Comments on: Webinar next Tuesday: New Site Features Added to Ancestry.com in 2008 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008 The official blog of Ancestry.com Sat, 25 May 2013 04:38:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: RON http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-36102 RON Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:19:18 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-36102 Our you going to give the correct time for the show? 8 PM EST Wake up! The rest of use are using Daylight Saving Time Our you going to give the correct time for the show?

8 PM EST

Wake up! The rest of use are using
Daylight Saving Time

]]> By: Terry Carter http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-34663 Terry Carter Tue, 03 Mar 2009 15:27:45 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-34663 Eric, I'm also a newbie and already experienced my share of frustrations (which brought me to this blog). Reading the comments here from the "old timers," what strikes me the most is that you apparently redesigned your site in a vacuum. You introduced new "features" and eliminated some old ones, only to reverse yourselves (e.g., state and country pages). Frankly, I don't know if I'm going to stick with you. Your site is buggy and unintuitive. I end up with duplicate records, "children of unknown spouse" (and I can't delete the unknown spouse), people drop off for no apparent reason and more. Mostly, making changes to your site without proper testing (and vetting) is inexcusable. Microsoft can get away with this crap, but you can't. The marketpalce will punish you. Eric,

I’m also a newbie and already experienced my share of frustrations (which brought me to this blog). Reading the comments here from the “old timers,” what strikes me the most is that you apparently redesigned your site in a vacuum. You introduced new “features” and eliminated some old ones, only to reverse yourselves (e.g., state and country pages).

Frankly, I don’t know if I’m going to stick with you. Your site is buggy and unintuitive. I end up with duplicate records, “children of unknown spouse” (and I can’t delete the unknown spouse), people drop off for no apparent reason and more. Mostly, making changes to your site without proper testing (and vetting) is inexcusable. Microsoft can get away with this crap, but you can’t. The marketpalce will punish you.

]]> By: Eric Shoup http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-33744 Eric Shoup Sun, 22 Feb 2009 00:21:52 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-33744 Thanks Julie for the input. I'll pass this along to our Trees team. eric Thanks Julie for the input. I’ll pass this along to our Trees team.

eric

]]> By: Julie Mulroy http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-33715 Julie Mulroy Sat, 21 Feb 2009 18:42:34 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-33715 I couldn't figure out how to comment on the "adding other relatives on the record" feature, so I'll do it here. The concept is great. However, it seems to work best (or only) when the record is found via head of household. Work-arounds such as adding the record to the husband when it was turned up in a search (or hint) for the wife can lead to a parent married to a child and other oddities. One has to be careful not to duplicate relatives whose names aren't recognized as variants, and the original image must be scrutinized for relatives not included (especially those identified as in-laws and their children, who are clearly grandchildren of the head and spouse). And sometimes only the first of several children is listed. Since using this feature I have ended up with "children of unknown spouse" (often duplicating the names and associated information of children of the spouse on the record), and multiple attachments of a record to the same individual. This means checking every replicated event on a profile to make sure the one with the most information and proper documentation (especially the original document IMAGE attached, which I repeatedly consult as new questions arise) remains. So this feature, while great in concept and a typing-saver, is definitely not a time saver, and must be used with great care In an ideal world, all the ancillary information for each person would be added ss well. I couldn’t figure out how to comment on the “adding other relatives on the record” feature, so I’ll do it here. The concept is great. However, it seems to work best (or only) when the record is found via head of household. Work-arounds such as adding the record to the husband when it was turned up in a search (or hint) for the wife can lead to a parent married to a child and other oddities. One has to be careful not to duplicate relatives whose names aren’t recognized as variants, and the original image must be scrutinized for relatives not included (especially those identified as in-laws and their children, who are clearly grandchildren of the head and spouse). And sometimes only the first of several children is listed.

Since using this feature I have ended up with “children of unknown spouse” (often duplicating the names and associated information of children of the spouse on the record), and multiple attachments of a record to the same individual. This means checking every replicated event on a profile to make sure the one with the most information and proper documentation (especially the original document IMAGE attached, which I repeatedly consult as new questions arise) remains.

So this feature, while great in concept and a typing-saver, is definitely not a time saver, and must be used with great care

In an ideal world, all the ancillary information for each person would be added ss well.

]]> By: Debbie Scott http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-31875 Debbie Scott Wed, 04 Feb 2009 11:42:33 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-31875 Hi Eric, Thank you. I hope it's something they can rectify. Debbie Hi Eric,
Thank you. I hope it’s something they can rectify.
Debbie

]]> By: jswatson71 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-31363 jswatson71 Thu, 29 Jan 2009 20:34:16 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-31363 I wasn't able to listen to the Tuesday night webinar but listened this afternoon and really learned a lot. Thanks! I wasn’t able to listen to the Tuesday night webinar but listened this afternoon and really learned a lot. Thanks!

]]> By: Eric Shoup http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-31350 Eric Shoup Thu, 29 Jan 2009 18:16:55 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-31350 We had a little over 400 people turnout for the webinar. 98% of attendees surveyed said they would recommend the webinar to a friend. For those of you who missed the webinar, you can find it <a href="http://event.on24.com/eventRegistration/EventLobbyServlet?target=lobby.jsp&eventid=131590&sessionid=1&key=FCD7B37960E09B88BB2279119F4B154A&eventuserid=22138751" style="color: #546a00" rel="nofollow">here</a>. For those who attended, we also sent out a set of links to additional resources that were referred to in the webinar: <p><a href="http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2008/05/29/new-record-merge-feature/" style="color: #546a00" rel="nofollow">New Merge Blog </a></p> <p><a href="http://landing.ancestry.com/toolbar/default.aspx" style="color: #546a00" rel="nofollow">The Ancestry Toolbar</a></p> <p><a href="http://search.ancestry.com/search/CardCatalog.aspx" style="color: #546a00" rel="nofollow">Ancestry Card Catalog</a></p> <p><a href="http://www.ancestry.com/WorldArchivesProject/" style="color: #546a00" rel="nofollow">Ancestry.com World Archives Project</a></p> <p><a href="http://blogs.ancestry.com/circle/" style="color: #546a00" rel="nofollow">24/7 Family History Circle</a></p> See you next time. Eric We had a little over 400 people turnout for the webinar. 98% of attendees surveyed said they would recommend the webinar to a friend.

For those of you who missed the webinar, you can find it here.

For those who attended, we also sent out a set of links to additional resources that were referred to in the webinar:

New Merge Blog

The Ancestry Toolbar

Ancestry Card Catalog

Ancestry.com World Archives Project

24/7 Family History Circle

See you next time.

Eric

]]> By: Eric Shoup http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-31349 Eric Shoup Thu, 29 Jan 2009 18:10:14 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-31349 Thank you for the additional feedback. Claudia - We realize we have more to do on search. We are actively working on improvements to our algorithms that you will see in the coming months. We also reinstated the state & country pages yesterday after removing them during our site outage a couple of weeks ago. Derla - I am hoping that you were able to see the webinar on Tuesday. If not, we have posted in the Learning Center for your review. I will post links to its location in just a minute. Debbie - I will pass this feedback along to my Trees team. regards eric Thank you for the additional feedback.

Claudia – We realize we have more to do on search. We are actively working on improvements to our algorithms that you will see in the coming months. We also reinstated the state & country pages yesterday after removing them during our site outage a couple of weeks ago.

Derla – I am hoping that you were able to see the webinar on Tuesday. If not, we have posted in the Learning Center for your review. I will post links to its location in just a minute.

Debbie – I will pass this feedback along to my Trees team.

regards

eric

]]> By: Jim Livermore http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-31346 Jim Livermore Thu, 29 Jan 2009 17:11:23 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-31346 How was the turnout? How was the turnout?

]]> By: davidfra http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-31301 davidfra Thu, 29 Jan 2009 03:04:18 +0000 http://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2009/01/21/webinar-next-tuesday-new-site-features-added-to-ancestrycom-in-2008/#comment-31301 I agree with all the comments here with the exception of "Mary". Your company, website, genealogy software, etc. shows a complete lack of concern for any problems which users may have. Year after year you charge more for software and services and do less and less to earn those increases. A large portion of information that you provide for a fee has been taken from users for nothing. You produce new software (FTM) every year or two with little regard for what customers want and with no attempt to correct software problems. There is no way that name searches on your site was coded by a real software programmer, when I get over two million results on a specific name with a specific birthdate, race, place of birth. If you don't want to provide useful software and services please sell the company to someone who does. Your company sets genealogy back years. I agree with all the comments here with the exception of “Mary”. Your company, website, genealogy software, etc. shows a complete lack of concern for any problems which users may have. Year after year you charge more for software and services and do less and less to earn those increases. A large portion of information that you provide for a fee has been taken from users for nothing. You produce new software (FTM) every year or two with little regard for what customers want and with no attempt to correct software problems. There is no way that name searches on your site was coded by a real software programmer, when I get over two million results on a specific name with a specific birthdate, race, place of birth. If you don’t want to provide useful software and services please sell the company to someone who does. Your company sets genealogy back years.

]]>