The updated link for the RM9 Wiki can be found here: RM9 Ancestry Treeshare
1 Like
Sounds like you have done a lot of work on this. Do you mind revealing the identity of the other program you have not eliminated? Asking for a friend. 
2 Likes
I always go back to FTM. They are not without their problems, trust me. The engineers also seem to not care about many things, and some of their suggestions are ādo this and TRY againā That, to me is not the solution to any problem. I settled on that one because if I make a manual entry it is considered valid. If I make a change on ancestry I have the option to let FTM override it automatically or make manual acceptance, in which case they show me the changes. That saves countless steps. If put information in the program that is an automatic approval. I will say that RM has a quicker connection to ancestry than FTM. I will always keep RM as a backup.
1 Like
as I previously mentioned, people often put information in their program that they do NOT want on Ancestry and as such there it should not be an automatic approval.
I am a regular high-volume user of treeshare, replicating information from Ancestry where I enter it to RootsMagic. I entirely agree with @Sami that I donāt need the treeshare process to force me to check everything I have entered, and I certainly find the amount of manual work it currently involves utterly unacceptable. However, I used to work in process automation and I know that what @rzamor1 writes is also true, and that automation done badly can result in screwing things up. It is often not possible to automate something 100%, especially when there are differences in database design between the two databases involved.
Thatās why I spent a long time thinking hard about what could be done, setting myself the target of eliminating at least 90% of the current keystrokes/mouse clicks, and working out how this target could be achieved without introducing a risk of corrupting either database and implemented in stages each of which would be relatively easy to code and test.
I posted it in a thread called Proposal for Treeshare improvement. Unfortunately, apart from the section about Treeshare corrupting your RM database if you import two children with the same name in a single operation (which still hasnāt been fixed), none of the other suggestions gained much traction here.
Even so, I remain convinced that an approach like this is the only way to make serious improvement and I recommend my suggestions again to the RM community and the development team.
Well said, Alan. Hope they take your suggestion. Simple fix to not wanting things out on ancestryā¦they can create a private lock.
There is no such thing as a private lock.
Maybe not in RM but FTM has the option to lock the note field. And no one has to make their tree public on ancestry.
It aināt just notes. RM has {} to wrap private notes in. Sure, people donāt have to make their tree public, but there are good reasons to do so and you canāt seriously expect everyone is going to make them private just so you donāt have to do a little work.
So harping on this will get you no where. You have two choices if you wish to use online interactions with Ancestry. Both have their way of doing things and I would say that you can bet your monthly food budget on the fact that neither of the two options is going to change any time in the future.
Wow really? This is not about harping. Itās about options.
No, you are not the only one that feels that way.
1 Like
But not making your Ancestry tree public does NOT stop Ancestry from accessing it, and loading your data into their search engines and AI to improve results they are showing other users. True, those users will never see your tree, but on the other hand you are paying Ancestry to use their service on top of giving them hours of free research and data entry time. And Iāll bet you didnāt even get a Christmas card from them. 
There are hundreds, if not thousands of people who have their trees private. Even if you search you canāt access records for those that are private. I may not have gotten a card from ancestry but I get one heck of a deal on membership every year and have countless records at my disposal that I couldnāt get anywhere else. Iāve met relatives I never knew I had. Thatās worth more than a crazy card. Speaking of christmas card, RM must have lost my address because I didnāt get one from them either.
ā¦and as dear old grandad said, if hundreds or even thousands of people jumped off a cliff, should you? Being the precocious lad that I was, I declined to jump.
However, private trees, cliff jumping and Christmas cards not withstanding, I keep information in my file. Such as a fact called Legal Issue and Social Security Number among other things that need the fine grained control. Those are facts that can inadvertently be upload. I suspect hundreds, or thousands of people have data record that should not be in the hands of Ancestry. To those hundreds or thousands control matters. You have an option to mass sync, and you have stated that did not go as wellā¦and now you demand RM do it? You really think it is going to turn out better.
I agree. As the recent data breach at 23 and Me points out: how much of your personal data that you uploaded to Ancestry would you be willing to let hackers have? Your SSN? Maiden names? Birthplace? Birthdate? Relativesā names and personal information?
First of all, I never used, nor did I see anyone, use the word ādemand.ā Thatās your word. What anyone puts into āanyā program is their choice, personal or otherwise. Anyone has a right to think, and make a suggestion for anything they think might be useful in any program. That, however, does NOT mean that any engineer associated with that program has to act on it.
All options are always helpful. Any option can lead to a new option, one that no one expected. There is everything right with suggestions.
Social Security system releases that information. Maybe that should be addressed.
What you are referring to as āmassā sync is beyond me. As with any program, RM, also, putting in small amounts for transmission is always best. So where the word āmassā came from is interesting.
As far as Rwcrooks comment about data breaches. There are data breaches across the web in any form of system you use. Banks, credit cards, emails. You name it they have been breached. Concern, absolutely. Can hackers be stopped? I seriously doubt it. As far as Rwcrooks asking how much information would I be willing to let hackers haveā¦the same goes for the information put into RM. If you think that hackers need ancestry, RM, FTM, 23 and me, or any sites to get your information that is not true. Hackers love to break into anything that says it canāt be broken. Itās their sole purpose.
My boss, who was IT manager of the company I worked for, also taught computer programming always said; If manās hands can make it, manās hands can break it.
This was purely conversation to talk about options.
Ancestry and TreeShare have options to not only keep the tree private but also to not be searched or appear in indexes.
Absolutely they do. People always have the choice as to what is put into their program. Just because the information is there doesnāt mean it has to be entered.
While they do have ways for your private tree to not be searched or appear in indexes-- most people who mark their trees as private do NOT know that this is a separate option that you have to tell Ancestry you donāt want doneā¦
Sorry but have to disagree-- a lot of the records on Ancestry are also on Family Search and Family Search has records that are NOT on Ancestry or Ancestry just gives you an Index of the info-- for example marriage of my g-grandparents from Ancestry
So in order to find out any other details, I would have to contact the county they were married inā¦
Went into Family Search and found the Church record for their marriage which NOT only gives you the witnesses BUT gave me the names of both of their parents-- I knew who her parents were BUT thought I would NEVER EVER know the names of his parents since they didnāt come to the US with himā¦
Same goes for records of my Ancestors from England-- Ancestry gave me the index info-- figured out it was from Find MY Past-- for a few dollars a month I was able to access the original records that gave me names of witnesses, names of their parents and whether or not they signed the document or made a mark-- found out that a lot of my female Ancestors were educated even as early as the 1750sā¦