Isn't this just a bit of marketeer-speak, that tries to deflect from the real issue by focussing on something else that is largely spurious? It's even less convincing than the comparison table put out by The Genealogist in an attempt to show how their website is better than Ancestry and Find My Past. In both cases, they concentrate on what they do with the data they hold, when the real issue is the quantity and scope of the data itself. 180 million Find a Grave records versus 30 million on Billion Graves (so they've only got another 970 million to go - another bit of marketeer-speak!) tells you pretty much all you need to know about which is the better. Or it would if Find a Grave told us how many of their Memorials had photos of the gravestones. >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2019 14:14:01 +1000 >From: Steve Boyd <boydsd@tpg.com.au> >Subject: [BK] Difference between Find-A-Grave and BillionGraves >To: bk@rootsweb.com >Message-ID: <38372f97-cebd-6cf8-5387-8329ccbbcd06@tpg.com.au> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > >G'day all > >I just found this article (by BillionGraves, part 1 of 2) outlining the >differences between the two cemetary mapping sites. > >https://blog.billiongraves.com/2019/04/17/what-is-the-difference-between-billiongraves-and-find-a-grave-part-i-researching/ > >I would be interested to hear if anyone has experiences which refute the >BillionGraves claims. >I find that there are more graves in Australia listed in BillionGraves >than in Find-A-Grave. > >Steve Boyd >Melton, Victoria >Australia > >