Is this "user" really an approved FamilySearch project?
For some reason, directly naming the user (or not) is in breach of Community guidelines, so I am providing a link to the page where I am seeing this. See https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/changelog/LY45-F4Q .
In spite of the name suggesting it represents a project dealing with correcting place names, the changes made to the profile in question are just connected to the individual's personal name.
Quite some time ago I suggested a block should be placed on patrons creating usernames like this, which - if not representing a project endorsed by FamilySearch - certainly imply they do.
Hopefully, FamilySearch / Family Tree administrators are monitoring existing and newly created usernames, especially to prevent other users being provided with a misleading idea they are dealing with inputs from a reliable source. Regardless, I would be grateful if a moderator could pass this one to Administration for investigation.
@Ashlee C., please.
Answers
-
My best guess: it is just the name someone chose, not an official project.
You may want to flag your post, @Paul W, to assure a Mod sees it.
1 -
@Paul W Thank you for bringing this to our attention. When you encounter a profile that seems problematic, the most effective action is to use the "Report Abuse" button. This is what FamilySearch encourages all users to do in order to help maintain the accuracy and integrity of the platform.
0 -
@Ashlee C. Unfortunately, "Report Abuse" tests our patience. The first several responses are boilerplate telling the user how to contact another user. Then there is usually a series of "this is not abuse," followed by links to what is considered abuse. Only if we are very persistent do we ever reach someone who may actually look at what we have reported.
Effective is not a description I would use for that process.
9 -
What about users with names like "Tree Helper" or "Community Census" or "Volunteer"? These users are also giving the appearance of official FamilySearch projects. Attempts to report these users have not been dealt with by FamilySearch either.
3 -
My comments in the past have related to addressing the problem by "nipping it in the bud" - that is, that any new usernames should be subject to moderation and declined to be approved if it was decided their appearance might provide the misleading impression that they represented an approved project, rather than a name chosen for themself by an individual.
I understood from a previous response from a moderator (unable to trace the conversation, unfortunately) that this suggestion was being seriously considered for implementation. Basically, I was hoping for a response on whether there was now such a mechanism (and this recent example had just slipped through the net), or if - short of the name representing / including a profanity - a user was still completely free to create any name they wished.
2 -
The problem with some of these names is that they do represent "officially" approved projects - whether instigated by BYU, or completely "in house" FamilySearch exercises (usually involving volunteer input). Whatever our personal thoughts such projects, at least they do seem to have been approved for use (in Family Tree) by FamilySearch management. It is the effect of an individual purposely adopting a name because they want to make their work look more authoritative that represents the issue I am specifically raising here.
2 -
I understood from a previous response from a moderator (unable to trace the conversation, unfortunately) that this suggestion was being seriously considered for implementation. Basically, I was hoping for a response on whether there was now such a mechanism (and this recent example had just slipped through the net), or if - short of the name representing / including a profanity - a user was still completely free to create any name they wished.
@Paul W Apologies for the delay in getting back to you. I reached out to gather more information, and I can confirm that your suggestion is still under active consideration—it’s a work in progress. Unfortunately, that's all the information available at the moment. Until a decision is made, we encourage users to continue using the Report Abuse feature to flag potentially problematic usernames. I understand that this process can be frustrating, but it remains the best option for now.
1 -
1
