tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post683303168693351491..comments2024-03-26T11:22:41.940-07:00Comments on Genea-Musings: Why Aren't Researchers Using the FamilySearch Family Tree?Randy Seaverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17477703429102065294noreply@blogger.comBlogger94125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-21190035300671813112020-08-08T23:31:22.025-07:002020-08-08T23:31:22.025-07:00I recently went back to what I thought was “my tre...I recently went back to what I thought was “my tree” and discovered I was incorrect - this is a common play area, where others come in and “clean up” my data for me, introducing errors throughout. The slides on how to get along with others, “my tree-itis” typically suffered only by older users (!) is condescending and prejudiced. Perhaps it’s a noble concept, but the software engineering was poorly executed. It’s a shame, so much data and time invested, now with so many errors it’s not really of any value.Prog Rock Keyshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18359645418567965552noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-70916693313377274232020-06-22T14:36:58.691-07:002020-06-22T14:36:58.691-07:00BANDAR JUDI SLOT PALING LENGKAP DENGAN 1 USERID BI...BANDAR JUDI SLOT PALING LENGKAP DENGAN 1 USERID BISA MEMAINKAN SEMUA PERMAINAN<br /><br />WELCOME BONUS UNTUK PERMAINAN SLOT 50% MAKSIMAL 1.000.000 IDR<br /><br />WELCOME BONUS UNTUK SEMUA JENIS PERMAINAN 20%<br /><br />TO DI JAMIN RENDAH !!!<br /><br />DEPOSIT BANK LOCAL :<br />BCA - MANDIRI - BNI - BRI - DANAMON - JENIUS BTPN DLL<br /><br />DEPOSIT E-CASH :<br />OVO - DANA - LINKAJA - GOPAY - SAKUKU<br /><br />DEPOSIT PULSA (DEPOSIT NON RATE/ALIAS TANPA POTONGAN) :<br />-> TELKOMSEL<br />-> XL / AXIS<br /><br />Demo SLOT<br /><a href="https://sites.google.com/view/slot-thundering-zeus-ttg/" rel="nofollow">Slot Thundering Zeus</a><br /><br />LINK AKSES : <br /><a href="https://museumtogel.coffeecup.com/" rel="nofollow">Agen Togel</a><br /><a href="https://museumtogel.coffeecup.com/" rel="nofollow">Museumbola Slot Habanero</a><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />BlackDahliaMurdererhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05331352733393603287noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-68560565111945733942019-02-28T12:04:26.993-08:002019-02-28T12:04:26.993-08:00I will never enter my research into an online tree...I will never enter my research into an online tree that can be changed by others. I have a friend who has spent hours and hours correcting a parentage error that has been spread all over the internet. Within a day or so after she entered the information resulting from her careful research, someone else came along and replaced her entries with the myth that was spread all over the internet. She was horrified. She did not know when she entered the information that others could change it.<br />This is certainly not for me!Cindyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05244723423396838849noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-86353883388640509082018-07-05T14:32:13.509-07:002018-07-05T14:32:13.509-07:00I've had the same experience with FamilySearch...I've had the same experience with FamilySearch. <br /><br />I spent hours adding my research to FamilySearch years ago–-after having painstakingly researched recent family lines that no one had ever worked on – true virgin territory from the early 1900s and mid-late 1800s. I carefully got to know the family in every way possible, interviews, detailed sources (I'm a Harvard-trained social-science researcher and am utterly meticulous in my sourcing). Then I added my research to Family Search. This was back when they had introduced their first collaborative tool: the ability to dispute someone else's entry. You had to write a reason and ideally include sources material. You could propose an alternative (spelling, date, etc)---but you could not deleted theirs. <br /><br />Family Search promised at the time that no one's data would be deleted. <br /><br />Some time later they quietly changed this. They allowed any user, however naive or self-interested, to delete or modify other users' entries. My own father died 2 years ago and multiple people added his death information, some with erroneous dates and locations, even though they were not even at the funeral and burial, as I was. My corrections took second place. Another ancestor that I had doggedly hunted down for months had a sudden and unannounced name change. I only discovered this because I was searching for her and couldn't find her by name! All the public and private records I can turn up have her name as Lizzie. Someone arbitrarily changed the name to Elizabeth (without a reason or source) and deleted the name Lizzie! After a deliberate search, I found a page several links deep that indicated my work had been deleted; but I only found it because I knew what I was looking for, knew it was missing. I was able to add it back with an emphatic note about sourcing. <br /><br />It just makes no sense. Of all the genealogy groups in the world, you would think the LDS would care about accuracy above all. Every person entered into the database eventually takes over 2 hours of member time doing ordinances in a temple. The hidden cost of inaccurate and duplicative temple work must be staggering. Is it too much to ask that someone spend a fraction of that time actually checking sources before entering questionable information? <br /><br />One suggestion to solve this is that Family Search create experience-based, tiered edit permissions, such that naive users can enter only themselves and immediate family members; then can start linking sources to other records; with some experience learning to source properly (and with other reviews' approving their links), they can then start indexing**; and only after EXTENSIVE experience linking sources to existing records and indexing records would users be allowed to add new people to the tree; and finally, only the most experienced users would be able to delete or combine records. Less experienced users might be able to flag an entry, for deletion/combination by a more experienced user, but not make changes himself or herself. It would also make sense for users to have to study and pass a test to qualify for some tiers. <br /><br />These changes would be quite easy to make and would dramatically improve database quality. Moreover, the changes would attract skilled researchers to come back to FS, while now they are fleeing en mass and leaving the system to the amateurs (quite the opposite of what FS should be aiming for!). <br /><br />I can't in good conscience continue spending time on FS when uneducated and sloppy amateurs (actually, many are also teenagers, encouraged by the church to get involved while young, but without any training!) can ruin my work, obliterating it without a trace. <br /><br />I'd love to see FS live up to its potential. But quality of the record has to come first. <br /><br /><br />** because errors in transcription are wasteful, and FS does not allow changes to the index, no even to request a review of an index entry!.... but somehow it's ok for a new user can delete my daily tree!<br />Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14411358902349497430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-34899773050274037352018-07-05T14:26:41.416-07:002018-07-05T14:26:41.416-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14411358902349497430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-45675859414200872432018-01-26T10:11:02.306-08:002018-01-26T10:11:02.306-08:00Erin, posting images of your source documents shou...Erin, posting images of your source documents should be persuasive to people who are paying attention, even when someone else changes your documented birth date to something different. Scholarly minds would go and look at your links and source descriptions anyway, but the images tell the story in a compelling way. Yes, some Clueless might delete an image, but it seems to be too much work for them to do that. I've never had it happen, although I suppose a Clueless might delete the entire person, deleting the images at the same time.<br /><br />A couple years ago, I did try uploading a test gedcom of about 100 people -- grandparents and two generations of their descendants with spouses. They all had to be reconnected to each other, have duplicates merged, etc. Too much re-working. I gave up on the idea of uploading another gedcom to the FamilySearch Family Tree that day. <br /><br />If Ancestry ever recovers the WorldConnect Rootsweb site that it disabled recently (not sure how motivated Ancestry is to do that), wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com is a good place to upload your gedcom. It's just yours and is searchable by Google as well as the WorldConnect search mechanism. It includes your sources and ties each fact to its own sources as you did in your home database. No images. I have used it as a good place to attract/help distant relatives who don't have the money for Ancestry, who are just dabbling their feet in the waters of genealogy.<br /><br />I THINK I've read that it's possible to upload a gedcom to FamilySearch as something atomic and static -- not tied into the FS FamilyTree. That might be what you (and I) would like.<br />https://tinyurl.com/GedcomFamilySearch<br /><br />Can good documentation drive out faux-genealogy? We can only keep trying.<br />Marianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08873605766046172611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-13218162319099731452018-01-26T09:26:13.318-08:002018-01-26T09:26:13.318-08:00My advice is to heavily comment your entries, clea...My advice is to heavily comment your entries, clearly stating their sources, and then invite others to comment.<br />As to the concept that "I did it for me; why should I share?" if that's what you're saying, I can only say that in time, reality eventually becomes the standard, if it's demonstrable, and I'm doing this for posterity, and because I enjoy the research, and it would all be pointless if my research dies with me.Paul1307https://www.blogger.com/profile/05835264879506945213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-88498541139468877642018-01-24T08:59:52.258-08:002018-01-24T08:59:52.258-08:00I'm glad I found this old blog post with recen...I'm glad I found this old blog post with recent comments. I Googled "familysearch inaccuracies" because I was wondering if it was just me who is disgusted with the way the family trees work. I've been researching my family history for 25+ years (and online for most of that time). After going to a talk at the library about the wonders of FamilySearch I decided to upload my documented tree - to spend *hours* reconciling my tree with existing people in the "big tree." I apparently didn't read well enough to understand that after spending all that time and effort, I wouldn't have MY tree. It would just be "the big tree" that everyone and their mother, from novice to expert, would be modifying what I spent more than half my life working on.<br /><br />I feel like I did a lot of hard work (for free!) for LDS and what I got in return was a total wreck. I use their site to search for records, but I consciously refuse to update my tree because it's reminiscent of working in a group in school where you're the diligent kid and the others in the group are sloppy slackers. Who has time for that? Not me. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09012883805159293788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-62273328068256103362018-01-02T01:45:33.465-08:002018-01-02T01:45:33.465-08:00Randy - I know this is a few years after the fact,...Randy - I know this is a few years after the fact, but just wanted to add my comments. I agree with Gambo Man before me who explained it as a "total disaster." As a professional genealogist, I am not into a group participation family tree where detailed, sourced trees are allowed to be overridden with erroneous, unsourced information at a whim. Nor do I have the time to continually change my work back to the documented dates, names, and information.<br /><br />I will say that a person can gather an incredible amount of free documented information on familysearch.org. I would not recommend storing it there unless you have nothing else to do.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-37711545790887951262017-10-13T04:54:09.032-07:002017-10-13T04:54:09.032-07:00Total disaster. No need to explain further.Total disaster. No need to explain further.Gambo Manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16360882321028571943noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-49197109930022684632017-05-29T15:21:07.292-07:002017-05-29T15:21:07.292-07:00I would heartily agree with what Paul said. Certai...I would heartily agree with what Paul said. Certainly I have been people's nightmare more than once - I have done bad merges, sometimes affecting the same person again and again. Fortunately some of these people have bene quite patient and I have worked hard to clean up any mess that I make. Over time I have found that familysearch.org tree has improved it's data quality and I do attribute that to the hardwork of volunteers collaborating.<br /><br />I think that the single shared tree model makes great sense, but it does require patience and humility on the part of the users. For my ancestors there is no way that an ancestry.com tree that I author myself will be as complete as the familysearch.org tree, though it may be more correct in some placesUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08448733463838897096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-51835595087890078482017-05-10T18:12:35.633-07:002017-05-10T18:12:35.633-07:00What I have found is that if you give a detailed e...What I have found is that if you give a detailed explanation of why you have submitted some specific information, as well as references that categorically back up your assumption, people are grateful for your input. If you just post something with no reference or explanatory information then you risk possibly becoming someone else's nightmare.Paul1307https://www.blogger.com/profile/05835264879506945213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-30331457581989713402017-05-10T17:35:22.849-07:002017-05-10T17:35:22.849-07:00I use familysearch to look up info sometimes, but ...I use familysearch to look up info sometimes, but I do not use the family tree feature. It allows sloppy strangers to change my information! In one instance, I picked up my research after a short hiatus and began researching a particular line. I spent considerable time on it, then got a funny feeling ... I don't remember any of my relatives moving to Washington state! Then I started poking around and realized that some stranger had added a totally different (and incorrect) family to my tree. <br /><br />I think there is a place for each name where you can check to see if anyone "modified" it, but why on earth should I have to do that. All this time spent coming through records until my eyes felt burnt from my monitor, only for Familysearch to hand over the keys to my home to some stranger to mess my place up. <br /><br />I'm really upset over this. And to make matters worse, now they won't let me delete my tree because others have added incorrect things to it! I've spoken to a few people that do genealogy research as well, and they were unaware that Familysearch did this and were quite shocked. <br /><br />It's really disappointing.morlanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11367350886013695167noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-63616681022772289182016-08-30T14:50:23.955-07:002016-08-30T14:50:23.955-07:00At some point... years ago... I must have uploade...At some point... years ago... I must have uploaded my tree to Family Search. I think it may even have been before the feature existing now that anyone can change anything on that tree. I just realized that fact while doing a search one day... a lot of the "matches" were from my own tree that I had forgotten was even on there. <br /><br />I would like to delete that whole tree but find there is no way to be able to do that now. And the reason I'd like to delete the whole thing is as has been mentioned in the numerous other posts on this thread. <i>Anyone</i> can change information even if they have totally wrong information about someone in my tree. It just doesn't seem like a very sensible option to me.emmwhohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05661135535373690587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-68805438387525430952016-08-16T22:38:57.848-07:002016-08-16T22:38:57.848-07:00I'm a FamilySearch.org user. The one thing th...I'm a FamilySearch.org user. The one thing that sets this program apart from the other ones I've tried is that I can source all other records using RecordSeek.com from MyHeritage.com, Ancestry.com, other people's trees, or even a Google Search. I like linking up with other people's trees on this program because they give me great clues to find records and sometimes they have already found it for me. Why reinvent the wheel? I'm a bit obsessive compulsive on finding records when dates are recorded so I source things to see if their information is correct. I would say 90% of the time it is correct in my tree. <br /><br />I can put a great myriad of photos on it, life stories, audio recordings of deceased relatives, and even a short story about a family member I knew personally. (Look under "Memories" in the person's profile.). I have not found all these features in other programs I've used.<br /><br />I have found that if I source well; it doesn't get changed much. (I can periodically keep my updated tree in another program if I want to.) I put "watches" on people who I am concerned about. A note will come up that it is being "Watched" when someone looks at this person or they are wanting to change something.<br /><br />When I source, I put very specific places that have more details so it intimidates the beginners especially.... For example if I put something like "Copenhagen, Denmark" it is more likely to be changed. If I put something like Copenhagen, Sokkelund, Copenhagen, Denmark or Gentofte, København, Sokkelund, København, Denmark (parish, city, judicial district, county, country) then it is less likely to be changed. The same concept works in the United States, also.<br /><br />Another sourcing suggestion is if you have something like a birth/death record then under the "Sources" section there is a tag that you can check something like "Name," "Gender," "Birth," or "Death/Burial" This record will show up under the person's name, birth, gender and death when someone clicks on any of those fields. I put the actual records not just a website link since those can change frequently. If someone sees a real birth record document when they click on a name, they are less like to want to change it.<br /><br />I have found a wonderful 3rd cousin who I have been able to share Danish photos of my grandmother's with while she shared her grandmother's photos. They are priceless. We have been able to work on our tree together and share common research. She has found that her work rarely gets changed, also. <br /><br />I understand many concerns, but if one knows how to handle the problems in advance, the program is the best one I have seen. (Currently Danish records are better on MyHeritage.com for my line of research, but I transfer the information to FamilySearch.org because the tree fits my needs better.)Rosiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06669543277478195940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-27953952949333693052016-08-02T11:46:05.629-07:002016-08-02T11:46:05.629-07:00OK so it isn't just me. I was starting to thi...OK so it isn't just me. I was starting to think it was because I was new at it and not grasping how to work their website. But I have been reading reviews/comments and so many people swear by the site. I am still unsure how I feel about FamilySearch but I am giving it another try. <br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12333188908963160994noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-27685066297185706442016-07-31T16:54:58.408-07:002016-07-31T16:54:58.408-07:00I too, am losing interst in FSFT, because I have f...I too, am losing interst in FSFT, because I have found people added to my tree, without my consent. Where my grandmother came from, for instance. There are many families with the same last name. THEY ARE NOT ALL RELATED TO EACH OTHER, yet Family Search as well as Geni tends to make them all one family which they are not. It's just like there are many John Smiths in New England, but they are NOT ALL RELATED! Just because they have the same name.OldQueerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12253518854784763408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-60418893478855527052016-07-07T08:49:11.259-07:002016-07-07T08:49:11.259-07:00I am so glad that I googled for reviews on this su...I am so glad that I googled for reviews on this subject. The thread has been interesting & informative. I don't have much to add but here are my two cents. I've always had an interest in my family history but never really delved into it. About 3 years ago I signed up with MyHeritage.com and thought I would give it a shot. Unfortunately things in life kept getting in the way & I found that I didn't have as much time to devote to the search as I had hoped so I wasn't getting my moneys worth (I cancelled after one year). Last Fall I felt like I was in a better place to start the family tree research again but I was reluctant to sign up on a site that you have to pay for (just in case I didn't follow through with this project). I joined FamilySearch.org because it was free & supposedly had access to tons of records. I had some information already so I wasn't starting from scratch. My first few attempts were challenging but I thought that, maybe, I just wasn't used to the site or doing it wrong. I would leave it for a few weeks and go back but continued to have issues. I couldn't find people or when I did the information was wrong. I found building the family tree very awkward to work with. I thought it was just me. Recently I spoke with a woman that had done major research on her ancestors and clan. She suggested FamilySearch so I decided that I had better give it one more solid try. Once again I ended up frustrated. I just do not like the FS website.....at all. Maybe it is me but I find it incredibly frustrating which takes the enjoyment out of doing this project. Every single time I go on the website I waste time and get aggravated. And now I find out that strangers can go in and make changes??!?!?!?! WTH? I know it is free and maybe it will work for others but I am done with it. I think I will go back to finding what I need on other free sites. Even if I have to pay a little bit I don't mind (which I do for the ScotlandsPeople website). I just may have save up my pennies and go back to MyHeritage or sign up with Ancestry.ca.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12333188908963160994noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-2939422810868594232016-03-19T06:19:00.175-07:002016-03-19T06:19:00.175-07:00I don't like the trees because the last time I...I don't like the trees because the last time I knew, an absolute complete stranger could come along and change my family tree. It is one thing to have your information posted and another to see if you're right or wrong. A complete stranger should not have the right to come along and change things without contacting me or giving me reasons why. When there is controversy and narrow-minded people involved, it matters!Debra Winchellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01217880693035812274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-4891990149261792282016-03-01T15:48:27.713-08:002016-03-01T15:48:27.713-08:00This is an excellent thread.
I have used Ancestry...This is an excellent thread.<br /><br />I have used Ancestry on and off since 2007 or so to build up a tree. I had a trial sub and then another sub that came with the desktop software. I *really* like the user interface. It's extremely intuitive for me, a non-professional. <br /><br />I exported my GEDCOM and started to import it into FamilySearch last year, but haven't yet finished (although frankly I'm not clear on whether it is visible to others, because I see it when I search). I will say that they have excellent user support (I chatted with someone when I was confused about whether or not I had uploaded my tree). <br /><br />This year, I've gotten DNA tested through the free service Genes for Good, and have uploaded my DNA results to GEDMatch.com and am locating DNA cousins through Facebook groups I'm on with people who are searching for the same surnames. This is just to say that DNA is also a factor in my assessment of a given service. <br /><br />I am particularly interested in mapping my tree geographically. I also found the Gramps software which does link with Google Earth. <br /><br />I'm starting to tire of giving Ancestry.com money, and before I found this thread I was thinking that maybe Family Search would be a good alternative, but the records are really much more limited (How can that be since LDS has been doing this for centuries?) My tree itself will provide the first records for my ancestors, who go back to the 1600s in the North American continent.<br /><br />So.... next steps for me are unclear.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12591610321607273321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-47228171886623165132016-02-26T02:39:09.534-08:002016-02-26T02:39:09.534-08:00For most of the same reasons commenters above have...For most of the same reasons commenters above have said they find FamilySearch frustrating. The site is slow, the processes are clumsy and laborious, but most of all it's the problem with bad data. What was the old term? GIGO? Garbage in, garbage out. <br /><br />When anyone, no matter how careless, malicious, or misguided can add data and, even worse, change good data input by other, more careful, skilled, diligent people, you've got a bad system.<br /><br />Ancestry has loads of errors as well, but at least no one else can alter my carefully researched contributions. In fact, at this point most people can't even see my trees, because most of the date is not yet close enough to certain, and I don't want to share errors that too many people will copy and share. (It would be great if we could share only the parts we're sure of.)<br /><br />Collaboration can be great, but only if all parties share a level of commitment to getting it right.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-44570307628944693032016-02-22T21:25:11.781-08:002016-02-22T21:25:11.781-08:00I use FT regularly now. Initially I had problems w...I use FT regularly now. Initially I had problems with someone changing some information I put in, but I have been careful to support my work and explain why I changed the information back. So far I haven't had anyone else change what I corrected. The best part of FT for me is that often see new photos, stories and sources shared by others that I wasn't aware of. FT is a wonderful tool, and I suspect it will get better and better over time. DavidEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14370423930727332233noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-13012759808694599862016-01-25T14:44:54.524-08:002016-01-25T14:44:54.524-08:00Why aren't more people using Family Search mor...Why aren't more people using Family Search more often. I disagree with scotia8 it is not user friendly. I am constantly calling them up to find out how to find something. So often when I do a search for someone I put in before I get, "No data found..." even if I get quite specific it isn't found. Their programming needs to be simplified. It is VERY confusing.Eye of Horushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07398136948080848879noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-84277884199195079502016-01-17T18:15:06.606-08:002016-01-17T18:15:06.606-08:00I use FamilySearch Family Tree. It's not perf...I use FamilySearch Family Tree. It's not perfect, but I find it to be user-friendly for the most part. The FT programmers respond to feedback and have gradually been improving the program over the last few years. I like the whole idea of collaboration since "my" tree is far bigger than anything I can personally research. I appreciate seeing what others contribute, including pictures, stories, and research backed up by sources. When stuff is added or changed which is obviously mistaken, I make corrections and add a note saying why. Detailed notes and sources are persuasive. Collaboration can be messy, but it's the future of genealogy, and the sooner we join in the better.scotia8https://www.blogger.com/profile/11871424231149431891noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26204193.post-51716238497296124362016-01-01T17:48:56.344-08:002016-01-01T17:48:56.344-08:00It is interesting to read everyone's views and...It is interesting to read everyone's views and experiences. Thank you for sharing them.<br /><br />I might mention that earlier last year, FT added a messaging system so users can collaborate with users who have not provided an email address. I have used this function,it works really well and I want to thank the programmers for adding this function. My experience in collaborating with others has been very positive.<br /><br />There have been a lot of improvements made this past year.<br /><br />I also index records. While I really prefer to work on my own family, I figure I need to give back as a token of appreciation for others who have made my research easier. I think of working on FT the same way. Others taught me and I use FT to help to others learn.Kent Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12356187245661856343noreply@blogger.com