Unknown Spouse in Ancestry which of course is replicated in FTM

[At home in NZ]

I have had a further response from Ancestry thanking me for my suggestion , I won't bore everybody with the whole text. I am not best pleased seeing as I was asking for Help, not making a suggestion for an improvement.
Ancestry Support only knows how to send out bog standard messages obviously written in templates.

I will again voice my displeasure.

I will try McKiev.

 

[At home in NZ]

Damn and blast, I wrote a whole load of stuff here, my computer froze and I lost it all!!

MacKiev:
There is no way to edit multiple facts in bulk, you would need to do each one individually, I'm afraid. I can certainly pass the option for such along as a feature request, though.
Me:
I would have thought that an experienced programmer would be able to do this using an appropriate tool,
MacKiev:
There is no such current functionality in FTM, at this time, but I will certainly pass it along as a feature request for you.

I have been looking at issues I have raised with MacKiev about FTM 2017, I have also been loading GEDCOM files into FTM 2017 from before and after the dates of an issue I raised twice in July and August 2021 about husbands and wives becoming detached.
They were supposed to fix what was a known issue, 'in a future update'.

I strongly suspect it never happened because GEDCOMs that were created before I raised the issue on 31 July 2021 are giving me correct marriage relationship reports.
Guess who isn't very impressed??

 

[Pauline]

Ancestry Support only knows how to send out bog standard messages obviously written in templates

That’s been my experience too. And sometimes, just as you feel you might be getting somewhere, the next reply is back to telling you to clear cookies and cache.

I did once get an issue escalated to the technical team, and even though I was able to tell them exactly what was causing the issue, nothing was ever done about it.

 

[peter]

Ancestry Support only knows how to send out bog standard messages obviously written in templates.

It's the same in most large organisations - the people with the most experience and knowledge are higher up.

That’s been my experience too. And sometimes, just as you feel you might be getting somewhere, the next reply is back to telling you to clear cookies and cache.

That doesn't necessarily mean that they don't know what they're talking about - even an expert will take you through some basic steps before looking for more complex solutions.

I did once get an issue escalated to the technical team, and even though I was able to tell them exactly what was causing the issue, nothing was ever done about it.

Even if you're able to pinpoint the problem precisely, there is still a cost in fixing it - not so much a financial cost, but the cost of delaying other projects. Generally they will seek to make all of the changes in a particular part of the code around the same time - it's more efficient, and it reduces the chance of unintended consequences. In some cases isolated bugs don't need to be fixed because they are in a section of code that is being replaced, or becoming redundant.

The priority for a company like Ancestry is to maintain the integrity of the data; errors in the way that the data is presented are far less important.

 

[Pauline]

That doesn't necessarily mean that they don't know what they're talking about - even an expert will take you through some basic steps before looking for more complex solutions.

Yes, but I am talking about having been taken through all those basic steps once (and I always clear cache and cookies, and try different browsers and devices anyway before contacting support), then having finally moved on beyond the basics, having the next person take everything back to basics again.

The priority for a company like Ancestry is to maintain the integrity of the data; errors in the way that the data is presented are far less important

I've never succeeded in getting anywhere when I've reported issues with data either.

 

[peter]

I've never succeeded in getting anywhere when I've reported issues with data either.

I did, but it took about 7 years before they made the corrections.

 

[At home in NZ]

EXCUSE THE SHOUTING, I'M EXCITED! I HAVE AN ANSWER

to this question I asked of Mackiev:

On 31 July 2021 and 3 August 2021 I raised the issue of husbands and wives becoming detached from each other. I was told it was a known problem and would be fixed in a future update.
It seems that never happened, Why not?

The answer:
My name is Linda, I am senior technical support agent at Software Mackiev.

You are right, unfortunately the problem with spouses being detached from each other persists in FTM 2019 and we are now investigating it together with Ancestry to find out what's triggering this as it seems to be caused by the error in connection between FTM and Ancestry.

As soon as there is an update available to fix this problem, we will notify you via email.

Sorry for the inconveniences occurred and thank you very much for reporting this issue to us!

Regards,
Linda

Ancestry users who do not sync with FTM can now relax as it is only affecting FTM 2017 and FTM 2019 users who sync with Ancestry.

 

[At home in NZ]

The priority for a company like Ancestry is to maintain the integrity of the data; errors in the way that the data is presented are far less important.

and there's me thinking they were supposed to be helping people to research their family trees and to build trees that can be presented in an accurate fashion.

From what I can see popping up in front of me on a daily basis, the current trend is towards 'Building family trees for dummies'.
There is so much 'help' by way of Hints, Notifications, Ancestry trees, Geneanet trees and whatever else, it must be really hard for an inexperienced researcher to pick the wheat from the chaff.

 

[peter]

The priority for a company like Ancestry is to maintain the integrity of the data; errors in the way that the data is presented are far less important.

and there's me thinking they were supposed to be helping people to research their family trees and to build trees that can be presented in an accurate fashion.

Distorting someone else's comments is impolite and unhelpful.

 

[At home in NZ]

Distorting someone else's comments is impolite and unhelpful.

It’s bit hard to have an opposing view around here.
As I have said before, you read too much into what people say

If you had ever attended a management course I'm sure you would have learnt one of the golden rules:
Praise in public, punish in private.

 

[peter]

Distorting someone else's comments is impolite and unhelpful.

It’s bit hard to have an opposing view around here.

I have no problem with you disagreeing with something that I have said, but disagreeing with something I haven't said makes the forum less useful.

As I have said before, you read too much into what people say

If you quote what someone else has said you must expect your comments to be read in that context. If you don't intend your comments to be read that way, don't use the quote.

If you had ever attended a management course I'm sure you would have learnt one of the golden rules:
Praise in public, punish in private.

Let me see..... you're criticising me in public for criticising you in public?