1000 years of temple work...

My mother told me today, after her frustration with New FamilySearch problems, "I think I know why it's going to take a thousand years to do all the temple work in the millennium."

"Why's that?" I asked, noting the smirk on her face.

"Because that's how long it's going to take for FamilySearch to get the software working!" We both laughed, knowing that there might be some sort of truth to the comment.

---------

Well fellow genealogists, I regret to say that I will no longer be posting to the Shoebox Genealogy blog. Don't take this as me giving up the fight to turn NFS into a piece of rational and usable software, but I've been offered a position outside of the genealogy field that's impossible to refuse.

As my blog's dying wish, I only ask that someday we'll get real sources, discussion pages, biography pages, research notes pages, image uploads, multimedia, and data ranking incorporated into NFS sometime before I die. Is that too much to ask? (Believe me, I restrained myself from making a REALLY long list...)

Good luck, fellow genealogists.

Super-fast Browser Favorites for Genealogy

This isn't really a major revelation, but here's a neat little trick I use when doing searches for genealogy stuff. Maybe it's not even a trick, maybe everyone else already knows about this, but for the benefit of anyone who might not, I'll post it here.

When I am searching Ancestry.com, I often use the advanced search feature, but I also like to search just one record, especially when I am searching the censuses and the SSDI and things like that.

When I have a source that I search often, I'll add it to my favorites list, but will not use the page title as the title of the favorite. For example:

If I figured I'd be using the 1880 census often, and would like to have a way to access it quickly, I'll click the little star with a plus sign, (in Internet Explorer) "Add to favorites."



Then up will pop a little window with a suggested title for the favorite. This is where the trick comes in.

Instead of using the suggested title, you're going to shorten that title to something easy to remember, like, "1880."

Now, because you have a favorite titled "1800," when you type 1800 into the address bar of your browser, it won't go to a search engine, it will go directly to your favorite with that title.

You'll know its working if, when you type it in, there's one or two instances of the same name below. One means its finding that page's name in your favorites, the other means its finding that page's name in your history. Don't worry that there are two. Just hit enter, and it will take you right to that page.

The real advantage comes when you spend a little time to set up all the major searches that you use to really short favorites. Here's a sampling of a few I use:

FS - FamilySearch.org advanced search page

NFS - The search function for New FamilySearch. If you bookmark the search page, it will still bring you to the login page to enter your credentials, but then will bypass the intro page and will go straight to search.

WT - Ancestry World Tree

SSDI - Social Security Death Index

CEN - Search all US Census Records

1790-1930 - Each US Census has its own favorite

1841-1901 - I use the English census about 10:1 over the other UK censuses of the same year, so those are the bookmarked ones

CARD - Ancestry's Card Catalog

ADV - Ancestry's old advanced search

ADV2 - Ancestry's new advanced search

PL - FHL Catalog, search by place

BMD - FreeBMD.org.uk

and many more...

I find it much easier to go up to the address bar and type a few letters and hit enter, than navigating through Ancestry's slow sidebars. Maybe it won't be so nifty to you, but when I'm working on billable hours, it saves me a ton of time, and helps me find what I want a lot quicker.

The possibilities are endless, and you don't have to limit this to genealogy. Now go, be fruitful, and multiply your favorites! Enjoy!

What we lost when Life Browser died

Life Browser is a prototype interface for New Family Search. It is still currently available at http://labs.familysearch.org/lifebrowser/ but it is no longer being worked on, nor is there any foreseeable future for it. Life Browser represented some of the loftiest goals of FamilySearch, and when it died, so did my hopes for New FamilySearch’s success.

Here’s what we lost when FamilySearch killed Life Browser:

1) True Collaboration
Why it was great - At the bottom of the Life Browser individual page is a forum-style discussion tool. This is obviously meant to be used as a collaboration tool. Discussing and publishing the progress of one’s research is a vital part of the Scientific Method, and of genealogy in general. It’s also something genealogists desperately want. Take the success of Genealogy.com’s GenForum, and the plethora of personal genealogy sites which publish one’s own findings. This was possibly the single greatest feature of Life Browser.

The current dilemma - Now that Life Browser is dead, and Family Tree aims to supplant New FamilySearch’s current interface, we can see no collaborative tools in FamilySearch’s future. Sure, you can blindly change anyone’s pedigree, but finding out why they made the change is nearly impossible. The only similar feature in NFS to date is the ability to explain why you disputed an event. Ever been on the losing end of an opinion war in NFS? Merge, un-merge, merge, un-merge. It feels like being poked in the eye by an anonymous bully, and so you give up. A far cry from collaboration.

What it should be – Bring it back, for heaven’s sake. It can’t take up nearly as much processing power as keeping all that royal garbage in the database. I’d even prefer a forum which allows discussions on several different topics, and sub-topics. This way, you can easily chat about Grandma Myrtle’s childhood, and also seriously discuss the subtleties of Mayflower genealogies.

2 – Evidentiary Support
Why it was great – Next to each event in Life Browser was a little colored phrase which said “1 Evidence,” “15 Evidences,” “No Evidence!” etc. I was especially happy with the exclamation mark beside “No Evidence!” This feature emphasized the importance of having sources, and allowed you to support your claims. It also scares away individuals who are willing to change info based on hearsay. If there’s 7 pieces of evidence for a birth date, you might be less inclined to replace it with "WFT estimate 1798-1898" that you found on the web somewhere.

The current dilemma – Again, no evidentiary support is allowed in Family Tree. The “records” tab is a great improvement over the incomprehensible sources in NFS, but it allows only a few types of sources: user submitted, IGI, AF, PRF, and LDS Records. In addition, all records are created equal in Family Tree, and there is no way to group records which support one event or another.

What it should be – The preferable way to show evidences is not only to list which pieces support the current fact, but to be able to allocate evidence to dissenting information also, a failure of Life Browser. The ability to rank the value of evidence is also needed, making a birth certificate of more value than an IGI entry. Indeed, allowing users to rank how well a piece of evidence supports the event (not how much they believe it) would allow a ranking system to be collaborative. This would also help to achieve the goal of computer-assisted research. If the computer knows how well or poorly a pedigree is proved, it can make better research suggestions for an end-user.

3 – Multimedia Support
Why it was great – A major feature of Life Browser was the ability to upload, download, print, comment on, geo-code and document pieces of multimedia, such as photos, documents, pieces of evidence, stories and such. It seemed that it would easily be able to integrate with Record Search, allowing you to eventually connect microfilm images with their subjects. This made genealogy fun and exciting, allowing users to easily share multimedia and encouraging them to share everything they had with the community.

The current dilemma – There is no ability to upload multimedia in Family Tree’s foreseeable future. However, it would seem that FamilySearch would at least try to incorporate Record Search images into Family Tree at some point in the future (to not do so would be a huge oversight). I have several books of original research from the 1800’s, lots of newspaper clippings, and many original records and photos that I feel bad about not being able to share with everyone in an easy way. Letting users upload their own content gets people excited. Look at YouTube, Flickr, Blogger, etc. Ignoring this potentially massive boost to genealogy is like discounting the automobile in favor of the wagon. In their defense, this is a resource-intensive feature, especially for FamilySearch, which is not supported by ads or investors.

What it should be – Uploading multimedia for genealogical use should be a major priority. It may even involve partnerships with companies like Ancestry or Flickr, who have the resources to host this massive amount of data. FamilySearch can avoid some of the legal issues surrounding the posting of data if each user uploads only the small portion of a record that is relevant to one individual, and can claim “fair use” under copyright law. Allowing content to be uploaded and connected to its subjects is a major step forward for genealogy, and has already been successfully adopted by Ancestry.com. Take heed, FamilySearch, and follow in their footsteps.

So if Life Browser is so great, why did it die?
Probably a lack of resources at Family Search, and an effort to stay focused on the core purpose of New FamilySearch – fix the duplication issue (no comment on this, I’m biting my tongue here). However, if you ask Gordon Clarke, FamilySearch’s head of third-party software development, its so that a select few can make some money. When asked directly about the death of Life Browser he responded (I paraphrase with caution): “FamilySearch is not pursuing these features, and is leaving these to third party developers. This should provide you with the ability to add rich features to FamilySearch and turn a profit.”

The biggest problem with this is that third party programs will not allow users to collaborate in an appropriate manner. If the company “XYZStartupGen” offers a product that includes all of these features, hosted at their webpage, how many FamilySearch users are going to be able to see it? 2%? Maybe 5%? If you don’t know what information is available without accessing some $19.95 per month service, what good is it anyway (unless you’re Ancestry.com, with a huge market share)?

Leaving this feature set to third party developers is a bad idea, it eliminates everything that is free, engaging, and collaborative about FamilySearch. Ignoring these and other major features will lead to it’s dismissal by serious genealogists, avoidance by casual genealogists, and adoption by only those who have no regard for evidence, collaboration, or verification.

The death of Life Browser, in my eyes, was the death of New FamilySearch.

Good thing we believe in resurrection.

NFS and FamilyTree Beta News

This is the new listing on Beta.familysearch.org of changes made to the new system. Users are being invited to try out the new familytree application and beta.familysearch.org this morning. It's incredibly slow, and previewing the trees from a search result brings up all kinds of false connections and associations.

It's a little screwey, but there's some things I really like about FamilyTree (shocked?). Needless to say, I still don't think it's hitting it's target audience yet. I've spent this morning with a 65 year old woman, 20 year genealogy veteran, teaching her how to use FamilyTree, and nothing seemed intuitive to her. After an hour, instead of being excited, she gave up. And I was being encouraging of FamilyTree! I promise!

Anyway, here's the news:

New Features as of February 2009
In February 2009, more records of deceased Church members were added to the system. The statuses of several ordinances that were incorrectly listed as “In progress” are now listed as “Completed.” And you can now find information about third-party certified computer programs on the FamilySearch Internet Service.

More LDS Church Membership Records
The system now contains the records of about 350,000 deceased members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints whose records were never added into the system. You can now see these individuals on family trees and use the Search feature to find them.

Corrected Ordinance Statuses
The statuses of about 500,000 ordinances that were incorrectly listed as “In progress” now show as “Completed.” The system did not automatically update these ordinance statuses when the ordinances were done. This sometimes occurs when a user of the new FamilySearch prints a Family Ordinance Request and has the family ordinance cards printed. Then all or some of the ordinances are done in a temple that does not have the new FamilySearch. The ordinances are recorded, but it takes longer for the information to appear in the new FamilySearch.


You can continue to use family ordinance cards in any temple, regardless of whether the cards were printed using a Family Ordinance Request or TempleReady disk. Please be aware, however, that it takes extra time to update the ordinance information in the new FamilySearch when ordinances are performed in a temple that does not yet have the new FamilySearch. This situation will no longer occur after all of the temples are using the new FamilySearch.

Third-Party Certified Computer and Web Programs
To see the most current list of certified third-party software, go to http://www.familysearch.org/eng/affiliates/index.html.


The Family Tree
The interface for the new FamilySearch is being redesigned to make it easier to use. This new interface is called the Family Tree. You are invited to preview and give feedback on the Family Tree while it is still being developed.

Getting to the Family Tree
To see the Family Tree, go to http://labs.familysearch.org/, and click the Family Tree link. Use your sign-in name and password for the new FamilySearch to sign in.

Data in the Family Tree
You see the same family information in the new FamilySearch and the Family Tree. Further, changes that you make in either program are immediately visible in the other.

Features in the Family Tree
The Family Tree does not yet have all of the features found in the new FamilySearch. For example, features that let you add new information, correct information, and print a Family Ordinance Request are still being developed.

However, the Family Tree has some very useful features that the new
FamilySearch does not:
• When you open an individual’s folder, you can see the contact name of the user who has the ordinances reserved.
• You can easily resize your family tree to show many more generations on the screen.
• When you hover the mouse cursor over someone in the tree, the path back to you
is highlighted. This lets you more easily see how you connect to any person in your tree.
• When you display the list of your reserved ordinances, you can see whether the cards have been printed and which ordinances are done.
• You can view the individuals in your pedigree as a list. When you first switch from
the pedigree to the list, the list contains the individuals in the pedigree view. Once the list is displayed, you can sort the individuals by last name, first name, gender, birth date, birthplace, or person ID.

Languages

The Family Tree is available in English, Spanish, Portuguese, French, German, Italian, Russian, Chinese, Japanese, and Korean.

Your Feedback Is Welcome

No good news on NFS progress, or lack thereof

The Ancestry Insider recently pushed for more transparency in the inner workings of Ancestry.com’s departments, and apparently has been heard. He then proceeded to post information about FamilySearch’s new products and progress being made there. He commented on FamilySearch Wiki, the Familysearch.org homepage, indexing projects, microfilm digitizing efforts, and Record Search progress. The one thing he, or anyone else, has failed to bring up is the New FamilySearch application itself.

It seems as if a gag order is in effect – everyone I talk to who knows something about it seems to be relegated to statements such as “I can’t give you specifics, but we’re working on it,” or “It’s being looked into.”

From what I have gathered through a few loose lips is that the current iteration of the New FamilySearch family tree application (new.familysearch.org) appears to be struggling. Information was recently relayed to me from a FamilySearch employee who vented about the problems and the lack of solutions coming from within the organization.

This employee gave me the following bullet points:

• FamilySearch, while it may be owned by the LDS Church, operates very inefficiently and has an incredible lack of communication between departments. Very rarely does one department know what the other is up to.
  
• Progress on New FamilySearch has stalled. They believe that in order to fix the current problems they will need to bring in outside help – at $300 per hour, per programmer. Given the hiring freeze at the Church, and the current economic issues, they don’t want to do that. Hence, production has all but stopped.
  
• NFS may be released to the Utah and Idaho areas BEFORE the problems are fixed. This would be a change from the rumors of a late 2009 release. They might choose to do so to get it off their plate, and drop it in order to work on other projects.
  
• Several of the products that have been in production have now been scrapped. No word on which ones, but it seems like any effort to incorporate media or upload source records (i.e. Life browser) have been abandoned.

While she did state that she didn’t have the whole picture (and she didn’t think ANYONE at FamilySearch really did), she thought things were not looking good for many departments, and there were lots of people who fear their jobs may be cut soon.

As the Ancestry Insider recently pushed for Ancesty.com's efforts at transparency, I should hope that he would encourage the same among his current colleagues. A weekly blog post from each of the product managers - especially those concerned with NFS - would go a long way to increasing trust and respect from FamilySearch's patrons. It might also be the only way that those within the organization find out whats really going on in the cubicle next door.

Oops - tagged.

Hahaha. Just so you know, my wife accidentally posted her list of favorite things to this blog. Interesting read, but probably not what you were looking for.

The Analogy of $4 Gasoline

Once upon a time, we Americans paid relatively low gas prices. We drove wherever we wanted, and we took little thought for the $20 it took to fill up our gas tanks. Then came $4 per gallon gasoline. All of the sudden, it's $100 to fill the tank on your truck, and travel plans got cancelled! We got angry, we yelled and screamed, we demanded a reduction. Prices dropped to $3.50 per gallon, and now we're all peachy, barely realizing that prices are still astronomically high.

Once upon a time, cautious family researchers called distant relatives on the phone, wrote to foreign parishes for records, and meticulously recorded the information in their personal records. Then came New FamilySearch. All of the sudden, wild cousins were running amok with our records and doing unspeakable things to our ancestors! We (or a small minority of us) got angry, yelled and screamed, and demanded some changes. New FamilySearch changed uncombining rules, spiced up FamilyTree, and now we're all peachy, barely realizing that New FamilySearch is still a flashy but incredibly poor genealogy program and in need of serious fixes.

I can't imagine how in the world to solve all of these major problems of duplication and poor records. But I know this isn't it. Even now that we've had some concessions, and New FamilySearch is less horrible than it was this spring, I can't imagine why I would want to support it. I participate in indexing, and I love contributing to the FamilySearch wiki. But I'm not diving into the ancestral sludge pit of New FamilySearch just yet.

This makes some people uneasy, and I get little looks when I start discussing the faults of NFS with people, as if they're trying to signal "Don't let the Bishop hear you say that!" This mostly occurs when I talk to people who have never used it, or who haven't done any in-depth work.

On the other hand, when I talk to most people who have really used the system, I get head nods and commiseration. Instead of cautious looks, I get a pat on the back, and a little "Amen brother, Amen."