MyHeritage -- Snaps Up Geni.com

Jaak Tulp - I know about marketing and business too. And I know that the company in question ought to have had in mind the lack of future cash flows from the lifetimers from the very beginning.
However this lack of management was not the lifetimers' fault ;-)
- But maybe the company did offer the lifetime subscription because of lack of cash flows at that time. And now feel that the warmth from their peeing in their pants has turned up to be a cold pleasure.
- I'm glad I'm only a pro-subscriber, who still loves the Geni system. And I do hope that the new year 2013 turns up to be a peaceful year in here.
Happy New Year to you all – also to the Geni Team who is just doing their job.

I hope this Geni company will be in business loooong time in the future. Because me too has written a lot of stuff in the big tree and am content of this genealogy program at internet.

HAPPY NEW YEAR to all geni users out there at internet and also the same to Geni owners and staff.

Ok, yes, sorry for being so rough. It just bothers me that people throw accusations not knowing the real problems behind the actions of Geni. I´m not gonna justify anything, but if nothing would have happened then the question is not just about lifetimers, but the whole future of Geni. Yes, of course, lifetime PRO subscribers are not fault of being so short-sighted believing that a company can keep it´s services active and unchanged for 10 or more years. Even 5 was more than enough as it came out now. They just took what has been offered.

Jaak Tulp As you tried to point out, and unfortunately most people do not realize, that the "lifetime" concept has a different connotation to the legal and business world than it has to the general population.

ie.

"Anytime you hear the term lifetime, it does not really mean lifetime. Lottery winners often learn that lifetime is defined as about 20 years. In our legal system “life in prison” does not always mean someone will be behind bars until they die."

"Smart companies often clearly define what “lifetime” means. There are occasions where some companies offer “lifetime” subscriptions without very much of a definition. Consumers run the risk of thinking they have a certain level of service without much of any recourse if the party selling a “lifetime” subscription decides to limit their level of service, walk away from the business, or simply coast along giving the subscriber less and less over time."

"An undefined lifetime subscription can cause mass confusion. Services may get added that suddenly are not included in the lifetime subscription. The consumer is left wondering exactly what they bought." ….
"The bottom line is that consumers need to be a bit cautious anytime they hear the term lifetime.  Before buying anything “lifetime” read the terms and understand them.  Lifetime typically does not mean until the day you die."

( http://siriusbuzz.com/what-happens-with-that-sirius-lifetime-subscr...)

Good points, Jaalp and Malka. I haven't wanted to comment because people need time to grieve over the changes. But, throughout this controversy three things go through my mind.

First, businesses almost always act rationally. It's very rare that a business wants to cheat its customers. If we don't understand the reasons for the changes, we can guess that there are things we don't know.

Second, new businesses -- particularly those with an untested business model -- are always going to need changes and adjustments as they go along. No one ever has the perfect model on Day 1. The changes are always going to be controversial for existing customers.

Third, businesses rarely make off the cuff decisions. We can guess that My Heritage and Geni had extensive internal discussions, that they almost certainly talked to their lawyers, and that they made what they think is the best decision possible for the company and its customers.

Personally, my main interest is preserving and improving my data. That matters more to me than the details of subscription plans.

And you know that, Jaak Tulp!! Quote: It just bothers me that people throw accusations not knowing the real problems behind the actions of Geni. Unquote.

Yes, i know that, Private User! And Private User, these three things are most correct. So anyone who feels they are cheated... please try to see through the eyes of your "opponent". I know, this is difficult, because Geni needs to keep at least some of its reasons sealed, but as Justin said as the first thing - businesses act almost always rationally. Why? Because they have to choose between welfare of themselves and welfare of the customer, but neither of them can exist without the other. The question is...would you do something differently under the same circumstances?

Oh my! The second person referred to should have been Justin Durand

The problem with the "ready set go...everyone merge" concept is that folks keep adding duplicate profiles then the merge fest begins. I'm wondering if there could be some early warning system to folks that they are adding a duplicate profile BEFORE they they complete the profile?

OK, Beth Marie Beeman, that sounds like a challenge to Geni/MH engineers. The idea isn´t bad, but there are following reasons that have to be considered:

1) some folks make intentionally duplicate profiles because they either have and upload a GEDCOM from an account that is a claimed historical profile and then close the account giving the management to their real account that they use.
2) some folks do duplicate profiles to avoid other managers from taking control over their profiles or want to separate themselves from some troublesome managers.
3) some managers make duplicate profiles especially because of the opposite...to gain control over profiles when merged.
4) what would the early warning system give to the manager - the possibility to merge the profile directly into the possibly matching profile? What if the merge would be wrong? Or should the manager cancel adding the profile and connect to the matching profile? Again...no quarantee of accuracy.

Jaak Tulp My goal would be to stop folks from adding duplicates. It's time consuming to do merge after merge after merge. Just today I have a notice of a duplicate profile on one that has been here for eons, with multiple managers and it's a master profile to boot. So for me simplicity is best. The folks doing the adding of duplicate profiles should be warned that one already exists.

I understand that, Beth, but this warning system already exists. The magnifying glasses in tree view and also in profile view. The question is not about system, but behaviour of people.

Jaak Tulp It has has not been my experience that the current "warning system" works when adding profile. It tends to occur AFTER the damage is done. And we could discuss the behavior of people until we are both exhausted. :)

Beth it is of course one if my dreams for Geni to warn of a dup. Technically, at this point, it cannot be done until after the profile creation is complete. So you are going to have, always, one new duplicate at a minimum.

So once the profile is made, and a match shows, I believe there needs to be better advice to the manager - STOP & MERGE.

Hey folks - if you want to continue the discussion of avoiding / minimizing Duplicates - could you take it to a discussion already existing about that - such as: http://www.geni.com/discussions/110680 (or start another for that topic)?

Lol Lois. Stop herding the masses :)

Agreed Erica.

"Lol Lois. Stop herding the masses :)". In this particular instance I think Lois is correct in directing people with an interest in "Duplicates" to the existing discussion of that topic.

I may be wrong but the topic of discussion was : MyHeritage-Snaps Up Geni.com. Noah Tutak entered the discussion "To avoid speculation" concearning the Snap up and has been fielding questions regarding that topic. It is our opportunity to hear his point of view on memberships, data subscription, benefits, Gedcoms and the MH-Geni merge.

It would be nice to continue in this direction with the topic. The subject of Dupilcates and Profile Merges might be better served in that disscussion as the topic and not a diversion as it is here......Thank you for your input Noah Tutak..Please carry on I will be in the area....☺.....ttfn

In all seriousness, if I didn't think it was appropriate here, I would not have posted it. I did not intend to have a long drawn out discussion- but the subject of merging, etc is a new benefit of the My Heritage era - so it is entirely appropriate.

Beth Marie Beeman Were you directing your last comment to me? ....☺

Was there someone else in the room? :)

Beth Marie Beeman Yes, at the time there had been 15+/- in the discussion. Noah Tutak had been addressing the concearns of users on the 22nd, 23rd and 24th. The question you asked about Gedcoms was very relevant. I thought his answer was a bit foggy though.

The discussion started to go off on the 27th. On the 28th the merges and
duplicates started. Lois made her request on the 28th. I happen to agree with her in this instance .....because by that time the discussion was about merges and duplicates.

Appropriate or inappropriate with several people involved in the discussion you were not refered to as the cause of Lois' s request nor in my agreement with Lois' request were you mentioned.

I did get a chuckle from your herding comment ...... funny.... ttfn

Beth Marie Beeman and others,

MyHeritage & Geni are acutely aware of the issue of continuously added duplicates. In a recent [semi-technical] discussion with Noah & some of the MyHeritage staff, it was said that when the MyHeritage matching is fully integrated in the Geni site they SHOULD be able to identify duplicates WHILE they are being added to the tree. So that should in theory severely reduce the number of new duplicates being added. This will take a couple of months to complete though.

Shmuel-Aharon Kam - May I have a word, please. Don't make it impossible for the Danes to work in here, if the duplicates are stopped already by adding.
You see, as it is now you may be informed about quite a lot of duplicates when you have added a profile. And afterwards none shows to be a duplicate.
We have lots of common names as Jens Pedersen, Hans Jensen, Søren Nielsen.
Geni ought to include birthdates, date of death, places, spouse, children, parents to the match.
As it works now it's a mess and waste of time.

Private User, this refers to using a MUCH better matching-system than the present one. Of course I doubt the system will block people from adding new duplicates, but it reduce the number a lot.

Thank you Shmuel-Aharon Kam (Kahn / שמואל-אהרן קם (קאן! Good to"see" you again :)

The same to you, Mz. Beeman. :-)

I have been working on Geni on the assumption that I will have access to my work throughout my life. My work counts in not hours but weeks and months. It consists not only in filling in profiles but also unique research work and connections that are only found on Geni.
The same goes for other life-time pro users, I assume there are hundreds, maybee tousands of us. If I / we don´t have the access to the work we done on the assumptions it will be our own forever, and they sell our work, the tree we bulidt, to MyHeritage perhaps the logical answer to this problem is that they owe me and all the Geni life time pro users payment for mine/their work?
It is odd that a big company like this doen not hav a sense of justice and the meaning of contracts. Plus Myheritage does not have a sense of business, reputation and trade mark.

I agree Ella. Geni has sold the "World Tree" that "WE" created for them. Somehow it does not seem fair for them to sell MY thousands of hours of research then turn around and take away my lifetime membership.
Except for a few entries due to a death in the family, I have not done any research to add to my family tree since I got that letter back in December. In fact, I've deleted more than I've added.

Yes, emotionally i agree with you, Private User! This subject of individual contribution into the world tree is pretty sensitive and hard to evaluate. As it seems then Geni staff seemed to define the value of individual contribution with the number of profiles added. As Beth Marie Beeman said earlier then she was focusing on the quality, not quantity of the profiles. This does not make her research less important or is someone´s contribution of helping thousands of other users by merging, researching and giving notes to everyone else, but researching for him/herself less important? I dont think so...

Some users are more open, some less open to share their knowledge and sources, but of course this work here with the world tree is work on hundreds of thousands of users (some more active, some rather passive), but not something that can be bought or sold.

Practically, unfortunately, we live in a globalized world and the world tree is everyone´s and no-one´s at the same time. The question is who will hold the system up and running and the one is getting the honor and glory.