Genealogy Chat

I am sure this has come up before but I cannot find thread.

I recently was asked to share my tree but as I don't always -depending on the nearness of the relative- I always send a worksheet of the family in question and offer any more information if required.

A few weeks later I was just trawling through my surname on Search Trees and found that this person had found out my son's name and has now added it to his tree on this site,together with another close family member.
I wrote back to him explaining that this information hadn't been passed to him and in a nutshell, as kindly as I could, asked him to remove the names.Partly because I feel responsible for their appearance even though I haven't given any of that information. I was sent a cynical reply explaining that I did indeed not give that information.

Why would anyone want to take a name of a 4th cousin in order to add to their tree? As this has never happened before in all the sharing/giving information I just wondered if it is the sort of thing that has happened to others on this site.-jl

Its the same old story, Once you give info to someone else you have no control over it,

you can ask them to remove certain info from this site and also ask GR to remove it,

But you will still not have control, the info you pass on to anyone ( close family or a distant rellie ) can and does end up on other web sites

Roy

Hi Roy
I would have accepted it if I had given the information and I know it is possible now to get some of it off freebmd. As it is an unusual name it is easy I suppose to get some of my older in laws details but not my son's name as freebmd isn't so up to date. It just seems creepy to me that anyone should want to take someone elses family.-jl

You could ask Genes to remove it as the person doesn't have permission from your son and any other living relation to add them to their tree.
They are breaking the terms and conditions of the site.

Janet, I do understand what you mean by creepy - we, or at lest most of us, know how to find the names of living relatives, But it is still a shock when we discover someone else has done the same with us!

Your contact is breaking the T&Cs of GR. Under the FAQ tab, Privacy tips, it says

**You must have permission** to include any living individuals details or photos in your family tree.

** these words in bold

http://www.genesreunited.co.uk/content.page/help_privacy_tips

If s/he won't remove them, GR will at your request.

Why not have distant cousins on your tree? I do and vice versa for many of mine.

The issue only arises when one or other party does not wish to have their name on anothers tree in which case you observe their wishes.

Sharing trees is one of the most difficult decisions to make. In most cases this can be done, but I found a two instances where I was deeply offended by the most distant relative adding my sister who lived just 5 months onto their tree. I removed the permission as soon as I realised and now very rarely share my tree.

I would add here that this person was not a member of genes and was the sister of a member who was doing one side of their family parent and the member the other. Unfortunately, it was too late for a few members of my family being added before I withdrew my permission. She wondered why I had withdrawn her viewing my tree, but I decided not to pressure the issue and put it down to experience. I also withdrew from corresponding.

The first person who started to copy my tree totally and was a very distant relative said she thought it was fun to have a large tree.

All of this is against the rules we know, but sometimes trust is abused and there is little we can do about it apart from trying to be a good judge of the genuine requests.

A very good point brought up by Janet, but I cannot see how it can be avoided. The genuine family members would suffer if this system was withdrawn and clearly the rules say permission is required.

Thanks Janet for raising this point - a very good one!

Regards,

Sappho

Thanks for the advice/replies everyone-jl

Don't forget that the rule re getting permission to include living persons is only a GR Condition of using the site.

Other sites may not have the same rule and many operate outside the juristiction of English law anyway.

I decided long ago that i would only have a very basic tree on GR the reason was because i am not interested in anyone else's tree/research as far as my tree goes,

My main tree is kept on my PC using FTM2006 If any one other than a very close rellie wants any info via this site or any other site, then i insist on only giving/sending the relevant part of my tree by gedcom through emails, But only after proof that the connection is a proven one.


Roy

As I said before Roy I didn't give any information about my living relatives and they are not on this site even in a hidden context. My original question was simply to ask if anyone else had had this problem-j

Janet,

This topic actually comes up as often as the moon goes around the earth and there have been countless threads on the subject.

Opinions vary as to whether there is or isn't a problem and from with members who have no problem to opening their trees to others and those who would never share their tree under any circumstances whatsoever.

I actually share mine with over 400 other members and have access to over 650 trees on the site.

Janet, I think we all learne by our mistakes, and yes you will find most people who have been researching for a number of years have had this or a simular problem in the past

Hope this answers your question

Roy

Fair comment Roy-thanks - jl

I have hidden all living relations on my tree,I was intrigued to find close relations including myself on a strangers tree but at this stage do not see it as a problem but have got straight in touch to find out more.
Susan