FindAGrave Addicts

Comment

Comment by David L Plaskett on July 31, 2010 at 11:16am

I too think FAG has a very useful application BUT I feel changes should be made. An example is that in my search I have relatives buried in France (1914-1918). Some ambitious number quota hog has laid claim to entering all the data to the records and therefore has it under control. Things like this should not be allowed. A relative should be able to lay claim to the record without creating a duplicate.
The practice of encouraging numbers to be a favorable membership criteria is also encouraging confict.

Comment by Larry R. Bish on July 31, 2010 at 10:28am

I find that FAG is a wonderful program that I have been using for years. I have found a extensive amount of data as a result of members work. As in all endeavers their are problems from time to time. Some do not wish to eliminate duplicates and some are not responsive to changes. I for one try to use common sence reguarding FAG. If the grave is connected to me I will not transfer, no mater how distant, but will add any data you wish. We all go thru a lot of effort to enter the data for all to use. I am not very responsive to others who just try to steal your work. On the other hand we should be as accomodating as possible. Larry R. Bish, BishTreeClimber@aol.com.

Comment by Bob Rowe on July 31, 2010 at 10:18am

The new “Complaints” page was created by the same person, Mr. Pritchard, who contributed the 13 complaints. It is very obvious that he is upset with Find-A-Grave. To a point, I don’t blame him. I too thought that direct family should include aunts and uncles. The interesting contrast is that anyone can create any memorial whether they are related or not. It seems obvious that some people add memorials from the obituaries they read in the daily paper.
I checked on the Reece Cemetery that Mr. Pritchard refers to in his complaint. He states that it is a private cemetery. I know that private cemeteries exist and feel that they should be clearly marked as “private” and they should have “No Trespassing” signs if they are private. If you look at the satellite photo of the cemetery in question, it does not appear to have a fence around it. About the only clue I could see is that the entrance to the cemetery is connected to a private driveway. However, it is along a public road and very visible. Google maps even has it listed as Reece Cemetery. Google provides a process for correcting problems in their maps. If it were my private cemetery, I would have Google remove the reference from the map. Google makes mistakes too. I sent them a correction to a cemetery name. I don’t know who provides the information that you see on their maps but they showed it as Evergreen Cemetery when it is actually Greenwood Cemetery. They also had a large grey area showing the cemetery as part of the adjacent apple orchard. They eventually corrected that too.
I have sent a few corrections to FAG admin and they have corrected those things, but I wish that they had an automatic email reply when the work is done. I have never had an ongoing thread with admin to determine if they are rude in any way with contributors.
In defense of FAG, they DO own the website and have the right to make any rule they wish. Every organization goes through growing pains and needs to make policy changes along the way [make up the rules as they go]. Their history blurb states clearly that they started life as a website dedicated to famous people and then extended it to include everyone.
I also agree with Mr. Pritchard about posting living people on FAG. This seems to occur when there is a combined grave marker. The marker is created when the first spouse dies and the death year of the survivor is left blank. I even feel awkward posting a photo of such a marker when it seems obvious that the spouse is still living. I would never create a memorial for anyone unless I know for sure that they are deceased.
It is difficult reading a couple of Mr. Pritchard’s posts because of misused words and severely misspelled words. Some of us are spelling challenged and grammatically challenged. Almost everyone has a quality Word Processor on their computers. I recommend creating your post in a word processor and after correcting all the errors [and proofreading it!]; you can copy and paste your newly created post. Even if you don’t have a word processor with a spellchecker, PLEASE take the time to proofread your work before you click the submit button. Before you say it… Yes, I make mistakes too and don’t catch every one of them. But I try hard to prevent this from happening. If you are going to stand on a soapbox you should take the time to make sure the t’s are crossed and the i’s doted.
I have several pet peeves about contributors… I wish people would do the research before they create a cemetery listing based on assumptions. I have sent corrections on two different cemeteries that had listings in two different counties where there is actually only one cemetery. For one of the cemeteries it even happened twice. If someone dies in one county, don’t assume that the cemetery also exists in that county. If you are creating a memorial based on an obituary published in a New Jersey paper stating that interment will be in Anyname Cemetery in St. Paul, MN, don’t assume that the cemetery is actually in Ramsey County and thereby create a new cemetery in Ramsey County when the “real” cemetery already exists at FAG in Dakota County. If you are providing a volunteer photo and you have gotten the grave location from the cemetery office, please list that location in the photo caption. This information is very helpful for the next person trying to locate the gravesite. I have seen countless entries for women who never married and their surname is put in the maiden name box leaving the surname box empty. When you use the “View all interments” link these listings are indexed at the beginning of the list with four dashes showing for the surname. For any female who never married, they ONLY have a surname – no maiden name. When you create a memorial, there is a really cool “Add Relationship Links”. I have seen countless memorials where the spouse is mentioned in the bio, the spouse is listed in the same cemetery [but it could be a different cemetery] and they are not linked. I don’t know why people wouldn’t use this nifty tool. When you request a photo of a marker in a larger cemetery, please take the time to call the office to get the location and list it in the memorial. Many of us who take these photos already know the cemetery well and have maps. I often go to a local cemetery on my lunch hour to take photos. It saves me time when I don’t have to stop by the office to get the location.
I apologize for this very long post but wanted to get a few things off my chest.

Comment by Cindy Abrams on July 30, 2010 at 6:14pm

I found it interesting that in the new "Find A Grave Complaints" forum that only one person has registered 13 complaints.

Comment by Rebecca Poertner on July 30, 2010 at 3:14pm

Found this in a magazine: "Takes just 60 seconds to restore original beauty to a headstone or memorial with this specifically formulated spray. It deep cleans and renews luster as it quickly and easily lifts dirt, moss, mold and grime. And it leaves behind a protective Teflon* finish that preserves and maintains both the stone and the inscription. Effective on granit, marble, concrete and natural stone; contains no harsh or harmful chemicals. Simply spray on...wait a minute...wipe with clean cloth. 16-ounce supply. Made in the USA. Spray-On Headstone Cleaner with Teflon - $9." What do you think? Could this really be something that would help us read the stones better; or do you think it would damage the stone? Comments please? I don't want to order any unless I know it's safe. Thanks for any and all opinions.

Comment by Sherry Hightower on July 30, 2010 at 11:42am

There has been a new group form just for complaints about FAG. I think it is good idea, don't want to flood this group with complaints and from the thread, there are many!!

Comment by jammie barker on July 25, 2010 at 9:43pm

there is a free program called photoscape that changes the sizes of pictures very easy. you can get it from download.com

Comment by Christy Pollet Petrich on July 25, 2010 at 4:46pm

I know that changing the camera settings is easier, but often the requester wants a better pic and appreciates receiving an email with the higher quality pic attached. If you don't take it, you can't send it!!

Comment by Michael Stills on July 25, 2010 at 2:59pm

666 Members on Findagrave...hmm...does the Rapture begin soon?

Comment by Cheryl Bayer Teke on July 22, 2010 at 6:12pm

Resizing pictures to download was a real pain, I just changed the setting on my digital camera to take pics at 3M instead of 10M and it's great, they download directly...do not have to resize!

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 25
• 26
• 27
• 28
• 29
• …
• 62
• Next ›
• Page