Suggestions

You will have probably gathered that I rerely post to this site.
This is not because of any lack of interest in genealogy - I am a researcher of over 25 years experience- but because, in the main, I have no issues with the workings of this site which is, in general, excellent.
It is only recently I have been exploring the Boards for answers to some site problems.

I would like to make a plea for some tree enhancements where the only workaround at the moment is to edit and replace the GEDCOM file:
I might add that I do not like using GEDCOM files to update my tree as I always find it a risky business and more than once has replacement resulted in attached data such as photos moving to inapropriate records.

It would be far better if Genes provided a few additional features that would make my use of the GEDCOM file unnecessary for other than a Backup.

1. - Merge two individuals:
I have often come accross situations where, for example, cousins marry. At the moment the only way that one can enter the information on a tree is by showing one of the people twiice.
By editting the GEDCOM file Off line one can merge the two thereby completing the "circle" When the GEDCOM is replaced then the tree works properly.
I now have about 8 such instances on my chart.

2. - Add an unrelated individual:
Very often one finds information on lines which look as if they MIGHT connect at some stage in the future and it may be that someone already has an answer. It would be nice to have the opportunity to explore these more thoroughly and yes, I could create some additional FREE accounts but do I really want to have an additional 10 accounts? I think not.
For my own surname, I have conducted a One Name Study (for England only so I do not qualify as a GOON), so have loads of additional information from about 1680 to present day.
Again, such individual CAN be added via the GEDCOM by editing off Line.

3: - Enhanced Error Checking.
I have always been surprised at the number of errors I have found when checking my Genes GEDCOM in my (old) copy of Family Tree Maker. These generally relate to date errors where perhaps I have inadvertantly typed a date in wrongly.
I would be content to be able to initiate an in depth check "as and when" rather than in real time.

I understand from emails received from the Helpdesk that my first request for merging individuals may already be receiving attention but there is no indication of when.

Thanks Genes for your consideration.

An excellent and well presented proposal, well worthy of consideration.

I hope GR manage to see it amongst all the non-suggestion threads which have now taken over this board....! You could try putting the prefix ENH: in front of the heading to make it stand out.

Thankyou InspectorGreenPen for your support and comments.

I know for a fact that the Genes Technical team do monitor this Board as I see that an earlier suggestion of mine has already been adopted.

It was included in the Bug Fixes to the New Message System and related to the types of Attachmnets that can be made

So Thank you Genes.

I do of course appreciate that whilst some modifications can be done easily, others may take a considerable time to work out how and to test.

Perhaps a shedule of work planned to show us what has been accepted (or perhaps rejected) might be a good idea?

It does seem that my suggestion might be in danger of being overlooked due to the current focus on sorting out the Messaging System which is a pity.
Perhaps I will have to resort to sending a Message to the Help desk,

Perhaps my second post was badly phrased but plaese let me explain my reasons.
Firstly, this is a Suggestions Board and my original was a suggestion rather than a gripe.
Second, at the time of my revamped 2nd post on this thread earlier this morning, the number of views was 78 and had been the same for over 24 hours and the thread had almost dropped off the first page of subjects.
Phil made his appearance on the Messages thread yesterday (the day when no new person had accessed my thread) and quite rightly he stated his case but in doing so he implied that several days had elapsed since he had last looked at the board. It seemed a distinct possibility that either he, or his team were unaware of my suggestion though that of course is not to say that another member of his team may have noted it earlier in the week. .

I would not presume to try and jump the qeue of potential enhancements but when one is not sure then anyone from Genes Technical is even aware of my suggestion, it does make me wonder if posting to this board, despite its stated purpose was such a good idea

Although I have not been greatly inconvenieced by the site problems, I am quite happy that they should be sorted as a priority. I do hope however that there is also a todo list for someone to look eventually at my suggestions.

If you want personal service Jeremy, send an e-mail to GR

Your gripe about being unable to show marriages between cousins without entering them twice has been aired on these boards since time immemorial, so I doubt that any change is likely to happen in the foreseeable future

It's very magnanimous of you to concede that site problems should be resolved......as you use GR so seldom, you can't have the least idea of how frustrated regular users have become.

Strange as it may seem to you, those of who use the boards regularly also hope that OUR suggestions may be considered

Your comment about 'error checking' surprised me.........as you have 25 years of experience, one would have thought that you would check for errors before uploading files............

Flick

You imply that I am not a regular user of Genes. NOT SO.
It is however true I am not a regular user of the Community Message Boards which I see as secondary to Gens main aims of promoting contact with extended family through building and sharing trees .
My decision to create an on line tree was taken in 2009 and since then I have been transferring information from research to grow the tree.which currently contains some 2800 records. I have also sent and received many personal messages over that time.
We are all human and quite capable of typing something incorrectly. I find that my eyesite is not as good as it used to be and yes, I carry out regular checks on accuracy to ensure that I have the best possible information. That is not to say that I begrudge a little help from Computer systems, be they on line or local.
A favourite phrase used by the Rail Regulator springs to mind:
"What GOOD reason have you for NOT doing as I have asked?"
If one of my suggestions has been posted before then that would suggest there must be good reason why it has not been implemented.

Perhaps the fact that the number of views had not changed, AND that the number of views is vastly larger than the number of posts is an indication that other people are not as concerned as you about this particular suggestion


........ at least not until other problems are resolved.

Jeremy

Why do you think that your suggestion is more important than those of others who pay a sub to have GR membership in exactly the same way as you do?

Do you seriously think that because YOU have asked, GR should fall over themselves to do what YOU want?

For heaven's sake, let's have a site that works efficiently as a first priority

Your conception of genes' 'main aim' may differ from that of others

We have a separate team working on tree development now, so now is a good time to be posting any suggestions. I'll will make sure that they are keeping watch for tree suggestions and point them to this one as well as the others that currently exist.

Thank you Phil and I wiesh you and your teams good luck with sorting out your other, more major problems.

And thank you to all the other contibutors to this thread who have helped to keep it active long enough to be noticed.

Glad to see it is on the GR radar. Well done!