Log in
Sign up
View all  |  Close all
#
Subject
Posted by
Actions
1
Smart Matches Pt III
Gus Porter
- Close
Hi Folks:
 Well, they've done it.  I've now go more smart matches to work on than I have people in my tree.  I received an extra 4,480 odd smart matches this morning.  Now isn't that priceless?  What are these people smoking?  
I am quite diligent at trying to do all the smart matching I was receiving until, I began getting snowed under, inundated if you will by these mindless smart matches.  There has to be a better system than this for collaberating with others who wish to see if your "Joe Blow" matches his / her "Joe Blow".  Right now I have started to work on people with the least number of matches for confirmation / rejection because I am spending altogether too much time triying to do this and ignoring my own work.
If My Heritage knows how many matches you have pending, why don't they find a way to put them in a folder on their site and only send out a small number at a time.  Then when they see you are finished, send out another groujp. 
As I mentioned in my first rant, I have begun to refuse to even look at matches that have "Private or Prive" stamped in place of spouses, children, parents and sibling.  That is basically stupid because most of these people have passed on many years ago and would surely not object to having their name shown.  Other than doing a tree match on every one of those individuals so marked, one is playing Russian roulette when they try to identify the individual for confirmation / rejection.  I personally refuse to do this as it just takes too much time for too little return.
I have received some positive feed-back on what I am ranting about but "My Heritage" has to get involved and find a solution to this bottle-neck.  I'm sure that if they try they can overcome and put out a software update that gives more control to the individual site managers to control their own sites.  First step would be to add user control for the privacy settings that would drastically reduce the "private" stamp from being abused.  
If a moderator or "My Heritage" support person happens to read any or all of the three rants I have put up on this forum, I would be pleased to discuss this with them further.
Gus:
Gus Porter
Canada
- Reply
2
RE: Smart Matches Pt III
Rhianna W
- Close

Hi Gus,

I'd be happy to talk about Smart Matches with you.

The first thing I'd like to clarify is that the label <private> lastname is shown by default for living people in the family trees at MyHeritage. We do this to protect the privacy of living members of the family tree, while still allowing those names to get matches so you can get relevant leads about people in your tree.

It's also possible to mark specific individuals as private if you use Family Tree Builder, so you might see some people who made deceased individuals private by choice.

I know that in some circles it's also considered correct to mark people born after 1920 private regardless of whether they are deceased or not and there are other "ways" of protecting information on your family tree.

In regard to Smart Matches, improving the system is one of the first major tasks on our list after the release of Super Search tomorrow. I know one of the biggest problems you have is being innundated with too many matches and we're going to rennovate to make sure you get less, better quality matches.

We definitely appreciate your feedback and I'll be happy to hear your comments. 

Rhianna W
Tel Aviv, Israel
- Reply
3
RE: Smart Matches Pt III
Eric Dalton
- Close
Two more things to look at before you confirm are, how long has it been since the tree was updated? The longer it's been, the less likely the other person will come and confirm. Another is to notice if the tree is "basic". If it is, the owner can't confirm at all. Just two ways to cut down on your work.
Eric Dalton
- Reply
 
Loading...
Loading...