I think the problem is threefold :- 1. The ancestry phenomena has peaked, probably from its high spot of around 2006 2. Ancestry (the programme) in itself has become more unreliable. This has come from the "public trees" placed on its site. The essence of ancestry is Do It Yourself not copy others. I have a Family History programme which is linked to My Heritage and have evidence of numerous examples of where my tree has been copied in exact detail by others and then shown as a perfect match! 3. Those of us that have been tracing ancestry over a period of time, have literally done to death post 1837. Its pre 1837 that is still an interest but records pre this date are not always in existence. Regards Graham

I have to be honest Graham, whilst I understand where you are coming from, I disagree with all three points ;-) If you mean by "The ancestry phenomena", interest in family history or genealogy, nothing could be further from the truth, its still an expanding market (and some) Ancestry isn't a program as such, I presume you mean Ancestry online trees, Ancestry, like any other online tree space provider are just a facilitator, they do not and neither should they police the input of others, they like any other online tree are susceptible to error and it behoves each researcher to check each record/person out thoroughly themselves, copying or falsify family trees is not a new phenomena, its been going on as long as man has walked the earth. There have always been (and probably always will be) those who want a quick fix, so either copy others research or take the one "that looks near enough" , whilst there are more copying these days, it still doesn't change my original point that it behoves each researcher to check themselves (I never did get the joy in copying someone elses research anyway, the joy is in the hunting and finding surely) a simple case in point that pervades the online trees of many is the "family coat of arms" displayed by many, enough said on that I think As to your last point, show me someone who has completed their tree post 1837 (or pre or both) and I will show you a fibber, it simply can't be completed, there is always something new to look into and learn, I have been researching for donkeys years and consider whilst I have amassed a great deal I have only scratched the surface as yet As to pre civil registration records, there is a massive amount of information and records available online now, more than ever and growing almost daily, we have never been so blessed with access to records, albeit a small percentage when compared to the whole, but still enough to keep of out of mischief for a good deal of time to come Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 18/03/2016 10:30, Graham Taylor via wrote: > > > I think the problem is threefold :- > > > > 1. The ancestry phenomena has peaked, probably from its high spot of > around 2006 > > 2. Ancestry (the programme) in itself has become more unreliable. This > has come from the "public trees" placed on its site. The essence of ancestry > is Do It Yourself not copy others. I have a Family History programme which > is linked to My Heritage and have evidence of numerous examples of where my > tree has been copied in exact detail by others and then shown as a perfect > match! > > 3. Those of us that have been tracing ancestry over a period of time, > have literally done to death post 1837. Its pre 1837 that is still an > interest but records pre this date are not always in existence. > > Regards > > > > Graham --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Cant say I agree with you Nivard Too many people these days want instantaneous results. The Pizza effect. You bung it in the oven and its ready in 5 minutes. Genealogy is not like that. It takes time, effort, diligence, thought, and money. It's like a Jigsaw puzzle and you need to put all the pieces in place before you complete the picture. Programmes like "Who do you think you are ?" don't actually help. Too often they show a celebrity typing into a pre paid search site and bingo the first one they come across is the one they want. It ignores all the pre programme research that will have gone into the one hour programme. Perhaps its just that those coming into genealogy have neither the time, the energy, the patience or the inclination to take days, weeks and months researching , because that is what it takes. Accept there is a combination of many factors but I can't agree with you that research is expanding. Information is expanding but can we trust the information that is being peddled? Regards Graham -----Original Message----- From: eng-lincsgen-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:eng-lincsgen-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Nivard Ovington via Sent: 18 March 2016 10:55 To: eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LIN] Quiet on Lincs I have to be honest Graham, whilst I understand where you are coming from, I disagree with all three points ;-) If you mean by "The ancestry phenomena", interest in family history or genealogy, nothing could be further from the truth, its still an expanding market (and some) Ancestry isn't a program as such, I presume you mean Ancestry online trees, Ancestry, like any other online tree space provider are just a facilitator, they do not and neither should they police the input of others, they like any other online tree are susceptible to error and it behoves each researcher to check each record/person out thoroughly themselves, copying or falsify family trees is not a new phenomena, its been going on as long as man has walked the earth. There have always been (and probably always will be) those who want a quick fix, so either copy others research or take the one "that looks near enough" , whilst there are more copying these days, it still doesn't change my original point that it behoves each researcher to check themselves (I never did get the joy in copying someone elses research anyway, the joy is in the hunting and finding surely) a simple case in point that pervades the online trees of many is the "family coat of arms" displayed by many, enough said on that I think As to your last point, show me someone who has completed their tree post 1837 (or pre or both) and I will show you a fibber, it simply can't be completed, there is always something new to look into and learn, I have been researching for donkeys years and consider whilst I have amassed a great deal I have only scratched the surface as yet As to pre civil registration records, there is a massive amount of information and records available online now, more than ever and growing almost daily, we have never been so blessed with access to records, albeit a small percentage when compared to the whole, but still enough to keep of out of mischief for a good deal of time to come Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 18/03/2016 10:30, Graham Taylor via wrote: > > > I think the problem is threefold :- > > > > 1. The ancestry phenomena has peaked, probably from its high spot of > around 2006 > > 2. Ancestry (the programme) in itself has become more unreliable. This > has come from the "public trees" placed on its site. The essence of > ancestry is Do It Yourself not copy others. I have a Family History > programme which is linked to My Heritage and have evidence of numerous > examples of where my tree has been copied in exact detail by others > and then shown as a perfect match! > > 3. Those of us that have been tracing ancestry over a period of time, > have literally done to death post 1837. Its pre 1837 that is still an > interest but records pre this date are not always in existence. > > Regards > > > > Graham --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-LINCSGEN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Yes, Ancestry (the programme) has a lot to answer for. I have a friend who started researching her family tree last year and thanks to a public tree on Ancestry is now convinced that she is directly descended from the 6th century rulers of Saxony. However she has said that I don't have to curtsy to her *every* time we meet! Jean On 18 March 2016 at 10:30, Graham Taylor via <eng-lincsgen@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > > I think the problem is threefold :- > > > > 1. The ancestry phenomena has peaked, probably from its high spot of > around 2006 > > 2. Ancestry (the programme) in itself has become more unreliable. This > has come from the "public trees" placed on its site. The essence of > ancestry > is Do It Yourself not copy others. I have a Family History programme which > is linked to My Heritage and have evidence of numerous examples of where my > tree has been copied in exact detail by others and then shown as a perfect > match! > > 3. Those of us that have been tracing ancestry over a period of time, > have literally done to death post 1837. Its pre 1837 that is still an > interest but records pre this date are not always in existence. > > Regards > > > > Graham > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ENG-LINCSGEN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >