Ancestry Lab beta features

[kiterunner]

I don't know whether everyone has this coming up on ancestry today? On the "Extras" tab it shows Ancestry Lab - new and when I click on it, there are beta features that you can enable to try them out:

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/beta

The features currently included are as follows:

MyTreeTagsTM beta

Add labels to people in your tree to highlight personal details or to clarify your research status. If you enable this feature, you will be able to access it directly from your tree and on every Facts page for the people in your tree.

New & Improved DNA Matches beta

If you enable this feature, you can more easily sort, group, and view your DNA matches in any way you'd like.

Please note that if you have been using Chrome extensions to sort or organize your matches, these extensions will not be supported in this beta experience. We advise you first save or record any work you may have done with any Chrome extensions before participating in this beta feature.

They both sound worth a try! I wonder whether this is what ancestry are going to be talking about in their livestream from Rootstech tomorrow?

[kiterunner]

I should add that I tried this in a different browser (Opera) and just kept getting "Something went wrong - try again" but it still works in Firefox for me, so you may need to try a different browser if you can't get it to load in your usual one. I have enabled both features now and will report back. Also, you can disable the features again if you don't like them after enabling them.

[kiterunner]

The "new and improved DNA matches" feature looks good so far - it displays all the comments that you have added on the list of matches, rather than you having to click to view each one, and a lot of my matches are now automatically labelled "Father's side" (as my Dad has also had his DNA tested.) And there is a button to click for each one - "Add to group" - so you can set up a group of shared matches to look at (maximum of 24 groups; I don't know yet if there is a limit to how many matches you can put in each group) and choose a colour for each group. Also the filters are improved. I'm itching to get on with sorting into groups but I have to go out shopping now! Will look at it properly later, though.

[maggie_4_7]

Yes I have it but I was on tablet and I seemed to lose the notes I had put in but I was looking quickly before I went out. I shall take another closer look now I am on laptop.


How do you get to the notes to edit or add?

[kiterunner]

Do you mean the notes that you can add to your tree, or the DNA match ones, Maggie?

[maggie_4_7]

Do you mean the notes that you can add to your tree, or the DNA match ones, Maggie?

The DNA matches one.

[ElizabethHerts]

I have clicked on the two options and just a very few of my matches have notes against them. This is because most of my matches have no trees at all.

It tells me shared ancestors, but they are only for ones I already knew about, so I hope it will improve in time.

[kiterunner]

The DNA matches one.

Hmm, it seems a bit fiddly at the moment! I clicked on the person's name on the DNA match list and it took me straight to the "compare" screen and then I had to click on her name again to get to the page where it lets you add or edit notes.

[maggie_4_7]

Interestingly I had a 10 new matches appear today and I looked at one that intrigued me and when I went to the profile it told me which ancestor connected us which I thought 'ooh brilliant' but when I looked in his tree this ancestor isn't there!

But he is connected by that ancestor through a granddaughter but he hasn't got any ancestors on that part of the tree and also he has misspelt her name as Kirby when it should be Kilby (I have both names in my tree to make it more confusing) so I assume they are looking at both trees and comparing potential ancestors of his lady with mine.

Also I have a new laptop (bought October and I was trying to keep it as clean as possible and without too many downloads) and was using Microsoft Edge but the Ancestry Lab beta was playing up so I have downloaded FireFox now. So it doesn't work well in Microsoft Edge although Ancestry do say they only support Chrome, Firefox and Safari.

[kiterunner]

By the way, the reason I was using Opera to view my match list was because it wasn't loading properly on Firefox (on my desktop computer - it was o.k. on my laptop) but the beta version seems to be loading o.k. on Firefox anyway.

[maggie_4_7]

Hmm, it seems a bit fiddly at the moment! I clicked on the person's name on the DNA match list and it took me straight to the "compare" screen and then I had to click on her name again to get to the page where it lets you add or edit notes.

ahh okay, I was trying to click on the icon of the notes didn't think to click on name again. As long as I can get to them to edit and add.

[kiterunner]

Interestingly I had a 10 new matches appear today and I looked at one that intrigued me and when I went to the profile it told me which ancestor connected us which I thought 'ooh brilliant' but when I looked in his tree this ancestor isn't there!

But he is connected by that ancestor through a granddaughter but he hasn't got any ancestors on that part of the tree and also he has misspelt her name as Kirby when it should be Kilby (I have both names in my tree to make it more confusing) so I assume they are looking at both trees and comparing potential ancestors of his lady with mine.


Wow, that's exciting! I wonder if they have done this with any of mine. Will have a look.

[kiterunner]

Ooh, yes! It is saying:

"How are you and XXXXXXXXXXXX connected?
Common Ancestors

According to Ancestry family trees, these are common ancestors you and XXXXXXXXX share. You can view each relationship to see if it’s correct."

And those people are not in XXXXXXXXX's tree, but they are actually our shared ancestors. Now to see whether they have managed to solve any of my puzzles...

[kiterunner]

Well, I haven't found shared ancestors who I didn't already know about yet (but I've only looked through a very few), but there is someone who has the wrong couple in their tree where our shared ancestors should be, and ancestry is showing the correct people as our shared ancestors. So maybe some people will use this kind of information to correct their own trees.

[kiterunner]

Sorry to say they don't seem to be labelling matches as "Father's side" once I get to the 5th-8th cousins, though I suppose it could be misleading if they did, since I have come across one or two who have shared matches on both sides of my tree.

[kiterunner]

And yes, I have now looked at a new match who only has a small tree and ancestry is showing me our supposed shared ancestors who are not in that person's tree. Only problem is, it says their 4xg-grandmother was a sister of my 4xg-grandmother, but I haven't got that sister in my tree, and it is a Nottinghamshire family, so I have (previously) looked through the PR baptisms and there is no such sister.

So, proceed with caution! To be fair, ancestry does say "you can view each relationship to see if it's correct", rather than claiming it definitely is.

[maggie_4_7]

And yes, I have now looked at a new match who only has a small tree and ancestry is showing me our supposed shared ancestors who are not in that person's tree. Only problem is, it says their 4xg-grandmother was a sister of my 4xg-grandmother, but I haven't got that sister in my tree, and it is a Nottinghamshire family, so I have (previously) looked through the PR baptisms and there is no such sister.

So, proceed with caution! To be fair, ancestry does say "you can view each relationship to see if it's correct", rather than claiming it definitely is.

Yes with Ancestry caution is the key word but the first one I looked at was right which was a miracle seeing as the name had been spelt incorrectly too :) but it might give us clue.

[JayG]

I've just been having a look at this.

I've lost all my 'common ancestors' hints. On my main DNA page it says I have 23 of them, clicking on it brings up the new DNA matches list but there aren't any matches, just a message 'No matches match the selected filter'.

It looks like some of the features might be useful tho.

[kiterunner]

If anyone else is wondering how to add someone to a group when you haven't got them showing in a list, for instance you are looking at their profile or the "compare" page (and say, they are 5th-8th cousin, unlinked tree), you can click through to the page that has tabs for their pedigree and surnames, shared matches, and map and locations (I don't know what this page is called, but it's basically a summary of a particular person from your DNA match list) then click the star next to their name, then go to view your DNA match list and choose "starred matches" from the Group dropdown menu, then that person should appear in the list of starred matches and you will have the option to add them to a group. (Then you can click on the star again to removed them from your starred matches.) It seems something of a "round the houses" way of doing it, but it's the quickest way I could find, unless someone has found a better way?

I filled in a feedback survey, but I was expecting to get to a page where I could type in all my suggestions etc and only realised I should have done it where it said "tell us more about any of your answers" when I had gone onto the final page and it submitted.

[Anstey Nomad]

Late to the party (had started my own thread). Now not convinced by this shared ancestor feature given the inaccuracies of some of the trees on Ancestry and the fact that I’ve looked more closely at the Bodycote shared ancestry and the line of descent is wrong.

[Phoenix]

I'm not impressed that my 22k matches are now all on a single page. It took 4 months to triage BM's matches down to abt 500. Looks like I'll have to do that with mine, if I am to have anything sensible to deal with. t's currently really sticky, moving down the list.

On the plus side, you can put people into more than one group, so coz is in two main groups, and sib's child in four.

[JayG]

Does the shared ancestor feature only work if you have a public tree?

[kiterunner]

Does the shared ancestor feature only work if you have a public tree?

I'm guessing it is the same as Thru Lines: ThruLines is available for a limited time for all members to explore. ThruLines Beta is available to anyone who has linked a public or private searchable tree that is well built (should be at least 3–4 generations deep) to their AncestryDNA test.

[kiterunner]

I can see I will need more than 24 groups. Am going to set them up just on one side of my tree for now and work on that, then at some point I will get rid of them and set new ones up for the other side, unless they increase the limit in the meantime!

[ElizabethHerts]

Is there any explanation about groups anywhere?

[kiterunner]

I can't find one, Elizabeth.

[ElizabethHerts]

I'll make it up as I go along, then!

[JayG]

I'm guessing it is the same as Thru Lines: ThruLines is available for a limited time for all members to explore. ThruLines Beta is available to anyone who has linked a public or private searchable tree that is well built (should be at least 3–4 generations deep) to their AncestryDNA test.

Thanks Kate. My tree is set as private, non-searchable so that must be why I'm not getting some of the features.

[ElizabethHerts]

My tree is private too, Jay, but I'm getting the features.

I've started colour coding my matches, but it could get complicated!

[kiterunner]

Elizabeth, presumably your private tree is indexed (searchable) and Jay's isn't.

[ElizabethHerts]

I use my daughter's tree, so I'm not sure what the settings are.

[NickiP]

I'm not getting any ThruLines either. My tree is private and set to be indexed, but haven't saved any Ancestry records to it which is probably why I'm not getting anything as they won't have indexed it.

[kiterunner]

I swear they are subtly shuffling the order of the match list each time I view it! I'm slowly working through my matches to see which shared matches (if any) each one has, but sometimes I get to where I was up to in the list, look at the next few entries, and then find that I get to a load of entries that I've already done.

[Phoenix]

The only easy way to sort things seems to be to assign a group a "to be sorted" colour, which you change when you've done. But I find it very difficult to manage a list of over 20k. Hopefully we will get pages back.

[maggie_4_7]

The only easy way to sort things seems to be to assign a group a "to be sorted" colour, which you change when you've done. But I find it very difficult to manage a list of over 20k. Hopefully we will get pages back.


Good grief 20,000!

I am slowly working through mine which is about 300 I find the new features helpful especially the groups.

I have sorted through about a third of them into groups. I don't understand why people have their DNA done, upload it without any trees! I have managed to work out a couple of those because of their other matches.

I have a group named unknown no other matches and unknown and other matches so I can deal with the knowns. But it is a big task and yes I hate that the Ancestry list does seem to shift about.

I did uploiad to GedMatch to cross check some which helped but I have now deleted my kit but kept my profile. I may upload again in the future.

I have uploaded to My Heritage but to use it properly I need to pay money which I don't want to do at the moment but I notice the same people are coming up, but there are a lot more matches.

[kiterunner]

300 in total, Maggie, or just 300 "4th cousins or closer"?

[maggie_4_7]

300 in total, Maggie, or just 300 "4th cousins or closer"?

4th cousins or closer.

[Mary from Italy]

It's worth looking at the others too, because if you can connect to more distant relatives it confirms your tree further back.

[maggie_4_7]

It's worth looking at the others too, because if you can connect to more distant relatives it confirms your tree further back.

Yes I am looking at those too but it is a bit of a job mainly because the list keeps shifting about which is why I like the group system I am shoving them in one straight away so I know I have been there before :) and also why I like the Thrulines because it picked up a few very distant cousins and I checked all their trees and crosschecked theirs and my research and bingo one was a Norfolk and a Northamptonshire connection which was great but way back, two Scottish ones way back, I wasn't sure I had the right families there is always a niggle with some research for me, but if we haven't we have all gone wrong but we are connected :)

[maggie_4_7]

I swear they are subtly shuffling the order of the match list each time I view it! I'm slowly working through my matches to see which shared matches (if any) each one has, but sometimes I get to where I was up to in the list, look at the next few entries, and then find that I get to a load of entries that I've already done.

Well either that or as more people have their DNA done it is re-ordering the list as they are added by the amount of DNA/segment match. I can't think of any other reason why it happens but yes I have noticed it too.

[kiterunner]

Well either that or as more people have their DNA done it is re-ordering the list as they are added by the amount of DNA/segment match. I can't think of any other reason why it happens but yes I have noticed it too.

Maggie, the matches that I was talking about which appeared in between some that I had been working on, were not marked as new, so I don't think it was that. Though I suppose if there is a glitch where previously-viewed matches are being marked as new, there could also be some new records not being flagged. I do hope not!

[Kit]

Just an idea here for everyone with totally unidentifiable US matches. I've now created a colour group titled US origins, so I can stick all US based matches with poor or no trees or no easy way of determining the relationship into a labelled too hard basket. I might create a too hard basket too, depending on what colours I have left.

[Kit]

I just wish I had ThruLines. My tree is complete enough and accurate enough to be allowed to join in. It's just not working for me.

[kiterunner]

Ooh, the group selection dropdown menu is showing me how many in each group now, plus how many matches in total (29,080 - that's a lot of scrolling to do!) and how many close, distant, new, etc. And I think the search box has moved so it's easier to find. I guess they have been reading the feedback.

[maggie_4_7]

Well for some reason I have lost Thrulines it is back to DNA circles!!

Actually none of it is working can't get into DNA matches at all.

[kiterunner]

That happened to me the other day, Maggie. I made a thread about it, but by the time I had posted the thread, it was working again. Toni said it had happened to her the day before.

[maggie_4_7]

I think it is because they keeping updating it.

I cleared out all my browsing data and cookies and now its back.

Toni, perhaps if you do a clean up and clear out of the cookies for Ancestry you might get the new lab features perhaps. Is it only Thrulines you haven't got?

[Kit]

I don't have ThruLines or common ancestors Maggie. I emailed ancestry about it and the girl suggested it might be because I have not put a name on my tree for my Dad or his parents. I have changed it slightly so they now have surnames, which would have been easy to work out anyway but no other details. If in a few days nothing has changed I'll try deleting cookies and see if that improves anything.

I'm quite wary after reading on FB a woman who contacted a DNA match had the match respond that they shared the same birthday, even though the woman was listed as living on her tree and so her details should not have been visible.

Hopefully once the testing is finished the ThruLines will work for any 3-4 generations on a tree, not just starting from the home person.

[Phoenix]

It is all very odd. One DNA match has a twiglet tree, but when you click on it, it's an oak tree. So how are some bits visible, and others not?

[Kit]

No idea.

I randomly get the number 1 next to the extras tab, like there is something new, but nothing has changed.

I also get all the error messages appear regularly as a flash before the next one appears and then it all loads.

There was something new today but I was too slow to make it out. I think as they keep updating their program odd things happen to us.

[kiterunner]

Has the ThruLines had a bit of a revamp? It's now divided into sections for parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, etc. and I don't think it was before. But it still doesn't show markers for which people it's worth clicking on! And it doesn't work on my laptop now, or at least not on Firefox. I will have to try other browsers later.

[Kit]

Yes, that revamp came in a few days ago.

ThruLines are still working on firefox for me.

[kiterunner]

It's working on Firefox on my desktop, Kit, just not on my laptop.

[kiterunner]

And it's working on my laptop again now.

[kiterunner]

I'm not sure whether this comes under "Ancestry Labs" or not, but they seem to be changing the Compare page that you get when you click on the name of a DNA match from the list. I saw a different version, where it lets you change groups and it has several tabs instead of everything being on one page, but then the next time I clicked on one it was back to the old version.

[maggie_4_7]

Ancestry Lab is telling me there is something new but when I go into the menu there isn't.

[kiterunner]

Yes, it often does that to me on certain browsers, Maggie.

[Phoenix]

They have removed so many useful features. No lists of names or places any more, just a silly stunted tree and an inadequate map. Goodness knows where they get their gazeteer from, but they don't recognise half the parishes in Norfolk.
I'm sure this is fine for beginners looking for first cousins, but I think I've lost my chance to find distant cousins unless I disable the beta view. So cross that I've just renewed my subscription.

[Kit]

Do the feedback and let them know. Although that feature is also becoming rarer unfortunately.

There is also the new profile page which we can beta test. I'm not real sure on the difference as I don't have much information but I can't see if other trees might be DNA matches without the new profile anymore.

I also wish they'd tell us if the person has done a DNA test rather than they are not a match or have not tested. Although I guess it doesn't matter as a spouse might do the tree rather than the blood relative.

[kiterunner]

I also wish they'd tell us if the person has done a DNA test rather than they are not a match or have not tested. Although I guess it doesn't matter as a spouse might do the tree rather than the blood relative.

There is a good reason for them not telling - imagine if your DNA test showed that your Dad wasn't your biological father, and then your paternal cousins etc could see that you had done a DNA test but you didn't match them! You might not want everyone to know.

[Phoenix]

There is a good reason for them not telling - imagine if your DNA test showed that your Dad wasn't your biological father, and then your paternal cousins etc could see that you had done a DNA test but you didn't match them! You might not want everyone to know.

Ah, so it was a blip when I could see that they had had a test done, and we didn't match.

[kiterunner]

I'm not sure whether this comes under "Ancestry Labs" or not, but they seem to be changing the Compare page that you get when you click on the name of a DNA match from the list. I saw a different version, where it lets you change groups and it has several tabs instead of everything being on one page, but then the next time I clicked on one it was back to the old version.

I am seeing the new version of this again now. Nice to be able to add someone to a group without having to go the route of starring them and then viewing starred matches.

[Kit]

There is a good reason for them not telling - imagine if your DNA test showed that your Dad wasn't your biological father, and then your paternal cousins etc could see that you had done a DNA test but you didn't match them! You might not want everyone to know.

Good point. I hadn't thought of that.

So not telling people before you get the results is a wise idea.

[Phoenix]

I am seeing the new version of this again now. Nice to be able to add someone to a group without having to go the route of starring them and then viewing starred matches.

That is about the only good point. I am really cross about losing the place name facility. And I do hope they ultimately put pages back again. Searching is so much more difficult at the moment.

I'm visiting a fifth cousin next Monday who I doubt I'd have found under the current system.

[kiterunner]

Phoenix, can you explain what you mean about losing the place name facility, please?

[kiterunner]

Never mind, I see now. Hmm. Why did they do that?

[kiterunner]

Ah, there is a "Birth Locations Map" that you can use to see where the DNA match's ancestors were born.

[Phoenix]

Ah, there is a "Birth Locations Map" that you can use to see where the DNA match's ancestors were born.

This only works if they recognise the place. They think Blakeney is inland, not on the Norfolk coast. Charleton in Devon does not exist, nor do heaps of others.

You may find a match doing the search, but then not find it on the map. And if you can't find it on the map, it's like a missing census page. I have provided feedback.

[Phoenix]

Aaaaaaaaaaaargh.

You can now only view 5 generations, so for a surname beyond that, you have to view the full tree.

I will never want to look at a relation with a tree in the thousands now.


Oh, and just to make the day perfect, it sounds as if FMP is throwing open our trees to the world unless we opt out.

[NickiP]

Not happy, not only can you only see 5 generations now but if you click on one of them it doesn't open a window with the basic details but takes you to their tree instead.

I'd left the search page open with results for a surname search, now it shows the search details at the top reducing the amount I can see at any one time. Not an issue for anyone with a big screen, but my laptop screen isn't that high resolution so I can now see less on the page that I did previously and have to scroll down more. Added to that they couldn't even put in the intermittent 5-8th cousin shared matches that they appear to have been trialling. Hope they change it back.

[kiterunner]

Oh, and just to make the day perfect, it sounds as if FMP is throwing open our trees to the world unless we opt out.

Where have you seen that, please, Phoenix?

[ElizabethHerts]

I had an email, Kate.

"We’re about to implement a pretty exciting change and thought you should know in advance.

From 1 July, the deceased ancestors in everyone’s trees will become shareable. Which means other members may receive hints about the dead ancestors in your tree. They’ll only be shared between members who have common ancestry – likely, a distant relative. Making family-tree building a more conducive, collaborative experience.

Your privacy is of the utmost importance... Therefore, any information on you or your living relatives will remain private. Equally, no-one else will be able to edit your ancestors’ details or see your tree – just you. So you’ll remain completely in control.

This change is totally optional – if you don't want your ancestors to be shared, just follow the instructions in our FAQs before 1 July. We’ll send you a friendly reminder before that day, just in case.

In the meantime, feel free to have a look at our updated privacy policy.

Best regards,


The Findmypast Team"

[kiterunner]

Thanks, Elizabeth. I would have thought they should make it "opt-in" rather than "opt-out". And I'm not sure about this: "They’ll only be shared between members who have common ancestry". Wouldn't you be able to put anybody you like as your ancestor to see who has them in their tree? They can't easily check whether that person really is your ancestor, can they?

[Kit]

I like your email more than mine. This is all I got:

We’ve updated our privacy policy to accommodate tree-to-tree hinting which, for members with family trees, kicks off from 1 July. Here’s a quick summary of what’s changed:
• We’ve clarified how we use historical records and your right to deletion (section 7A)
• We’ve expanded our list of communications to include tree hints (3B)
• We’ve included how we share The Tree data with our new sister site RootsFinder and updated details about how The Tree functions (Section 6)
• We’ve added greater detail about the default settings for tree and how to delete a tree (Section 6)
• We’ve added what it means to share deceased ancestors on your Family Tree (Section 6). These changes to sharing settings will take effect from 1 July
If you’d like to explore this in a bit more detail, take a look at our privacy policy page.

[maggie_4_7]

I got an email too but I don't have a tree on there. I only ocassionally get a month's sub when I need to get some images.

[kiterunner]

I did get the same email as Elizabeth, but I hadn't checked my emails when I saw this thread.

Interesting to see RootsFinder mentioned in your email, Toni. I hadn't heard of it and didn't know that FMP was going to be sharing tree data with it, though I assume they mean from their "world tree" rather than from individual family trees.

[Kit]

I'm finding it all a bit strange. Why did I not get the email that the rest of you received and vice versa? Mine is just the privacy policy updates.

I have a tree on there but think I'll delete it. I thought the hints might come in useful but they don't work unless I access them as soon as the email saying I have new hints comes in.

[Janet]

FMP sent me the same email you got, Toni.

[Phoenix]

I'm bracing myself for more updates as Ancestry won't let me in at all at the moment.

[kiterunner]

There is a message at the top of the page at the moment:
Note: You may be experiencing some intermittent service with the Ancestry.co.uk website. We apologize for any inconvenience this might cause and appreciate your patience as we work to resolve the problem as quickly as possible.

[ElizabethHerts]

It's been like that for me for the past couple of weeks! They should have made that announcement back then.

[kiterunner]

I finally cleared cookies (for ancestry only) in the browser that I usually use, and now when I click through to the user profile, it actually works. Hope it lasts!

[kiterunner]

When viewing a family tree, "Tree Search" (which kept refusing to work) has disappeared and "Find Person" is back! Maybe not so good for people who use tree tags? But fine with me as I don't use them.

[Phoenix]

Our backend services are overtaxed at the moment and we are unable to retrieve all your matches. We apologize for the inconvenience, please try again later.

I'm finding the old style matches continue to be much easier to use. When I can get in.

[ElizabethHerts]

Lots of complaints on Ancestry's Facebook page, which are largely ignored. Every so often you find, tucked away, a statement from Ancestry, usually not helpful.

For website problems they really need to display, at the top of the website page, information on what is going on. At present you have to scroll and scroll to try to find anything at all.

I wanted West Yorkshire marriages, I clicked, and I just get:

We're sorry, this page is no longer available.
Return to previous page
Don't know where to go from here? You might find one of these links useful.

[maggie_4_7]

I have been getting error messages a lot, especially this one:

An unexpected error occurred.
You can try reloading the page, or come back later.

[kiterunner]

I agree with Phoenix's post above - if you are getting that "backend services" message about your DNA matches, turn off the new and improved DNA matches in ancestry lab and (hopefully) you will be able to see your matches.

[kiterunner]

If you turn off the New and Improved DNA Matches, you get the old format list of surnames and pedigree format, and "map and locations". Handy if you want any of those back! Of course you don't see the colour groups that way, though. I suppose you can make a running list of which groups to add which people to, and when you have done a few, switch the new and improved matches on, add to groups, then switch it off again. I was doing this for a while before anyway, so I could work through the match list page by page instead of the endless scrolling.

[Phoenix]

I am working through (the 24k) eliminating those I will not get a response from, or don't form a group, and making notes.

Then (in about six months!) I can switch to beta and code up quickly. Though 24 groups is frankly not enough. The don't knows are currently in a single, messy pile.

[kiterunner]

I agree that 24 aren't enough, Phoenix. I'm still only grouping the matches on my mother's side and just noting down which groups the ones on my father's side will go in when I switch over.

Can someone please remind me what is improved about the "new and improved DNA matches", apart from the colour-coded groups? I feel as though turning off the Beta was an improvement all round apart from that!

[Phoenix]

You only have a five generation tree and you cannot find a list of place names. Those pinned on the map (and many parishes are not recognised) are only for those five generations.

Feasibly, you could have a good match six generations back, but if your match has a large tree, you have to trawl through page after page of family, attempting to spot that match.

[Phoenix]

One good thing about the new and improved, but I don't think this is a change, is that you can see the notes without having to click on them.

[Kit]

FMP sent me the same email you got, Toni.

I've got the email everyone else got now too. I would have preferred to get that first.

[kiterunner]

There is a new feature just been added to Ancestry Labs - "Hints Feedback". "Let us know why you accepted or ignored certain hints so we can provide you with more meaningful hints in the future."

I'm about to try it out. Hopefully they will actually use the feedback to improve the hints system, which is pretty bad at the moment.

[kiterunner]

This evening, it keeps giving me the hint feedback form to fill in when I accept or reject a hint, although the Ancestry Lab shows that I have the Hints Beta disabled, and there is no on / off switch showing on the hints page. I usually turn it on if there are some wildly wrong hints that I want to flag up, and then turn it off again as it is quite time-consuming to fill it in for every one. Hope this is just a glitch and they aren't making it mandatory!

[kiterunner]

Well, now the Ancestry Lab tab says "There are no betas available at this time." so I guess the Hints Feedback system can't be turned off any more. I don't think I'll bother to fill it in for accepted hints, though, only rejected ones.