Suggestions

;-)

Wot...Jax?

:-D :-D :-D :-D Gins

As everything I have said tonight has been in invisible ink I shall not bother to reply to anything that you say anymore John, as most of it is what Gins has said

Sylvia

I cannot respond to everything you say. I would only point out that you keep saying so many of your friends like the tree. I think that is a useful point, but I think that argument was known as "reductio ad absurdum" in Logic. Yes, politicians use that a lot and then spin and spin. I suspect you would make a much better politician than me.

I have suggested a more scientific way of moving forward based on asking a random sample of members what they think and what they want. Email and telephone people. Use a market research company if Genes staff cannot do it.

Basically doing what everyone else does. Companies and individuals. Ask round, discuss, decide, do, follow up. Just imagine the Genes Team trying to organise a barbecue without asking who wanted to come, what the weather would be like, who would buy everything, who would cook everything.....

Dross

:-\ :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\

Cant be bovered to read your........c@ap

Gins I am not up for a fight at all. But I do get upset when someone says they liked the old tree and about four people then tell that person it has been removed and get over it. Really nasty and hateful sometimes and I cannot stand back and see that sort of rudeness and thougfhtlessness. What if it was their cat that had died rather than the old tree had been removed? Would they react the same.

Some of us have used that tree in its different formats for many years WITHOUT COMPLAINT and to have it removed and replaced by something very slow and fiddly was a great shock. It will probably not be a shock to you at all, as it was talked about on Community and there were Announcements.

I think the lack of empathy for people who have used these Community Boards mainly over the years to those who have mainly used the tree is terrible. I can hear you say "well, if the cap fits, wear it" and you may have a good point.

But I came on Community a few weeks ago because I have loved my 9 years with Genes and have helped a lot of people, been helped by others and made a lot of friends. But because I and several others had not been on Community Boards before we have been treated in a very unhelpful way at times. Very high-handed and patronising often.

I found it very difficult to understand why people enjoyed chatting on here when I first came on Community. I said I thought it was banal (a genuine opinion) and was absolutely slated. General Chat is not for me, but I have come to understand a little of what you get out of it. I have loved building my tree. Can you not move a little to understand the pleasures I and others have had on this site for the last 9 years? After all, we are all customers and we must all want Genes to succeed through increased subs and increased hits and therefore increased advertising revenues.

Dear John



Why are you always up for 'a fight'....


........sigh

This thread you started has 255 replies and I would'nt be suprised if half of them are from you and I wonder how many others posted more than once on it?

Its a bit like the Genes blog...its looks like a couple of hundred people have replied until you actually read through it and see the same names posting over and over.

As for the suggestions...I made one suggestion which is also something I have been sending emails back and forth to Genes about this week. They dont know me from Adam as I get the same generic response as everyone else

Those threads were set up for Suggestions not for complaints

Cynthia

I have just contributed to threads already started and given my honest opinion. I have been called all sorts, and can give you chapter and verse if you really want it. Two posters actually thought I was being bullied - and it did seem close to that at times.

The only thread I started was when I saw the announcement thread about how we liked the new tree. I wanted to comment "well, I don't like it" but there was no way anyone could make a comment.

So I copied and pasted it to a new thread and wrote my comment. And 300 more joined in with their thoughts.

I will stop being positive about Genes pre-fiasco and critical post-fiasco when they finally add to their rather ridiculous announcements of 2nd Aug. Hardly anyone is contributing to Estelle's Suggestions threads any more, so surely time has come for the folk in Shoreditch to journey up to Scotland and sort this mess out with the paymasters.

John


you are extremely fond .............. far too fond, to my mind ............... in applying what YOU think to what others have said, and thus denigrating people

Politicians do that ........ it's called spin doctoring over here, and is much disliked.


This is not the first time that you have misinterpreted what I've said ..........

................... some might say "twisted my words" ..........

......... to make yourself look better, and me look one of the opposition.


I have NEVER been negative about the old tree .................... I did after all start my tree on here ..............................


.............. all i have done is to attempt to point out that you, and others with the tree problem, very conveniently forget that there ARE people who are happy with the new tree, and are working away very busily adding to to their tree.


The fact that something like 20 or 30 people have been posting multiple times (nay hundreds of times) over the last few weeks on the Boards re how much they hate the new tree, while only about 10 people have posted in favour of it does NOT mean that twice as many people dislike the new tree.


All it means is that those who dislike the tree are far more vocal that those who like it. Those who like the tree are far too busy building their trees


That applies in all aspects of life ...........

.......... more people who dislike the country's government will be vocal than those who either like it or are so-so about it.

......... more people who disagree with a TV programme or a movie will be vocal, than those who like it.

Those who are not anti-whatever will say "I'm OK, the government's working for me, that programme was interesting. I'm OK" ................. and will not stand on the opposite street corner and shout out loud.


I know of at least 25 people who DO like the new tree ........ some have posted on threads to say so, others have not bothered with posting on GR, but have said elsewhere or in other contact with me that they are very happy.


This information does make a lot of your statements trumpeting "Noone likes the new tree" to sound ridiculous.



BTW ............. I have not looked back on all threads to count the number of people who have posted, nor the number of posts made ................... I'm relying on memory of names of people, and numbers of times I can remember them posting. For example, a very large percentage (75% 80%, higher?) of your 581 posts have been on the same topic, dislike of the tree.


I have been open about the fact that I have a small number of names on my GR tree ................ that's MY desire ..................

I'm also very open, as you know, about the fact that I have not actually entered any more names on that tree in the last 3 years or so, except for one test that I did at the beginning of August to see if I could understand what you and others were complaining about. My tree worked just fine, so I guess you should count me as one of the satisfied people!


................ I have no wish to be a name collector, nor to be in competition with others as to how many names I "own".

Nor to tell everyone all the time how many names I have, nor how many names I add in a session

It has been suggested by some that trees with many thousands of names MIGHT have more problems than ones with only a few hundred names.

That's possible ................... and I can see that exchanging information on size of tree MIGHT help sort out the problem



My tree is maintained at home, on my own computer, in a format that I prefer .......................... for your information, that tree probably has more names than you have in yours


but I have no wish to have it on GR ........... so it stays where it is, and I work on it as and when I feel like it.



The number of posts that any of us showing under our profile has absolutely nothing to do with the tree ............... you are deflecting people's attention by intimating that is so.


Most us who have a large number of posts showing have spent years helping others find ancestors, break down brick walls ............ and helping them to learn how to find the information by themselves ...............


for example, by telling them how to find the information on a particular site, OR by explaining where we have found obscure information, in ways that can be easily understood.

It has been OUR desire to do that instead of building a tree on here, or spending all our time on our own families.






I would add that several of us have been told off constantly, by you and others, for saying ................. contact GR at [email protected] uk .......................


................ we've only been trying to help people get solutions to their problems

It is well known among those who have used the Boards for any length of time, that GR does NOT read the Boards with any great regularity, and that they respond on the Boards even less frequently


Therefore, all that posting on these Boards does is to relieve your own anger, and possibly help others realise that they are not alone in having problems .....................


such posting(s) will NOT result in replies from GR in response to the posts.


You will not get the old tree back by virtue of hundres of postings distributed among 4 Boards ........ because GR simply will not see them!


So, why would we not try to help someone with a problem get better response??



sylvia

Wendy - I was okay with the old tree but think the new tree has some additional features which are helpful. Maybe I am just fortunate in not having hit too many problems with it.


John - I do take exception to your statement that when you came on the board you were 'attacked, called moaners and told you were complaining to the wrong people'.


You were not attacked, you were advised but you didn't like the advice.

You did (and still do) keep harping on and on about the old tree.

You did come onto the boards to complain but, these are the Community boards, NOT the Complaint boards.

We can all have our opinions on things but any real 'complaint' should be sent directly to Genes.

How they chose the 5000 people who were invited to try the beta testing I dont know.....but I doubt whether they were all users of the community boards.

Computer literate....No I can turn laptop on and off and work my way around the internet, apart from that I have no idea how to do anything. Cache, cookies even browser is a foreign language to me.

I have to say I have managed to do things with the new tree which I never was able to on the old one....like looking at a large tree which was opened to me....or finding where my particular ancestor fitted in some other large tree and moving up, down and left and right of the tree using the arrows. There may have been some easy way to do it before...but I never found it

There have been quite a few adding 100, 200, 300, 400 and even 500 a month to their trees. I woud never be so judgmental about motives, and whether that is good or bad. If I had a family of 12, I would always put all 12 on and, if easy to find wives and families would extend that as well. The only thing that would stop me was if someone already had the tree on A...... and it looked accurate to me. No point in me researching people who were not closely connected to me and who were already on someone's tree.

I was quite surprised that I had put on 23,000 in 9 years. But I only had 3 posts on Community in 9 years, and never felt the need to complain in that time. Cynthia has 1400 in same period and very many more posts than me. That doesn't make either of us right or wrong. It does make us family history nuts - probably certifiable in my case at least. But it is a very interesting and absorbing hobby and has been for 31 years now in my case.

I still maintain that those involved in the trial did not have large trees and were all very computer illiterate. No "soft Joes" like me were asked, I feel sure. And anything new should be trialled with the Lowest Common Denominator.
I suspect they chose those who had been on Community - particularly those who had been moaning about all and sundry whilst folk like me and Wendy plodded along building up trees, writing to contacts and enjoying ourselves.

When we tree huggers came on community boards in August to complain, we were attacked, called moaners, told we were complaining to the wrong people. Yes, a lot of help was offered by Cynthia and others.

But you have to admit it has been a constant stream of postive energy to either get the old tree back or develop our tree in such a way that we are all keen to use it again without doing too much technically. :-) :-)

I have just looked at my updates and counted the people who have added to their tree during July and August....I am not interested in these updates as none are related to me as it happens

During July there were six different people updating their tree
During August there were twelve different people updating...one adding 144 people and another added 48...none have complained on the boards...so do they like the tree??

Like Cynthia I cannot understand why anyone would want to add 200-300 people to their tree each month...My main tree has 650 names...just direct lines, their siblings and their children and no one born after 1920.

Cynthia
My thoughts are all my own.Although not very computer savvy I have had a tree on Genes since 2004 and do know how to use this new format.Knowing how to use it and liking using it are two very different things.
Do you really like this format ? It looks so unprofessional,the old tree format reflected what it was, an historical record of all our pasts.If "myheritage" members have either the modern or traditional option for their trees why can't Genes accommodate those of us who wish to work with the old tree.Genes stood out as a family tree why would it even want to look like all the rest.

Wendy,

I do hope that you are not angry because of John's thoughts that it is computer savvy members who have 'forced' Genes to change format. He has absolutely no proof of this.


I hope you have seen the helpful threads which various members have posted regarding how to use the new tree format.


Cx

John ,I have about 7000 names on my tree.I used to log in most days and it was always a pleasure to look at the tree,all the info plus any photos for each relative was on their one page. The tree was so quick and uncomplicated to use.I am angry that Genes have only listened to those with the technical jargon and knowhow.
I learned the very basics of how to use a computer solely to enable me to research my family History.The format of the old tree reflected the fact that it was recording the past.
My son is a graphics designer,he points out that the design of a site should reflect the subject matter.I don't suppose that was taken into consideration.
I do not believe for one moment that according to Genes the majority of members approved this new format.This was said to cover their like it or lump it policy.
In all fairness we should have the option of access to the old tree.

John, are you deliberately being obtuse and argumentative? Are you actually reading and understanding what Sylvia and I have both said?


I am getting the feeling that, if you don't understand what we are saying, you go off at a tangent.


Point one. I am NOT moaning or being negative about the old tree format - it was okay by me BUT the new format is okay by me too. I'm quite adaptable to change.


Point two. Why on earth would anyone want to add 200-300 names a month to their tree ??? That seems very excessive to me. Genealogy is not a competition where people are competing to see who has the largest tree in the world.


Point three. My tree was also started in 2003. I only add names as and when I am following a particular line and feel it necessary. I am not interested in adding names just for the sake of it. I HAVE added a couple of new names since the change and have had no problems at all.


Point four. Given the millions of members on this site, there is no way that, just because someone comments on the Community Boards, it indicates how the majority are or are not feeling.


Point five. The fact that you think some of us may have 'forced' Genes into changing the format beggars belief.


Point six. I'm stuck for words.

Wendy Your reaction to the tree that began this thread has been similar to all of us who have used the tree a lot. That is what I believe, anyway. And I am asking for a few stats that either back up my feelings or not.

No one with a large tree (putting on, say, 200-300 new relatives every month) seems to have even been asked about this new format. Not sure who was involved in the trial, but I suspect it was members with a good knowledge of computers who can communicate with this strange world of computer programming. Nothing wrong with that, except it needs to be tested out on Soft Joes who know dicky mint about computers like me before launch.

What has upset me a bit is that we have been called moaners if we say we like the old tree. That is turning logic on its head. We were happy customers and getting on with our hobby. There were obviously moaners who thought the old tree was not fit for purpose, and forced change on Genes which appears to have been badly researched and badly communicated so far.

THOSE MOANERS HAVE SPOILT OUR HOBBY. WE ARE THE POSITIVE ONES. WE QUITE LIKED THE OLD TREE. :-D :-D