspaper Archive

British Newspaper Archive

Read about historical events at the time they were happening. Perhaps you'll discover your ancestor in their local newspaper?

Start searching


  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Suggestions: TREE

Page 2 + 1 of 20

  1. «
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. »
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date


PricklyHolly Report 29 Aug 2012 11:32

I suggest you give us back the option of the "Old Tree"

Simples!! :-)


Ann Report 29 Aug 2012 15:46

Old tree option please


Simon Report 29 Aug 2012 17:01

What chance of someone form the Genes Team now posting a note on this thread to indicate that they have read and inwardly digested the comments therein???

Slim, I guess, but it really would be a morale booster for all those posters who have taken the time to write up their comments about the ghastly new tree.

Even better, of course, would be for GR to now say what they are actually going to do to improve matters. The majority opinion from this thread is firmly that the new format is disliked (to put it mildly) and that many are proposing to leave GR when their current sub runs out. Surely that should be a matter of concern for GR and make them LISTEN to what us paying customers WANT. (But maybe they don't realise that because they don't actually read this thread - despite what they say?


Rosemary Report 29 Aug 2012 17:15

I used to use Genes Reunited a lot but I hardly ever bother now I dont like it and find it complicated to use. I will not be renewing my membership.



Ian Report 29 Aug 2012 19:23

Its only my personal opinion but I always felt this was the best site for researching and growing a family tree.

I now think its the worst, all this has happened in the space of 1 month.

Simon I agree with you some comment from GR would go a long way.


Greyhound Report 29 Aug 2012 19:37

I like the old tree at least it did not delete info from my tree like the new one. :-|


Martin Report 29 Aug 2012 23:30

What I want to change about this new inferior tree is the way the text boxes in the slide-out panel have the same words typed into them as the headings above. It makes it harder to see the information you have entered as the occupation box says 'occupation' and the Place of baptism box says 'Place of baptism' and so on.

Surely we're intelligent enough to know what goes were without having to see this twice?


KenSE Report 30 Aug 2012 09:35

The Old tree used to warn you when you tried to leave an amended record, that the changes had not been saved. On the New tree it is too easy to forget to save.


KenSE Report 30 Aug 2012 09:47

The place names offered seem to be the places that currently exist and seem quite inapprpriate for records from the nineteenth century and earlier and of course there were a lot of county changes in the mid twentieth century.

I would like these alternates to be included in the lists offered


Porkie_Pie Report 30 Aug 2012 17:11

Could i suggest that GR amend your advice in the FAQ relating to compatibility view under the heading Unable to see the whole of my details panel NEW and Unable to view the whole of the dashboard NEW

I have tried your advice on IE7 through to IE9 and your solution does not work

I either have to use the zoom function on my browser or go to full screen view using my browser F11 key because the full screen view in the tree it's self does not work and i did report that to you whilst doing the beta testing

And before you blame my screen resolution i have tried all combinations

Also can i just remind you that most members are not spotty 14 year old computer geeks and as such constantly having to make changes to their browser is not an option,

One of the first rule when in business is to no and understand the strengths and weaknesses of their employees,

The same rule applies when trying to meeting customer expectations

see my thread



Simon Report 30 Aug 2012 17:56

Hmm. 24 hours later and still no sign of a reply here from GR. Presumably that means they haven't read this thread; which is a shame as more sensible comments are continuing to flow in from members trying their best to improve the appalling tree that has been foisted upon us. :-|


Roger Report 31 Aug 2012 09:52

But GR won't reply because they won't admit they got it wrong.

The old tree was more user friendly than this ever will be.

As we did not have to zoom in or out to see what we want to see and it was miles easier to use.

Soory but this is a fact GENES.


RolloTheRed Report 1 Sep 2012 20:54

If somebody selects "do not show living relatives" for shared trees then in practice any entry with birth < 120 years is not shown.

Suggest it would be better to change the rule so that people for whom a death date is known and shown are not to be included as living relatives.
Another well known FH product works on this basis.


+++DetEcTive+++ Report 2 Sep 2012 10:41

Whilst accepting that it is impractical to print out a large tree in its entirety, it would be useful to print the 'immediate family' view.

Currently this is not possible.


RolloTheRed Report 2 Sep 2012 19:14

Printing descendents, ancestors for a given person works fine though.


Simon Report 4 Sep 2012 21:13

Oh dear, oh dear, still nothing here on this board to show that anybody from GR has read this thread.


Sheila Report 4 Sep 2012 22:16

I would much prefer to go back to the old tree. Will probably not renew as I don't enjoy using GR anymore.


Ian Report 5 Sep 2012 01:44


It is obvious that nobody at GR is even reading this thread, I quote from the 1st message on this thread
"Please note: duplicate posts, general questions and anything that isn't a suggestion will be removed."

Well there have been posts that are not suggestions and they have not been removed. Therefore I assume it is not being read.


Simon Report 5 Sep 2012 09:30

Well, I now gather that Estelle is on holiday until tomorrow (Thursday), so perhaps she'll read the thread when she gets back and answer all the queries and put in hand all our suggested improvements.

After all, what it seems we all want is to have a fully functioning, user-friendly tree and the many suggestions on this thread, together with those which have been sent to GR individually through the 'feedback' system, must surely lead them to actually make some positive changes to the current tree... mustn't they?

From reading some of the other similar threads on this and related topics, it seems that many who are not fussed by the new tree use GR more for the Community aspect than for building their trees. It us us tree builders in the main who have been saying that the new tree is no good and not fit for purpose and bemoan the loss of the old user-friendly tree.

I'm quite happy to accept that technology moves on and that the old tree system was creaking at the seams and needed to be updated both in style and function... BUT... please give us something useable!


Sandra Report 6 Sep 2012 11:44

i do not usualy put things on the boards but i am so fed up with this new tree
i dont think any of gr people are listening but when all its members dont
renew membership maybe then they will realise what they have spoilt