Search for content in message boards

Blocking

Posted: 19 Aug 2010 3:24AM GMT
Classification: Query
Ancestry.com already offers the option to block certain users from contacting other users. How hard can it be to modify/add to that blocking process, to keep certain users from copying?

I have a public tree, because I believe in sharing and helping. I have made some great friendships with distant cousins who also have public trees.

I object to the members who copy indiscriminately, just because a leaf wiggled. These people have people married to themselves, their children, their grandparents, ad infinitum.

I know we can't control the world and we can't cure stupidity, but why can't we control just our little corner?

Re: Blocking

Posted: 19 Aug 2010 4:06AM GMT
Classification: Query
Because once you make a tree public it ceases to be your own little corner.

Anything that can be seen in a browser can, in one manner or another, be copied.

Granted- Ancestry could limit the tools they make available to do this and I've been screaming at them for years to do just that but so far it seems to have fallen on deaf ears.
*sigh*

Re: Blocking

Posted: 19 Aug 2010 5:18AM GMT
Classification: Query
You can control your corner but you cannot control what others do with what they copy.

Re: Blocking

Posted: 19 Aug 2010 12:55PM GMT
Classification: Query
Just who are these "certain users" that you want to block, and how will you recognize them beforehand?

Re: Blocking

Posted: 19 Aug 2010 1:10PM GMT
Classification: Query
Margaret, you have simply encountered some of the problems associated with Public Trees and we've all been there! The ONLY solution is to make your trees Private and then give shared access to those people with whom you are working.

Re: Blocking

Posted: 6 Feb 2012 9:09PM GMT
Classification: Query
I have no issue sharing any information that I found outside of ancestry, as long as the spirit of sharing is reciprocated and mot hoarded to a private tree.

The reason I post information and photos of my ancestors to my ancestry trees is so that others that do not have access can find it.

The only users that I would block are those users that take my photos and place them in their PRIVATE trees.

Re: MIssing the Point??

Posted: 7 Feb 2012 4:55AM GMT
Classification: Query
Please enlighten us; how do you know when anyone has copied your photos and what they do with those images? How do you know who has a public tree, a private tree, both, or neither? How do you know which tree owner is abusing your photos, the public or the private tree owner? Are you quite certain of this?

And please enlighten us as to where ACOM expressly advertises it is selling access to private trees. Membership subscriptions are sold for the privilege of accessing the various databases available online for your level of paid membership privileges.

Tree owners choose whether to make their trees public, private but indexed and searchable, or completely private. Public trees are available to all, with information on living persons shielded unless a tree owner grants guest privileges to others to view such information. Private tree owners may choose to grant access to specific individuals for a limited time, or not. It is their choice.

If you believe a private tree owner may have information to help with your research, you could send a private ACOM message to that person and state your case. There are those who will respond and provide assistance, as well as those who will ignore your message. But, the public tree owners may do the same. It is up to the tree owner to decide if they wish to volunteer their unpaid time to help someone or to share the contents of their tree/s. No one is required to provide information from their tree/s to other members unless they wish. There is no entitlement clause that private tree owners must share any information whatsoever free of charge and on demand .

If a tree owner establishes a public tree, then access is available equally to paying subscribers with public or private trees. And, there may be many paying subscribers who do not have a tree on ACOM to share with anyone. Will those members be treated differently? Micromanaging everyone else's tree/s is not a privilege of membership, nor is it professional.

One might look at it this way. If someone called you or sent an email requesting the key to your home, to your automobile, your credit card and pin, and your access code to your bank account so they could look around, I seriously doubt that you would agree to hand everything over. Think about it. It is the same principle.
Posted: 7 Feb 2012 5:46PM GMT
Classification: Query
Here is the practical problem - even if you could block people from copying directly from your tree, you would not be able to block them from copying images that previously were copied by someone else (i.e., people about whom you do not object). Once it's out there, it can be copied by anyone, from any public tree where it appears - you will get a notice that your photo was copied, even if the copying actually was done from someone else's tree where a copy of your photo is attached.

Re: Blocking

Posted: 26 Feb 2012 1:56PM GMT
Classification: Query
Easier to make the tree private.....

My tree got "damaged" twice.
Once in the bad old days when you accepted a single entity as related? It would accidently merge the two branches without the pop up. I didnt touch my tree for afull year it made me so sick. Records I had entered and no longer have access to? Gone! poof. Worse is when I saw it start to be seen as a "source" in teh worlkd tree because so many researchers that trusted my tree at time also changed their trees cliking on mine!!!
Then when I was semi private a relation to my child changed a critical branch to the bad.I wasn't aware until the tree they added contacted me and said "um, not to be mean but WHO are you?"

So for now, I stay full private. I allow viewers and if they respond they are related? I begin contact to arrange access to more information. If they do not respond they are removed from access in my "spring cleanings" of invitees. My experience does worry me about how many just add from the World Tree without double checking afterwards.

I want to share but I want the infomation applied correctly

Re: Blocking

Posted: 9 Nov 2012 7:52PM GMT
Classification: Query
This is interesting & useful information for me. I've only been properly using Ancestry for a few months & recently came across a user who is obviously quite closely related to my dad. I contacted them & asked whether they'd be willing to share the 'private' information in their tree. I can appreciate that they chose not to do this, but was very annoyed that they didn't have the courtesy to reply that they'd prefer not to & then helped themselves to my photos!

I hadn't realised that by making my tree public I was potentially allowing others to make changes to it. I'm extremely careful with my research & never add anything that I've seen on anyone else's tree without verifying it for myself. It could be a disaster if someone else changed something that proved to be wrong.

It seems from reading this thread that I would be better if my tree was private. Perhaps I've misundestood? Bear with a newby if so, but advice would be welcome...
per page

Find a board about a specific topic