Well, as I said in another posting, I got an e-mail after two days from the senior support team member Marianne. I have been offered a fair compensation and she is going to call me early next week. BUT that said it didn´t solve my problems in fact I have new ones added to the list.
I would think that MH will soon add a maximum records disclaimer for FTB.
Even though the limits of databases have been extended (I think the 2010 version of Excel would handle a million rows) as those limits are approached, performance suffers. It should be no surprise to see this happening in FTB.
For several days I have been trying to copy information of confirmed direct ancestors relatives with no success. I expected to be as easy as in ancestry.com
I have just found a post from 2 years ago saying that you don´t allow it for security reasons.
I can only say that I don´t understand it and that I am very dissapointed. I want to build and complete my family tree, get as deep as I can. I don´t care that much of finding new distant family memebers, I already have trouble keeping in contact with the ones I know.
We heard a lot of complaints about individuals who worked for a very long time for their genealogy projects (some even more than 5 years of collecting information, photos, interviews... etc.) and found that other individuals copied that very same private information that they have worked for so long in a matter of seconds (imagine the frustration seeing someone copying your life's work).
So we have implemented an extra step that would require you to contact that family member to request a membership in the site manager's site. This not only results in communication between the two parties, but also holds a positive connection for research.
I understand it might be frustrating to do that extra step, but it helps protecting the privacy of individuals greatly.
You can also turn off the ability to copy photos. Under your name (top right of online tree), click My Privacy, then at the bottom left click Content. Uncheck the box beside "Allow managers of other sites to copy photos of matched individuals".
I've no idea if that actually works, or even what purpose it serves, since on a public site there is even a button to Download any photo in the gallery, and there are so many other ways to copy a photo.
A couple of users have suggested placing a watermark over every photo you post, making it virtually useless to others. Members would be allowed to see it without the watermark. NOBODY would be allowed to download or copy (there are ways to block this). But all of these things will have to be implemented by the MH developers.
I am so frustrated. There are two trees owned by the same person, each with 230 matches to miy tree. Am I really expected to review 460 matches?! Also, in Record Matching, because MyHeritage imported trees from another website, practically every person in my tree is duplicated. I have thousands of duplications within my own imported tree.
This is a huge burden -- almost enough to discourage participation. Does anyone have any suggestions?
I know your frustration Doris. I have 4 trees in my file. I have one marked as Default. They tell me to delete the other 3 and they won't match them any more. There is suppose to be a delete button by the file and I have none. They have matched all 4 of my trees instead of just one. I get 198, at the least, matching trees a day. 3 of the 4 trees I can't even edit because they are not suppose to be shared. How do you delete a tree if they won't let you? I use Family Tree Maker and their help section said to Export the file then Import it again then delete it. It won't Export anything. I don't know how to contact anyone in MH so I figured if I posted here I might get help. If this continues, I will close my account. I still am paid for 3 more years. I don't know what else to do as I can't keep up since they rehashed everything.
Click on your name in the top right of the MyHeritage screen. Then click on My Sites, then on the site you want to delete. Once there, click on Settings, then on General, then on Administration. Then you can delete that particular site. Do that for each duplicate or for any tree you want to delete.
Please accept my sympathy. I'm afraid I can't help much.
Question 1: "Am I really expected to review 460 matches?"
No. You are welcome to totally ignore useless matches. When you review the matches with someone else's site you should find controls to "confirm all", "reject all" and "ignore this tree". That last one lets you remove a specific family tree from all future smart matches (so you could block those two sites).
I only pay attention to smart matches that I have called for. And few of them have been of any real value or use to me. But that's just my family; your mileage may vary.
Question 2: "I have thousands of duplications within my own imported tree."
Are you using Family Tree Builder? If so, check Tools > Check for Duplicates. This will tell you what you already know, that you have duplicate individuals.
The utility may find 100% duplicates but it may also tell you, for example, that there is a 38% chance that Mary Ferguson b. 1871 and Mary Jane Fergus b. 1940 are duplicates. No, it's not terribly intelligent, and there's no way to teach it to be less stupid (by not showing me anything below 80% likelihood, for example).
For each of those duplicates, however iffy, you are given a choice of ignoring it or.... ignoring it.
Now, an intelligent software developer would have realized that a user will want to merge the data between two duplicate individuals. Exactly as you do for two individuals found via a Smart Match, only for two individuals within your own tree.
Instead, you need to manually check the data for each duplicated person, manually move from one to the other (the "keeper"), fact by fact, note by note, date by date then manually delete the other copy (the "gonner").
To make this nominally easier, you can save the Duplicates report to a file, then print it so that over the course of the next few weeks you can manually keep track of which duplicates you have manually merged and those you haven't yet got around to....
Yes, it's a huge burden. The inability to automatically merge duplicate individuals is an excellent example of asinine programming, and yet another thing I hope the MH developers will get around to fixing.
In the meantime, someone on the support team may have a workaround.
Suggestions you ask>Well I can tell you from 2 years of experience that you have just become the latest to realise their is a problem with duplicated trees.
It get even worse- if you locate the "tree owner"and invite myheritage to chastise him/her or even that they recomend a rationalisation of the trees- they (MH) will refuse your request- and why-- because they will not interfer with the tree publishing and it would bean invasion of THAT tree owener's privacy.
Your objsectivity in wanting to rid the duplicate trees carries no value. This is just a piece of the world that myheritage live in- they have "POLICY"on privacy and intervention- my view change the god dam policy- but not likley.
They revel in the fact that you have got a over stated number of actual smart matches- in the eyes of MY you have a great number of matches abd THAT is waht sells my heritage- you have got 460 matches not 230- so THAT means its good from MH - the user - you are ..just irrelevant and you will be ignored.
Just because a connection(son) is not included on the tree doesn't mean that the actual match should be rejected. No wonder there are so many problems.
?? Not sure what this refers to
Personally, I am getting fed up with the whole Smart Match thing and ignore all of them. They're more nuisance than help.
Did you know that you can turn off Smart Matching in FTB V6 (and probably V7 as well) ? Go to Tools > Options > Smart Matching (tm) and set Auto Match to "No". This will prevent FTB from looking for Smart Matches when you add a new person or edit an existing record. This will speed up FTB considerably.
It won't stop the online version from finding them, though.
It means that all of the information was correct. But a family member was not on the tree, so the match to the person on the tree was rejected by the other person after I had accepted it. In other words John Smith and Joe Smith are father and son. I have John on my tree, but not Joe. I get a match for John, but since my tree also doesn't include Joe, the other person rejects our mutual match for John, even though every detail matches and it's clearly the same person. How is the system supposed to understand what real matches are if people are so silly that way?
...I have John on my tree, but not Joe. I get a match for John, but since my tree also doesn't include Joe, the other person rejects our mutual match for John, even though every detail matches and it's clearly the same person....
Thank you, now I understand. What happens when you confirm and the other site manager rejects the same match? does anything bad happen? For that matter, what happens if you both confirm? Or both reject? Or both ignore?
As far as I can tell, it doesn't make any difference.
I like to check to see if the other tree has data that I lack. If they have a tree that goes back to antiquity but I can't see any proof, evidence, or sources, I leave quickly. If I see notes, sources, etc. that obviously came from my tree, I leave quickly. I used to ask the site manager how they know that John was the father of Joe, but nobody ever replied, or they would say, "I got it from a smart match" so I stopped doing that. No point in perpetuating unsupported links.
Beyond that, I can't see a single benefit to paying any attention at all to Smart Matches. I don't confirm, I don't reject, I just ignore them.
It may not matter in the end, but I think that if more people accept or reject validly, the system will "learn" your tree better and make you less likely to get crazy matches that don't make any sense. That's my theory anyway.
That would imply "intelligent" software that is built to "learn". This system is not that sophisticated. It's just a database that is algo'd to find similarities and spit them out automatically... nothing "intelligent" about it.
I say we all boycot Smart Match until they improve it.