I totally agree.. My concern (not my only concern but my main one) is that data submitted will be, as someone mentioned, etched in stone. There must be some way to update it. No matter how long one has been working on their family tree (30+ years in my case) it is never finished and it is and always will be a work in progress.As you indicated information that has been posted on the LDS Personal Ancestral Files is a perfect example of what can happen when data is not updated. Much of the info in those files was submitted many years ago and is absolutely wrong (some of it to the point of being ridiculous). I was told there is no way to correct or update the info that is already there and the only option is to submit my own info. That is not an acceptable solution to the problem. I am quite certain that continually updating info on a website would be a full time job and I for one do not envy anyone willing to undertake the task but that appears to be only option. Vonda In a message dated 9/16/2005 1:53:24 AM Central Standard Time, orinwells@wells.org writes: I have been occupied with other activities while this issue about the GEDCOM's has been flashing back and forth today. Let me throw my two bits worth into the fire. We all need to recognize that Bonita is making a valiant effort to make it possible for us to have the genealogies supporting the DNA testing on-line where users can view it and possibly contribute further to our combined efforts. I am personally very thankful for her efforts. I am also feeling very guilty that I have not had the time to provide her with the support she needs from me with regards to additional gedcoms, updates to the existing data on the website etc. I believe that, to Margaret's point, we must be prepared to make corrections to ANY of the genealogies (I hate to call them GEDCOMs as this is only the exchange media for the genealogies). that are posted. They must NOT be "set in stone". If we all have learned anything from the DNA it is that we can often discover that what we thought we knew may not be right. One of the worst problems with Ancestry.com, the LDS IGI and Personal Ancestral File, genealogies on-line, and many of the other Internet sources for information is that it is virtually impossible to be errors corrected. Even when the genealogies are placed on-line by an individual you often will get a very cold shoulder if you dare to suggest they have information that needs to be corrected. If we can provide a source that can be trusted, then the data will have credibility. But part of that credibility must be the method and willingness to make changes when new evidence surfaces as it does from time to time and I fully expect will happen from the DNA testing. We still have 3 or 4 new participants getting tested every month with no sign of slowing down. We have much to learn. As we learn it we will have to adjust what we are calling the "official" genealogies. Exactly how we will make the changes and the processes we will have to employ for this are yet to be determined. But we must allow for it. I fully expect we will discover new branches that we will need to add to many of the trees over the next year. If we find "children" that have been incorrectly attached to a couple, we must be prepared to correct this when it is found. Once we have the core for each family, the time to add a new branch or correct a name or remove a wrong branch should be simply to make the corrections to the base genealogy, generate the new web pages and post them to the website. At least it "should" be that simple. To accomplish this we all need to work together. Many different people have different parts of the puzzles (it isn't just one). There may be some genealogies that we have to question because connections have been suggested for which there appear to be no sources. My suggestion is that if it looks reasonable we can include it but there should be a way for us to make an indication that the entry has not been proven. If we have source documentation for a birth date, marriage date, death date, actual name, relationship, etc. that this needs to be documented with a reference. This may be going way beyond what Bonita is trying to accomplish, so we may have some trouble getting to the prefect scenario. We also need to let the family genealogists review the final product before it "goes to press" and make any corrections that can be justified and question anything that needs to be questioned. This weekend I hope to be able to spend some time on this by getting material Bonita still needs from me. I don't know exactly where she is with regard to the different families. Personally I would like to see us swing them in one at a time rather than shotgun them all in place at once. But that is just my opinion. Please be gentle with Bonita. We need her. We need what she is doing.