Re: Data matching privacy issue on MyHeritage


Edward Sneithe
 

I have been at genealogy for 40 or so years. It started out with me making many trips to local sites for vital records and local history sources. I have been using software for genealogy since mid 1980s.

With the creation of Ancestry and Familysearch online I have been using them to search for vital records with an occasional trip to a place to get primary source details. I have tried looking at family trees in both of these and the results fall into several categories.

  1.  The family tree is wrong according to my well documented tree.
  2.  The family tree is so poorly sourced that you can only use it for hints as to where to search next
  3.  The family tree does not contain any additional information. I usually have more information than the online trees.

The first two cases concern me greatly as we are putting questionable data online that others are taking as gospel. Does not meet any genealogical standard that I know of. The concern for privacy in MyHeritage also concerns me because of privacy issues.

I don't know about MyHeritage but Ancestry requires that I upload my tree to get any help from them and then they own the data whether it is correct or just plain fiction. I have disabled my hints with Ancestry and Familysearch because I want to only put out well documented and correct information. I still use both for searching for vital record.

Others may say I am cutting off my nose to spite my face but integrity is a very big issue for me so I will take the lumps and search for the vital records myself.

Just my 2c for what it is worth

On Wednesday, August 19, 2020, 3:21:18 PM EDT, Adrian Bruce <abruce6155@...> wrote:




On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 at 18:36, Pauline Parnell <paulinelparnell@...> wrote:
...  There is no point in taking a DNA test unless you are prepared to share. ...
 
Most matches will not bother to contact you if you don't have an online tree and many assume you won't answer if it's private...

Yes indeed, to both those bits that I clipped.  One of the really frustrating things is those who've taken an Ancestry test and done nothing for their tree. I *assume* that they've just done it for the ethnicity angle - to see if they really are descended from that Cherokee Princess?

Only slightly better are those with 8 (or whatever) people in their tree. Now, it might be that both have masses of paper documentation or trees on other sites. But I need to prioritise, so I work on what I see, and these come way down low.

If they have a private tree, again it's a question of priorities - Ancestry might tell me that their private tree includes a XXXX ancestor (say) but if I can't see if it's a XXXX from 1700s/1800s in the ZZZZ area, well, sorry, but I've got some that are clearer and so higher priority.

I messaged about 4 people in Ancestry who are descended from my 3G-GM's 2nd marriage - not one responded. Mutter, mutter.

Adrian


 

Join family-historian@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.