I am with you all the way, Eira. I work on Family Tree Maker (Ancestry) which picks up and displays likely matches to any open Trees on Ancestry. I have long since taken down what appeared of my "Public Member Tree" on line and have "privatised" my work since, as someone had picked up most of my tree and was adding their "research" of Richardsons who were in no way connected to mine. However, I still get the "hints" if something appears on a tree on the public members trees. I have spent a lot of money and time on the Scotlandspeople pay per view site digging up ancestors in my Richardson line and have managed to get right back to the earliest date of a 1659 baptism. Last year i had sent a Tree Chart of all of this family line to a cousin of my late mother's, for his 97th birthday. I had found a "hint" shortly after sending off the chart and on following it, I discovered someone who had appropriated what had been on line before I privatised. I contacted said person via Ancestry and explained she had the wrong Elizabeth marrying into the family and asked if the marriage certificate had been obtained. The response was that no she hadn't, would probably do so but would first speak to her Granddad (naming him) as he "had done a lot of research on the family". Her Granddad was Mother's cousin!! I responded pointing out that I had just sent him the Chart and requested that she not put it on line. Only to discover a few days ago that a substantial part had appeared on line. But once again said person had created a pickle; attaching, from Ancestry, another "ancestor" who did not belong and included a half sibling as "Francis" on my ggrandfather's generation who was actually listed on my tree with the abbreviated name "Frank" correctly transcribed from the records I worked on. What annoys me in all this is that I have a large file of biographical narrative on every person on the Tree chart which I wanted to send to this elderly cousin. I am now hesitating. I have no objection to sharing any research with legit researchers and have pointed this out to said person. But I have also told her that when I find something of interest on a Public Member Tree I always contact the "owner" to ask the source of their information and if I discover that our families are connected I then ask if I may add the information to my research. Simple manners! And it has never failed for me, I share as generously when I am asked for info in the same way. Double GRRR!! Lyn Surrey From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: 05 March 2014 08:01 To: [email protected] Subject: SOUTH-AFRICA-EASTERN-CAPE Digest, Vol 9, Issue 70 I want to rant about the importation of my family data undertaken at no little expense by me in London and elsewhere by people who have downloaded my data from Geni and have placed it on My Heritage where for a fee I can view my own research. I know the data is in the public domain and to that extent does not belong to me but what I loath are the ignorant errors made by those who download the data. For example, Quakers did not use the days or months of the year as did the non-Quakers in England and could have noted a birth as occurring on the 'third day of the seventh month' and now by the downloaders as the 3rd of July' whereas prior to 1752, the seventh month was called September by non-Quakers. I would like these people to care enough about genealogy to be aware that any second-hand data should always be verified before posting online and not to pass off the research as their own. Grr. Eira