dee_burris: (Default)
Dee Burris Blakley ([personal profile] dee_burris) wrote2010-11-24 11:19
Entry tags:

Can't we all just get along?

I am a big proponent of making genealogical information freely available. I intend to do that in this blog, and I try to support other online activities where the information is free.

That's one of the reasons I am such a big fan of FindaGrave.

I am not, however, a fan of the increasing politicking, nitpicking and inflated egos I find in the FAG forums though.

Particularly those that surround transferring of memorials to family members "out of guidelines."

Yes, there is a four generation "rule," (which is really two generations up and two down) that I personally ignore when I get requests for transfers of memorials to family members for decedents to whom I am not related.

I make that clear on my profile, which really chaps some of the forum members. They are the ones who hang on to the memorials they have created for dear life, and will not ever ~gasp~ transfer "out of guidelines."

They make fun of people who even ask.

Like a snippet from an ongoing thread entitled Rethinking transfers!...

The post I replied to...

I had this one ask for her GGG Father. She had created 8 memorials and managed 68. I wandered (sic) how many GGG Fathers she had.

My reply...

Well, that would probably look like this...she had two parents.
She had four grandparents.
She had eight great grandparents
She had sixteen gr-gr grandparents.
She had thirty-two gr-gr-gr grandparents.

If I understand biology correctly, half of those gr-gr-gr-grandparents were male.

So I would say she had 16 ggg grandfathers.


I cannot fathom why you would want to hold on to the management of a record for someone to whom you are not related when someone who is related wants to manage it...

[identity profile] http://www.google.com/profiles/Nolichuckyroots (from livejournal.com) 2010-11-24 19:16 (UTC)(link)
Amen! I completely agree.

Love the blog. I actually hunted around trying to tie your Williamses to mine so I could claim kin ('cause there are only a few Williams families, after all). No luck, so I'll just have to remain a fan.

[identity profile] dee-burris.livejournal.com 2010-11-24 20:27 (UTC)(link)
I consider that high praise coming from you. I love your blog.

And I have several sets of Williamses in the family. You may want to check out my online tree at Rootsweb (http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?db=sharpchick) to look more in-depth at the Williamses I've found so far.

[identity profile] chipmunk-planet.livejournal.com 2010-11-25 15:07 (UTC)(link)
LOL ...

(my maiden name is Williams, so I feel your pain ...)

[identity profile] dee-burris.livejournal.com 2010-11-25 20:29 (UTC)(link)
How wild...I meet so many people who once were Williamses, married them, etc.

I bet you do, too.

[identity profile] chipmunk-planet.livejournal.com 2010-11-25 15:07 (UTC)(link)
Possessiveness. They made it so they think it's THEIR record/grave/etc. They don't stop to think that maybe the person's descendant might have a better interest in keeping it up (and making it accurate!) than they do.

[identity profile] dee-burris.livejournal.com 2010-11-25 20:28 (UTC)(link)
Sounds like the voice of experience...

[identity profile] chipmunk-planet.livejournal.com 2010-11-28 16:52 (UTC)(link)
LOL ... well, yeah, but not directly.