Consolidate automated hint tools

WDavid72

* FamilySearch has the Records tab of Recommended Tasks

* Mobile App has the "Tasks" feature, with the option to either show close relations with hints, or hints for recently-viewed profiles.

* Campaigns has the "We may have found a new record of your relative" updates.

I'm a fan of automated tools to help find record hints that might interest me. I'm not a fan of the disjointed methods of approaching the exact same task. These disparate methods give a distinct, unpleasant smell of in-fighting and discord.

The Records on Recommended Tasks, and the Tasks feature on Mobile App both provide a good vehicle, tailored to the interface. But these are present, and available -- to each user as they have time. But why would these show completely different list of records? And why does the "new record" campaign even exist?

These tools provide a quick way for users to have a feeling of accomplishment -- of constantly working toward the goal of improving the tree. Users of the web interface should see a similar list to what the mobile app provides. And both lists should include the same records that seem to magically get found by the "new record" campaigns.

Suggestions:

• Keep the recommended tasks (web) and tasks (mobile), but work together so these are just interface-oriented front-ends to the same resource pool.
• Ditch the new record campaign. Figure out how to incorporate these records into the automated hint search tool
• Allow for tuning of what the records show (mobile allows for either showing just relatives, or recently viewed profiles -- what about allowing the user to input a starting profile to build from in order to find related hints? Also allow the user to have some control over just how close of relation the tool should look for)

Effectively - stop the in-fighting and work together to make a better tool that piques the user's interest of records to attach. Use frequent updates to consistently bring more records to the user's list.

dontiknowyou

Lots of good thoughts, @WDavid72.

My impression is that not only are the user experience front ends different, but so are the back ends. They are the product of separate engineering teams. This competition, which looks like wasteful, destructive in-fighting, is a huge part of what makes FS so agile. It is a deliberate strategy.

As a heavy user for years of both web and app interfaces, I have experienced numerous features develop on one interface, then get copied on the other. Often it is the app, newer and apparently still with a much smaller user base, that has the new tools first.

I find it kind of fun being always on the bleeding edge of product development with no notice and no instruction. I just get dropped into it and play with it to figure out how it works. Do all FT contributors have the same UX, or have I been secretly placed in an invisible beta tester group?

I have mixed feelings about the new records campaign. It is of almost no use to me: I work in FT to minimize time spent searching and maximize time spent building and polishing trees. FT is a power tool and I make the most of it, but I know I am an outlier. Many genealogy researchers rely on these notifications of new record collections; they avoid FT, preferring to download records off FS to work on elsewhere. Neared completion on a surname study, I would like to catch recently added historical records without manually searching each new collection. To do that I would need to be able to filter historical records by date added/changed on FS.