leaving Family Search
Comments
-
I have uploaded more than 30,000 documents to FS Memories - and not aware that Ive lost a single one
(other than the ones I have accidentally deleted myself)
0 -
Lucky you! You obviously don't get the - every day every hour - "your upload has been restricted because it violates our terms and will be deleted" message. Those of us who suffer that humiliation, while not violating any rules, cannot upload so fast or so often. Less to lose, I guess.
0 -
I do get restrictions occasionally just like you - it use to be pretty easy to rectify
but I think we are currently in a transition phase so that how uploads are restricted and rectified is currently in flux. - thus the issues you allude to.
there should NEVER be any humiliation as to restrictions - it happens to all of us
The restriction process is not a perfect process - nor can it be. - especially since it is NOT a human being that is doing the initial restriction - - it is a computer with very limited "machine intelligence" that is making a best guess.
Things that can often trigger a restriction include:
copyright marks
watermarks
partial nudity (even if not considered obscene)
inclusion of guns in photos and other similar devices
symbols that may be considered in some context to be inappropriate (even if in your context it is not)
inclusion of certain words that may have double meaning
Id be interested in seeing some of your items that have been marked as restricted
I should be able to get them thru the upload process for you.
if you so desire - email a FEW to me at djyancey1965@gmail.com
0 -
I personally have long considered the rules about uploads to be excessively restrictive. Images of people kissing (including wedding photos), crossdressing, religious dress and hunting/fishing are the particular areas where I disagree with FS's policies. For example, first communion photos are banned- and are the only existing photos before a wedding for some people. I presume that Latter Day Saint clothing is also banned, which is ironic. I can't see why hunting and fishing photos need case-by-case authorization. And I suppose the rule on kissing comes from LDS doctrine? I think it would be helpful if FS could point to quotations from the Book of Mormon or D&C to help non-LDS users (who are the majority) understand why this rule exists.
FS should be careful about their rule about crossdressing. One day, if not already, there will be countries (they are safe in the US due to the 1st Amendment) that will consider that to be anti-transgender discrimination. I don't intend to start a debate on that topic, I'm just pointing out a future possibility. It only takes one decision from the EU Courts for this to become a major problem.
0 -
Mine are not even photos - in general, they have been vital records that I have added to help differentiate same-name people. A few times, the restriction has been on my own writing - a proof statement to explain conclusions I've made.
For a long time, I stopped trying to upload, because it is just TOO frustrating to receive that nagging "You broke the rules, and the artifact will be deleted" message EVERY time. The AI needs to be retrained.
Meanwhile, I find that my personal photos from other sites are downloaded from those sites and uploaded to FS, often to the wrong person. That's particularly annoying.
0 -
again Id really liike to see some speciic examples - because what you are describing almost never happens to me . .
0 -
I have learned these sources attached to 2 people are often created during a merge of some type. They do need to be corrected and often can help me find duplicate that need to be merged or even family members how have been removed from a family. They are a tool to me, and I just fix them.
Cindy
1 -
Finding duplicate links usually means that some merging needs to happen.
However, merging does not create those duplicate links. Think about it. And no normal operation that contributors are able to do creates them, or they would be everywhere.
Some of the duplicate links I have found I can resolve, but some I cannot; I send those to the FT engineers.
0 -
Okay, now I have witnessed the creation of these vexing duplicate links. It happens when two contributors are attaching the same source at the same time. The source can be attached to the same PID or different PIDs.
This might be a case for FT engineers to look at. It can happen when contributors are collaborating but seems to be more frequent when there is edit warring. Fixing these duplicate links is not hard, usually, but many contributors here are unaware of them and may be leaving them in place. I suspect they may be one reason, perhaps a very big reason, why so many trees that get fixed get un-fixed again by contributors who clearly are just innocently processing FT hints.
0 -
"dontiknowyou": are you referring to adding sources - or adding FS Memories items???
0 -
responding to: A van Helsdingen
there are plenty of hunting and fishing photos on FS Memories
and plenty of first communion
and kissing is by no means against lds doctrine
but - again because the first initial restriction is not even done by a human being - but by an imperfect computerized process - its not uncommon for things that are technically not allowed, to actually get through and the vice versa.
0 -
"dontiknowyou": are you referring to adding sources - or adding FS Memories items???
Sources as in historical records that the Source Linker page can handle. I was responding to @Cindy Hecker on a tangent from the original post in this thread.
0 -
tangents just confuse things terribly
for new subjects - please submit a new post.
0 -
for new subjects - please submit a new post.
At the time I thought we were on the main subject. I thought the OP and other person expressing unhappiness with their tree being changed wanted help fixing the problem that was leading others to change it.
1 -
If pictures of religious ceremonies and clothing, such as First Communions, ARE allowed, then why do the rules say otherwise? The consequence is that many users refrain from uploading photos that will or might go against the rules.
And if the ban on kissing in photos has nothing to do with Latter Day Saint doctrine, then what is the (secular) reason for the ban? All the major commercial (and secular) genealogy websites have no problem with it.
0 -
For the most part the restriction on items of a religious nature - ie. clothing etc - are related to things that people will feel are sacred and / or personal and not appropriate for public view. it is a rather gray area.
As I said previously - the initial restriction is not even a human interface - but just an imperfect AI process.
I realize that some of the restrictions can be rather vague and confusing and the kissing one "a little too far" . . .
for the most part I upload what I feel would not be offensive - and if the system flags it - then I put in an application for 2nd review and most times it goes through - if not and they feel it is not in compliance with establishe rules then I leave it at that and respect the rules - not worth me getting riled up because of it.
(I upload thousands of items to FS Memories - even me trying to keep the general rules - I get items restricted here and there - not that uncommon - a large percentage end up going through on appeal. ) - either way with all those that have been restricted - they realize Im not someone intentionally trying to abuse the system - its just the nature of the beast - to get a restruction here and there (sometimes a false positive)
I dont pretend to understand all the rules. . . and I realize there is a certain degree of subjectivity,
0 -
I did try contacting family search when the id mpierce sent me messages indicating that I was messing the tree up by adding my input. Yes, I had a source but she didn't approve of the source. She said that it was a private database and not a state historical database. She would list all the reasons why the private database was faulty and the historical database was the best. I felt that both databases had merit. I tried to compromise with her but she would not hear of it. She would delete my source, I'd put it in, she'd delete it, etc. Unfortunately, she must be a close cousin who I don't know and I find evidence of her presence in nearly all my ancestors profiles! What a nightmare! I finally just gave up and quit using FS for a long while - during the pandemic, I wanted to gather more names for the temple so I went back in. To my dismay, mpierce was gone but it appears that she may have replaced her username with "everyone" to make it appear that everyone agreed with her decisions regarding the sources. I'm so done with her kind on FS - it is surely not my intent to turn the beautiful wonderous work of the Lord to a wrestling match on whose source is better - I perform my research on ancestry.com then run over to FS and submit the name and then I am outta there! Satan can find his way into even the best intentioned situations. I pray for all of us to have great success in our research of our ancestors - I know the time grows near when our Lord will return so I engage daily in His work and pray that the temples will fully open and allow us to perform His work for our dearly beloved departed.
0
