why are new id's created for the same person in multiple groups
I created my own group with my spouse and children. My ID number for that group is GPYJ-DMJ. That connected to my correct line.
https://www.familysearch.org/tree/pedigree/sibling/GPYJ-DMJ
However, my mother-in-law added me to her group. The information seemed correct, I accepted the invite, but realized later it has a different ID number. My photo and memories are no longer connected to my group with my in-laws. How do I get my information to be consistent across groups?
Risposte
-
Each family group is a separate private space so each living person has a unique ID in each group they are in. If you are in ten groups you will have eleven copies of you each with a different ID.
I have some thoughts about ways to cope with this but need to test them to see if they actually work.
1 -
Still haven't had time to test some things but just wanted to make another comment. I think a common misunderstanding is going to be that the primary purpose of family groups is to decrease duplication of profiles. It is not, as you can see. The primary purpose is to allow us as a family to work together on the profiles of our living family members.
The only situation in which family groups decrease duplication is when, for example, a grandfather creates a group from his extensive private space (duplicating all those profiles) and invites all of his grandchildren, none of whom have FamilySearch accounts yet, to join the group and when they all do, none of them create any living profiles except their own and then never work anywhere except through the group. Then their personal private spaces will be empty except for a minimal profile about themselves and all the information they contribute will be in the family group private space.
Now back to thinking about how you can best keep your three profiles - your own, the one in the group you made, and the one in the group your mother-in-law made - up to date. At the moment all I can think of is that when you make an edit or addition in one, you will need to do it in all three.
1 -
I am less interested in using the feature if I have to duplicate my submissions to participate in multiple family groups. I would prefer to have one account that I can upload my photos or stories to and have them shared with different groups in an easier format. Multiple users that require duplications doesn’t seem to help. Maybe if I could choose to add my photos and memories with my main account to specific groups that would be great.
i would like my personal info to be shareable in several groups from one location.
1 -
I'm agree with Jennifer Beth Butler. I think it would make more sense to have all copies (in personal space and different family groups) synchronised, BUT being able to desynchronise at will the copy in the personal space and the copy in other specific groups. To resyncrhonise again the copies would require to create another copy and merge.
1 -
Hi there ..
I´m asking myself what now has to be done because of - more - multiple ID´s and profiles after a person died ..
1 -
0
-
You all might want to investigate the new process of tagging Memories, also the Together by FamilySearch experiment. Both of those have settings that you can select which Family Group you want to share to. When tagging memories, you are able to see each person in each group and tag to all of your family groups (or one or two of them) at the same time. Check those out and then consider your questions here.
0 -
The new tagging is excellent :-)
0 -
.. sorry but the "tagging memories discussion" is a different one .. yes there are now different colours for the same name tag depending upon the group the profile belongs to .. and not only with images of persons but also with pictures of source documents persons are mentioned in ..
0 -
.. in my experience the new tagging ist very slow right now and it takes an awful long time until you can start tagging the next person in a document with more than one ..
0 -
@J Wolfgang R Binte , you stated "I´m asking myself what now has to be done because of - more - multiple ID´s and profiles after a person died .."
The answer is, not much more than needs to be done now. If user A marks Mr. X with ID AAAA-AAA in his personal space as deceased then goes to the group and marks Mr. X with ID BBBB-BBB as deceased there, both profiles will become public in Family Tree where user A can merge them. User A is then done with doing anything.
When user B sees that Mr. X is now deceased, she can go to her private space and enter Mr. X with ID CCCC-CC's death information. The she can do one merge, her formerly private copy into the public copy.
User C will do the same when he sees in the group the new information about Mr. X.
So one user per group Mr. X is in will have to mark Mr. X deceased twice and do one merge. Then all other users that have a copy of him will mark him deceased and do one merge, just like they do now.
This is a minor increase, one per group, in the number of merges that will need to be done.
Where there will be less work going forward, is when a growing group of people don't bother to ever enter duplicates of their dozens of living relatives into their personal private spaces because they can instead just join an existing family group where those profiles are already well established.
0 -
@Jennifer Beth Butler @J Wolfgang R Binte @Bosch Thank you for your comments regarding the ability to synchronize your information across the various family group trees that you are part of. The product team that is building this tool is aware of this issue and is working on a solution.
Thank you @Gordon Collett for your clarifications and explanations!
Please, all of you, let us know of any ideas that you come up with.
0 -
I've decided I need to be more careful about which living people I share in the group. Maybe there is no need to share all of my children and their spouses. However, I shared my record of my 90-year-old father because I have uploaded numerous Memories that no one else could see. Now everyone in the group can look at them.
0 -
.. I already had an existing familygroup - with my wife an children (and children in law) - for sharing temple ordinances that had to be done .. because of the difficulties of keeping up with the growth of the family, because of marriages and birth of grandchildren, not every one of my children had an complete tree as mine for his or her sibblings. So I was eagerly waiting for that funktion and feature to share the living in my tree with them.
I'm also a child with three sets of parents because for two times in my youth I lived with foster parents. From those times in my life I also do have sibblings I would like to share with my (wife and) kids so they for themselves can look up the connections.
.. the living (or better not yet deceased) persons in my group, are less than the not yet deceased ones in the group tree right ??
Now my question:
if I look on the list of the persons to invite into the group I do not see my children - the already early group members - classified as groupmembers but can, or have to invite them (again) !?
0 -
The product team is looking at ways profiles could be compared information imported/exported from profiles in one tree into a different tree. We would be interested in hearing your thoughts on how this type of 'synchronizing' could work. Obviously, a single profile shared across multiple groups is not a possibility, because it would show evidence of work by people who are not in the particular group that you are in. Also, who or what group would 'own' that profile? If you could show a mock up of how it might look to compare across different trees in order to copy & paste information from a profile in one tree into a profile in a different tree. Or if you have thoughts on how that copy & paste could work, please add to this post.
0
