Trees Private AND Searchable?

[jillruss]

Sorry if this has already been covered - (I must have been off sick that day!)

But what does it mean when the 'new' profile page tells me that a match has a 'PRIVATE SEARCHABLE TREE'?

I thought it was one or the other, but not both - and private trees were NOT SEARCHABLE by their very nature?

Confused...

[davidft]

I believe what that means is that the tree is private so others can not look at it. However it is searchable in that it turns up in search results and then if you want to look at the tree itself you have to message the tree owner and ask them for access.

EDIT: This is what Ancestry says


Private Tree

This setting makes your tree "Private" so that it can't be viewed as a Public Member Tree. Note that the information from your tree will still be indexed for searching, but those who find your information can't view your tree without your permission.

What does this mean?
Even if you don't share your tree, other members can still learn if a specific deceased individual is in your tree, in addition to the birth year and birthplace of the person and your username (but no personal information about you).

They can then contact you anonymously through the Connection Service on Ancestry sites to request more information. Keep in mind that members who want to learn from your tree may also have helpful information about your tree to offer you in exchange.

(Option) Also prevent your tree from being found in the search index.

Note: although your tree will instantly become public or private, it usually takes about a month or more to be reflected in the search index.

[hallmark]

I have mine Private but Searchable.... so if I have Joe Bloggs born Tiwanaku 1777 and you have Joe Bloggs born Tiwanaku 1777 we will both get a Hint of this one Person as a possible match.

I can't see and then rob your Tree nor you mine.

You have to contact me or I contact you.... or we can Ignore each other   

[jillruss]

Thanks, davidft.

So, my private tree is really not private unless I click on the option ' Also prevent yout tree from being found in the search index'?

It seems to me that searchable trees are 'key' to us DNA types in locating matches, common ancestors, Thrulines etc so I'm okay with that as long as it doesn't show up when any old Tom, Dick or Harold searches on Public Trees. It also seems like a damn good idea to put as many siblings and children on there in order to take advantage of the fact.

Cue: my mission (should I choose to accept it!) for the next few months!!! 

ADDED: hallmark - I get plenty of those 'ignores' already!!

[davidft]

Thanks, davidft.

So, my private tree is really not private unless I click on the option ' Also prevent yout tree from being found in the search index'?

Yes that is the only way to make it totally private.

It also seems like a damn good idea to put as many siblings and children on there in order to take advantage of the fact.

Yes they do actually recommend that somewhere in their familytrees or DNA notes sections as a way of increasing your chances of making \ confirming matches. However there search facility isn't the easiest so no direct link.

[Flemming]

The bit that puzzles me is how you can search on a name and list of matches come up without any trees at all. How does Ancestry know a person without a tree has Mungo-Bloggins in their line?

EDIT: Sorry, I should clarify this is for DNA matches. Sorry again if I'm on the wrong board.

[davidft]

The bit that puzzles me is how you can search on a name and list of matches come up without any trees at all. How does Ancestry know a person without a tree has Mungo-Bloggins in their line?

EDIT: Sorry, I should clarify this is for DNA matches. Sorry again if I'm on the wrong board.

My opinion. What they are doing is not comparing one person with one person but comparing one person with a whole bunch of people who share some DNA. Of the ones that share a specific section of DNA say the same 35cM on chromosome 9 they then look to see if any of them have a tree and if two or more do they then suggest the common ancestors in those trees to all who share the 35cM match on chromosome 9. It is a bit hit and miss and that is why all "suggested" matches need to be independently verified. Alas some people see its a match from Ancestry and so must be right, but it not always is, and add it to their tree and that is how bad trees with spurious and incorrect information proliferate over time.

[Flemming]

I suppose what also doesn't help is them not showing you shared matches below 20cM. Here's someone with Mungo-Bloggins in a search, without a tree, but they're at 19.85cM so you can't see where the match may be coming from. Ah well, keeps the brain active.

[jillruss]

This has set me off -

I started adding more obscure rellies to my private tree yesterday - children and wives of siblings etc.

I had a good laugh: found one who'd married a Minnie Cooper!!

Then I nearly cried when I found one who'd not only lost two sons in WW1 but, when I l looked more closely, they were killed on the same day (worked out it was probably Ypres). How heart breaking must that have been?