Yes, they are.

I just added to my Ancestry.com family tree several distant relatives
-- every bit of info I have added is VALID -- public records, family
Bibles, newspaper articles, cross-checked, double-checked.

Now, the "little leaf" is showing up and damn near every "hint" is
crap.

It's always been like that.  That's why I don't use any unsourced  
information from other's trees.

In a message dated 3/31/2012 11:15:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  

Yes,  they are.

I just added to my Ancestry.com family tree several distant  relatives
-- every bit of info I have added is VALID -- public records,  family
Bibles, newspaper articles, cross-checked,  double-checked.

Now, the "little leaf" is showing up and damn near  every "hint" is
crap.

-------------------------------
To  unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GENMSC-requ...@rootsweb.com  with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and
the body of  the message

On 4/1/2012 8:46 AM, Pats...@aol.com wrote:

You just realized that?

What is more if you offer the person with the crap trees, the
documentation ie. birth, death, marriage certificates with the correct
information you probably will be ignored.  I sometimes think all they
want is a paper with a lot of names and dates, and don't care if it is
correct or not.  On the other hand if they did not take the time to
complete the research in the first place, I doubt they would have the
time to correct their errors.

It seems to me if you are looking for your ancestors you should want to
HONOR them by identifying their real parents and siblings.  Those people
with the crap trees do not spend enough time on their research to
realize there may be two families of the same name with daughters named
Susan.  Naming your children after your ancestors was the way to honored
their your ancestors or a dead sibling.  Families repeat the same names
from generation to generation, and multiple times within siblings families.

I suppose there are those people with the crap trees who are ashamed of
their ancestors because they did not have an Ipod.

Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names wrote:

I'm not sure we can honestly blame specific people for those
nasty little leaves.  Many of them seem to be the results of
AI linking.

IMO, AI linking is worse than people doing it...at least you
have a 50/50 chance of arguing with a people.  You just
can't argue with someone else's computer's AI results. :(

Cheryl

On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 09:14:17 -0400, Keith Nuttle

I've noticed the same thing. I have a relative who I suspect is bad
mouthing me because I correspond with them and then never hear from
them  but they have the same incorrect information she has.

I've researched the death records from the city where they lived and
the obits but that doesn't seem to satisfy her.

If I'm wrong and someone can prove different records, I'm quite
willing to review them.

I have found some valuable hints though. One was from someone
researching the husband of someone in my family.

Homework is the name of the game.  If I accepted family trees at face value, I could claim to be related to Odin, King of the Norse gods.  Some are fairly accurate however.  Check the sources.  Research names without sources.  It's possible that at least some of the info is correct even if most is junk.  I had an entry in a family tree that connects with mine, that had grand children born BEFORE the grand parents.  I contacted the guy with the tree and he shrugged it off.  Don't expect intant family tree info.  I have been working on mine for more than fifteen years and still have many mysteries to solve.  But the bottom line is that if you want accuracy do the homework yourself.  Consider every fact unproven until otherwise.