Suggestions

nor have I heard anything, yet



sylvia

I would have posted this on Glitterbaby's thread if it were still going.

I have now received a clarification from GR as to why my post was removed. It was because I mentioned "a company other than ours".

Ken, re " because I mentioned "a company other than ours".", that is beyond my comprehension; I have read genes reunited staff's words that discussion of other companies is allowed; also, many other companies are mentioned in, for instance, useful sites threads that Phil Moir intends to merge.

:-|

I agree Joy, but I am going to be careful in future.The post that they objected to wasn't particularly complimentary to the other company, nor did it include a link.

Is this GR going into "denial" mode to try to justify its actions?

In my 30 odd years in business, I learnt that it is OK to admit nistakes (IF this is what has happened)..

Nobody is perfect. We are all human and we are all capable of making the odd error.

An admission will generally earn far more respect than abject denial or trying to hide behind the "rules" .

So it is ok for GR to stickie a thread on the Find Ancestors board advising people to take out an Ancestry sub then?

This is now making my mind up about whether I want to continue on here

jax

Well I got my reply and do you know what, this site stinks and if anyone wants to report this too, because what I said was in jest is'nt that what these are for?

:-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D


I shall go elsewhere to help people in future, because this has done it for me now

Jax has a valid point concerning the post which has recently been stickied.

Feels very much like Double Standards are being applied here and I for one do not like it one bit.

It seems OK for some but not for others.

A wide degree of Latitude was granted in the past and I fail to understand why this has suddenly changed.

This is most certainly not in the spirit of co-operation.

I've been following this subject with interest as I would like to know wether it is links to other sites that have suddenly become offensive.
It seems unlikely as the ability to make links active was added during the revamp in May and other sites are always being mentioned.

I think Ken makes a more likely reason by saying "The post that they objected to wasn't particularly complimentary to the other company"
I can understand GR not wanting derogatory comments about other sites on their site as they could be sued.

Don't bite my head off. I'm only trying to make sense of it all :-D

Sorry Island but I think you are wrong

Have a look at the very bottom of the page. There is this statement:

"Any views expressed in message boards and members notes represent the opinions of the author and do not represent the opinions of Genes Reunited Limited"

I really think we need some clarification here rather than trying to guess what GR are up to. :-)

No Island I don't think that's the problem. When I said "not particularly complimentary" I really meant that I wasn't plugging it. It was to do with the census and the fact that the other company had listed the available counties but that the other company had acknowledged that there were some missing areas from some of those counties.

Part of my email to GR

"
"Can you please make an announcement on the board as to whether it is now 'absolutely NOT permissible' to mention the Ancestry website in conversation or indeed to mention that certain records can be found there that neither GR nor FMP hold"

and the answer which applies to that point

"We do not encourage other websites names to be mentioned on the Genes Reunited message boards.

If we receive multiple reports about the same post then we will take action."

Answers from genes reunited have been inconsistent.

I cannot tell you how tempted I am to 'report' those stickied threads of GR's which mention
"... other websites names...." ;-)

(but I won't obviously, because it would affect members who need the advice )

Anyone read the new blog about Facebook and Twitter ( well hush my mouth!) ?

Jeremy
Thanks for your response but guessing how GR works has being going on for quite some time.
Regardless of the waiver I would think derogatory comments about other sites would be removed if they were reported by staff of that site - just trying to see reasons as GR aren't being forthcoming with any.

Ken, sorry, I'm not psychic :-D It seemed reasonable to assume that "not particularly complimentary" might mean 'uncomplimentary'.

As I said, I would like to see clarification regarding inclusion of other websites as removing posts for that reason seems very odd. There must be more to it :-S

I have to say......if only a fuss like this had been kicked up over random discounts and two different subs for long standing members when it has been queeried on the boards. I don't need a price list from members, only GR can explain this - same old, same old eh? ;-)

edit - I'm a slow typist... Rose, that beggars belief! Since when? Why add a facility for links and why is Phil making a list of 'useful sites' ???
In my experience GR send out differing reasons depending on who picks up the email. TWO different reasons were given for the 30 free credits puzzle. Sorry, going off track but I think it is relevent.

I could have a field day reporting posts I dont like, will give me something to do in the early hours of the morning :-D :-D

Note I have put your grinning faces at the end again GR

To me that means it is a JOKE

Hmmm

Food for thought.
Might it be that some staff on another website are deliberately trying to disrupt messaging on this site?

Might explain why the reports all appear to be done at night time (UK)

How many reports are required for Genes to decide to act and do Genes actually read the contents of the messages involved?

I rekon the "Reporters" are laughing in their boots at the mayhem that is being caused.

Actually this thread was titled "Attention-Plil Moir". I wonder why he hasn't responded? He seems to be a sensible person and I would value his input.

"this thread was titled "Attention-Plil Moir". I wonder why he hasn't responded?" - although he posted on a thread the other evening, perhaps he is still on holiday?

There was another one, I thought, addressed to Estelle, but did it whoosh? :-S