Charani <SGBNOSPAM@ mail2genes.invalid> wrote: > On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:20:46 -0600, clifto wrote: > >> I hate to say it, but what I've seen of LDS so far is highly >> disappointing. What little tiny fragments of my family tree I've >> found there are sparse and inaccurate. I've pretty much stopped using >> their site as a resource. > > The IGI and their associated Pedigree and Ancestral files are a waste > of time because of the inaccuracies and outright fantasy entries. > It's a resource I rarely ever use now either. > > It is only one part of their holdings though, albeit the best known. Hugh's mention of the social networking value of the trees is something I overlooked/forgot about at first, but in retrospect it really IS a valuable asset. All of this really comes back to what I think I see as a good turn-around and new direction in software & sources.. It seems that it's going to be easier for people to use the new web resources and software to auto-record and pass on good, credible source citations in their trees. Wow. Imagine if all of the trees out there already had good sources/cites!!