Posted by Ancestry Team on June 26, 2015 in Website

At Ancestry, we value and respect our customers’ privacy and we have standards in place to protect the integrity of the data our customers entrust to us. So, we want to be clear about a policy change we are making.

As of today, we are updating our privacy statement to clarify what information we may use and share in an effort to further research in fields such as human evolution and migration, population genetics, health, ethnographic diversity and genealogy. We feel we can contribute to discoveries about the intersection of family history, health and genetics that could benefit our members and society at large.

Please visit our updated privacy statement here.

What this means to you:

We will not share information with third parties for research unless the information has been anonymized or aggregated so that individuals cannot be reasonably identified. Personal information such as names and addresses are kept confidential.

We will not share information from private trees for research purposes unless you have agreed to participate by signing our informed consent.

Your Privacy Settings:

While the majority of our customers choose to keep their trees public for the benefit of discovering, sharing and collaborating with the Ancestry community, you do have the option to make your tree private.

New customers are prompted at registration to mark trees as ‘public’ or ‘private’.

Existing customers can log-in and follow the directions here to make their family tree private.

If you have any questions or concerns, please visit our privacy center here.

231 Comments

  1. jj3288

    Thank you for being good stewards of our ancestors data. You have helped my family answer many questions. Have been a member for sometime and will continue to be

  2. bjmastro51

    The “new” ancestry has some real problems that I hope you can work out but in general, I love it! It is slow, and the inability to quick edit bothers me as it is time consuming to pull up each person’s profile to change or delete. Also the galleries with photos and stories are now very hard to access on other people’s trees, as I like to make sure when I am connecting information that it is who I am looking for before I connect them, but I have seen improvement with this and am back working comfortably with the new system. It takes time to get used to it but you can’t go as fast which may prevent mistakes. I sure do wish you would include an undo button or a back button that would save my inadvertent deletes as I am spending most of my time trying to delete a branch that I accidentally dropped instead of the research I want to do. But overall, kudos! You have made each person come alive with the ‘lifestory’ and I enjoy that immensely!

  3. Doris Goheen

    I chose not to enter my family tree on ancestry because of all the personal family stories it contained but another family member entered my years of research without my permission. Will ancestry remove that if I ask them to?

  4. Frances Poer Fox

    There is a lot of wrong information as always. We have to be very careful to find proof of every connection. I like public trees.

  5. Naomi Emmich

    I recieved an Ancestry message from a woman I corresponded with years ago. It was a link to her DNA results- eighytwo pages of Ancestry users, fifty names (active trees) on each page. This is DNA? This is privacy?

  6. Tonia

    I am okay with the new Ancestry format, but I can’t seem to locate the option to view a “Family Group Sheet” like in the previous version. Is this still an option and if so, how do I find it….It would also be very helpful in not only on Ancestry.com but also in Family Tree Maker if we have the option to color code/highlight information areas in our tree so that they stand out when printing….

  7. Sheila Most

    The new ancestry has so many glitches in it that I have reverted to the original form. I have reported about 4-5 errors/problems. The person on the phone agreed, but none has been fixed. One of the worst is that I can no longer add a new source for an event already listed on my family tree. The new ancestry is very cumbersome to use. I do like the life story feature, but I don’t see any other worthwhile improvements.

  8. While other trees that show connections to my tree are sometimes interesting, I usually can’t use them to add to my tree, because there is no documentation. I have seen so many conclusions that people arrived at using the assumption that it is the information is the most likely possibility turn out to be completely in error. I have a possible connection for my oldest known paternal ancestor appearing in Spotsylvania, VA at an earlier time, but without documentary evidence confirming that they are the same persons, I don’t show it in my tree. other people do include it.

  9. sandra nolan

    still getting used to the new ancestry but i wish the trees were public for it is hard to see the connection on privite trees.I have run into possible connection but the tree was privite and sending off a request to view never get a reply.i can understand if they have some ppl on privite due to still living but the ppl who have already passed

  10. Tis is a thread about privacy settings – NOT about the new-look Ancestry, so please place such comments elsewhere. The privacy statement clarifies and reassures. I have yet to understand why people make their tree private (yet also purloin material from other trees) when family history depends on the exchange of information freely and willingly so that we can break down those brick walls and, as so often happens, find interesting new relatives.

  11. Allen

    It’s amazing how so many people get off topic.
    And sadly, this topic is about Privacy Settings. It is about what Ancestry does with all the private information we put in our profiles. They use that information to sell products and create lists. Shameful practices of businesses these days. Our trees are mostly filled with the past.. no big deal, but this privacy info has much to do about US now. BE VERY careful what you write in your Profile statements!

    And, I don’t care much either for the cumbersome NEW Ancestry.

  12. JanetStJohn82

    I wish there was a message box available to post my reasons for using the tree as I do. When I use information from another tree, I do so with the intention of finding better sources. I want others to know they bear that responsibility, as well.
    I do not like the new Ancestry, finding it slow and cumbersome. The life stories are not useful, as I prefer writing my own stories about people I research. Many in my tree are extraneous to the main purpose, but may later provide a newly discovered relationship.

  13. Please do NOT allow any trees to be posted online. Far too many carry no documentation, and that is simply because there was none to be posted! A cousin of mine has posted faulty PUBLIC information that concerns my own living family members! And a completely unrelated woman listed MY parents on her public tree because the man she was searching and my father had the same unusual given name. No proof, mind you, just a wild claim! Fortunately, I was able to contact her and she apologized and removed that faulty information. But, my cousin doesn’t make corrections! Frankly, I find Ancestry to be an unfortunate and irresponsible purveyor of other people’s often undocumented information, information that the Family Search website shares free of charge. I will not renew my membership and I will warn newbies to stay clear of Ancestry.

  14. I am finding the new Ancestry much harder to navigate. And if the information is repeated on the tree, I do not know how to get rid of it.

  15. karen border

    Let’s keep things more public – if a person worries about privacy, start the genealogy with a dead grandparent. That way, the connection to the originator is hidden,

    And BRING BACK THE ANCESTRY WORLD TREE! Yes, it had lots of errors, but the info was there and could be followed AND CHECKED by others – saves lots of time, and provided so many family lines…Please put it back, with a warning about accuracy. Every time you change Ancestry, it gets less useful to me, and more annoying, and not worth the money!

  16. Margarette Coates

    I have been using ancestry.com and Family Tree Maker ever since they came out. I have used Family Tree Maker from the very beginning of the program. When ancestry was started, I found it extremely useful and have loved it from the very beginning. Yes there have been glitches along the way, but that comes along with any program you use. very few of them are perfect. ancestry has been a great help to me and working out my family tree and the extended branches of my family tree. Through DNA I have come up with many family connections, including connections for some in-laws that they never knew about. I will continue to use the program because it is awesome help. I only wish that between the two programs they would set it up so that when you merge a census into your files it would show up as a census rather than a residence. I too wish people would be more accurate and forthcoming with their sources information. I try very hard to do that and I I have no problem with my tree being public as long as those that are living are protected my privacy. I don’t mind their names being out there as long as other personal information is not shared until they are shown is deceased.I two wish people would thank you ver be wish accurate and for coming with air forces the information. I try very hard to do that and I have no problem with my tree being public as long as though they’re leaving are protected privacy. I don’t mind their names being out there as long as other personal information is not shared until they’re shown as deceased. Thank you very much for all the help that I have received from ancestry.

  17. Danny Roberts

    I don’t like the new updated version, because it don’t print the picture you input for a relative..also when searching on message boards or newspapers, it pickups all kind of words, broke in pieces instead of the name you input, that’s old and new version….

  18. JB Mogren

    I tried the new Ancestry.com… I didn’t like the look as it is not as neat and organized. I switched back to Classic and it was a good feeling to be “home” again!

  19. Judi Hart

    I also am unhappy with the NEW Ancestry. I do like the facts, but everything else is difficult, slow and it is difficult to find things. I agree with all the disagree statements above.

  20. patricia

    The “new” ancestry is terrible. Correction of information can NOT be found, the ability to contact a person is lacking, The whole ancestry really stinks now. The ability to send notes to the site owner is absent. Who make the unpopular decision to change the entire format? They should be fired !!

  21. jfoote

    I do have to agree with most of the above comments. This NEW ancestry is not fun to use and I am not happy with itl

  22. Joan Viney

    The new format for Ancestry.com is moe cubersome and hade to use. You need to take some lessonns fom FamilySearch.org (which is free). I often have to go there to locate a person first—to find dates and places of birth and death—before using Ancestry to check for further informaion. Also, making the data list using much smaller print makes it much more difficult to research! Please return to the old format generally.

  23. Kay Schroeder

    I too agree with the comments above. Please don’t take the “Old Ancestry” off line until all the errors and inconveniences are worked out. The New Ancestry is painful!

  24. Lesley Hager

    I do not like the NEW ancestry! Pleas let us stay with the old one. It is slow. It is hard to use & add things. Even your staff when we call doesn’t get it.
    Respectfully Have you ever heard of the KISS principle? I may suggest that you may want to study it. KEEP IT SIMPLE SIMPLE!
    I like the OLD ancestry- Why fix something if it isn’t broken? Have a nice day! My prayers for all ancestry people is that we can endure this horrible NEW ancestry.

  25. I too do not like the new format. I am making my Family trees into books. The colours of the new format are not printer friendly. Too much grey and black. The format is very similar to familysearch which I did not like and that site is free.The old site was great, fast and easy to use. If the new format stays, then I will not. If it is not broke, don’t fix it.

  26. kc

    I am not a member but have visited the site. I have problems with Ancestry in general. I was invited as a guest and found private information [their social security numbers for both my parents, family pictures of not only them but of myself. A distant cousin had done my family without asking our permission. Even though my parents and brother-in-law have died I found it offense for someone that was not a direct family member to be able to place our private information where anyone could see it. It angers me that someone was able to do my family sister, brother and parents without asking the immediate family. When I asked for it to be removed I was told only the original person can remove it. Now all I have to do is google my mothers name and I can find her picture on the internet, thanks to Ancestry it’s on the internet. I don’t even have to go to ancestry.com to find the pictures of my deceased parents, grandparents or sister and brother. Thanks Ancestry. So I have decided NOT to join. I know they don’t keep information private or I couldn’t Google and find it.

  27. Marina Sands

    Whether to go Private or Public with your tree is always going to be a problem I think its a personal thing. My tree is Private but I don’t mind passing on information to other people to help build their tree but when I state that it is not to be made public and they ignore my request I do see red especially when they don’t mention where they got the information from. Some of the records are still not available through ancestry or they have just be made public so seeing 20 years of hard work put up on someone’s tree I start to feel regret that I passed it on in the first place.

    Ancestry should have a policy in place to stop this from happening or have a block feature in for the original contributor to apply.

  28. Peter

    Private or Public it’s a democracy thing I allowed people access to my tree and without asking took personal things off it.

  29. DK Sullivan

    I do not care for NEW ancestry. Us older folks took years to be able to enhance our speed on gathering research only now to be slowed again by an “improvement.”

  30. Kurt

    The new Ancestry is just horrible i just renewed my subscription truly having 2ed thoughts now. It’s so bad i work almost completely on family tree maker and don’t even take the time to sync any more looking for other sites to move my tree to just a shame. And to all of you out there it amazing to me how many private trees have no problem taking from public trees but do not want to share with others i truly feel if you have a private tree you should not be-able to see or take from public trees that’s only fair to the ones who want to share and grow and find family, Just remember just because he was a grandparent 2 or 3 or 4 Gen back don’t mean there is not a lot of family you have never meet or new about. That is one of the main points is to find family and if you been doing this a while you know you can not do it alone.

  31. John

    Like Doris Gooheen someone listed my family tree without permission. It was not complete and had many inaccuracies. It’s new a public tree. Joke.

  32. Myrtle Fletcher

    Please go back to the old format. This program is not easy to work with and does not have the information regarding parents profile, children’s date of birth etc. Pacifically the family tree page
    Why have a separate section for editing.

  33. Sloan

    I have been a member of Ancestry from the beginning. I like the old format, and will not be changing to the new format. If we are forced to, I will discontinue my membership. I am hoping this will not be the case because I love Ancestry.com.

  34. I too, do not like the new format and I’m looking for an alternative if the if the old format is discontinued. Please let us keep it.

  35. Robyn

    I actually do like the new Ancestry, but you have some serious bleeps to sort out. The one that frustrate me, is the Search The Records Option. It comes up with the first one or two or three that are relevant to your search, but then, I have found out, you have to keep scrolling, anywhere between 50-100 irrelevant results, no connection to the person you are searching, then bingo, up comes 10-20 results for the person you are looking for. Why would you get 1-2 results, and all with the correct information entered, then have to scroll thru so many to find the rest. Surely your master computer system can sort out the relevant or irrelevant searches in order. The old system could do that with no problems.
    Another issue I am having is I cannot edit information on my timeline. I found an error, and could in no way shape or form, find the required link to edit it.
    Given that we pay a subscription for the privilege of accessing records, and other Family Trees, I think Ancestry should have spent more time researching and testing the new system before releasing it to subscribers.
    And as for the speed, well I can recall the speed when I joined in the early 2000’s and I can assure you it was faster 10-15 years ago than what it is now.

  36. Steve

    I absolutely HATE the new look. I switched back to classic within 2 minutes. If it is forced down our throats, I will drop my subscription.

  37. Barbara

    I agree with the new look…do not like it. My complaint was I don’t like the fact that people can comment on our page! If they want to comment, they should send an e-mail or get in touch with that person however they have their information. I don’t want people commenting on my page about anything. I would like a back button or something easier to delete people also. It takes forever to remove someone they way it is set up now. I spent hours on Ancestry yesterday and it was SLOW, SLOW AND SLOWER. I got so frustrated. Spend the money on updating what you have instead of changing things! I like it the way it is and you are not Windows 6,7,8,9,10 which keeps changing and changing and adding and adding. Leave it alone!!!

  38. Robyn

    And regarding the debate over public/private Family Trees.
    While each individual has the choice on whether to remain private, is their decision, but what is the purpose of making it private, if no one else can see your information and data.
    I have messaged many owners of private trees in relation to my family, and I honestly cannot recall ever getting a single reply, and I have been on Ancestry over 15 years.
    I have many family photos on my trees, and they have gone around and around this world many a time. I would never deny any person the right to copy them, I put them up for a reason and that is so I can share them with others, and always feel happy when I see they have been shared.
    I had a very distant relative approx 12 months ago, who took great exception to myself copying one of her photos. Honestly it was like kindergarten the manner in which she responded. At this stage her tree was still public and I was able to observe many of my photos and information on her tree, that had come directly from mine. Given the manner and tone in which she spoke to me, was extremely upsetting.mshe eventually, at my suggestion of if she did not wish people to see her tree or photos then she should make it private. She followed my advise and went private.
    Imagine my surprise just a few months later to see her name on my home page as saving another photo from my tree. Even though she went private, she could still access everyone else’s trees.
    The only way I could stop her was too actually block her. In all my years on Ancestry, I have never had a bad word with anyone, but these private pages are extremely annoying and frustrating.
    When you put in extremely long long hours researching, cross checking, and documenting your research, only to have someone who does not wish to identified, can still access your data and records without you having a referral point.
    I am so very proud at my years of research and what I have uncovered, and am so happy to share it with others, but I feel very strongly that there is no place on Ancestry for people to hide behind private pages when they are accessing our information and using it for their own gains…

  39. Glenn Garrett

    Does this mean your company is taking information from your various sites and compiling them to present family information? Have already seen the mistakes in one of mine. How irresponsible to publish information without the lest understanding of the importance of real research – your site a a mess.

  40. Pat Johnson

    I don’t like the new ancestry either. I agree with spending the money on research items and leave the website alone.

  41. Trudy

    I have had a number of really good experiences that would not have occurred if my tree had been private. I have been able to offer information, and people have sought me out to pass along treasures. I don’t upload anything into my public tree that I don’t want shared.
    As to the new vs. old format, I like being able to shift back and forth. When I encounter something that needs to be edited, like removing a person whom I incorrectly added to my tree, I find it much easier to do in the old version. A few clicks, back to the old version to do my editing, and then back to the new version. I like how the new version clarifies the sources which document each of the life events.

  42. Joan

    Absolutely HATE the new Ancestry. Have used since the beginning but, given the difficulty, am searching for a new program. Customer service has been dismal and representatives seen completely unaware of how to resolve problems. I called more than 5 times about one problem – each and every rep stated they were sending me an e-mail how to resolve. Each person sent the same e-mail which had absolutely nothing to do with the major problem. Perhaps the company has grown much too quickly without the benefit of having employees who actually understand technology.

  43. nappycp

    I just purchased Family Maker 2014. My computer died and my genealogy data went too. Before I start with using this program should I, or should I purchase an older version or another software? I appreciate any helpful comments.

  44. Jen

    Please do not turn notification of service changes into a treasure hunt. First I get email: “Privacy changes, go here to read more.” I click “go here” and get a page with snippets from recent blog posts; have to find the one about privacy and click “read more”. This one at least provides a brief summary, but then “go here to read the new privacy statement”. You should have done the summary in the email, with a link to the full privacy statement if I wanted to read it — making me go to multiple pages is poor design and discourteous.

  45. sandra

    If you want acceptance of your new format you need to clean up your own misinformation first. Your added historical info can be highly erroneous when you add info that has no connection to person involved, ie: adding state of Alabama to a Jackson County, Michigan bit of info and have no way to correct the info you have added. Contacting Customer Service is no help whatsoever.

  46. Jan

    I do not like the new Ancestry. The pictures I have posted now have their heads chopped off and though I have reported this twice, nothing is being done to fix it. Also I find the new format very cumbersome and slow, especially when trying to open source information. Your customer service people tell me that the old format will no longer be an option very soon. I though I would like the Story option because I wanted those finding my tree to know that much of my information came from original 120+ year old diaries, this information does not show up to a casual browser. Maybe before you make these drastic changes you should make sure it works!!

  47. Colleen Johnson

    I began genealogy back in the days when you spent $$$$ and hours ordering certificates and microfiche & microfilm from the LDS Library. And interviewing family members and even then I want proof on paper for what they tell me. I know my information is 100% accurate. Many people now just want to claim huge numbers of ancestors and much of the information on public trees is so very wrong which is why I have my tree private. If others can’t do the work then they will not profit from mine. I had a guy tell me that we have to share as that is how we all benefit, but he has fathers married to daughters and married surnames confused with maiden surnames etc. (He claims to be a private investigator). The information is all there if he would like to find it. Doing the hard long slog of research is half the fun! Ancestry is a fabulous tool for research, but unfortunately many people publish their trees with errors and other claim those errors as facts and perpetuate them.

  48. Larry Allen

    I do not like the new version and another matter we paid YDNA tests and you take it upon yourself to do away with it!!! I see a class action law suit.

  49. Belkis Munoz

    I agree with Colleen Johnson’s comment on accurate information. There are a lot of trees with huge errors and/or no sources to support the information. That’s why I have my tree private. But I am please to share or help others if they are serious in their work.

  50. Marianne Bradley

    Like the others, I am having serious problems with the new version. As far as public/private trees, so many of the “new” genealogists have no idea how to search, how to document, how to build a tree, and they are copying, copying, with no proof. It is truthfully up to us “old schoolers” to know not to take any of the public trees as anything but possible hints. I have received wonderful new info from them and have seen horrible errors in others. So take them all with a grain of salt. The “newbies” are just collecting names as if they know what they are doing. But I have had Family Tree Maker since the 90’s and Ancestry for many years. Everyone should know that on Family Search’s trees, others can change your tree – it belongs to Family Search, not you. Great info, but your tree is public and changeable.

  51. ShariPDX

    Public trees are good. I worked for many years on my trees and why should someone else have to re-dig up and/or pay for the the same documents and information all over again. Some documents took me hours to clean up so I could read them. Why should others have to waste time doing what I’ve done? I want to do my trees, but welcome others to pick the fruits of my labors. And, why should I get “credit” for posting a public document? IT’S CALLED SHARING. Our parents tried to teach us that principle when we were kids. ………………………
    Obviously, some didn’t learn it very well. ……………………………. The new site is OK to look at, but impossible to work with. Alas, I probably won’t be renewing either.

  52. Marilyn Andersen

    I absolutely hate, hate, hate, the new Ancestry. I cannot find anything. If it remains in its present state, I will not be using it. Please go back to the old format which was easy to use.

  53. Barbara Gaouette

    The new format is a disaster. If there is no way to go back to the old format, I will not be renewing my subscription when it comes due. Why did you change to a format that is so horrible and difficult to maneuver. Sometimes the new and improved version of something is definately not improved!

  54. joseph stanaitis

    I think the idea of spending the money for the DNA test and not publishing your family tree is just plain stupid. how can a person find any new kin if they dont reveal and old kin to make comparisons. There is one lady woh contacted me. we compared bonefides and she dropped the relationship. but she checks every couple of days to see if there is anyone of value on her hook.

  55. Bonnie Baker Lippincott

    I have a public tree that I put well researched (I hope) members of my family into. I do make mistakes and correct them when I find them or are told about them. I also have a couple of private trees only viewable by me that I put records and people that I have not researched well enough to know if they really belong in my tree. I hate running into a public family tree that has numerous entries for the same person because they have not taken the time to see if it is the same person with the name slightly different or some other thing. I have started excluding them. If they won’t take the time to make sure, I don’t think I can trust their “research.” When I have verified a person on my private tree to my satisfaction, then I enter them on my public tree. It may be extra work, but I think it is worth it.
    I too do not like the “new experience” of my trees. I worked with it for a week or so, figured out what I didn’t like and let Ancestry know. Then I changed back to the “old” tree format. Hopefully by the time they roll out the new format for real, it will have the kinks worked out.

  56. Darlene

    I hate private trees their owners copy your pictures, stories and data, but will not share theirs. Rarely will they answer an email. I wish Ancestry would let you block specific users from copying your data.

  57. Joan

    I also do not like the new format and did not know you could go back to the old form. I hope I can find how to do that.

  58. How Private is a Private Tree when ancestry can invade it and alter all the information I spent hours and hours checking, cross-checking and documenting? Their Alternate Facts conflict with the real facts and I have found NUMEROUS errors in the Life Stories that ancestry has generated from my Private Tree….What gives them the right to go in and manipulate the information I have posted? They should stay out of my tree. It is none of their business. It is about MY family and MY family history. They have no business editorializing what I have entered in my tree. BUTT OUT, ancestry!!!

  59. Irene

    I never take what ever I have found as right I will always check as far as possible for the proof before I add anything to my tree, I think I have been carful but surprised a few time when I have been wrong. It does annoy when people think they have it all right and put that tree on completely wrong. The number of times when clicking to find distant relatives look at their tree and they follow back a completely different line. It is up to us to check everything for our own tree and hope that other people will not high jack our tree but check it out for them selves. We can do in one weekend what it use to take 10 years before computers took up family history so thank you.

  60. canetoad123

    I now find that I am having to use Free BMD alongside Ancestry. The main reason for this is that Ancestry will no longer allow an initial search by Registration District, which I find incredibly frustrating. The comparatively weak ‘place where your ancestor might have lived’ I find next to useless as there are so many mistakes in the indexes relating to the counties in which certain towns are located. Also, although Ancestry will allow a search for a surname only, it will NOT allow you to put in the first letter of the first name along with an asterisk, whereas Free BMD will, as long as the number of results does not exceed a set limit. PLEASE ALLOW SEARCHES BY REGISTRATION DISTRICT! And why can no corrections be made to name and place name information on the 1901 census? I gave up alerting you to this months ago and STILL no corrections can be made!

  61. Charles

    What a disaster the “new” Ancestry is. It’s like the difference between a finely written letter (the old version) and a stinking text message (the new version). I’ve been a member for many, many years, and this “new” version, if forced on me, will also force me to end my association with Ancestry.com.

  62. Peter Stubbs

    AN ANCESTRY PLEA:

    Clearly there is a high level of disenchantment with the ‘New’ Ancestry. I can only hope that the powers behind the scene read and digest the strong level of feeling as has been expressed above. Who knows how this disaster has come about so suddenly and unexpectedly? Does it have the hallmark of an experienced team working towards improving an already good product incrementally, or a group of pimply faced young nerds who have been given the task of changing the world and being noticed?

    Unfortunately, change for the sake of change appears to have become the norm recently. So many aspects of our digital world are changing so rapidly and radically that we find ourselves spending more and more time trying to re-learn the basics of something totally new than building our knowledge base within a safe, familiar and predictable format that we have come to understand and trust. And one that we know works!

    This new approach is particularly inappropriate in the field of genealogy, where continuity, experience and professionalism are essential requisites. Please Ancestry, listen to your customers, your family, your supporters. Take heed of what has been said and be brave. Take it on the chin and recognise that serious mistakes have been made, but that it is not too late to make the necessary changes. No excuses please! Only then can we all go forward together and continue the proud tradition of Ancestry, of which we have all been such an integral part.

    The maturity and wisdom of your response will determine the future of millions around the world. Here’s hoping…

  63. I am more than ever satisfied with the support and assistance received from Ancestry.Com..Au and
    their associated affiliates in the various Countries I am researching.. Pedr Marshall

  64. kurt

    Dear Ancestry HELLO HELLO ARE YOU HEARING WHAT YOUR PAYING CUSTOMERS ARE SAYING If you are going to make changes at least make changes your paying customers are asking for Not what you think they want.( Key word paying customers) And please remove the 14 day free trees that plug the system and are never used again.

  65. Liz

    I personally have never cared for all the comments from others that Ancestry is posting on my site for photographs, paintings, information. We all have our own personal opinions, but I don’t need or want others on my Ancestry site.
    I keep a private site because years ago I allowed two certain cousins access, they each took my private photos, documentation, etc. that took me 30 years to research and pay for in some instances, placed those on their own public sites without my approval, then showed they were the original owners. When I complained to Ancestry, I was told “nothing we can do about that”. And, I do not appreciate or condone the Mormon church, owners of Ancestry, ‘baptizing’ my ancestors/family members into their church decades & 100s of years after their deaths, when none of those ancestors/family members ever held membership within the Mormon church or faith.

  66. Bonnie

    I also want to know how to get back to the old format. I am far too old to try to figure out this new one. I so enjoy finding new info and sharing it with others. I am proud of my family. Please don’t make it more difficult than it is to keep them sorted out. New is not always better. Thank you, Bonnie

  67. Nancy

    I hope we can continue to use the OLD format. I also do NOT like the new format – can’t see the media; comments, etc. I am a long time Ancestry member and appreciate the great job of digitizing and making records available. Keep working on improving the search feature (so that items more than a century from the dates put in the search fields do not show up). I have a private tree because I see so many errors on trees with no documentation and merged families or generations that are really separate lines – however, I love the idea of a message from someone so that we can connect and see if there is a link – then I give them guest access and we often have continued to collaborate – a couple with great success – that part of Ancestry is very helpful.

  68. ellarsen

    It is terrible that Ancestry has to dumb down the site – pink and blue, for pete’s sake – and stories and other simplified things. I have long asked for an name alphabetized Shoebox to facilitate retrieving items – too simple, I guess. And now just a mess!! and space cluttered pages, etc. I agree with many of the prior negative comments!!! Thank you! Hope Ancestry LISTENS!!!

  69. adknative

    Ancestry never ‘listens’ … that’s the problem. But for those who also HATE the ‘new’ ancestry… AND the lack of choice, as we are about to be FORCED to the ‘new’ crap version… I suggest you google ‘GRAMP’ (no quotes) for a FREE genealogy program WAY better than Family Tree Maker. I bought FTM specifically BECAUSE ancestry promoted how easy it was to use and how it SYNCed with your online tree, so .. hey, no duplicate work between trees! Now, ancestry is ditching the ability to SYNC trees. Oh, yeah – my subscription is going to be cancelled as soon as they force us into the ‘new’ crap, too. That is definitely NOT what I pay for.

  70. Terry Sancroft Baker

    I have several family trees on Ancestry, some private and some public. The reason that I have my main (very large) trees private is (a) I do not want my info to be plagiarised and (b) if someone requests to view these private trees then I can can enter a constructive dialogue with them so that we can exchange info about the people that they are interested in. This also restricts the number of enquiries to manageable numbers (unlike ‘matches on GenesRe-united). I totally agree with people’s comments about the New version of Ancestry. 2nd law of engineering ‘if it ain’t broke don’t fix it’ (1st law of course is Murphy’s or Sod’s Law – if something can happen it will). My final comment about updating software is that there is no greater frustration than the new version of Google Maps., especially as the old version has been removed.

  71. I’m less concerned about the Privacy issue than the many faults of the so-called NEW Ancestry. It’s almost impossible to make edits and corrections among other problems. After many years with Ancestry.com I’m ready to abandon it in favor of my other genealogy sites. I regret renewing my subscription!

  72. Vegan Vegas

    Doesn’t matter what the subscribers want. If Ancestry wants to sell our info or to change to “new’ ancestry, they will and we can either take it or leave it. They know the majority of us will stay because there’s really no comparable site. Look at all the screaming went on a couple of years ago regarding old vs new search. Like that did anything to change Ancestry’s mind.

    Bottom line is Ancestry’s bottom line and we are just “subscription units”.

  73. Vegan Vegas

    @Terry Sancroft Baker
    re google maps. have you seen this?
    change dot org / p / tell – google – bring- back – classic – google -maps (remove all spaces)

  74. Jon

    I am not a fan of the New Ancestry either. I can’t figure out how to print a Family Group Sheet from a tree–which is pretty standard genealogical info. Also please allow some triangulation and ability to compare shared DNA segments. Let’s set a higher standard of intelligence–higher research standards, ability to actually utlilize DNA info, etc. Genealogy is more accessible these days, but even still, it really is not that easy. Making mistakes is easy, but finding correct information may be more of a challenge.
    I really hope you listen to the feedback elicited!

  75. Jessie Fyfe

    If I am forced to use the new ancestry, I will cancel my subscription to Ancestry.com.
    You take it upon yourselves to arbitrarily change the program and expect all of us to just “go along” with what you say is a “better” way, when in fact, that is not the case. The problems are too great at this time for me to waste my time on it!
    You had better learn to listen to your paying customers or you will lose us!
    Like many others, it seems, I don’t like the new ancestry! I have had too much trouble learning the 2014 program to start with another one! Please do not screw around with us anymore!

  76. Elaine

    The NEW Ancestry is SO BAD. I feel as if it is insulting my intelligence. I like the research and don’t need “stories.” Please keep the “old” format. Are you listening to these comments, Ancestry.com??

  77. Mindy

    I THOUGHT THIS WAS SUPPOSE TO BE ABOUT THE PRIVACY SETTINGS !! Didn’t realize it was “Gripe about the new ancestry”.

  78. Bobbie

    I’m with all the unhappy, new format subscribers. I have been with Ancestry a long time too, but if they insist on making us go to the new one, I’m gone. If , as some have said, if Ancestry doesn’t listen they are going to lose a lot of subscribers. I have had a lot of fun finding family & researching for hours. I’ll hate to lose that.

  79. Carol Wolfe

    If I could preserve all the information and photos I have collected some other way, I would cancel “new” ancestry. I don’t like it AT ALL. Fire your web designer!!!

  80. I do hope you still give us a choice. I have built up my tree over the years now and it is my only depositry of all my work over several family lines. I like the fact that it is simple to log photos, media etc. I am happy to share anything I put onto my site. Photos, certificates and links. I think its helping others with an interest in the same name.

  81. don kirstine

    Far two expensive, the sad part is if you don’t keep feeding them money you lose every bit of work that’s been done.
    At least My Heritage has a way to print your tree at home.

  82. James Shearer

    I agree with the majority of members and dislike with the new Ancestry.Try the old method again.

  83. Chris Falteisek

    I’m having problems with the new ancestry.com website look. It seems you changed it while you were in the beta stage & before all the kinks were worked out. We used to have an option to use the old style – will you offer that again – the new style/look is not working well…

  84. JW

    To my fellow Ancestry users, please don’t hold your breath while hoping they will drop this “new” version or you will likely pass out! I also am totally dismayed at these changes. Having worked for large companies myself I’ve seen these kinds of overhauls before, typically spearheaded by an executive of great hubris that wants to put his or her stamp on a product, often without any focus group study from actual consumers of their product. An investment of six figures most likely has already been committed to a software contractor, mix in the hubris factor and it’s extremely unlikely they will turn back. I respectfully ask Ancestry management to recall the lesson of the New Coke launch many years ago.

  85. Ronnie

    I’ve been using Ancestry since before it was called Ancestry 1999. It was free back then didn’t get very far online back then it was 6 more years before I linked to a cousin. This is the first time in all the years that I’m so fustrated with the new beta version. I’ve tried to use it numerous times without satisfaction. You have so many issues with it I don’t understand why you went live with it! Now being told it’s going to be this way! To soon you have way to many programming issues. The old version is great new is not always better. Keep the new color and the stories of history I don’t need it, glad I can turn it off. I’m staying on the old version as long as I can or when my subscription ends July 13. I’ve backed up my trees I suggested people do the same. I have family tree maker, been using it for a couple of years. You’ve added a tremendous amount of new data list while your search still needs a lot of work, you really need to concentrate on improving what you already have. Very frustrating. What is going on with the DNA
    portion? Rumors abound about it all being up for sale. What does all of this mean to your loyal customer base?

  86. Suzette

    I just spoke to Ancestry and this will become mandatory the end of the year. Good to know, as I will be moving all my data to a new software program (using Family Tree Maker) as well all my data. I really thought Ancestry would be here and easy to use for generations with the information I put in, not what a corporation thinks should be in my tree.

  87. Janet Hopkins

    Hello, can Ancestry please tell me, or any other subscribers, how I can go back to the old format permanently? I find the new one very cumbersome to use, and am considering not renewing for the first time in years. Please email janetchopkins@hotmail.com thank you!

  88. Sharksweetie

    The New Ancestry has added facts to some of my ancestors that are totally wrong; it has assumed incorrect people of the same name (I suppose). It has a great-grandfather never moving to the US although he lived and died in the Dakota Territories, This is TOTALLY unacceptable. When the Classic format is gone, I probably will be, too.

  89. The new Ancestry is providing some wonderful info and added features, It is just a matter of getting used to it and learn how to use it. Ancestry is my faborite and it is sad to hear such negative comments.

  90. Lexacon

    I do not like the new look of Ancestry. It is too hard for me to use, is slow and hard to navigate pages. Can I go back to the old way? I cannot make corrections or add info to people I have in my tree. Also it does not show if a comment a person made to your tree is actually there. Please go back to the old version.

  91. Mary

    I also do not like the new look of the family line I will not update to 2014 I will stay with 2012 it is much easier to tie your family line in if you should go back to the old way and update it then I will update, but I find it a little hard when I go to ancestry and click on my family tree please go back to the old way, new is not always good. I do love the pictures

  92. RandallDennis44

    Several folks have stated that the NEW Ancestry is horrible. Can you be more specific than that? I’m of the opinion that everything is still here,the “detective work” has been streamlined and the gui interface is arranged more logically. We will be more comfortable over time.

  93. RandallDennis44

    The new security policy seems to refer to data that would be required of the user who signs up for DNA analysis. There are some pretty detailed questions that would need to be answered. That data is made available to medical researchers but is allegedly submitted with out names.

  94. Helen Spurgeon

    The New Ancestry is to hard to use. The background color is hard to look at and the icon are also hard to see. Not printer friendly at all. PLEASE GO BACK TO THE OLD ANCESTRY.

  95. Like almost everyone else that posted above, I HATE the New Ancestry format. Thank you for letting us choose to stick with the old format. If you remove that choice, I will have to find another genealogy website.

  96. I don’t see a suitable message board so I will use this one.
    I am finding the new Ancestry a burden to use.
    It is pretty, neat and organized but it is very cumbersome to use. The ability to quickly navigate and edit is lost and it has become too time consuming. It not only slows me down, it slows down my computer.
    I am thinking about removing my public files because they are now too difficult for me to navigate and edit. I will use my Family Tree Maker on my computer for all my work. If I can find a way to revert back to the old setup I will.

  97. Linda Tweed

    Do I understand correctly that the DNA results are being referred to the medical profession. I paid for that service, and am absolutely opposed to my information being transferred to a third party, even if it is encrypted. I didn’t pay so that you would have information to sell off to medical researchers! I’m really steamed! Under the circumstances–you should be sued! Just another instance of being screwed over by a corporation.

  98. Leslie Gould

    I really do not line the new Ancestry.com. It’s slow, it’s more difficult to use, I can’t message people. Either fix this or take us back to the old one. This costs too much money to not be working properly!

  99. Greg

    This post is about your privacy not whether your tree is private or not – and/or to make complaints about your cousins stealing your data or misrepresenting it.
    What’s at question here is whether you are happy to have Ancestry send anonymous data to marketing companies etc to give them demographic information of their user base.
    If you have a problem with this, you best remove every Internet account you have.

    I didn’t know there was a new look Ancestry because this hasn’t been rolled out on the UK version of the site. I just tool a look. It’s stunning. There is no ‘new’ information aded by Ancestry in my tree. All of the alternate facts etc are data you have added to your tree when clicking like mad and saving everything you find in the search into your tree.
    Ancestry has not make any changes to your tree or data.

    The new look is stunning. When will you roll this out to the UK site?

  100. Eustace

    There is so much inappropriate, unsubstantiated and stolen information in public trees that they are worse than useless, so that no one with an ounce of professional integrity would use them for research purposes. Error is propagated as truth, and even when it’s pointed out, it usually doesn’t get correct. This is why I record none of my research on Ancestry.com.

  101. I get really unhappy when people with private trees, whose photos I CANNOT access, take my photos and info. If there trees are PRIVATE, they should not be able to access the photos and information on my Public Tree. If they do not want to share, why should they be allowed to take the information from mine. I do not like the NEW Ancestry

  102. StevenBoman73

    In my humble opinion, I think existing members of ancestry should have been given an option to try the new Ancestry and if not satisfied with it, we should have been allowed to stay with the old system which I think is better.Thank you for all the hinds you provide and all you do for your members. SMB

  103. Kathy

    I put my tree online in the early 90’s and am sorry I ever put my tree on line. I think all trees should exclude recent info( the last couple of generations) Then people would not be so irate over the privacy issue.

  104. Monique

    Don’t like the new version. It’s not user friendly. I don’t like when you search and can’t choose the way we did before. Don’t like most of the customer service as their only answer is well send you how to do it. Instead of guiding you through it as they used to do. When. You get older it’s easier to be walked through it we pay good price for all and don’t get proper service

  105. Mary

    Ancestry in the past promised not to show the living. They have not kept that promise. I have found myself and my brother both on Ancestry public trees.nither of us have daisy roots in our faces. Therefore my tree is not on line and will not be. Much more information is accessible on line free now,Ancestry is much less valuable than it was. Lie to us once about privacy as you have further promises are not to be believed either.

  106. mfarmer194

    Agreed, the new Ancestry totally sucks! Too time consuming, too much fluff that takes up our bandwidth, too little attention to fixing old problems still being carried on, too complicated…probably will not renew my world membership.

  107. secooper13

    Yes the topic of this blog was supposed to focus on Privacy, but we are humans, and always will find an outlet to vent if one is not provided, and the comments reflect a need to give feedback and much is about the “new” Ancestry….which is a BETA version. If you have never participated in a BETA version of any program, they are usually designed to help get all the kinks out of a new version before its final form. If participation is not what you want, then you can easily go to your settings and select to revert to the “Classic” version.
    As for TREES, this program is only as good as WE make it. It is through SHARING that we find our connections. However, it is through stewardship and personal responsibility that we must carefully examine every addition we make to our own trees. If you are NEW to this research, be careful, for our trees are not your candy store. It is exciting, yes, but you must be reverent in dealing with the families of others, for they may turn out to be YOUR family…or they may turn out to have distant ties or even NO ties to your own known family. We can only benefit from what others have made public, yet many are choosing to keep private to protect from people using their information for the wrong families. I tend to think that if you take care of your own tree, and publish carefully that information that would not be offensive to any living relatives, then you are serving the spirit of this research. I am often surprised to see my grandfather’s picture on a strangers tree and sometimes it is not connected to the correct family, but it is THEIR process, and a gentle message usually is well received, as most of us DO want our trees to be accurate. I hold no hope for the Privateers who hide theirs from others but still use the information from our Public Trees, but I’ll not be bothered with their Karma….Happy Hunting!

  108. dellairene2

    I totally agree with secooper13 with summing up this blog on Privacy. I have been a member of Ancestry for about 5 years. And, I am still learning. I have met so many great Ancestry users that have shared tips on manuevering through Ancestry. I appreciate and enjoy the stewardship from being a member of Ancestry. I, also, prefer the “Classic” version. We can only be responsible for our own family trees, by being careful of not including wrong data from the Public Trees of others. It’s a major frustration to hit a brick wall by finding a possible lead on a ancestor. And, finding the TREE is owned by a Privateer. As unlikely is it may seem, we may be a ancestor to a Privateer’s tree, if they wouldn’t mind SHARING. I feel this is what Ancestry is all about. Please keep our living relatives, “Private”.

  109. Is it possible to see a redlined version, which would show what has changed. This alleviates a difficult word-by-word comparison of old to new. Thank you for your consideration.

  110. I tried the “New” Ancestry and found it to be slow. The Profile pages were another feature I didn’t care for either, there were other issues I just did not find user friendly. It was not that it was ‘hard’ to use, just not as convenient. Hey, if it’s not broke don’t fix it! Call Ancestry, the nice folks there will help you to go back to the old Classic system. Or go to the upper right hand corner of your page (Ancestry) you’ll see your name, click there and change back to the Classic setting. You’ll have to answer what you do not like about the new program first. Takes less that a minute! ALSO I find that Ancestry can be very slow at times which can be more frustrating than the “New’ Ancestry. To the person who had someone hack into their Tree, this happened to me by a distant family member. It’s very easy to do. Check often to see if there’s any new names who have access to your Trees and what level of access. Report them to Ancestry.

  111. Michael Dixon

    Privacy is good.

    But, with proper safeguards in place, Public is better.

    I learned the advantages of sharing genealogical data when the hard drive on my six month old computer fried.

    Fortunately I had backed it up 2 weeks beforehand!

    In the 1950’s a large part of our late Victorian ‘paper tree’ was ‘disposed’ of by a [stupid?] relation as household clutter.

    The only protection of family data we accumulate through time and effort is by sharing. I keep all my genealogical data unlocked and available to all on Ancestry. I also share it freely among near relations, and more distant relations since uncovered by Ancestry.

    Quite a few of those far-flung relatives benefiting never bother to say ‘thanks’, but really, who cares!

    I get to protect that data through dispersion, and hopefully these ‘data miners’ eventually will add some original family branches too.

    Public means Protected!

  112. Judy Deline Sabin

    To quote Charles: What a disaster the “new” Ancestry is. It’s like the difference between a finely written letter (the old version) and a stinking text message (the new version). I’ve been a member for many, many years, and this “new” version, if forced on me, will also force me to end my association with Ancestry.com.

  113. MaryT

    I, too, am a long time user of Ancestry and DO NOT LIKE the new format. It is slow, hard to use and I do not like the compiling of other users trees with mine. I try to verify all my findings and have come up with different conclusions than other users trees. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE…leave the ‘Classic View’ option! I will add…the new look and story telling feature is nice for showing my (less involved in genealogy) family members. The eye-candy and historic timeline holds their attention. Please rethink the ‘total switch’ to the new format I feel Ancestry will lose more than they will gain with the switch.

  114. Laurie Morales

    I didn’t see anything in the new privacy statement other than standard business. It didn’t actually address the research fields mentioned, and how/what is shared and with whom. For instance, does Ancestry own a health corporations of some sort, or share with a third-party health corporation? And is sharing for purposes other than advertising and promotion? The privacy policy is vague, unless there is a separate policy for DNA users.

  115. mary

    Having read all the negative comments about this new format of Ancestry I will not even deign to look at it far less explore it. I have been using Ancestry for many many years, and have always been happy with the improvements that have made searching so much easier. I have to agree with those who have written about the frustrations of seeing wrong information posted on public trees – most commonly because no research has been done – merely a click of the mouse to copy info,- simply because a name is the same. I have seen children with birthdates before their parents, daughters married to fathers and even an 17th century male with a WW1 pensions Record! By the very meaning of the word, a researcher should not be making these fundamental errors – usually by plundering others’ time consuming efforts, but should be painstakingly building their own tree, branch by branch. If someone is not prepared to do this, then Genealogy is not the pastime for them.

  116. The NEW ancestry profile is HORRIBLE I cannot use it I have tried so my 6,000 + people will remain that. I can no longer use my family tree. I know someone must have found this new program but it is not user friendly at all and takes to long to update pictures etc.
    At this point I may not renew my subscription and stop all my years of research because through the new system it is not possible!!! Thank you for your old website that worked!
    My only hope is that you will retain the Classic View option so some of us may continue.

  117. Sarah Elliott

    I agree with several of the others. The NEW Ancestry is TERRIBLE. How do I revert to the old Ancestry? It is horrible. If this is to continue, I will research ways to cancel current membership.

  118. Robert L. Gadbois

    I have been with Ancestry from the time of their previous program. I have found the changes to the program thru the years has always made the program less workable and less valuable to me as a research program. I have, in the past, canceled the program twice over the limitations added the program. I will have to make another determination on the benefit of your new program to me and act accordingly. At the least, i thank you for the early very informative years of your programs content and benefits.

  119. Nancy R

    I totally agree with those criticizing the “NEW” format. I am finding it hard to work with, edit and access sources I’ve added and want to recheck. If there is someway to reject the “NEW” format and get back the “OLD” format, let me know.

  120. susanews

    My tree was public until I got a message from someone who found her birth and married name in my tree. I had the name checked as “living” yet she was able to find it. It turned out to be my mistake – I’d attached a marriage record that belonged to her, not my relative. She had found her own full name in a Google search, and the names of the relatives I had attached as parents. I apologized for violating her privacy, and reported the breach to Ancestry. I will no longer risk a public tree.

  121. Looks like I am in the majority…. I hate the new format … It has been so slow and so hard to move around on the site. Even the search engine does not give you accurate info…. I too will have to decide if I want to pay this high price for such poor quality service.

  122. T_Watson23

    I find your new ancestry very cumbersome to navigate – some areas there is no way a comment /correction can be made. The one in particular is Recent Collaboration – how does one get into that site to read the current news? I personally do not like the new Ancestry and have been willing to give it a try – but no dice. Somebody must have been in the upper atmosphere to put such a piece of garbage into place. The computer/tech industry seems to feel that we must change things just “because” – what kind of logic is that? If the program works well for most people, leave the program alone. New/change is often just an employment exercise. I have found many errors in info put into Ancestry – here again, members are on the lookout for accuracy of data – not how much gets put into the system. Question for Ancestry – WHY DID YOU CHANGE THE SYSTEM???? I THOUGHT THE OLD SYSTEM WAS WORKING PERFECTLY FINE. POOR JUDGMENT

  123. G Habitz

    I’m still using the old format and sometimes its so slow I have to reboot and start over. For the most part, it works, and sometimes its better not to try to fix something that isn’t broken. I started my maternal and paternal trees 56 years ago and have always worked on my own. I can’t afford a subscription on a social security income. I wondered, many times, if I should make my tree public; but for one thing, I don’t have professional help and I can’t guarantee that all my facts are accurate, and I don’t want others using bad information. I have seen how some of my relatives have posted wrong information, especially about my own parents and I don’t appreciate that. I do this for my own satisfaction, so I’m prone to staying private. On the other hand, I am always glad to help anyone who asks, but I don’t want to leave my work unprotected and have it misstated by someone else. Ancestry has become a big industry and its aggravating to find that they have bought up every viable source of research all over the world. You can’t look anywhere and not be referred back to Ancestry, for which you are charged an arm and a leg. I have always had to go it on my own. Ancestry seems to be sabotaging everything—they don’t make researching easier by owning everything world wide just so they can charge big money for themselves. They have never been very helpful; they’ve never answered any of my messages so I get the impression they are only renting out their space to get money. On the other hand, I am grateful that they provide the online space to build a tree. There are other programs besides Ancestry, but I didn’t know about them until long after I had posted over 4500 names…..and I’m stuck.

  124. Gail G

    Re: PRIVACY. I have minor issues with selling my customer information in today’s world. Ancestry vows to share only aggregate data in research, but I would not like that to include DNA/health data which the insurance industry will snap up. Another separate issue is violation of PRIVACY of Trees by members. I wish all names/dates could be public for searching, while restricting copying of trees, photos, documents to by permission only of the original owner. I keep my tree private and share it often. When others copy and post my information, including errors, to a public site the privacy is erased, without my knowledge or permission. Ancestry has been a fabulous online research tool for me and that is what I pay for.

  125. Rae

    STOP PUBLISHING *LIVE* PERSON DATA !!! You do that and it will go a long way to restoring my trust in you.

  126. Kristie

    If I am to understand these statements correctly, you plan to sell our information to the highest bidder, unless we make our trees private (or delete them). So, marginally additional profits are more important than people discovering cousins, DNA matching, and sharing precious old photos and experiences? Wow. Everyone who uses the internet has information shared – this is not new – but health and genetic information is. This updated policy, plus the dysfunctional ‘new’ ancestry excuse for a research website are two great reasons for every member to question their subscription at renewal.
    I also have specific issues with the ‘new’ site, but have already addressed them here: https://blogs.ancestry.com/ancestry/2015/06/05/new-ancestry-feature-update/#comment-284438

  127. Barbara Barooshian

    I do not like the new Ancestry with stories. I found that the stories are not correct, mixed up, and just a summary. It is totally confusing to me. I liked the old way: click on family or click on pedigree. I can’t seem to add facts “in order of when they happened.”

  128. smithcc

    My privacy question is this: In the past ancestry provided dna results to the FBI without warrant or even specific suspicion. Will ancestry now require a warrant?

  129. Where is the button to switch back. I miss friendly printer! I miss the family group as the introduction to the “life story”. When I print the new version it is not professional looking. The history photos you inserted usually are split on two pages, leaving some sheets half blank. I use too much ink and paper printing with your new version. Go Back.

  130. Barbara McKay

    I DO NOT like NEW *** Ancestry. Cumbersome. Went back to the old site….much better. You have a long way to go to get this right…

  131. Marion

    I have been a prof. genealogist for over 30 years. Used Ancestry since the PC age. I say ” if it’s not broken, don’t fix it”. The old Ancestry wasn’t perfect, but this new one is far from perfect, and needs to consider the old format. I have had my pictures, and info also ‘stolen’, Please limit the info time line, and try to use more of the ‘old’ Ancestry, otherwise I too will have leave the site.

  132. martin Goodson

    I have read through a lot of the comments about privacy, I have a 3 public trees on ancestry, but I don’t put anything on them that isn’t already out there in Cyber land. At the end of the day what info Ancestry has is a drop in the ocean compared with what’s already online, Ancestry allows you to put it in one place. Like every other hobby there are fanatics out there that just collect names, and copy, That’s OK if the info they copy is correct, but if it isn’t, it means they just have a list of names, that mean nothing at all . basically if you don’t want personal information copied don’t put it on.

  133. Anita

    As a disabled person unable to travel to do much searching, I have found Ancestry to be a great tool for my research. Is everything correct in all the trees I view? No of course not. But it is a starting point and can be helpful to eliminate the wrong branch. So I will continue to use it for help. I am also not happy with the new look, I like to print our copies of family group sheets to use when doing more research and can’t do that with this new look. I can’t even print a page from my web browser anymore because the site is so large it will only print the left side of the screen. Am hoping that these issues will be resolved before this change becomes permanent. Also don’t understand why people want to use Ancestry and have a tree and then make it private. Why bother. Seems very selfish to not want to help others researchers. This is the way you find new cousins and make new friends

  134. William Jackson

    I would love to have the option of sticking with the old version of ancestry for myself–while at the same time giving my “invitees” the option to choose either old or new versions.

  135. George Brown

    Gentlemen,we know your company is going through these “privacy statements” and “terms and conditions” reiterations so that the company can be sold. Having been a member on and off for a decade, I would like to say that I do not like the direction Ancestry.com is heading. Also I do not like the current layout and forced introductions of snippets of historical reference plugged into all of my ancestors’ timelines.

  136. LostQuays

    Sometimes I wonder if the Ancestry search engines were designed to just slow us all down… I’ve said this dozens of times on surveys that I constantly fill out. Just for once.. hire the right people to index the names. The name transcriptions are horrific.

  137. Alfred O Smith

    I have kept my tree private because I have used it as a working document and I know that it contains some undocumented material. I see where too many people have linked totally erroneous information to their public trees – cut and paste genealogy for pretty pictures.

  138. WendyGuske

    really not happy with the new ancestry format it is not user friendly to make corrections etc….have used ancestry for years but am very disjointed with the new one

  139. JL Wasson

    “New” ancestry is not user friendly–as were all the “new” changes in the past few months. Way to take a VERY usable website and make it horrible. One has to acknowledge the wonderful records available, but why make it so damn hard to search and link. The new “story timeline” is ridiculous–whose idea was that.I’m with all the others that want the option of “old ancestry”

  140. Noble

    So much harder to read grey font on white. Web designers being artistic. Go back to Black please.

  141. Brenda75773

    I had my tree public and discovered photos I had worked 5 years to find being added to other trees as their photo, besides destroying the integrity of the photo it is theft. I don’t like anything about the new Ancestry. At all.

  142. Beth

    From someone that keeps their tree private. I am somewhat new to doing this type of research, I don’t want to share my mistakes with anyone before I feel sure all I have researched is solid. I ran into an issue with another tree that had my grandmother’s father as the wrong person…and it was my own cousin that had published the information. When I asked her why she had shared her trees that had easily confirmable information that wasn’t checked her reply was “oh, that must have been the first tree I learned on”
    I wish people would keep their trees private unless they feel very confident, and have done their research as I have spent hours re-confirming information that was not necessary. In short, I keep my tree private so I don’t pass on bad information. Simply writing to ask me to share will get you my tree but with the added warning that there are probably mistakes at this early date.

  143. Louise

    Please go back to the old format. I doubt that I will renew if extensive improvements are not made. The system is so slow! My data bill is sure to increase!

  144. Beth

    On another note… please be aware that anything posted on the net for public consumption is out there forever. If you don’t want to share pictures or something like that, then best not to offer them up.
    Please do consider that someone like myself is overjoyed to find a picture of our shared ancestor, but if you don’t want me to save it and you consider it theft…don’t share as I have no way of knowing you don’t want me to use our shared relatives picture in my tree also. I don’t consider myself a thief, and sorry that some people feel that “sharing” is the same as “taking”

  145. Louise

    I have enjoyed working on my family tree for several years. The new Ancestry format is not enjoyable and it is very unattractive. I will not spend my time being frustrated with my favored hobby. If we no longer have access to the old version, I will need to find a website that I enjoy using. Familysearch.org is looking better everyday.

  146. Joyce

    The NEW and “improved” version is HORRIBLE–harder to navigate, harder to edit printing options reduced OR when available are NOT the view you are looking at–TOTAL waste of $ spent on NEW site. I will stay with Classic thank you–MUCH easier to negotiate—I don’t want FLUFF–I want better searching capabilities and better transcriptions–You folks cannot even transcribe a PRINTED directory correctly–work on your services and not all these PRETTY things that are only going to attract more fly by night folks who do nothing but mess up the database. You made a HUGE mistake spending $ on this nonsense. YOu cannot even print a “facts” page—Keep offering the Classic or you WILL lose a lot of seasoned researchers…

  147. Marsha Schaefer

    I feel betrayed by this privacy change and the recent “new and improved” site that is too hard to use.

    I have been a member for 7 years but I will have to consider other options when it comes time to renew.

  148. Phyllis

    Once again I wish it were possible to block people taking my information who have listed their trees as private. I respect their right for privacy; but why are they allowed to “take” from us who are willing to share.

  149. julie

    The whole reason i will not get a DNA test is because I know that you share it with Huntsman. His cancer institute may be wonderful, but i have HIPPA agreements with all my doctors already, not his.

  150. James K

    So: 90+% of the comments are telling you that the New Ancestry is terrible. What might you be doing to fix it? Please let us know…it’s your duty to respond! Without happy customers, your future will not be so bright!

  151. Daphne

    The NEW Ancestry is slow, time consuming and still lacking the ability to return to the profile page without going back, back, back, back, back, back. Also when adding a marriage unless the spouse is already in the tree the info is not added when the new person is connected. Too many errors when changing the system. Make a good program and stick to it, stop messing around with it and correct the errors that have been sent to you, especially the ones that have numerous transcription problems as is the London, UK Electoral rolls. My Private tree is just because one person copied my tree into another site and listed all living people causing trouble with my living relatives. I try to remember to thank the person from whom I have copied their story, photo, etc. but unfortunately I do sometimes forget. Thank you everyone for helping me with my tree if I have forgotten to write to you.

  152. TLiving245

    I’ve been an Ancestry.com member for several years and I love the new improvements! I would say it is “different” but not difficult to navigate. I think younger people will think the website is neat. For those who are not a Generation Yer, they may find that it is not user-friendly.

  153. Tom

    I have taken my tree private. The new format, which places the birth of children in the mother’s timeline, shows glaringly when a child was born before or shortly after the date of the parents’ marriage. I feel that is hurtful for some families.

  154. SarahMae

    I like the “New” Ancestry in general, but the only thing that really bothers me is the inability to quick edit any longer. It was a much simpler and quicker way of entering data directly to the tree.

  155. Ann Crosnoe

    WOW….I sent to your website for the Privacy Statement and Blog Post as you directed and there were a lot of unhappy customers and guess what….I am also very unhappy with the changes you have made. It isn’t that change is hard for me but the changes you have made are horrible and you need to go back to what you had before. It’s horrible to go backwards but after all my phone calls to you and then to see that I am not the only one who really is unhappy with what you have done to ruin what we had for several years is ridiculous. Whoever you paid to change this should now have to reinstate what was working and fine before. Can’t believe that you are one of those companies who fixes things that were not broken and now you can see the sadness of the regular users. I HATE THE NEW WEBSITE FOR WORKING ON RESEARCH AND MY FAMILY TREE> It sucks! Sorry but this is the truth and I’m glad many of your current customers have figured this out and as soon as the rest of them attempt to go back online, they too will see that what you have is horrible to use. Thanks, Ann Crosnoe

  156. Calvin7000

    I too have problems with the new Ancestry and have reverted back to the prior ancestry. I am concerned who is monitoring and how well they are monitoring the privacy of people living. Obscuring information does not work because much of it can be figured out. I also find resistance to my family because they do not want any of their information put online due to lack of privacy. I do keep my tree private. I also have found even with the current Ancestry system, there is often no documentation, only a library card directing me to the information. Hey, many of us live out of state and cannot run down to the SLC FHC library to get this. Other sites out of state have to order the information in and then, it may not be there as has been my recent experience. I hope you can fix these issues. Please don’t show pre-made descriptions of someone’s life. I have the documentation to show that. What about those that are not genealogists and just want to have fun? Do they really make correct connections and do you have the documentation available so we can make a new connection if appears to be more accurate? I also keep receiving inaccurate hints i.e. a bc for some born in 1921 shows up for someone I am looking for that was born in 1775. It has happened several times. Thank you.

  157. Becky Newman

    I have to agree that the NEW Ancestry has problems. I can’t get it to connect with Family Search to exchange information to my ancestors. I love Ancestry because of the ability to document my sources and all the hints it gives, but I can’t add them otherwise in the new format. I personally don’t see the point of improving a really good source file that we have already. The only good thing of the new format is that the stories seem to come alive with facts of the time our ancestors lived, but it takes so long to load and not personal enough to want to wait around to read or possible publish it. And then again how could I publish it? You should store a section of photos and captions of different years and eras so that we could modify our information for private publications. Now that would be worth purchasing, otherwise the New Ancestry isn’t worth much.

  158. Diana Devine

    I have to agree with most of the comments. The new Ancestry is much harder to work. What happened to our “Leafs”. Everything is more cumberson. It might be good if I was a programer but they don’t live in the real world. Ancestry is used by a bunch of old people who do not like change. Scrap it and go back to the old way.

  159. Penni Luntsford

    I love the documents available on Ancestry and have been a member since the beginning. Unfortunately, I do not care for the new tree format at all. I find it frustrating and taking more effort.

  160. I can see using anonymous info for research but I don’t want my info used for profit, no selling of my info or research. And I do not like the new format, will cancel subscription if this is all there is.

  161. Lynda

    All I want to be able to do is print all of the information for each person, siblings, children, parents, whatever I see on the page I want to be able to print.

  162. Claudia Hansen

    Oh, no! If the Classic version of ancestry.com is denied U.S., I will cancel membership. Have loved the easy to use old version for 8 years. New version doesn’t have anything I need, and it is so cumbersome to do the basic tasks. Not user friendly. Old version is the most genius piece of software I have ever enjoyed. Today I synced my ancestry tree down to FTM to protect it in case I have to cancel my world membership. Please listen to your customer base! We loved what you created, don’t ruin such a great site!!!

  163. derlcannon

    I agree with Joyce and a lot others “The NEW and “improved” version is HORRIBLE–harder to navigate, harder to edit printing options reduced OR when available are NOT the view you are looking at–TOTAL waste of $ spent on NEW site.”

  164. Darrell Brown

    It would be helpful if Ancestry.com provided a brief description of “What Has Changed” in its privacy policy.

  165. Mark Stickle

    You folks had an incredible opportunity to build an amazing business. But you seem determined to blow it.

  166. jane

    Privacy Notice Changes – something new called the Ancestry Academy which I take to means learning programs under one name.
    I used a program from IDM called UltraCompare to see the changes. http://www.ultraedit.com/ – they have a free trial version that works well. It did a line by line comparison and there is a lot grammar and pronoun changes. The one thing I did notice that I had not noticed before in the 2014 version is that the privacy of your information can change based on the country viewing the information. I’m contacting my US senator about that because it always used to be based on the owner’s country, which to me is the person who builds the tree. Also, what you opt out of can change when you change browser or device. I don’t know ‘Ultra Compare’ well so I will continue to read it for areas that weren’t compared for some reason. If they had a “What has changed” document, it would be a lot easier….listening ancestry ???

  167. Sharon

    The new format is terrible. The ability to print the profile page is completely gone and is one of the most important features I used. Please revert to the old format asap. I am considering not renewing and I have loved researching on Ancestry for many years.

  168. susan

    The new format is HORRIBLE. Been a member for 5 years, worked so diligently – for WHAT??? To witness my years of detail-oriented effort completely undone. Terribly, terribly disappointing. Due for renewal in September, but ready to walk away. Dreadful design, why would you IMPOSE it?? At least give us the OPTION to continue with the old. This is not a matter of wanting to stay with what is known and comfortable – design improvements are welcome. This new design is a travesty. For years I have been sending requests for modifications / enhancements. Not a ONE of those represented in this new mess. What the heck are you thinking??????

  169. Martin

    Why do so many websites have to keep making ‘improvements’ that actually make the site much worse? The fashion at the moment is to change them for people using mobile phones even though makes terrible for anyone doing serious work using a proper computer.

    FMP trashed their site so many people left. BBC trashed their news website and main sites. I used ARCHIVE.ORG recently and they have gone the same way.

    Reading through the privacy statement it does sound very much like defining legally what already happens. In the EU it is of course illegal to pass on personal data to other companies unless specific permission has been given – a vague ‘share with other companies’ is not sufficient.

  170. carolyn

    I do not like your new ancestry format very much. I use to enjoyed looking at the pictures that were submitted, which its hard to excess now. Also I liked the old family group sheets,

  171. Luanne101

    I switched my tree to private settings when nothing could be done about a few people downloading my photos and then uploading the photos to their trees taking ownership. In one case the woman had 13 trees with the same info and photos! I really get upset when my photo comes in as a hint and I have to ignore my own photos. All the original info that I put with the photo is gone and ‘comments’ cannot be followed when there is so much ‘recopying’ going on. I know now that I can block these people but the damage is already done. When I first started ancestry I was so excited to share my history and family photos including some letters and documents. I connected with family that I never knew was out there. It may only be a few people that do this but you know the saying ‘one bad apple’. And, I too, do NOT like the NEW Ancestry!

  172. margaret k

    I find that in the new ancestry it very hard to correct any mistakes that I have legal documents to warrant changing. I will also go back to the old form,

  173. Dreading looking on my trees after all these comments. I don’t like too much change especially if detrimental. Haven’t looked for a while and have just upgraded to worldwide membership!!

  174. Diane Haner

    Both old & new have good & bad points, but do not be in a hurry to get rid of the old version until every one has time to work with it. At least 6 months to 12 months. I would like to print my trees(4) in the old version and I could use some help on how print all the branches.

  175. Edith Grubaugah

    I do have some problems with some of the family trees on the family tree maker on my computer.

  176. Mary

    I have opted to leave my tree public and enjoy the benefits of collaborating and sharing. I understand some may prefer to keep their Tree private however I have an issue with having my information shared to someone else’s Private tree. I do follow-up on information saved from my tree, both in the interest of collaboration and accuracy. Unfortunately ‘contact’ messages to members with private trees saving information from my tree go unanswered more often than not. There should be a functionality in Ancestry that enables the person whose information was saved to check the tree, or at least the portion of the tree that it was saved to.

  177. Jennie

    I also think the new format is complicated, confusing, and difficult to make corrections, additions and deletions of obviously wrong information.I have seen too many trees with very obviously incorrect,and impossible information because people don’t “stop and think”. I have seen children listed as born after the supposed parent or parents were dead or before they were even born! I have also seen many repetitions of the same person only because of a difference in spelling or arrangement of name, women listed as men because of a non-gender specific name. Census and other so-called reputable sources being used to “verify” what is obviously incorrect information if the person would just stop, “look” and THINK! A lot of these “mistakes” are from trees of people who are supposedly related to me, yet they don’t seem to “know” anything and don’t check out and verify correctness and sources. People seem to forget that census takers “back then” weren’t always very educated, were low-paid or volunteers, many people were immigrants with hard to understand speech; and census workers often wrote names “how they sounded” or made errors in spelling. I have found this true in a lot of my 40 years research. Example: One relative’s name was Richard T. but was listed on census records as “Artie.”There have also been numerous “spellings” of last names, spouse’s names listed wrongly, and similar names of unrelated people listed although they weren’t in an area inhabited by known family members of that time period. It has been difficult to make corrections on my trees with this “new” format. I ask everyone to be more careful about information you accept and upload. THINK! Are the dates possible? Does the information and name “fit”. Consider the “source”. ASK questions!

  178. Paul

    Have already cancelled my renewal 75% for no new information/bad information and 25% for the new Ancestry format. I also hate that I would have to pay even more for world record access, when I can get a lot of that from FamilySearch.org for free. This needs to be a unified world access Ancestry with a price for full access that is about half of what one country access costs now. Use the money to get us data, not pretty formats, historical insights or story telling algorithms. When I get hints before 1700, I almost always click “ignore” as the hints don’t even agree with themselves. Hate that FindaGrave results are presented with the same weight as primary data sources – FindaGrave entries are created by the same people posting data here – and can be wonderful or full of tripe. Data collections found in search results should be weighted by reliability (which we as members could vote on) and primary/secondary sources should be clearly labelled to help us decide what might be useful or not. If the new Ancestry is to come whether we want it or not, give us a global setting to turn off the most idiotic of the new stuff – especially historical insights and story-telling. I know some like story-telling, but this is all algorithm based tripe that does nothing to reflect the personality and true nature of the ancestor. If someone wants the historical insights, use Google to search for historical events – we don’t need no stinkin’ tripe added to our trees. Speaking of our trees, I don’t want people commenting on my tree and my sources. They can message me and if I don’t like what I hear, I can ignore them or block them. As far as the privacy of data. Stop collecting data on me and my living relatives!!!! I was thinking about trying the Ancestry DNA product, but if you are selling my personal data (aggregated, identifiable or not) then I will refrain from participating. Sounds to me like your proposed changes are angering your customer base and they do not sound all that loyal anymore. THINK and reconsider before it is too late!!!
    When GENI decided to have moderators change things I placed into their “world tree” I destroyed all links to that world tree and have not been back. We don’t want a world tree on Ancestry, we want to have a place to put our personal work to preserve it, and if we want, share some of our original work with others. Originally I was guilty of just copying links from anyone and destroyed most of that tree when it was obvious that it was mostly fiction (I have also put that tree private so that no one will be misled by my stupid decisions. My main tree is public, as I have done some original research and wanted to share – but due to Ancestry wanting to share info (aggregated, anonymous or not) I may have to start deleting all living people from my tree. Respect our opinions and respect our privacy or Ancestry will be the place I used to keep and share my research. Finally, this is not Twitter and not Facebook, and I hate the comments sections of my difficult to find sources being turned into conversations. All of the “cousins” saying “hi” to each other in a thread attached to my source is a ridiculous waste of bandwidth and my time.

  179. Rebecca Knott

    I am horrified and have changed noth of my trees to private. My major concern is how many keystrokes, ie: the complexity and level of difficulty I found to find my privacy settings. This is my number one concern, you have hidden the settings behind layers and layers. It should be far easier to find. You should all be ashamed of yourself.

  180. Thelma

    New format is even worse then the old format. Do not see a way to delete duplicates and triplicates of the same people that appear for unknown reasons. It is difficult to find the information I need sometimes from the long lists. May have to seek elsewhere.

  181. Doug Sinrud

    I agree with all of the comments about the horrible “New Ancestry” it looks to me as if you sold out to Hollywood and “who do you think you are” I could cars less about the so call stars of Hollywood. I just wand pure genealogy with facts.

  182. ctbena

    I wasted hundreds of hours creating my family tree on your Ancestry web site as I will not use the new extremely slow format. I will wait 5 days to see if you go back to the old format and if not please reimburse my payment of (1 month $38.00 ) for the overpriced search engine privilege I paid.

  183. Bev

    Today I am making my direct ancestor only trees that I use for DNA matching purposes PRIVATE. My other expanded but more speculative trees are already Private. I don’t have the time to proofread and edit out all the errors that have been inserted by New Ancestry into my trees, nor do I have the time or patience to do all the endless scrolling and clicking. New Ancestry was definitely not designed for genealogists.

  184. The changes are terrible, looks just like familysearch which is terrible too! I started there and only added a few people, then I went to ancestry.For all the people that say they will use familysearch, think again. I just visited there after a long time. YIKES. Any joe blow can change anything they want. They changed the spelling of my Grandmother’s name. I know 8 generations of my family because I have a family bible from 1800 listing all family members, birthdates and death dates. I have her birth certificate. So SOMEONE decides to change the spelling of her name and other people. I am so angry with them and ancestry. What is the point. I have been researching 20 years. Either site is NOT for true genealogists. Now I know why I have a PRIVATE TREE! After all it is MY FAMILY.

  185. Mary Carroll

    I do not like the New Ancestry at all. I used to enjoy working on my tree with Ancestry – not anymore. Are there any plans to go back the way it was? I will not renew until you do.

  186. Paul

    You have so many unfixed issues that need attention, why would your management even think about adding the tripe in the new format? Change for the sake of change? I have been waiting for years to have the recent hints on the front page work properly with all Macintosh browsers. There are dozens of dead/broken hints in my trees that cannot be accessed anymore. Ancestry customer support says they know about both issues and cannot do anything about them. That is where your R&D $ should be going. Fix what you know is broken and concentrate on real genealogy research tools and leave the stupid storytelling to attached stories from people who did real research or actually knew the subject. Like others, have just put my trees private to protect my living family and have suspended all thoughts of trying the DNA product. Why give up that much privacy willingly? Get back to your roots Ancestry, or you will no longer be the number one genealogy site.

  187. JT

    While I’d prefer that my tree be Public (in hopes of helping otheres in their research), it is currently Private, as I’m not completely confident in its accuracy. However, once I’ve reached that level of confidence, I will make it Public. Unlike that of many longterm subscribers, my searching is rather recent – hence, the greater potential for incompleteness and incorrect entries. I am so very appreciative of others’ info which has helped greatly with my research, but, like others, there is quite a bit of info out there that is obviously wrong and other info that has led me on a wild goose chase. I try to take it in stride, thinking that some folks’ work is like mine, a work in progress. My feeling is that until I have reasonable documentation, it’s still just a hunch. I don’t want to lead others astray, so my tree will be Private until it’s better documented.

  188. Allen

    I do not enjoy using this NEW Ancestry. When I can’t fix something in the NEW I exit and repair it with the OLD. I am thinking the only way we can express ourselves to Ancestry is to cancel our memberships! Make sure you make all your trees private. Ancestry has not fixed or changed anything I have called about in many years. I am certain they do not read all of our comments here. But you folks do. Cancel Memberships!

  189. Johanna

    I agree with the dislikes for the New Ancestry and for all the same reasons. It’s user vicious in many ways. Two simple examples: Ancestry’s insertions in the story line are sometimes laughably incorrect and historically impossible but cannot be corrected or removed from the timeline. Secondly, my tree has been public for many years, I have added some information and photos from impeccable family sources, and I have enjoyed sharing with other users. If someone copies something to a private tree now, however, the link will not show WHAT they have copied, which is information I feel entitled to have. (Sorry, Ancestry, but “5 photos” is not a sufficient identifier.) I have reluctantly made my tree private. The ability to share correct information was one of Ancestry’s greatest attractions, and I am sorry it has been truncated. Frankly, only Martians would not jump to the conclusion that all our data is not being sold to anyone who will pay for it. I’ll continue as a member for a few months, but if things don’t improve, I too will be a former member. I now regret giving Ancestry my DNA, but I’m glad I have Family Tree Maker.

  190. Maralee

    The “new system” is so horribly wrong in SO MANY
    ways – but the thing that is most personally insulting is
    your precious “circle” picture on profile pages. You
    have managed to cut faces of some of my ancestors
    IN HALF!!!!! These are very OLD treasured pictures
    and it breaks my heart to see only the mouth & nose-
    tip instead of a full face on some of my profile pages.
    And I prefer writing my own stories based on personal
    knowledge & facts passed down thru generations as
    opposed to superficial facts supplied by ancestry. I
    I fervently hope you DO NOT attempt to force this on
    everyone. If you do, your number of members will
    drop dramatically.

  191. Martin

    I have made all my trees private but still not certain whether Ancestry will do anything with the information in the trees.

  192. Kathy

    My Grandmother always stated that “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix or change it.”.I was quite surprised to learn that instead of fixing “old” issues, that Ancestry’s look changed entirely. Visual format and organization are difficult to follow.
    I have always enjoyed researching on Ancestry since 2001. I have met family I have not seen in years and made new friends via Ancestry. Thank you for putting me in contact with those individuals via DNA and trees.
    However I prefer the older format for it was far easier to use..

  193. Jerri

    As with many others….I don’t like the new ancestry at all. I like many others may be looking for a new place to call home for my family research if we are forced to use it.

  194. Paul

    Since Ancestry only pretends to listen to our concerns, then I like the call to action. Put your trees private and drop memberships until they change!

  195. Jean Bolte

    The new tree may have some good points, but please, please don’t force it on us. I’ve spent so much time and money on my tree, which is a never ending project, but I find the new one so confusing and time consuming that it’s taken all the fun out of researching

  196. Eleanor

    Hi I have two private trees, the reason being they contain a lot of living individuals, photographs etc I also run several public trees, if I receive messages re my private trees, I put the information on the public trees so I can share, I totally agree that we should share information but also protect information on living relatives, I have issue with people who do not share any information, I am suspicious of their motives, there are a lot more members who are not adding any ancestors or information in any form. Thank you to all the members who have helped me over the years

  197. Claudia

    I really don’t care for the new ancestry. I wish it was the way it used to be when I first started. I am considering cancelling my membership.

  198. Ann

    The new Ancestry is hard to use and is not as easy to use as the old version. Do we have an option to use older version?….

  199. ARYE1

    The new Ancestry is hard to use and is not as easy to use as the old version. Do we have an option to use older version?….
    I am also having a hard time posting this comment……

  200. ARYE

    The new Ancestry is hard to use and is not as easy to use as the old version. Do we have an option to use older version?….
    I am also having a hard time posting this comment……And No this is the first time I am commenting on this new version!!!!!!!!

  201. ARYE

    I find it strange that I am having so much trouble posting this comment…….I DO NOT LIKE THE NEW VERSION…..The new Ancestry is hard to use and is not as easy to use all the features as the old version. When zeroxing a tree page only parts will copy…..What’s up with that?…….

  202. BEE

    Since so many others have gone “off subject” here, I guess I’ll add what I posted on a couple of other blogs: Why in the world do I have to practically stand on my head to add a spouse, error messages, “phantom hints” for years! PLEASE stop this nonsense and pay attention to the “classic” site and get it working properly instead of all this “fancy-dancy” stuff!
    I hate to tell you how many “trees” I find with 2, 4, 6 names entered “over a year” from people with ethnic names, probably thinking they could type in Grandma and Grampa’s name and find documents. Unfortunately, those ethnic names were badly spelled from the minute they boarded that boat, until their dying day, and the transcribing of those names made it even worse.
    Some census records had surnames written that bore no resemblance to the actual name, so it is next to impossible to find, unless you are a persistent person and know a few “tricks”. FORGET those stupid sliders. I’ve hated them since the last “improvement”. I refuse to look at the “new and improved” site, and I dread the day I have to use it. I don’t need “STORIES” – I need documents! STOP THIS MADNESS!

  203. I am leery of any new Ancestry.com family tree improvements. I have been a loyal subscriber since 2000. I guess it is time to look for another tree format. Any suggestions? I haven’t converted to the new A.com format but did download current gedcom to my computer. Like others, I don’t need want stories, I can write those myself. It seems like we are just contributing to A.com database without any compensation…..hmmmmm.

  204. Monika

    I WISH SOMEBODY WOULD CREATE A COMPETING “ANCESTRY” SITE. MAYBE THEN ANCESTRY.COM WOULD SHAPE UP AND START LISTENING TO ITS CUSTOMERS!

  205. Anne Chevis

    The New? Ancestry Tree is horrible. The gray background is horrible. I don’t like the smug answers from ancestry.com service people” well, this is the future of Ancestry.com, we’re just working out a few? bugs in the system” I have been a loyal ancestry.com member for years. I could just cry… I have spent thousands of hours working on my lines. I may have to leave….if no choice is offered because it’s so unusable.

  206. Paul

    Today Ancestry kept popping me over to the new format over and over like it had a mind of its own. Hate it! Hate it! Hate it! Keep changing back to the current format and hope it stays that way. To recap: Call to action! Ancestry keeps shoving things we don’t want down our throats, do not renew, put your trees private, and give them the message where it hurts – when their revenue drops and new customers cannot copy things out our our trees, and drop their memberships for lack of good info – maybe then they will listen to their customer base.

  207. Thomas

    I am aggravated about the manner in which Ancestry has managed their announcement to their members about the use of DNA and family tree information. I have made appropriate changes to my account and have privatized the tree. Ancestry.com should have sent an email notification directly to the inboxes of the members and, in very clear words described the work in detail. The then should have offered an opt out and a deadline to do so. I spent 30 years collecting this information which Ancestry can now monitize and sell? Ridiculous. Contacting the FTC and the HHS / HIPPA Office to file a complaint and seek legal action.

  208. Robin Hanna

    Who owns our trees? Do we? Does ancestry? How does ancestry have the right to post information to MY tree? I don’t need or want a poster of Rosie the Riveter on the timeline for every one of my ancestors who were alive during 1945. I consider that a privacy issue. My tree infomation should only be what I put on it. I did not give permission to ancestry to make ANY ENTRIES whatsoever on my tree. It is presumptious of ancestry to think it knows what historical events were important to my family. I think that’s a serious problem.

Comments are closed.