Search for content in message boards

SURVEY - What facts do you feel comfortable merging from Public Member Trees?

Replies: 69

Re: SURVEY - What facts do you feel comfortable merging from Public Member Trees?

Posted: 1361183979000
Classification: Query
Edited: 1361187213000
Rich Canfield comment

"May I ask what process you use when you are working on documenting a new fact? Do you keep it all on paper until you find a supporting source and then enter in FTM or whichever program you use?"

Rich I work the other way around.

I find a record first [e.g., a birth certificate]

If that record has a fact on it that I need to load/enter in my data base I then create a image of that record, and then a source name for that image/record and then I create/enter the fact name and then create/enter a source "attribute" for that fact name

I am basically looking for new records and not searching for fact names.

Second Comment

"You “workaround” the fact that the program doesn’t capture and use data, the way you wished it would. And also, in how it might be presented in a report or generated document. So, maybe ease up on workarounds being the doom of Genealogy."

No I don't - and I can't/won't ease up on the workarounds

When I see something in FTM that is lacking or in error I send in a request to FTM to fix it.

I also encourage othere to send in requests when they find the system lacking. If you look at most of my posts you will find they deal with either a request I have sent in or suggestions to others to send in [I have done this so many times I think some users reading my posts cajoling users to send in requests are becoming tired of my cajoling them]

Work arounds can and could create problems

1-If a user sees a problem area and then creates a work around essentiall doesn't know that a problem exists and if they don' know this they will not fix it.[They work on problems with the highest priority first and if users dont send in the issues they will never get on the priority list]

2-If eventually finds the problem area and then writes software to fix it, that software may overide/change users work arounds. [For example I think the workarounds presentlu being used to overcome some of the deficiencies of "Places" may eventually come back to bite the uses who are using/advocating them. A real live example of this is the so-called no spouse entered problem. There were issues in this area and users developed workarounds, then attempted to fix it {by (unilaterally changing users'data bases)increasing the spouse count and creating a "no spouse entered person."} The result of this was and is still being felt - one small example is that to overcome what Ancestry did the user ended up with incorrect register reports]

So Rich I encourage you also to send in requests to development group enhancements to fix the errors/deficiencies you see in FTM

SubjectAuthorDate Posted
RCanfield1962 1361025452000 
RCanfield1962 1361026403000 
silverfox3280 1361027738000 
RCanfield1962 1361070795000 
KATHYMARIEANN 1361107964000 
RCanfield1962 1361152387000 
KATHYMARIEANN 1361183979000 
RCanfield1962 1361193856000 
silverfox3280 1361203140000 
RCanfield1962 1361285032000 
per page

Find a board about a specific topic