Not impressed

[dotty.]

D'you remember the Canadian woman from the thread below who had the amazingly inaccurate tree for Queen Victoria? Somehow she has managed to half inch a photo off my tree of my Great Great Great Great grandfather's signature and seal from his will. She has no relationship to him whatsoever, when you look at her profile and trees, she is a cleptomaniac of random pictures! Should I tackle the issue?

[NOX]

No, just leave her to get on with historical Walter Mitty existance, it's just a bit weird and a bit sad but I can't imagine there's a huge amount you can do and it won't be bothering your ancestor:)

[dotty.]

I don't understand how she has managed to get at it as my tree is strctly private and by invite from me only.

[jackthehat]

I've let my Ancestry membership lapse for the time being so haven't been able to follow exactly what's been going on.

There seem to be quite a few like her, though. I have 4 people who have attached their trees to mine, nicking photographs, etc. in the process, despite my having contacted them.
One apologised for the error (but continued to nick and add stuff to her own tree), one wrote several times to assure me of the connection (there isn't one) and two have just ignored me.

I'm not sure quite what the answer is............Are the bods at Ancestry particularly bothered by this sort of thing ?

[dotty.]

If they offer subscribers the choice of making their tree private and give us the invite option then they should stop members from just grabbing at randon stuff, especially if people complain, which if she doesn't fess up that she has no connection to the ancestor i will be doing

[Barmaid]

It's really annoying Dotty. I have someone who does this - she's like a family history stalker. There is a minor connection on my paternal line way way back, so she's nicked the WHOLE of my paternal tree and all my maternal stuff too. She's got about 20,000 people on her tree - and a lot of the information she has on there is WRONG.

On another paternal line (which is completely unconnected to her) there is a rumour that there is descent from the Dukes of Marlborough. I've never proved a connection, but she's included all their stuff too and the connection that she has found is laughable.

[craft1948]

I've written to a couple of people on ancestry who have 'ancestors in common' pointing out that a lot of their information is totally incorrect...........they have just ignored the information I have supplied.

[dotty.]

It's annoying isn't it, I have sent this woman a message asking how he appears on her tree but he obviously doesn't, she's gonna get another massage later iof she keeps him on there

[Rose Maybud]

Dotty - she got the picture of the seal from your profile page.

I clicked on your earlier link to revisit that page and she has changed Victoria Victoria to Lois Downard. Your comment is still there, which rather gives away the fact that she has changed it. BUT, the trouble is, anybody looking at that page now would think that YOUR comment is in the wrong - why post something about a Victoria Victoria when the page is about a Lois Downard?? I think you need to collect more ammo before doing anything.
I then clicked on your username and got your profile, (which is very good, btw) and there is the pic under 'recently added content', even though you added it this time last year. It does look impressive. I'm envious! And you can save it, make it your desktop background etc

[Rose Maybud]

Your Broady of Rostherne tree is listed as public, also three others.

I have made the picture of the seal my desktop background, i.e. not saving it to a tree - just wondering if Ancestry can detect that and tell you.

[dotty.]

I shouldn't have any trees public Rose, I shall go and check my settings, which are public?

[dotty.]

Oh I've just left some random ones showing as public!