Help get this topic noticed by sharing it on Twitter, Facebook, or email.
I’m happy.

Any eyeball icon (or equivalent) in FT-search results, to show "I'm already watching this person".

IDEA: On the results listed from a FT search, "flag" the individuals I'm already "watching".

BACKGROUND
My goal is to watch any profile with a surname 'Straehle'. So I did a search on FT, clicked on each name, looked at its pop-up window to make sure that its watch-flag was set as "watch".

Now I'm up to page 16 of 59 pages of results (currently). I won't finish my flag-checking today. Okay. But at some future time when I resume this effort, I will do another FT-search for 'Straehle'... and I wont know whether the results are in the same order, or if new individuals are sprinkled throughout the list! To be sure I'm watching every Straehle, I'd have to have to re-check all 400 that i've already done.

Gee, that's daunting! How 'bout if the results of a search on FT had a little eyeball icon beneath the person's name, to indicate that I'm already watching it?
3 people like
this idea
+1
Reply
  • Any time you put any record on watch (turning white star to black star), it is already automatically on your watch. Any changes during the week, it will be reported in weekly reports to you. Even those changes YOU made, will be reported back to YOU as an option.

    I got more than 3,000 on watch list. Periodically reviewing to remove any that have not been changed for many moons.
    • view 1 more comment
    • Easy! The ones that are off watch are the ones that have WHITE STAR.

      You have to click on the name for the summary box to pop up to see if it shows up as white or black on your end, not mine.

      no other way.
    • Thanks for your input, Mr Samuelsen.

      Of course, my post indicated that I already do what you are suggesting i learn to do: 'click on each name, look at its pop-up window to make sure that its watch-flag was set as "watch".'

      And my comment suggested that one cannot, tell whether the flag/star/ is set "without individually clicking on each name...."

      I guess your reply-comment was simply to confirm that there's "no other way [currently]." That's why I posted it as an IDEA!

      FT search produces a list of 'hits', about 25 hits per page. JUST BY LOOKING AT SUCH A PAGE -- no-no, you can't click anywhere! -- the viewer cannot detect which profiles are being watched.

      My post was because I have already clicked the "white star" for 400 of the 1500 Straehle profiles. When next I search for 'Straehle' to set the watch-flag (the white/black star), I won't know which 400 are set as 'already watching', and which 1100 are set 'currently unwatched'.

      Looking to the future... Let's say that I've clicked the white star for all 1500 Straehle profiles. Later, I do a search for Straehle and find that there are 1520 profiles. How shall I find the 20 new profiles, in order to click their white star and watch them? Should it be necessary to click on all 1520 profiles just to find the 20 new ones??
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited

  • What a great idea! To have an immediate visual clue that someone is on your watch list would be very useful.

    It would allow one to pick out more quickly the relative one is trying to find again from a list of similarly named people.

    Many people have listed on this board complaints about not being able to find their relative in the complete Family Tree search results. This would help them quite a bit.

    It would also help when looking for duplicates when using Find to immediately see that the two people with the same name and similar vital information are cousins, because you are watching them both, rather than possible duplicates.

    It might also encourage people to use their watch lists more. I am always surprised to see how few of my relatives that have a lot of active contributors are being watched by just me.

    I would have it look like this:



    I assume that the main programming concern would be the amount of computational power and time it would take to check each name again the searchers Watch List one by one.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited

  • An extension of this idea might be to show the star for anyone in my pedigree. I agree this might take a lot of computational power.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited

  • I’m anticipatory.
    Tech team... instead of a star as the watch flag, could it be a pair of eyes (closed eyes if not watching, open eyes if being watched)?
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited

  • Basically you actually want to replace the stars with eyes.

    Nothing else actually changed except adding or removing from your watch list.

    That's it.

    And if you want to find EVERY one, just broaden the search, not narrow the search (remove dates, remove given names, etc.)

    Have you tried this method to find who is already on your list?

  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited

  • David, I think you and Julistra are talking past each other about two completely different things.

    What she wants is an efficient way to manage this scenario:

    1) She is currently watching all 974 people by the name of Straehle in Family Tree.

    2) Tomorrow, someone adds a new person by the name of Straehle to Family Tree.

    3) She then wants to efficiently find that one new Straehle that is not on her watch list so she can add him to her watch list, without clicking to inspect a summary card up to 975 times.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited