GenesReunited

[Steve Henley]

I started a tree on GenesReunited.com back in 2005 and still use it. I like the stability - and also its lack of interventionism. I know what my geographical place names refer to, and don't need to say explicitly that they are England (or Australia, New Zealand, etc.) to prevent a dumb AI-powered website insisting that it knows better. But since its acquisition by FindMyPast the level of support for G-R has become abysmal, maybe to try driving users into its own tree offering. If they want to migrate users to their own tree they need to offer some incentive. My main purpose in using G-R at the beginning was to find cousins, but LostCousins can do this more reliably and effectively. I like the look and functionality of G-R trees as well as the relatively low cost - but if necessary would rather take the tree offline or move the data across to the totally free Wikitree than be pushed into letting FindMyPast or Ancestry do their worst to it. Does anyone have similar experience, or suggestions? I know there are other online tree options such as MyHeritage and have links with cousins who have trees there (which they have shared with me), but I'm not particularly impressed by them.

 

[peter]

Always have your main tree on your own computer - online trees are very limited.

 

[Steve Henley]

Always have your main tree on your own computer - online trees are very limited.

Indeed so! And also take regular gedcom backups of the online tree, especially if it's a shared tree with cousins adding their own information! What I have also found vital is to organise the 'back story', the information that doesn't find a place in a tree structure, because there's too much of it or because it may not be verified (or verifiable). The way that I've done this is to do a descriptive writeup for each main branch of the family. For example multiple generations of Sheffield cutlers across 3 centuries, with a 19th/20th century diaspora to various places around England and beyond. Included newspaper clips/quotes, photos, images of documents, etc. And keeping copies of all the original documents in a set of folders for that branch of the family.

 

[peter]

What I have also found vital is to organise the 'back story', the information that doesn't find a place in a tree structure, because there's too much of it or because it may not be verified (or verifiable). The way that I've done this is to do a descriptive writeup for each main branch of the family. For example multiple generations of Sheffield cutlers across 3 centuries, with a 19th/20th century diaspora to various places around England and beyond. Included newspaper clips/quotes, photos, images of documents, etc. And keeping copies of all the original documents in a set of folders for that branch of the family.

I have a similar system, although it's probably not as well organised as yours. I have a hanging file for each ancestral line (multiple files for some lines), with a folder or two at the back containing certificates and copies of microfilmed entries, and am gradually accumulating digital copies of my early research as they become available online. A lot of work to do when the Suffolk registers eventually arrive on Ancestry, as I have more ancestral lines originating in that county than any other.