Heartbroken
Since 2013, I've carefully built my direct and collateral lines on the FamilySearch tree, in addition to documenting them on another platform in an individual tree.
I've been a strong proponent of building the FS tree. I'm so very grateful for all the records made available, at home, at my affiliate library, and at the FSC. I felt it was the right thing to build the FS tree.
Today, I'm heartbroken. I encountered a malicious destroyer. Years of work gone in a day. Yes, it's all there in the change logs, but I may never find it all to repair.
I've reported the abuse - along with the snarky comments left by the destroyer. I know the process, but I wanted to let the Community know.
Answers
-
Regular participants here in Community will be only too aware of your experience in dealing with issues within the Family Tree program. In which case, we can appreciate the problem must be very serious that it makes you feel it will be so difficult to unravel.
Hopefully, a moderator or other FamilySearch employee will reach out to you, or even refer the matter directly to someone in the organisation who will be willing to arrange a thorough investigation of a matter that almost certainly should be regarded as abuse.
One does despair that the code of conduct here in Community is so strict that members can be banned for breach of its terms and conditions, yet Family Tree users appear to be able to act with impunity in refusing to collaborate with others, or even completely vandalising branches of the tree.
If anyone considers I am incorrect in making my last comment, please provide either: (a) a direct link to a department to whom such serious breaches can be reported for investigation, or (2) any examples of how FamilySearch Support has previously provided positive assistance in handling / ultimately disciplining users who have been guilty of such abuse. Surely, knowing that sanctions can, and will, be enacted against those who vandalise Family Tree will act as a deterrent to those who believe such behaviour is acceptable. Exasperation at not getting ones own way is certainly no excuse to cause such damage.
Over the last month I have had to spend many hours repeatedly re-editing / correcting the errors of another user who insists - without any evidence - that she is correct. So, like many others I'm sure, I feel complete empathy with regards to your predicament, which seems to far exceed my own problems.
Wishing you well in getting this matter resolved.
9 -
@Áine Ní Donnghaile It does make me despair that some of the most stalwart supporters of FS FamilyTree can feel so distraught about things that happen and are, effectively, guaranteed to happen thanks to the attitude of FamilySearch towards the way people work.
And, as @Paul W points out, this contrasts with the rigour that the Community is (normally) policed
5 -
@Áine Ní Donnghaile I am so sorry to hear this.
2 -
Thank you all for your support.
I've just received a reply from Support, with the expected
"We have received and reviewed your multiple Report Abuse support cases, and have determined that these Discussions do not qualify as abuse."I recall - clearly - being threatened with banishment from this Community and even the FS Tree for a comment a mod here deemed "snarky." Yet, multiple posts of the Genealogical Proof Standard, along with accompanying suggestions that I memorize it before I add to the tree, are not considered abuse.
8 -
With all organisations with whom I have dealings I have found there to be an escalation procedure regarding the processing of a complaint. In particular, if a complaint is not "upheld", advice is given as to the next step one can then take.
Again, perhaps an employee / moderator would kindly advise of the "next level" to which your complaint (of abuse) can be directed, given that it has been rejected at such an early stage.
Obviously, it would be useful to all of us (FamilySearch patrons / members of Community) to be aware of FamilySearch's complaints / appeals procedure(s), but I would hope - at the very least - you would receive a personal response from a FamilySearch representative, via the private messaging function.
6 -
Thanks, @Paul W
I've responded to the email, as suggested in the body, but I hold out little hope. I was once involved in another dispute - not my research, but a guest who was destroying the work of others. It took weeks to get resolution.
This has been added many times over:
0 -
There may be light at the end of the tunnel, and perhaps it is not an oncoming train. Some of the snarkiest remarks have been deleted by FS.
6 -
Too bad some [thankfully not too many] when seeing a perceived errant relationship/source are quick to say 'You are wrong' instead of 'Maybe I am wrong'. Being Wrong/Right is not something I easily say in family research as genealogy is fraught with many twists and turns. Mostly it's 'Could be..', 'Might be…', 'Looks like…' especially the more removed I get from present day.
0 -
I'm usually pretty accepting of new information or alternate points of view. Unfortunately, that's not the situation in this case.
1 -
Unfortunately for you the other individual was not so much…
0 -
@Áine Ní Donnghaile I'm so sorry! That is horrible. Malicious destruction is just not acceptable. Let me know if we can do anything. Sam 😠
8 -
Thank you, @Sam Sulser
0 -
So many here on Community have become like family and it is good to see that we have each other's backs!
I can feel your pain as my Welsh FT lines are continually in need of unraveling what was added, merged, or deleted. Not sure how I would deal with rudeness, but I think we need to make a clear distinction between malice and an ill-mannered (and often erroneous) attempt to claim superior knowledge of the facts. Support has to make the hard decision of what qualifies as abuse, but it doesn't mean bad behavior is condoned by FamilySearch.
1 -
Thanks, @SerraNola
Unfortunately, it feels as if Support is backing the other "guest." The destruction continues unabated.
And the rude remarks, though slowed, have hurt.4 -
Very sad to read all this.
5 -
Would it help if multiple users (we on this discussion board) made the same complaint of abuse regarding these records?
1 -
Thanks, Cheryl, but I don't think so. Support has told me that what is happening doesn't qualify as abuse, and I'm pretty sure they are tired of hearing about it. A couple of cousins have reported, too. I don't think they have even had a reply from Support yet.
The other guest must have stayed up all night because I see massive garbage this morning.
2 -
Áine, I hope you can put this in perspective. Support is like the football ref in which you don't agree with their call, but that's how they saw it. The other guest didn't get thrown out of the game, unfortunately. Despite all of that, you continue to do good and help hundreds of people find their roots. FamilySearch and all of us owe you a debt of gratitude.
1 -
Perspective is a bit difficult at this time, as I hope you can appreciate. I see work disappearing that has taken me many years of careful research to compile. Meanwhile, I'm being called names and my work disparaged.
4 -
@Áine Ní Donnghaile You are awesome and have helped so many especially through your accuracy and integrity for years- don't let anyone take you down and may you be blessed for all you do. ☺️ Mary — these emoji's aren't nearly enough to convey all the good feelings so many have for you and your work!
4 -
Thank you @maryellenstevensbarnes1 That's very kind.
0 -
If not qualifying as abuse, surely unkind comments are a violation of FamilySearch's Terms of Use?
"Disagreements regarding facts pertaining to a deceased individual are likely to occur, and such disagreements should be set out in clear terms based on the facts and citing sources where possible, without resorting to abrupt, insulting, or unkind language or comments."
And per earlier in the Terms: "If you disagree with any of the conditions of this Agreement, do not use this site."
****
We all agreed to these terms when we created our accounts. While abuse may be its own issue, surely there are consequences to violating the Terms? I'd hope behavior such as this would at least constitute an official warning, with the above quotes included, messaged to the other party? Usually, when users are reminded of the Terms, it curtails rudeness, at least to some degree.
This is such a wonderful website. I've learned so much from this community and am grateful to have it, along with the mods that keep this corner of it free from unkind words. However, on the main site, I don't want to be anxious of other users' disregard for rules, or feel like contacting others might result in unchecked incivility. Disagreeing is one thing, rudeness is another. Right now, I think I could use some guidance on what to expect in regards to enforcement of the Terms of Use.
@Áine Ní Donnghaile, I'm so very sorry this happened to you. As others have said, you're an outstanding member of this community, and you've helped so many people (including me!🙂). If there's anything we can do to help you repair the damage done, please let us know.
4 -
Thank you @GFre for the kind words. I'm keeping my head down for now. I'll keep researching, of course, but I don't think I'll be adding anything else to the FS tree because nearly everything is now being changed (may I say corrupted) on an apparent whim or desire to annoy.
2 -
Malicious and deliberate - today's discovery:
My grandmother had two sisters with the same name. One died as an infant; the other was born 10 years later. I knew the second Mary Elizabeth well. I had both of them thoroughly documented with every available source.Imagine taking the time to delete all the dates from each to force a merge, including removing the "no couple relationship" on the infant.
This record contains little information: xxxx-xxx. There is enough evidence to believe it is the same person as xxxx-xxxAnd then walking away with all the red flags flying that the children were born after the death of the mother.
All the while, posting the basic tenets of the Genealogical Proof Standard on every member of my direct line with the suggestion that I memorize it before I work on the FS tree.4 -
@Áine Ní Donnghaile - if the actions that you describe don't constitute abuse then I have no idea what does… Sigh… 😔
3 -
I've been instructed, by Support, to stop reporting, AND not change anything the other guest has "contributed."
2 -
How sad.
0 -
That might indicate a desire by Support to freeze the scenario so that they can examine what's been going on properly, without things being changed beneath their feet - even for good intentions on your part.
2 -
Support presumably have access to the underlying data for the purposes of analysis, however (including all the Change Logs) - in this collaborative environment they surely can't expect /anything/ they are investigating to stay as it is unless they mark it read-only.
0 -
Their message did not indicate they were investigating anything.
2
