I am standing in the same line, waiting for a good method of dealing with the duplicates that have arrived by trusting the SmartMatch and merge features. I would suggest an "equals" command that tells the program that this person is the same as the other entry. At that point - with some good programming - the software should be able to rearrange the family lines successfully.
EVERYONE is repeatedly banging on about duplicates and reviewing other posts there seemed to be something in the pipeline to match and merge. Surely with all the smart matching etc and your fabulous face recogntion this would be a doddle to do for you talented guys?
I have just purchased an alternative product to do this for me but pulling everything out into a gedcom, downloading to another package, choosing the duplicates with the most information, deleting redoing a gedcom and returning to ftb (because I hate the other one) is also a nightmare. Not sure if I am losing information this way too.
So I'm with the OP, and when you do reply tell us WHEN WHEN WHEN! Set a countdown clock on your site, we are all waiting
To get a smart match (which you need for a merge) you need more than a name, which is all that the parent smart match provides. Neither does it say whether the name is forename or surname which smart match seems to care about. The only way forward then is to try find someone with a reliable tree and compare the trees manually, which is to say it a bit careful; cumbersome
I have attached an image illustrating the problem.
The reason that we don't have this option is mainly for security reasons, so that people don't copy whole trees and lots of information without permission. Like you said, if you want to copy relatives from a tree, you need to contact the owner of the site, request a membership and copy the details manually.
I don't completly buy that explaination. With the suggested feature, it just makes what is already possible easier. If you compare trees you dont need to request a membership to see the members (if the site is open). And if the site is open, why would we need permission?
The explanation for not allowing copying of relatives from matched trees does not explain the negative policy. MyHeritage could enable the feature and make it's use contingent on mutual consent of the managers of both trees.
The current policy makes the long lists of "smartmatches" pretty much a nuisance for me.
Ancestry.com allows ou to copy relatives in a very easy way... I am very dissapointed myheritage.com doesnt... At least there should be a message or something telling you wich of our confirmed matches have extra information on direct ascendants... This system is not that smart at all.
I've thought about this more in the last two years since I wrote that, and I don't think that ancestry.com has such a great system after all. Because it's possible to add everyone on somebody else's tree, it's way too easy for a beginner to add junk and end up with a nonsense tree. Most of what is on ancestry.com is junk. They have good scanned documents, but they are just added along with everything else that isn't so good. Whatever else anybody thinks of myheritage, their trees look a lot better and make more sense. It wasn't until I transferred my tree to myheritage from ancestry, that I started seeing a lot of obvious errors. A lot of information has been transferred either directly or indirectly, and hasn't been corrected. I saw one "Product suggestion" on this forum where someone suggested that they correct the dating system because they had found ancestors born in "BC" times. NO ONE alive today can do that. Not me, not them, not even the Queen can do that.
Because it's possible to add everyone on somebody else's tree, it's way too easy for a beginner to add junk and end up with a nonsense tree.
Yes. People copy without checking or investigating, so they copy ridiculous errors. I've seen the same errors repeated again and again in trees that overlap with mine. It's one of the reasons I don't pay much attention to smart matches, frankly. I check out a match, think, "Well, that's wrong, that's innaccurate, I have better information than in that tree and I'm just getting out of here." I won't confirm or deny.
I also see photos from my site repeated all over the place. I don't mind sharing, but it's polite to ask rather than just take.
I was looking at this site, I like the set up, but 9 bucks a month? I would totally pay for 5 dollars but 10 dollars just seems to much. I know there is a lesser one for cheaper but its so restrictive with how much you can put on here. I still might just bite my tounge and buy it if it wasn't annual, make it monthly please, I and I bet tons of other people don't want to plop down a lot of money just to find out it doesn't work for them or their family.
A monthly fee could be 'do-able' for many people on fixed incomes that just can NOT manage an annual membership fee. The option of paying monthly would probably greatly increase the number of paying members.