Genealogy Chat

Let's be right though. GR couldn't really give two hoots as long as you pay your membership. You have to shout VERY loudly (and get ignored for a while ) before they will do much of anything. They cover their backs and take no responsibility for anything on the site but are quick to judge. Recent events show that to be true. I wouldn't renew my membership when the time comes if it were only 5pence. As anyone from a month or two ago will know u USED to be a very active person on these boards, i couldn't really give a good word for this place nowadays. Glen

Bea I share your concern. I cannot, for the life of me, see the point in putting children under 16 on your GR tree. You are not going to pick up ANY genuine contact from their names. And the possible misuse that details of under-16s could be put to, makes my blood run cold. On a general point - if you get a living person's permission to include them on your GR tree, you cannot pass that permission on to a third party - all permissions must be granted on a one to one basis. OC

When you publish your tree you, you alone are responsible for ensuring that you have the necessary permissions. GR are not responsible for this, If you believe that someone else has published details of a living person, without permission, then ask them to remove the details. If they refuse, or ignore your request, then contact GR and they will automatically remove the details.

When I am searching through My Tree Matches I quite often see names of very young children on there, born 2001, 2002, even 2006! Babies can't give permission, can they? I am really surprised that GR allows this.

It is actually against GR rules to put living people on your tree without their permission.

Am I right in thinking that hidden living relatives no longer show up in name searches?

<< Well I'm not too happy with it all. Some people don't even know I've done a tree, they might be a bit sensitive. >> You really ought to ask people's permission before putting their details on a public tree. I do have living people in my GR tree, but like OC I never let people see my tree. Once I'm happy there's a connection I usually email them an extract from my offline tree. There are a few people who have access to my complete tree but they are definite proven relatives. J

Well I'm not too happy with it all. Some people don't even know I've done a tree, they might be a bit sensitive. Think I'll delete it and start again. Thanks again to everyone

I have not been using the new tree either but on the old tree once someone had contacted you even if you sent them that's not my relative answer it would still show by the name as contacted so you could guess who they belonged to. Anne

Jennifer I havent looked at my tree since the new programme came out, so Jeanette's knowledge is probably more upto date than mine. OC

Thanks everyone - much appreciated Jeannette does this mean that if I choose not to show living relatives then if someone views the tree, they still can't access the living relatives names from the list? This really is a problem GR should sort out. Jennifer

you can't see list of reletives from other trees now only the trees Jeanette

Oh well............thanks anyway for the advice I do fee there should be a better way round it. Jennifer

Jennifer Afraid so - either that, or don't open your tree. OC

does this mean I have to go in and edit them all? Jennifer

Jennifer Be aware though, that those 'hidden people' will still be in full view in your list of names - not difficult for anyone to pick up who has access to the rest of your tree. I don't open my tree to anyone, but I have all living people in my tree disguised as 'Living Male' and 'Living Female' anyway - cos I don't want them identifiable through my names list. OC

thanks Gillian I started to get a bit anxious Jennifer

There are people on my tree who may not wish their details to be shared. When letting people view tree is it possible to limit the details, or stop at a certain year?