Do anybody collaborate with:

Susanna, agreed. Wouldn't it be grand if the main manager could actually have the authority to complete the merge?

David the problem with THAT solution, is that it creates the exact opposite problem. 1) You could use it to force merges on someone who doesn't want them... and 2) it concentrates too much power in the hands of that one manager (often randomly chosen, with no correlation to aptitude, participation or real interest).

I'd like a process that would automate the approval process for a direct relation of an already approved merge. For example, when one approves a merge, then requests to merge their spouse, parents and kids would be automatically accepted after 2 weeks (???). The manager could have veto rights to an extent, but based on limited criteria, like a bad merge.

AND, private profiles connected to public profiles should be visible to an editor of the public profile.

Gene,
take it to the Forum, here no-one [important] is very likely to see it.
http://forum.geni.com/

Gene,
private profiles ARE linked to from public profiles. So if a profile is public but an immediate connection is not, you can still follow the link from the public profile.

I think I smell a rat.....
Samuel Saveley, Margaret de Holland and Jacqueli Finley are collaborators with each other but no one else excepting to say Jacqeli is friends with a lot of people it seems.

I'm finding a lot of blockages with Samuel and Margaret de Holland that won't go away.

I have sent Jacqueli a message.

Jacqueli (Queen Elizabeth is her 2nd cousin) got a lot of her tree sabotaged and deleted earlier this year, so it is understandable that she is skeptical to collaboration at the moment.

Terry Jackson (Switzer)
....and Samuel and Margaret added one day apart.
=(

As I said to Terry in a private message, I'm one of Jacqueli's collaborators (and FG member). So I can probably resolve any issues. Samuel Saveley *probably* is another account of hers', as he has an exact match of her profile in his tree.

@David Prins. For being added as a co-manager of Margaret de Holland profiles, are you referring to individual profiles, or the whole lot?

Actually, these are or were, duplicates of my uncorrupted GEDCOM of my DIRECT ancestors only. Too many collaborators and managers are corrupting the authenticated GEDCOM and historical documentation of my tree and lineage.

If you really think to use for "the forces of good", fine, but there was nothing, absolutely wrong with my downloading my own GEDCOM and keeping it private to merge into my original account to fix the distruction from those who do not quite know what they are dealing with. Some of you here should be ashamed of yourselves and the things you say/do on Geni, seriously.

For heaven's sake - my direct ancestrial lineage IS the Historic lineage. You all act like vultures on prey over my profiles (family members).

This information has already been distributed world wide and available to anyone researching my family members - what I am offended by are those of you who "think" they know what they are doing or want to think they know better...?

I give up - I really have know idea what makes some of you out there tick.

But the bottom line is this - these historical individuals you are all "up in arms" about are MY G-GPARENTS all the up to ADAM. This is my OWNAGE and RIGHT.

Jacqueli: You act like you're the only one related to these people, and you act like you know more than anyone else here.

The very idea that you think you own the information of your ancestors is offensive to say the least.

You're a fool if you think you're smarter than our combined forces.

Mankind does survive based on the achievements of one... or even a few... mankind survives based on the collective.

Foolish remnants of loners like you should have died out centuries ago.

Jason P Herbert

Excuse me?

This was my very own from me to Adam GEDCOM, my ancestors, direct, I never said I was the only one related to them, but had the right to privately have my very own personal family tree, who ever is or is not in it, private.

A fool to belive I am smarter than "your combined forces"?

You're remarks are offensive and disturbing, and can be interpreted as a veiled threat, ie;
Foolish remnants of loners like you should have died out centuries ago.

If you who are reading this are so self important and involved not to understand how mis-guided these individuals are as the person above, you are beyond help.

Be proud, be very proud of your combined forces for good. Your sick minded.
Good gravy.

As quoted by Jason "Foolish remnants of loners like you should have died out centuries ago."

If that would have happened you wouldn't of had the precious Historical, Royal and Davidic lineage to be researching as you are. You just don't get it - maybe not so smart after all. These individuals are my direct great-grand parentages- from both sides, my mother and father, all lines, all gens. I am not related to this one or that one. They make up my existance today 110%.

You know nothing about me to say what you have. I have worked on this for over 30 years and with many and helped many.

I have every right to be angry over the lack of competence in those who have created a mess of what was a great project here on Geni.

I think it is a sad disgrace to genealogy the lack of ethics here.

"This was my very own from me to Adam GEDCOM, my ancestors, direct, I never said I was the only one related to them, but had the right to privately have my very own personal family tree, who ever is or is not in it, private."

That's fine... just don't expect others to help you if you insist on remaining separate from the rest.

"A fool to belive I am smarter than "your combined forces"?"

Indeed.
There's good reason the archaic phrase "Two heads are better than one" has held true for thousands of years.

"You're remarks are offensive and disturbing, and can be interpreted as a veiled threat, ie;
Foolish remnants of loners like you should have died out centuries ago."

There's a reason why Darwin Awards are so common amoungst fools.
There is nothing I can do in that regards that you are not already doing yourself.

"If you who are reading this are so self important and involved not to understand how mis-guided these individuals are as the person above, you are beyond help."

Pot... meet kettle.

"If that would have happened you wouldn't of had the precious Historical, Royal and Davidic lineage to be researching as you are. You just don't get it - maybe not so smart after all. These individuals are my direct great-grand parentages- from both sides, my mother and father, all lines, all gens. I am not related to this one or that one. They make up my existance today 110%."

Those lines where there before you... and they'll still be there after you.

I find it quite amuzing that you'd use such a dubious claim as "Adam" amoungst your "work".
Even if that human did exist (doubtful) that was before the time of the written word.

Which makes your claim hearsay at best and heresy at worst (for the religious).

"You know nothing about me to say what you have."

Arrogance, selfishness, foolishness... what else?

"I have every right to be angry over the lack of competence in those who have created a mess of what was a great project here on Geni."

It still can be a great project... provided we have enough people who are your polar opposites.
People who wish to work towards a common good/goal.

Instead of fools who merely wish to selfishly hoarde data.

"I think it is a sad disgrace to genealogy the lack of ethics here."

What ethics? The ethics of hoarding?

Excuse me while I throw up.

Jason P Herbert

Jason,

You are an self righteous idiot. My GEDCOM has been authenticated and published internationally. Proven legal and correct. I did not need work done on it. I was simply enjoying my very own family tree on Geni. I shared the information on Geni and many here know I worked well w/ them.

I created a separate account to merge into my initial account to fix the errors done by others who edited my tree w/o my permissions. I privatized the secondary account so that I could merge this into my original to keep it clean w/o merge issues. Because I privatized this did not mean anything other than I wanted to keep that GED clean for the merge.

WE all have a right to download our family tree and choose to edit the privacy mode anyway we want w/o others whining about it and label someone as an outcast.

You have defamed me publically. That was not nescessary.

As for your post and remark about Adam - are you for real? This IS the first written historical genealogical record and obviously has been recognized as so - or are you smarter than thousands of years of historians?

You don't get it. This is my personal family tree, my research, it was done from the get go and I never was looking for your or anyone else's help. That IS NOT a requirement to be your buddy to sign up for GENI.

Your slander and defame went to far.

Hi,

I think it is OK for anyone to have their private tree. Absolutely.
But to keep it private you can not - ever - collaborate, merge, invite or in any way let someone else into your tree.
The only reason for the "mess" like the one above is due to an, perhaps accidential, merge or collaboration or invitation.

If this has happened, the tree gets tangled into the big tree and there is no way back. Once merged into the tree, no longer private.

This has been explained over and over again hundreds of times and we still have to spend time reading upset posts about "without my permission/my tree" and so on.

Please, Jacqueli - it is very unfortunate that your tree was merged, but this has from the beginning been something you did all by yourself.

Maybe there is another, better website for your gedcom?
This is geni.com - an experimental site where the slogan from the beginning was Geni - we're all related.

Happy Midsummer-greetings from Sweden,
Susanna

Susanna,

My GEDCOM is on other websites - internationally.

I was working w/ others on the Big Tree Project - that is why I intially joined, my GEDCOM has the foundation for the Big Tree.

My mistake was to allow others to manage, and they allowed management, etc., then wrong information was added, profiles deleted. Some of these individuals were "friends" of managers that from their profiles were not contributors to Geni at all. They gain entrance into profiles by getting managers to except them as friends or family.

Jason -

Please identify with all of us your credentials or formal experience to make you a self-appointed authorian?

"You are an self righteous idiot. My GEDCOM has been authenticated and published internationally. Proven legal and correct."

Genealogy is as much guesswork as it is legitimate research. If you really had 30 years experience you should know that by now.

Without DNA.. it's not possible to be certain that something as simple as the identity of your parents is accurate in your records.

"I did not need work done on it. I was simply enjoying my very own family tree on Geni. I shared the information on Geni and many here know I worked well w/ them."

Every tree needs work... until you have all 4+ trillion people who have ever lived in a single database... *ALL* genealogy is incomplete.

"I created a separate account to merge into my initial account to fix the errors done by others who edited my tree w/o my permissions."

As you should well know by now... this is *NOT* how geni works.

Either you, or someone in your family group merged/collaborated with someone who merged a profile in your tree with another. Thus began the chain reaction.

"I privatized the secondary account so that I could merge this into my original to keep it clean w/o merge issues. Because I privatized this did not mean anything other than I wanted to keep that GED clean for the merge."

You cannot clean/keep your files separate if you merge another account into your first one. Once is the Big Tree it is impossible to get out.

If you really want out of the big tree... I suggest you close your merged account... and focus on the unmerged one.

"WE all have a right to download our family tree and choose to edit the privacy mode anyway we want w/o others whining about it and label someone as an outcast."

Not when it affects profiles that are not just yours. If you are a co-manager of a profile... then it is no longer yours to do with as you please.

Did you forget the concept of sharing you should have learned in kindergarden?

"As for your post and remark about Adam - are you for real? This IS the first written historical genealogical record and obviously has been recognized as so - or are you smarter than thousands of years of historians?"

No scientist/historian worth his salt would give much weight to biblical texts.

Nor would a true historian/scientist believe any oral records without substantial evidence outside of words.

A historical game of "telephone" is not a legitimate source of facts.

"Adam", if that human did, in fact, exist (again, doubtful)... then it was over 5000 years BEFORE any written language on Earth.

Hence, without significant external evidence... your claims are as baseless as that fiction story you call the bible (or any other religious text).

"You don't get it. This is my personal family tree, my research, it was done from the get go and I never was looking for your or anyone else's help. That IS NOT a requirement to be your buddy to sign up for GENI."

Then you shouldn't have added anyone to your tree. That was your mistake... not ours.

Jason P Herbert

http://video.filestube.com/watch,a864c45632da3c6803e9/Blasphemy-Cha...

Jason - I googled you. I understand you have "other" issues.

My personal and professional existance is not up for your personal vendetta nor any of your business. I wish no more of your drama.

I know a lot of people of the same beleif... and it is a fact as well, religion = war = death.
It is not a debate we want here on geni, is it?
Stop it now, please.

"I was working w/ others on the Big Tree Project - that is why I intially joined, my GEDCOM has the foundation for the Big Tree."

Arrogance, much?

Actually it was Scott Hibbard who was the primary catalyst for the Big Tree... albeit most of us wish he weren't.

His disaster of a tree is still the majority of the mess.

"Jason -
Please identify with all of us your credentials or formal experience to make you a self-appointed authorian?"

"authorian"??

I have no formal education (beyond high school).

I prefer to learn on my own time, faster than most.

History, and genealogy, have been my hobbies (after computers/computer repair) for the past 15 years.

I follow one, rather important rule:
"If the facts don't fit my beliefs, then my beliefs are wrong".

This makes me more versatile than most when it comes to learning... as I can quickly set aside invalid prejudices. Unlike most of you.

My behaviour has been compared (favourably or not) with that of the fictional beings known as "Vulcans" (Star Trek reference).

Logic is my path.

I am also MENSA qualified.

As is apparent from my words before now... anger is one of my flaws.

There may, yet, come a time when I'll teach (I'm only 25 after all)... but that requires overcoming my stage-fright.

You asked, I answered.

Jason P Herbert

"Jason - I googled you. I understand you have "other" issues.
My personal and professional existance is not up for your personal vendetta nor any of your business. I wish no more of your drama."

My atheism is posted on my profile for the world to see... what's your point?

Your beliefs are called into question here... because they contradict reality, and this contradiction has been placed in the geni database as verboten "fact".

It's also called into question with your claim:

"This IS the first written historical genealogical record and obviously has been recognized as so - or are you smarter than thousands of years of historians?"

A "scholar" that takes the bible seriously is beneath contempt.

Science has nothing to do with what you want to believe. Science requires evidence.

The bible contains no such evidence... therefore your claim of lineage to "Adam" is laughable at best.

Please... shock the scientific world with evidence of your claims... I welcome the challenge.

Jason P Herbert

Dear freinds - relax relax this is not a question of reight or wrong, it must be a question of making a good work - as good a tree as possible. We may have different intentions but in the end, if we are in "the big tree" no one have more reight than others, we need to respect each other - your discussion is maybe interesting, but not very constructive.

And as Susanna said: GENI is for international understanding not for personal issues and debats - thanks!!!

I was about to get my tub of popcorn and enjoy the fireworks...it would be a shame if all of the fun stopped now...

Seriously! Jason is making it very personal - an attack on me publically through this forum. I have every right to believe the way I wish also. No one wishes to be publically attacked by a neo-Nazi athiestic anti-semetic or their beliefs shoved down our throats. Jason is off on left field.

I already know most of you do not agree with this behavior.

I was personally attacked for apparently no reason - my accounts are none of this Jason's business and my account were brought up in this discussion. And he used a public discussion forum to do so. People just cannot go around disrespecting others in this manner. It is VERY wrong.

Jacki, I agree that this type of behavior is counter-productive, and only serves to upset the majority of users reading these forums. I believe that the personal attacks levied by Jason towards you were wrong, although you have to admit, they were not entirely unprovoked. I too, took exception to your opening comments to this discussion, but left it as your opinion, and you are entitled to it. Perhaps we can simply chose to agree to disagree, and move on to more productive discussion...like...who wants butter on their popcorn?

"Seriously! Jason is making it very personal - an attack on me publically through this forum. I have every right to believe the way I wish also. No one wishes to be publically attacked by a neo-Nazi athiestic anti-semetic or their beliefs shoved down our throats. Jason is off on left field."

Now who's attacking whom?

I am an atheist... but I'm not a bigot.

At least not in the way an archaic fossil like you would understand.

My only prejudice is intelligence... or lack thereof, in your case.

Look carefully... what you see here represents the next generation.

A generation of people who judge people by what they say and do... not by what they look like.

Can your archaic mind handle that ideal?

Jason P Herbert