Findmypast family trees changes

[Nic.]

Today I received an email from Findmypast containing the following information.

“We’re about to implement a pretty exciting change and thought you should know in advance.

From 1 July, the deceased ancestors in everyone’s trees will become shareable. Which means other members may receive hints about the dead ancestors in your tree. They’ll only be shared between members who have common ancestry – likely, a distant relative. Making family-tree building a more conducive, collaborative experience.

Your privacy is of the utmost importance... Therefore, any information on you or your living relatives will remain private. Equally, no-one else will be able to edit your ancestors’ details or see your tree – just you. So you’ll remain completely in control.”

So unfortunately we could now get the same terrible hints as we do from A******.

[CarolA3]

I have the same email with this additional paragraph:

[CarolA3]

And because they send me different emails to my old and new addresses, I have this:

[CarolA3]

None of which concerns me much as I don't have an online tree anywhere

Carol

[Nic.]

Carol

This should be an opt in not an opt out change. 

I’m sure there are many trees on their system which don’t have active users which means all of theses trees will appear.

Nic

[Finley 1]

Yes  received that  

stupidly cos I havent got a FindMyPast tree -- I have a cousin who is so so so Conspiracy theory that she thinks that this DNA will be the end of us all... one way or another.

I did it for one reason and thankfully it has fulfilled that reason.. It managed to tell me I am me and who my parents ACTUALLY ARE  bless em.. and their little aaargh fibs......

But here I am me..


I have created a tree or two  ALL private but allowed out to one or two very special people..ONLY   

People who are I feel Trustworthy.. but who knows..

Tomorrows problems are not yet known..

todays are enough to deal with..


xin

 

[CarolA3]

Carol

This should be an opt in not an opt out change. 

I’m sure there are many trees on their system which don’t have active users which means all of theses trees will appear.

Nic

I agree wholeheartedly Nic.  The second email I posted doesn't even mention the word 'optional'

Carol

[chris_49]

I got this email too. I didn't worry about it because - I thought - I don't have a tree on FindMyPast, or at least not one with anybody on it bar me.

Senior moment alert! I just checked and a years-old version of my tree is there. I must have imported a gedcom and totally forgotten about it! I'll make it private, but if you think you've not got a significant tree there - just check!

I agree,this should have been opt-in and not opt-out. It's not as if it's organ donation.

[BushInn1746]

Hi

I'm not putting any tree (so far) online, to a commercial website. Researchers should search for their own particular ancestors, in the town they got back to, rather than copy any old online information.

Someone was linking to Hood of Scarborough in the 1760s recently (possibly from posts on here). Some posts on here are just suggestions for me to research or things being tried.

Had the other person with a Tree on Ancestry checked more thoroughly in Register images online of the Yorkshire Parish and Township they had traced back to, they would find two 18th Century HOOD Marriages and Baptisms (both Marriages seem to have a same witness surname, who does not appear to be a church official).

 ----------

For Nuneaton, Warwickshire, Ancestry have put the Registers Images online but they must have only used the Familysearch LDS transcriptions? As they don't return on a search today.

The missing online Familysearch entries came to light 2005 and whilst researching back to circa 1718 the building occupiers and their surviving Ale-house and Common Inn Licences, for the Holly Bush, Stockingford, renamed The Plough Inn, Stockingford in 1813 / now The Plough Inn, Galley Common Public House), in Manor records of the Rt. Hon. Earl of Uxbridge Lord Paget and James Tomkinson Esq of Cheshire, etc.

Some transcriptions faithfully transcribed by the LDS volunteers must have been lost, whilst converting them in IGI Fiche and/or online formats?

Mark