General Chat

My tree is also private. If I contact anyone or they contact me, I will give them the information they need for that part of the tree, have also sent photos and copies of certs. Just because people have a tree does not mean they have to share ALL branches with anyone or everyone. Any information that is shared with me I still verify eventually with census and certs and any other information I can get.

I am not being selfish, but what would anyone want with my husbands tree if they are only researching one tiny branch of mine.

I would also like to add that some people tread down the wrong path and I am unwilling to follow it. Just because the information is on someone's elses tree does not mean it is correct and I have found it often is very wrong. One person with the wrong information can carry over to hundreds of others. Rather do my own research.

Gail

I think you are missing the point. If you are not prepared to pool your effort with others, your progress will be slow and cumbersome. I see no point reinventing the wheel where someone has already trod the same path. I certainly would not have been able to make links from Scotland to Cambridge to Hampshire to Ireland in a few weeks without access to the Public trees on Ancestry, LDS, Rootschat and various other sites that are generous with their information. In the same light, I have been happy to share with others information that I have gleaned from certificates, trips to the local archive offices, CDs from Family History Societies, etc.
I have dozens of potential matches on Ancestry and GR but while I can check a potential match in Ancestry with a couple of clicks, I have to go through a laborious process in GR.
I do like to have confirmation of a source and am obviously dubious about those with trees with 17,000 people in them but unless people readily share information, general progress will be slow.
I find it interesting that some FHS hang onto their data like grim death but others are happy to share it.

Oh well, Robert, your loss... you wouldn't be able to access my tree on Ancestry, either..... not without my permission.

As Ann said, it costs a lot of time and money to verify the info we have... and quite a bit that has been readily available on Ancestry with regard my own ancestors in other trees is very often totally incorrect, for instance, in one, my father was my son and my brother my husband, so good job I am thorough and check it all out for myself....

I will happily and proudly offer all I have to those I am certain have a connection... but don't want any old Tom Dick or Harriet delving around in my gene pool, thank you, lolol

Love

Daff xxx

Your choice Robert but you wont find all trees on Ancestry either not all trees are public. As far as I am concerned my tree is my property to share with who I choose, and I never refuse a request for information but I am the one who has proved my tree by paying for all certificates etc. How do you know that information you find on public trees is correct, without checking with the tree owner how do you know they have not just guessed and put somebody on their tree?

I am finding it irritating to constantly have to contact other users and get their permission before being able to see records.
This is a major downside as far as I am concerned. I am making all my progress on Ancestry, where the majority of trees are public. I can sit down with Ancestry and search on a name and immediately know if there is a link or not. The whole process in Genes is tedious and long winded. I will not be renewing my subscription when it comes up.