how are you to do merges/ duplicates & collaboration?
simpler / more intuitive less cumbersome would be my choice. some way has to be available to solve these massive duplicate problems........settings not set
collaborating & to many false starts on merges only to find geni does not allow..... i do not like to but i have to ignore these hairballs. good luck. positive progressive change is good....nothing fancy just good workable tree. thanks noah.
OK, but I am the only manager, for example, on some 1200 public profiles that there is currently no need for curatorship.
If someone had a question about one of those profiles (such as "I am your fourth cousin! let me claim that profile you have!") I would prefer I be contacted privately rather than publicly.
Maybe another solution is *adding" a "contact curator" button for historical profiles.
I think we should have the option of allowing or disallowing people to contact individual profiles, just like we can make a profile public or private. Some of the more popular profiles get lots of hits and too many fans, solicitors or haters will contact the profile owner with stuff that has NOTHING to do with genealogy.
Yes, Mimi, that might work. A "primary manager" could toggle off their "contact manager" button, maybe with a message to "leave a message on the guestbook" or "discuss this profile on the "discussion" tab."
On the other hand, how is that different from "block this user" ?
In the case of multiple managers on a relatively benign profiles, how would that work? Many questions are legitimate and geni related and may not be appropriate for a public discussion.
Lots of profiles are public not because they're well known, but because they're far away from their managers. (I approve of that, btw). Very often, the manager (who is usually exactly one person) is the best person to contact for more information about the profile.
By default: Keep the link!
(once we have "curator-locked" profiles, "contact manager" doesn't make sense - it should be "contact locking curator"....)