Moderators for individual records and/or family lineages.

Michael W. McCormick

@Gail Swihart Watson I know it sounds impractical, but with my suggestion comes the reality that what I am really suggesting is that FamilySearch consider it and talk about it with potential partners. If lineage societies or other organizations decline the opportunity and see it as too resource intensive that is their choice to make. The comment that it might be a good idea actually came from the Utah representative of the Mayflower society and I was quoting him. So for you to say it does not make any sense to suggest the idea and give one reason being that it takes too many resources, that reason does not necessarily hold water when the suggestion came from the society and whether it takes too many resources is a decision that they and FamilySearch could decide together.

Also I probably was too sensitive about your initial comment, but it piles up on a person when they get as many negative replies trying to convince people their idea is a bad one as they do positive ones, even if it is entirely about the idea and not personal at all as was the case here.

James7420

I do not see how having FS data match GSMD data would be a bad thing. It beats paying for GSMD to find you have no claim due to faulty information. There is not much new that will be found in this day and age. And if something is found GSMD can verify it before it's added (and expanded upon by more heresay.)

I only came to FS a couple of months ago, due to info my father found under "Famous Relatives". I got curious and joined as well, to get access to my mother's part of the tree. In so doing, I got a few more famous relatives added, and several we had before were now assigned to my mother's side rather than my father's. I didn't think much of it, as FS states that my parents were 11th cousins. As I dug deeper, I noticed that my mother's father's side was mis-connected. (My G. Grandmother's husband was not his father.) I corrected the mistake in my tree, but it does not reflect the reality in the "Famous Relatives" list. So when I follow the connection and see the mistake, I ignore that data but I can't remove it.

In the other lines from my tree, I started researching the Mayflower connections. I got quite into it and connected with a Mayflower descendants group on Facebook. Members of the group with the Silver Book of officially recognized family lines checked the connections familysearch showed, from a screenshot I posted in the group. But the most prominent line came back false. (No evidence the person ever existed) This group and the GSMD state that there are many issues with your data and it gives many false positives. (Mostly from people trying to get into the society, entering misleading data to forge a link to history).

I came back to FS famous relatives page to dig deeper, but this time I was shown a different connection with different people being the linking ancestors. But this new connection had a problem as well (GGM had no children with GGF, whose children came from a previous marriage.)

As I come back today, All the same Mayflower Pilgrim famous relatives are now listed as cousins and a different offspring of William Brewster is listed as a GGF. I realize that with the small population in early America, and limited potential mates, there is room for multiple connections. But now that what was listed as direct ancestors is now listed as cousins far removed, it appears the data is inconsistent and possibly even random. With inaccuracies both long past, where info was limited if available at all, to assumptions within living memory that are still inaccurately classified. This has left me with a feeling I might be playing with a "Magic 8 Ball" rather than a research tool.

I must say that this new awareness has taken a lot of the wind out of my sails. I realize it might get more people to sign up for the website. But anything that looks like deception will eventually backfire as a business model. It should be in our best interest and the integrity of our project to do our utmost to insure the data being deliver is accurate. Don't you think?