XPost: soc.genealogy   
   From: keith_nuttle@yahoo.com   
      
   On 09/09/2023 5:45 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:   
   > I'm getting fed up with the Thruline suggestions - you know, the "You   
   > may be related to  through ", which   
   > then shows the common ancestor in a box at the top, with two streams of   
   > boxes, going down to me on the left, and  on the right.   
   > The part of the chain - usually, up from me to the common ancestor, and   
   > part way down on the right-hand side - that's already in my tree, is   
   > shown as solid boxes, and at some point they switch to dotted boxes with   
   > an "evaluate" button: when you click that, it shows a few possible   
   > trees, each with a collection of records that support the suggestion   
   > they're making.   
   >   
   > For example, one recent case, I'd verified all the links from myself up   
   > to the common ancestor and then down three generations, to Robert   
   > Davidson. The next suggested person was George Jobling. When I clicked   
   > Evaluate, it gave me two trees to support that - one with 10 records,   
   > one with 0 records. Of the 10, the ones that showed anything to do with   
   > George's birth or parents showed his parents as Robert Jobling and Ann   
   > Rennison - no mention of Davison. (So there'd be no point in contacting   
   > the owner of that tree to ask her.)   
   >   
   > Tonight's one looks at first more promising: I've verified all the way   
   > to Henry Patterson, and the next person suggested is Rachel Patterson.   
   > That does indeed seem plausible. But: Henry was born, baptised, resided,   
   > died, and was buried, all in Embleton, Northumberland; and Rachel,   
   > according to the "supporting" records, was born and died in Tennessee.   
   > (One of those records, an 1880 US census, shows her father was born   
   > there too.)   
   >   
   > I'd accept the odd error, but in cases this just - well, plain silly,   
   > it's very frustrating.   
   >   
   > What's more: in a normal profile, where Ancestry create a "hint",   
   > there's the option to reject it (and even say why - e. g. names, places,   
   > dates, and/or relationships are wrong, or even just that I already had   
   > the information) - and when you do, the hint disappears. But for   
   > Thrulines, the only option is "Add to tree" - or of course don't; but if   
   > you don't, the suggestion remains there, however wrong it is, blocking   
   > you (and presumably the Thrulines system itself) from making another   
   > suggestion.   
   >   
   > I've sent Ancestry a screenshot, and got a thank you. Little suggestion   
   > they're going to do anything about it, *or even investigate it*.   
   >   
   > Sorry, . (-:   
   I have been frustrated with Ancestry Hints for some time.  I look at the   
   possible matches in Trulines, get excited because this could be the   
   break I am looking for.  However when you review the trees, there is no   
   documentation or their "documentation" is another unsupported tree.   
      
   Shier DNA matches are pathetic.  You get hundreds of matches, and 95% of   
   them will be private, or have 0 to 10 people in their tree.   ie 10   
   people for a 4th to 6th cousin DNA Match is worthless.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)