General Chat

I do agree with Jill... why not ask this person to explain what they meant, as you have been hurt by it.

I am of the opinion that our ancestors belong to no-one.... and everyone!!

Was the person on your tree a small child recently died, or a baby who lived just a few hours? I could imagine some folk maybe a little sensitive about that if it was their own, or a much loved little member of their immediate family... but if it is an ancestor, and shared, then I see no harm in it.

I always keep a little *note* of relatives related by marriage, but with no blood... I have found that it sometimes comes in handy for some folk who are stuck, and where the person on my tree is a sibling or something, lol!!

Good luck

Love

Daff xxxx

That does seem an odd thing to say to you Toni. I wonder what they meant?

I did have a minor "argument" with someone who had posted my mother's tree on here. Years and years ago when still very new to this hobby I shared my whole tree with a distant cousin on my father's side. He took the whole tree (as it was then) and added that to this site. This annoyed me a bit as it included all of my mother's side - which is not connected to him at all in any way shape or form whatsoever.

In theory, I don't mind him putting my mum's tree on it's just that I have a One Name Study on her side of the family so there seems little point in him having people contact him on any of those names as he has no knowledge of them other than what he had from me.

He then gave a copy to another cousin of his who added the whole lot again. I did ask her if she wouldn't mind removing mum's side but she was really unhelpful so I accused her of being a name collector!




Maybe there is something like that behind the comment/request. I would write back to them asking them to perhaps explain what they mean by it ...

Jill

thanks for ur coments and i agree with u all about living relatives
the relative i was asked to remove is not living and the person who asked me to remove them said i was using her relative as a specimin in my collection
i take my research and my tree very seriously and was offended by this coment
i have deleted the relative on this site cause i just didnt know what else to do about it
at the moment im sure if i want to cary on using this any more. most ppl on here have been really nice and willing to share or help with finding ancestors
thanks again for ur coments
toni

I don't use the "hide living relatives" option because I don't always have death dates for the ones I know have died relatively recently and they get hidden as well.

If I do put living people on my tree it's because they are "linking" one part of the tree to another. But unless I have their permission I just show them as "Living Smith" or even "Living Living" and put no detail on at all. I can then navigate my way around and for anybody else who is connected I point them in the right direction to start with.

I don't include my siblings and nephews, nieces etc. I would not add any children at all as I am mainly interested in going backwards.

If my nephew were to join this site and want to check out my info he can find the relevant parts of the tree either from me - or from my parents. He does not need to be able to find his name as he knows where he fits in.

Keep it simple. Keep anything on living people on your offline tree. It saves such a lot of hassle!

Jill

That is not so, Sat Nav... the reverse is the norm.... you do not add someone who might be living to your tree UNTIL you have permission... so that means that any living relative could ask for it to be deleted... for instance, I saw that someone had done some research, and had my sister named on her tree... this tree owner is connected, our gt gt grandmothers were sisters..... however, I know for a fact that my sister does not want her name on anyone's tree... not even mine!! This tree owner only had my sister, her first husband and their three children, and her second husband and their child as well... not myself (the eldest) nor our 6 siblings!!

So I politely asked for them to be removed, it was refused.... yep, refused... so GR was informed, and the names vanished! It doesn't matter how you are related... if you know that another tree owner has living people you Know don't want to be on a public tree... then you have the responsibility to ask for it to be removed, I think.

I do not put living relatives on my public trees, except for me, and my parents, who have given permission, are happy for it to be shown.... and I have stated so in my notes. We are happy for anyone else to use our names, as well.

Anyone who puts living relatives on their trees, without seeking permission, is just asking for litigation at some point!!

Apart from which, it is ill mannered, I think... even if it is *all out there* it doesn't mean that people have the right to use it!!

I mean... that would mean that anyone has the right to use anything that belongs to you with impunity...... like... oh, look at that bench in that person's garden... it is out there on display... lets nick it and use it!!

Bad example, I suppose, but that is how I feel about someone putting living rellies up... ancestors, though.... that is different! They really are to be shared... and I am incredibly pleased when I am able to share my own research with anyone.

Love

Daff xxxx

I have seen several posts about this.
I suppose,in theory,only the person themselves can asked to be removed.
Very strange request if they appear in "Search Trees"

Toni, as others have said, we are not allowed to put living people on our tree on genes without their permission. You can of course, have them on your tree in your own paprework.
I have also (sort of) added people onto my tree on here without their permission, because they are a link to others in the family
I my case I am thinking of my ex-husband. I wanted to include my in-law side of the family. Needed him as a link to them. He is added as "husband" so cannot be identified easily.

Have also, in the notes put such things as "This couple had two sons and one daughter" without including their names.
A useful tool to jog my memory, but without infringing the rules.

It is worth asking for permission when possible.

I also use the Hide Living Relatives facility.

Well if it is a living person I can understand their objection.
I really wouldn't be happy about people putting my personal details on a tree, or site, for others to see or have access to.

However, if it is a deceased person then I can't see why someone would object, so I would ask for their reasons why before I decided to delete or not.

K

What if you had all your living relatives hidden - would this person mind then?

I objected to one person not asking me for permission - I didn't mind my name so much but he had my children in there as well with incorrect spelling of their names. I only have the names of those happy for me to do so - and they are hidden.

GR have a rule in their Terms and Conditions which requires you to obtain the prior permission of living persons before adding them to your tree.

This means that if someone does object, then you must remove their name. If you refuse, then the person concerned can ask GR to remove their details from your tree.

In practice, I find this happens very rarely, but if someone does feel strongly then you have to respect their wishes.

i dont know how people feel about thier trees but ive been asked to remove a relative from my tree because i didnt have permission to put that person on my tree
i have deleted this relative but i feel like i can no longer add to my tree as i might get this request again has any one been asked to do this if so what can i do about it