Online tree etiquette

kathyc · Post by **kathyc** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 8:58 pm

The thread about the potentially stolen tree on GR got me wondering what the general consensus is about posting legitimately-obtained tree information. Is there an accepted way to treat this information?

For example, I added an entire branch of the family to my tree from a distant cousin I discovered a few months ago who sent me his GEDCOM file to merge with my own. Now what do I do when I share my tree online? Is it okay to include this branch given to me by someone else, or should I exclude these relatives from things like my public tree on Ancestry and from private sharing of information with new connections? I have erred on the side of keeping his information confidential, particularly with regard to living relatives, but I wonder if I'm missing out on making more connections by not having the additional surnames out there.

Kathy

ninatoo · Post by **ninatoo** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:14 pm

I use http://www2.tribalpages.com/ and whenever I receive stuff from other people I include the source in my notes. I would hate anyone to use my tree without permission, so I try to be courteous.

I don't have my tree at GR because it would not upload my gedcom files no matter what I did, and I have too many names to type in. So I just put a few bits and pieces of my tree in there to enable some matches. The problem comes when I get requests to see my tree...I then have to direct them to Tribal Pages, which is a searchable site with good privacy options. Oh well.

Nina

kathyc · Post by **kathyc** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:17 pm

Thanks for the link, Nina. I've never seen that site before.

Kathy

Russell · Post by **Russell** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:22 pm

Hi Kathy

Since all information is already in the public domain except where it affects still living individuals, I show all links I have established and confirmed as correct. These can include side branches which have often been my route back to the main trunk so they are just as important to me as the direct line.
Often, when I have shared date with someone else whose family interconnects with mine i have found that they have obtained some of their information through the same sort of information exchange as me.

I have made good contacts in this way and extended my knowledge of my main lines because the other person has approached their searching using a different set of basic information from me and come up with answers which I might never have found.
I don't know how many different surnames are in my 2500 name tree but they certainly reach to almost every part of Scotland and all levels of society.
We share them on TS and unless you are jealous and guard them it helps catch those folk who would never otherwise know they shared some ancestors with you.

Russell

StewL · Post by **StewL** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 5:00 am

Russell

"Jings help ma boab"

I thought I was doing well with around 450 individuals in my tree, looking at others now, I am only scraping the surface, or maybe my lot didnt breed as many wee rabbits as the rest of you lots lang deid yins did

Although one of my lang deid yins did try very hard to boost the population, split between a previous marriage for each they managed a total of about 16 that I know of

Still no complaining

Russell · Post by **Russell** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 9:27 am

Hi Stewie

I was surprisd when I checked numbers of relatives too. My family and my wife's various lines usually had 10-12 children and they were just as prolific. We have had to include these sidelines because, in rural areas thee were often marriages back into the mainline two generations further on and you have to trace them all to get these straight.
One Fife rellie had three marriages which produced 4+4+2 so he just made the average for production statistics. Third time lucky though. His daughter by the third marriage produced the famous Rodgers Tea Clipper owner & captain who won the China to London race. We had to include that line even though it is not direct. After all, when you have ag. labs and fishermen the whole thing needs a little spice doesn't it ?

Russell

Chris Paton · Post by **Chris Paton** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:54 am

I must admit that I find it odd when people get upset about others using their research, particularly as those who are most likely to benefit are almost certainly somehow related. Personally, I have received an absolute mint of information from others through this kind of info exchange, which is where the internet has been an absolute Godsend, though like Russell I always try to corroborate it, as sometimes people do get it wrong (as indeed, sometimes do I!).

It doesn't hurt to be acknowledged for my contribution, but at the end of the day, it's not the end of the world when I'm not. I have come across one instance in the past where someone has pilfered some of my researched, but I susbsequently discovered that I had made a mistake. I of course corrected it, though to my knowledge the offender has not done so, which means that I have an accurate tree and he has an innaccurate tree, which I just see as his loss!

Obviously those with whom I have a productive exchange are always updated with anything new that I find.

I do think everyone should double check the facts they find through these links by going back to the sources where possible (which is becoming increasingly easy to do thanks to the various digitisation projects being published on the internet). I guess ultimately my family tree is for my immediate family's benefit - if anyone else wants to incorporate what I find, go for it, it only further publicises my branch around the world, and therefore helps my family towards its ultimate goal of global domination! lol

Chris

Russell · Post by **Russell** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 11:42 am

Hi Chris

All very serious and laudable until I got to the last sentence when

So I picked myself up off the floor, checked for injury then

First I thought [-X [-X

Then realised we all have to have aspirations

So...I'll

drink to Patonic friendships.

Russell

Chris Paton · Post by **Chris Paton** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 11:48 am

Hi Russell,

I should have ended it with "Bwah-ha-ha!" and a mad glint in my eye.

Always happy to drink to Patonic friendships - I also see that you have 26 variants of MacGillivray in your tree - I know the feeling! lol

Chris

garibaldired · Post by **garibaldired** » Sun Apr 01, 2007 12:26 pm

Hello All,

I think the key word here is sharing. I love to share my tree with other people who also share theirs! It's a question of give and take.
I would not publish anybody else's research on the net, or elsewhere, without their permission and without acknowledgement of their work.
I would expect the same courtesy in return.

Regards,
Meg