Should there be an upper limit to the number of people in a FGFT (Family Group Family Tree)?
I presently have two of the original family groups; one with 188 members and a more focused personal family group of 23 people. In both cases, I would not want all the people in either of these groups to be part of a FGFT (Family Group Family Tree). There are only a very few people in my family who I would want to be actively working on a combined family tree or even adding memories or whatever to living people. I would suggest that some limits be placed on the total number of participants and not the 300-person limit that is presently available for the ordinance sharing functions of the existing groups.
Comments
-
The current limit number for each Family Group is 500 members. (It actually started as 100 until we did the 1950 census and they needed larger family groups.) The admin(s) of the group can choose to not allow others in after a certain number that is lower than this.
1 -
I'm sorry, I don't quite understand the statement "The admin(s) of the group can choose to not allow others in after a certain number that is lower than this."
Don't administrators need to invite people into the group one by one? Doesn't that always give the administrators full control over how many people are in the group and who they are? Or are there plans to let any current member of a group invite in new members without administrators approving this?
As a side thought, does anyone have a good way to say to a living family member, "Do I have your permission to add you into a shared group tree? By the way, I'm not planning on letting you into the group to see what I am posting about you."
0 -
Including a number such as the limit of 500 in a Family Group Tree completely blurs the reason for sharing with living people. The current limit makes sense for the ordinance sharing function, but why would you want the same problems with duplication and unreasonable postings by allow such a large number of participants?
0 -
Gordan, yes, admins do have to accept one-by-one. What I meant was although the system will admins to accept to up to 500, they can personally decide to only let 50, 100, or any lower number into the group. They do not have to max out.
0 -
Ultimately, there may be groups who have a tree and do reservations. Some will only have a tree, and some will only do reservations. The group admin will decide what functions are available. The system has a single max limit set for all family groups - not different ones for different types of groups.
0 -
No one is required to use this feature. It is just an option.
0 -
If I was working on a DNA Family Group Tree, I'd be jumping up and down to have 500 living people who shared DNA with a common ancestor!
0
