Messages DNA match now I hope that they do not respond

[Romilly]

Yes, well said TY, - I’m sure that’s usually the case.

The Trees that I was thinking of concerned my 2x Great Grandmother. Because she married 3 times, some descendants had got the details mixed up, or had missed out one or more of the marriages. My intention was certainly only to help, nothing more.

Romilly.

[ThrelfallYorky]

Just how I feel, Romilly.

[melba_schmelba]

I'm sure that most people who do feel they have to contact the owner of a tree to point out an error do it quite courteously, explaining how/why we have the proof that the relationship(s) they have down are very unlikely to be correct, and stressing that we would like to be informed if we'd got something similar wrong, especially if it involved haring off up a very wrong route, and proffering further information and help.
TY

Oh, I agree. But however polite and well intentioned you are, I often have the same experience as others, they either say thanks, and then never change the tree, or don't respond again at all and still don't change it .

[LizzieW]

There are trees on Ancestry with my g.grandfather as the son of a certain couple.  I was never convinced but lots of people have copied the information.  In the end I contacted one man and asked him where the information was to prove my g.grandfather was the son of the couple.  All he knew, which is what I knew, was that the couple did have a son (well 2 sons but one died) with the same name as my g.grandfather.  Fortunately this man had done his DNA with Ancestry as I had and there was no match.  So I was right and he removed all the information he'd added to his tree.  I contacted a few others who deleted the wrong information.  Obviously, they kept the correct son of the couple, but removed all the information that related to my g.grandfather, my gran, her children etc.  Of course, some people totally ignored me or just refused to believe they were wrong.

[guest189040]

I revisited for the third time my tree and my other DNA matches to the Cheshire origins of my family and my link to the DNA match is the only route I can find that meets the relationship criteria.

Some ancestors made the move into the Widnes / Prescot / St Helens area and other DNA matches that I have to distant Cousins with their origins in this golden triangle of Towns substantiate my tree.  One in particular has half the cM of the subjects DNA and I link to them at the parents of of one of the Common Ancestors of the subject and I share.

I have also revisited their tree and can see why they have made the links that they have, totally reliant on Names, irrespective of locations.

If they do respond then I will just say that Ancestry DNA shows us as Cousins but I have not found a proven link between the two of us and wish them well in their research.

[Pamela21]

Since everything has been digitalised I'm afraid it has encouraged laziness. Ancestry literally throws the information at you and it's too easy to just accept it without checking anything. So many people do that, or worse still, copy from other people's trees without verifying anything for themselves. I'd say half the trees on Ancestry are complete rubbish, and it's upsetting to find your family on a tree where you know they don't belong at all. I cross-reference everything carefully.
One or two ancestors have been VERY difficult to identify, and the excitement when you finally pin them down after sometimes years of searching!! I always want to shout it from the rooftops, but I agree some people don't seem interested in accuracy, which is not in the spirit of family history at all, because accuracy is everything! If you don't get it right then you are wasting your time.