I ponder the smartmatch capabilty that matches data to a tree that has not been updated for many years.
Does myheritage assume that one day the owner will respond.
What I cant get my head around is- if a tree is out of date by more than the current subscription limit (say 1 or 2 years) then the Owner CANT confirm or reject the smatmatch becuse they are unfinancial and have no access.
So it CANNOT be that "one day it may happen" sounds to me like a lapsed catholic with the view that if we wait long enough they will return.
Personally I think that bunkum and the sooner myheritage get their ship into line and BAN out of date trees the better the service. (might be)
Its just folly for myheriatge to think they have 500 million members world wide with 690 thousdand nine hundred trillion smart matches- when in reality- there are far far fewer and more and more an more aggitated aand agrievated users.
I agree with the 5 years subscription concept, but we know who those two are- what about the OTHER 3 million subscribers who only EVER bought a ONE year deal- they are the target of my concern.
The number of 5 year subscriptions would at a guess have to be in lower percentile of total subscriptions. Therefore we should make recomendations and have procedures in place for the highrer percentile of normal 1 or 2 year subscriptions.
About users who post a tree and then don't touch it - this is a sensitive issue. Some people prefer to "host" their trees online at places like MyHeritage. It's a cultural thing, as most early genealogy sites were just that - a place to host your tree - and not much more. So a lot of people who pioneered working online have this kind of mind set - that your family tree gets posted online and other people can see it, but you don't really do a lot more than that with it.
The fact that family history web sites have come a long way since then and integrated many social networking features that make it possible not only to record your family history and search ancestors, but also contact famliy members, keep up to date with each other, send invites and get event notifications, create charts and reports, view statistics and so many other things, just doesn't occur to some people.
I'm generalizing here and I apologize if whoever reads this doesn't fit in that category. There are many reasons why a person might choose to upload their tree and not touch it. I invite other people who read this post to elaborate...
A lot of those people have really large trees that benefit the community at MyHeritage. (IMHO) for this reason their trees should be included in Smart Matches. For example, my little 170 person family tree got a match with someone who had a huge tree. I confirmed the match and it helped me get to other people like myself who have little trees that I would otherwise have a hard time reaching.
In essence, those large trees are like hubs that bring people together. So it's a real question whether or not to kill matches on trees like that. I hope you will appreciate that the issue is not a simple question of whether or not to allow Smart Matching on large trees that aren't "active" per say.
I am also of the opinion that old trees have interesting things to offer. Even though the data is old so are the people in the old tree. Not much happens there.
When it comes to research of real old people(historic people) much can happen with found documents etc. which give new knowledge and perhaps make big changes in the relations between people. There the old trees can be a problem if you dont be careful. Maybe you have some data which is correct and you are fooled to change to the old data by mistake. Therefor it is essential to not copy data right of without checking which sources is used for the data.
I am right now working with the swedish nobility (1100-1600) and even though I'm not finished with corrections I get Smart Matches from people who have copied my data right of. How do I know this? Because I use Coat of arms as personal pictures and some I have drawn myself which are also copied. My source is ÄSF which consist of 4 books with corrections in each book of previous books. So by entering data from first book may include some fault which is later corrected. By copying it before I have entered the corrections will unfortunatly spred the faults if they dont check it first.
I believe some people want a large number of people with faults in their trees before less number of people but correct. Is'nt that strange???
I find it also anoying with some people who put up tree after tree like "My Tree 2011-09-30", "My Tree 2011-10-31" and so on leaving me with Matches from almost 5 identical trees in different stages of development. When I'm just finished going thru last batch with Smart Matches (200 ) they put up a new tree and multiply that with 5 since there are many who does this.
If I understood the Whats new in 6.0 this would not be a problem any more since it would be possible to only maintain one tree from one FTB project.