I'm ploughing through almost 30,000 smart matches, yet to be confirmed, looking for new data.
I posted previously suggesting different colours for different data - as per FTB matches, where different data is highlighted in red, and similar in blue. This would be a TREMENDOUS help.
But also, I have spent the last hour rejecting the same mismatches over and over. I have two suggestions:
(1) A database of previously rejected matches, that automatically rejects the same match in future. That is, once I've rejected a match between Robert Leeson (b. 1824) and Henry Leeson (b. 1829), I don't see any future incorrect matches between those two - I've rejected about 60 of these over the last year or so, and it's getting quite (expletive deleted) annoying.
(2) Part of my aggravation with the above is that in each tree I get 100% matches, for both Robert-to-Robert and Henry-to-Henry, before getting 60% (and incorrect) matches Robert-to-Henry AND Henry-to-Robert! If the database idea is not feasible (though I don't know why that would be - it's simple enough to program - all you'd need to record is name, dob, and dod) then at least could a less than, say 90% match check the match list to see if the same person has a greater than 90% match in the same tree, and if so, reject the lesser match?
I am in total agreement with this one! A clickable alternate line of descent would be awesome! I believe I seem to remember that about 5 years ago, just after I joined, there was this function, but it disappeared after a few months. The classic view on-line still shows cousin relationships.
Glad you agree with my suggestion. For some reason, MyHeritage deleted the original post. So that your response is not "Context-less," I thought I would recap!
In MANY families, related-marriages happen. The current system does recognize but does not report or display these fully. For example, if my Grandmother and Grandfather were also cousins, then I have dual relationships to almost everyone on our tree. I am my father's son, and I am also his cousin via the linkage between his parents. In fact, I am MY OWN COUSIN.
It would be really interesting (entertaining!) to be able to display or report on the FULL relationship(s) between people in the Family tree.
The system "should" be able to analyze and report on this by crawling backwards through both parents when asking for relationship(s).
FYI: THis kind of "interesting artifact" has been very useful to interest and engage the next generation in the maintenance and ongoing management of our family history.
Unfortunately when you invite family members from a family site than they get to see all of the trees that are within that particular site.
The best alternative would be to create a seperate family site for that particular family tree and invote them from within this new site. This would mean that they get to see and edit only that fmaily tree as they would not be members in the other site.
If they are already members within the first site then you would have to remove them from within this site by entering your site memebrs list via the Home tab and then clicking on site members. To the right of the persons name in the list you will then have the "More" option which you will need to click and then click on remove from site.
Yes I know I can export a tree as GEDCOM and import it into another FTB BUT I will loose my photos. A function importing a FTB-tree into an existiing FTB-trre with EVERYTING merged (photos, information, links, SmartMatches ans so on)
Your suggestion is a valid one and thank you for brining this up. I will forward this as a suggestion for future updates to the software and hopefully this will be taken in to account by our development team.
In FTB, when comparing matches, different data is shown in red. This is a great thing, as it means I can quickly see what is the same and different beteen the matched people. It would be great to have the same colours used on the smart match page of the website. Currently, as I go down the list, I have to read the names, and dates, and sometimes parents etc before confirming. It would be SO MUCH better and quicker if different colours were used to highlight the same or different data.
It would help if the smart match page on the site would, under the other site manager's name, also show the last date that that site was updated. I find that I get "new" matches to sites that have not been updated for up to 6 years, and very seldom find anything worthwhile in those sites (since more recently updated sites have frequently already copied that data anyway). I would happily ignore any really old sites, and maybe make a dent in the number of smart matches waiting confirmation(cuurently over 28,000 - and whenever I check a couple of hundred, I seem to gain a few hundred more!)
We do offer the option to see when the tree you have a match with was last updated. I recommend you to click on the family tree > Smart Matches™ option in your website. Click on the "by family trees option", the default settings
and here after on the blue "view matches'" option at the right side. At the left upper side of this page, you will find the name of the family site, family tree, the number of the persons cards in the tree (you have a match with) and the date this family tree was last updated. This way you can decide if you want to handle this match or ignore it. You can find this ignore option above the list of all the matches. As a result you will no longer receive Smart Matches™ for this tree that you are being matched with.
The reason why we offer the "ignore tree" option instead of the "ignore site" option is due to the fact that webmasters often publish more than one tree in their websites. This way you will have the option to choose with which of the trees you do not want to have any further matches, instead of ignoring all the trees in the website.
Yes, not so long ago, I had matches to something like 11 trees on a site belonging to someone who seemed to create a new tree weekly. There was one match to each tree, and it was not a vlaid match anywa y.
Your comment about multiple trees on a site is a good one, but how about letting us users know when there is more than one tree on the site - perhaps a message on the matches notification that there is either (a) more eecent or (b) dated trees on the same site. We could then take appropriate action. I've found that older trees on the same site do not have any new information - they're just older copies of the same tree. Then again, perhaps if MH had an option for the users to indicate that it is an old tree - I know you can turn off smart matches for a tree, whixch is what I would do if it was a previous copy, but some people don't seem to do this - what I mean is that if a user creates a second tree, the site should say "do you want to continue matching to the previous tree" and then turn off smart matching to that tree, and cancel all matches to that tree.