… won’t change my mind
Arrogant.
A snob.
Elitist.
Close-minded.
Not considering the interests of the community.
And… worst of the worst… no fun at all!
These are just a few of the names hurled at The Legal Genealogist for daring to diss the app We’re Related.1
On the grounds that, well, no, actually, we’re not, and the app saying so doesn’t make it so.
And for the sin of having declared that the Emperor has no clothes (or that most of us are really not related to the people the app says we’re related to), I’m told I need to lighten up. Go with the flow.
Here we are, a year after I wrote about this blasted app, and people are still yelling at me. Just yesterday, “come down off the high horse and just have fun with it” is the latest.2
Because, after all, it’s just entertainment, isn’t it?
Sigh… not to me.
Yeah, I know… I’m just so old-school when it comes to goofy things like preferring the Genealogical Proof Standard to a commercial app… so much a fuddy-duddy not to be entertained.
Not if it’s just plain dead damned wrong.
You see, all of the relationships suggested by the app come from online family trees. And essentially none of them, for any of my lines, is correct.
I don’t descend from any well-documented royal family. I don’t even descend from any of the many well-documented New England families. If you do, and the suggested match does too, you may find the app at least marginally accurate and, so, entertaining.
But if you don’t… well… I cannot for the life of me imagine why anyone would think it was “entertaining” or “engaging” or “fun” to give people the “thrill” of supposed genealogical information that is just plain dead damned wrong.
The app is almost hopelessly wrong in a huge number of these supposed relationships. The father of my third great grandfather Martin Baker is not Private, and his father is not Private either. I can’t see anything “entertaining” or “engaging” or “fun” to see line after line that go through one, two or three people named Private.
And the number of people I’m supposedly related to through descent from Alexander Baker of Boston is staggering — despite the fact that DNA has definitively disproved any link at all to between the Boston Bakers and my Virginia Baker line. It’s not “entertaining” or “engaging” or “fun” to see those suggested in the app either.
And what’s particularly “entertaining” or “engaging” or “fun” about things that simply can’t be so? I guarantee you, my Virginian Thomas Baker didn’t have three mothers. My fifth great grandmother Elizabeth Hopper didn’t have two mothers. My sixth great grandmother Dorothy Davenport didn’t have two maternal grandmothers.
So… once again… if you’re finding information about your lines that’s even giving you a hint in the app, more power to you. If you find it amusing or fun, go for it.
But don’t ask me to “come down off the high horse and just have fun” with an app that doesn’t even follow the laws of biology.
Name calling isn’t going to change my mind: no, actually, we’re not related.
SOURCES
- See Judy G. Russell, “No, actually, we’re not related,” The Legal Genealogist, posted 20 Oct 2016 (https://www.legalgenealogist.com/blog : accessed 1 Dec 2017). ↩
- See ibid., comments. ↩
Some people. Stick to your guns Judy, the app is trash.
Thanks, Kelvin! I’m not backing down on this one: it’s just not “fun” when it’s utterly ridiculous.
I look at it and every now and then – once every thirty matches, they do get it right. Like the Duchess of Windsor, formerly known as cousin Bessie Wallis Warfield – who my mother never mentioned by name except to call “That woman”. But as I tell people, and then show them my “match” with Isadora Duncan – in which every person on Isadora’s side is marked “Private” going back over two-hundred years – something is most surly a miss.
I don’t have any of those royal lines, Stu, so not even one that’s “get it right” for me, really.
When 1.) all your ancestors come over on the boat in the 1800’s and 2.) when they all came from countries with patronymic naming practices and 3.) they were all tenant farmers (except one), this app has no meaning for me. 🙂 As you can see, Judy, I agree with you, but somewhat it’s like those who take the DNA test for the ethnicity–they are not listening.
Sigh… you can lead a horse to water but… 🙂
Big waste of time that could be better spent finding the real ancestors. My peeps were mostly ordinary folks, too.
I understand wanting an easy answer — just click here and see how you and someone else are related. But it really really really isn’t that easy most of the time. Really. Sigh.
I agree one’s relationship should be proven.
It’s amazing how many people apparently think that’s optional.
Your case is solid. I concur.
You mean my great-great grandmother was’t simultaneously married to and having children with two men in two different states? I’m shocked (not). That’s the point at which I deleted the app. It’s not history or genealogy if you make it up.
🙂
Stick to your guns Judy, I agree with all of the above. And add that one of the things I dislike most about the internet is that it gives free rein to people saying things in a way they never would in person. The app is not even entertaining when it is just plain fantasy!!
Oh, and I’ll add the App is “Fake News”.
I’m glad somehow I missed this one. Though I’m not sure that some of the trees on well-known gen sites aren’t just as bad. They have some pretty improbable things. Or is that where they find the trees? Oh, my. Much of a mess. Keep on trying to educate people, Judy. These fantasy trees mislead people who sincerely are interested in learning about their family history, and ultimately create disillusionment. They deserve better. And those folks who are calling you names because you are ruining their “fun” need to get a real hobby. Maybe paint-by-number kits would be appropriate. There is no such thing as paint-by-number genealogy. It requires real work to get at the truth.
I don’t have or even want to use the app. I have enough problems with a second cousin and her information.
Oh, my. Just looked it up and found out it is from Ancestry.com. Why does that not surprise me?
Lol great answer!!
I’m one of those who, as you say, descend from “many well-documented New England families” – and I’m gobsmacked at how wrong the “We’re Related” app often is. And we know why. The computer algorithm builds its theorizing on certain other ancestry.com trees with wrong information. The positive side is the app has encouraged me to pay attention to certain overlooked ancestral lines to prove or disprove a “We’re Related” suggestion. That has enriched my family tree. But most people don’t look at it with a discerning eye. I fear it feeds into the frenzy of inaccuracy out there.
I know in the well-documented lines it can be a source of hints — and can be misused even in those well-documented lines. In the not-so-well-documented lines, it’s a disaster.
I wrote it a while back and wasn’t too favorable either. I’m still getting told “it’s all fun.” Nope it is not. Stick to your guns.
I’m still struggling to figure out why anybody would think wasting time on fairy tales is “fun” — but finding real ancestors with real evidence is apparently not. Sigh…
Sigh….doomed to be a commoner.
I know, I know… no fun at all. We’re never going to be invited on one of those TV shows where they roll out 23 generations worth of royalty for us, cousin… 🙂
Completely agree with you. Immediately determined the app to be useless junk and deleted it.
Thank you very much, Judy. It is very important for our trees to be as accurate as possible, and I am very concerned about people just accepting these trees without researching. Then these mistakes will be copied over and over.
Give ’em ‘ell, Judy. I haven’t even wasted my time downloading it.
Thanks for sticking up for the rest of us arrogant, elitist, fuddy-duddy, no-fun snobs. (I refuse to include close-minded, because I doubt that describes many of us.) I keep trying to explain to people how much fun it is when you follow the GPS and actually discover something, but I haven’t been very successful. 🙁
Lol! I agree. One of my “cousins” got the App and is having Fun with it. He also noticed that another person has the same line up in that app but the two of them have no known DNA connection. I have found, through research, that there are plenty of Fun and notable ancestors in my line that I really don’t need an App to suggest fake ones. BTW, we may be related through the BAKERs. Who knew?
My Baker line is Thomas Baker-Dorothy Davenport -> David Baker-Dorothy Wiseman -> Martin Baker-Elizabeth Buchanan -> Martha Louisa Baker-George Cottrell -> Martin Gilbert Cottrell-Martha Johnson -> Clay Rex Cottrell & Opal Robertson, my grandparents.
You don’t have to have a DNA connection to have a family connection. I’m adopted, and I have trees for my adopted family. Also, if the connection is far enough back, a DNA connection might not show even if everyone is biologically related.
Amen! Amen! Amen! Amen! Amen! Amen! How many times can I agree with you?! Stick to your guns. There are millions out here agreeing with you, Judy.
Like psychic hotlines, this app should be labeled “for entertainment purposes only”.
I haven’t even bothered with it. Life is too short. And your assessment just nails it for me. Thank you, Judy.
Thank you for calling out (however anonymously) these people who call you arrogant, elitist, close minded, and (given my experience) a few other names not acceptable in public. Whether it’s the app or some other context, it’s not “fun” to be called names like that just because you want evidence and aren’t willing to go with the flow. You also have may sympathy. And my appreciation that you are not letting rudeness intimidate you.
I cannot stand the app but a long time genie friend, Dorothy, discovered we are related several generations back. I asked her to prove it without the app and she already had a Gile/Guile/Gild family history from google books ready to share <3
I’d be delighted if that ever happened to me! 🙂
Some time ago, I was asked by maternal cousins to write their family history. After much research and typing, I presented the results to the assembled throng at a family reunion. The disappointment on their faces as they slowly realized that they were descended from 250 years of Methodist sandhill cotton farmers was both amusing and disheartening. I hope that none of them discover this app- I’m afraid they would probably like it (which is no doubt the intention of the authors). We must face it- some people just don’t like the facts ruining a good story 😉
You should have invited them to join your paternal family. What was it William and Ann were accused of, again? 🙂
Funny you should mention it- one cousin who was aware of the Pettypool story made exactly that remark. I responded that it was possible that her Davis kin were just better at eluding the sheriff than the hapless Pettypools… 😉
🙂
Judy….I LOVE the phrase “just plain dead damned wrong!” Love it love it. Can’t wait to use it in conversation with my adult children who think I’m half batty….a priceless turn of phrase. Made my day…thanks.
Thanks for the information on the app and standing up your principles. My genealogy research does not always lead to quick results to stay the least, but I want it to be correct. Not everyone has the standards you have for your genealogy research.
I agree with you. They are frequently wrong. It’s not fun and generally a waste of time one could spend on doing real genealogy.
I have to say, Judy — as someone with a long career in software — that these folks give software developers a bad name. Some of us have tried, hard, to follow the wisdom of the real genealogists. There is a place for software in genealogy, but this is not it!
Folks like you who work hard to do good work with software shouldn’t be tarred with this brush, that’s for sure.
I’m happy that someone else has seen the Emperor in their true state. I have been so disillusioned with “modern genealogy”, meaning its software (incl. stupid apps like this one), online trees, point-and-click fantasists, and general marketing *** — all of which are designed to make profit rather than help genealogy, or make better genealogists — that I’ve all but given up with it. The community, it seems, are largely content to be spoon-fed a cheap substitute.
I agree with you Judy. The biggest issue is intent. Why is ancestry doing this? Pure and simple: they value making money any way they can without being held to responsible standards. It diminishes the genealogical standards just the way tabloid journalism has profitted without standards. There’s big money to be had. I have many claimed celebrity, famous connections which are ludicrous, but I do have some which are sound, BUT the few are far outweighed by the inaccurate. I wouldn’t mind it so much if Ancestry actually advertised it as what it is “mostly inaccurate leads that may help your research”, and with a disclaimer: **we use unproven family trees that we highly recommend you research thoroughly before believing.” Alas, I believe it only soils the reputation of Ancestry in the long run, and makes our jobs as researchers even more difficult. We can only counteract this with writing about it, blogging and articles, researching said connections and using it to promote genealogy in a good light. Cheers!
Stick to your guns. We need more factual documentation and less duplication of senseless “trees.”
I agree, Judy. I can’t believe people who read your blog are saying things like that to you. I think I looked at this “app” when it was first announced and decided it was worthless. But the timing of your blog is unbelievable. Yesterday I was talking to a young man and his mother outside our library. I had commented on the many Civil War books they had just purchased from the library book sale. The mother said it was her son (about 10) who was the Civil War geek. Our conversation morphed into genealogy and the boy said they had just begun to do that kind of research and found how many famous people they are related to, including a “Private Alde”. I asked if they found that through DNA, but no, they hadn’t done a DNA test. He said it was through an “app” that his mother had on her iPad. They didn’t know the name — but now I do. Good thing I didn’t know this yesterday. I might have gotten myself into trouble with some people I don’t even know!
I am sorry this is happening to you Judy. Putting together genealogies that is wrong is neither fun nor entertaining in my book. Let’s stick to the genealogical proof standard!
Judy, I agree with you. But I must say that I’m most disappointed that you’re really not my 8th cousin once removed as the app says. 😉
I really do descend from the Pettypool line… your side, however, has the multiple Private parent of Private entries as far as I can see… 🙂
Judy to borrow and modify a line from a movie … we’re going to need a bigger high-horse.
You are not the only one not buying that nonsense behind the curtain. (Another movie.) Just because someone is related to someone who is related to someone etc who is the spouse of your cousin does not make you related. And that’s assuming the trees are correct to begin with which many are not. This is fake news not because I disagree with it but because alternate facts are not facts they are lies and nonsense. (Unfortunately not a movie.)
It is also not sour grapes. Despite not have nobility in my blood I do have some relatives who’ve done some good things. With good research and access to records many of my lines go back as far as possible (records exist.)
I’m not adding lies and bad data to my tree. I’ll stick with reality. I can find fun and amusement with or without my tree.
I sooo wish we were related! I love to read your blog and I have really enjoyed your lectures I’ve attended. Very good information and very entertaining!
Stick to your guns, Judy. The only thing “fun” about this app is the uproarious laughter its absurd relationships generate. It’s on a par with the inscrutable “Magic 8 Ball” from the days of my misbegotten youth. No, scratch that, the pronouncements of the “Magic 8 Ball’ had a much better reliability rating than the sub-par app. Unfortunately, it seems we now live in an age when the truth has been branded a weapon used by the “elite” (i.e.: those with hard-earned professional expertise gained by hard work and study) to oppress the masses who wish to believe a different set of facts more to their liking in the face of mountains of evidence to the contrary and none in support (sigh).
Stick to your guns, Judy! Many, if not most, of my matches are through a couple of WRONG, but widely reported supposed lines. I can pinpoint the generations in which the gross errors exist, but of course getting people to acknowledge those errors is hard, maybe more so when you’re left with a brick wall instead of a royal lineage! And if most of my We’re Related lines have fatal flaws, what can I assume about, say, Brad Pitt’s supposed ancestry. (Yes, well, we must be related because he looks like me, right?!) AND there is no way to dig down to find where a supposed connection might come from, AND it’s only available on your phone. Ugh, I no longer even look at it.
I have absolutely no desire to see what kind of mess that app would do to my family tree. I’m having enough of a struggle trying to get people to understand that my male ancestor is not their female relative. I’m sorry, I just don’t think that he had a sex change operation in the early 1800’s. Especially, when I can document that their relative was a female. At this point, I have yet to find a single person descended from my ancestor who matches any descendent of the family my ancestor without a least one other ancestor that both families share. It would have been wonderful it had been true, I could trade my 30 some year brickwall for a new one.
Stay strong!
I haven’t even heard of this app, but now I know I couldn’t care less about it. When I started out tracing my genealogy I did check numerous family trees online.
And there were glaring mistakes in them. People were just so happy to put someone in their tree, even though they had a different spouse, children and were in a different location. Only the name was the same.
How could they be so wrong I thought to myself. Just take your time and make sure that that is your ancestor and not some random with the same name.
What source does this app take this information from?
Out of curiosity I just tried it. It couldn’t find any matching trees…which it should have. It looks like it’s just another marketing ploy by Ancestry with no real substance.