Find My Past Searches

[margarita]

....... and get 2 months free subscription.....

I don't think it should be just fixed at 2 months - that should just be for starters. Then it should cover the period it takes to get the website back to what people thought they were paying for. At present rate of progress I can see that being a lot longer than 2 months.

If something as basic as restoring the previous style of census household view is only 'under review' how long will it take to review and restore all the features requested?

Maggie

[Pam Downes]

I don't think it should be just fixed at 2 months - that should just be for starters. Then it should cover the period it takes to get the website back to what people thought they were paying for. At present rate of progress I can see that being a lot longer than 2 months.

If something as basic as restoring the previous style of census household view is only 'under review' how long will it take to review and restore all the features requested?

Maggie

For all the FMP bashing that is (rightly) going on, I think we have to be reasonable. We, the customer, don't know how quickly they will be able to fix the main gripes, so for them to offer everyone a FOC 2 month extension now would, in my opinion, be fair.

We're all going to have niggles about the new site, just as we had about the old one (birthplace search in the 1871 census limited to county only was my main moan), so I can live with them then taking a further month to review the more minor issues. If a major problem will take three months (from now) to correct as long as FMP are up front about it I would accept that, as it must be difficult to prioritise everything to be put right, and some things will be fairly simple to correct while others will take more time.

Pam

[Ken_R]

Just had a look back at the FMP Feedback Forum and then followed a link to "Top Questions".

On the subject of searching the Census by Reference, the following appears,

We are currently receiving lots of feedback regarding the new site format and the issue of census reference searching is one we are looking at closely..

Click here to go to our Census Records page where you can search by individual census (if it is of any help to you). You should have the ability to search by reference on these pages:

Of course it is of help to us, otherwise people wouldn't be asking for it. Numpty!

It just exemplifies how these people are into 'sales' and have no experience (or input) as Researchers.

[Pam Downes]

Following on from Ken's post, and courtesy of a mailing list, here's how to get to a page which allows you to enter census reference numbers.
Search records in top tab. Click to get drop-down boxes and then click 'search all records'.
Scroll down to 'census, land and surveys' on left-hand side of page.
Select census.
Scroll down a weeny bit so you can see the individual census listed on the right-hand side of the page.
Click census required.
Scroll down to piece number, folio and page boxes.

Won't work for the 1911 census because that uses a different reference system.

Using the same method you can also make (some) address searches, though there's extra clicks to make. (We ought to sue FMP for RSI with all these extra clicks we have to do to get basic info!)
Same clicks as before but scroll further down the page, past piece number etc boxes.
There's two address boxes one of which is labelled 'browse house name' and the other 'browse street'.
Click 'browse street', and you get a pop-up box, in the top right of which there's a 'search filters'. Type the name of the street in that box, and depending what street name you've typed in you will get one or more boxes to select.
Select box as appropriate, click apply filters.
Then click search census.

It would seem that once you've searched for a street in one census then on other censuses you can type the address directly into the 'browse street' box - which will save you two or three clicks.

However it doesn't seem to work very well using High Street on the 1881. I tried to filter it by using a town, but only Scottish towns seem to be listed.
Doesn't like High Street on the 1891 either.

Searching by towns and parishes seems very hit and miss, and varies between censuses.

Pam

[almach]

Searching by towns and parishes seems very hit and miss, and varies between censuses.

There's too many anomalies, I'm dizzy with them. Some address searches find, others don't, an address can be found in one census year but not in another, no address search for 1911 census.

1841 - 1891 name is entered in the order: first name, last name, 1901 and 1911 the order is last name, first name. What!!!!

I have lost patience with it.

[almach]

For all the FMP bashing that is (rightly) going on, I think we have to be reasonable. We, the customer, don't know how quickly they will be able to fix the main gripes, so for them to offer everyone a FOC 2 month extension now would, in my opinion, be fair.

We're all going to have niggles about the new site, just as we had about the old one (birthplace search in the 1871 census limited to county only was my main moan), so I can live with them then taking a further month to review the more minor issues. If a major problem will take three months (from now) to correct as long as FMP are up front about it I would accept that, as it must be difficult to prioritise everything to be put right, and some things will be fairly simple to correct while others will take more time.

Pam

You are more understanding than me, Pam. I feel cheated, the site is not offering the service I signed up to. I'm unhappy too that we, the customer, are being used as unpaid beta testers.

[Pam Downes]

You are more understanding than me, Pam. I feel cheated, the site is not offering the service I signed up to. I'm unhappy too that we, the customer, are being used as unpaid beta testers.

I didn't say I was happy - and believe me I'm not. I feel exactly the same way you do.
The post you've quoted was in reply to reply which in turn was a reply to a reply etc in which the earliest post (#41) was talking about some people getting a two month FOC extension to their subscription.

At this moment in time I think FMP should automatically offer everyone with an annual sub two months FOC. (And if I was the CEO I'd be offering everyone a FOC extension regardless of their sub.) In view of the monumental mess they have made of the new site and its 'usability' we shouldn't have to beg for that extension, and the two months would at least 'give us our money back'.
As I said, it will probably take a bit longer than two months before all the tweaks are completed, but bearing in mind that the old site wasn't 100% perfect I could live with minor problems being outstanding for a further month. Major problems such as searching census and BMD records have to be sorted within the two months otherwise I will be demanding a further extension!

I'm only in favour of being reasonable with FMP and giving them a chance to sort things out if they're reasonable with me in giving me a two months FOC extension. It hasn't been forthcoming yet, so first thing in the morning I will be starting to compose my demand.

Pam

[almach]

so first thing in the morning I will be starting to compose my demand.

Sent my email early afternoon, Pam I wonder how long before they reply, and with what offer!

[raineshoe]

Well another week on and still no response from FMP despite numerous e-mails and responses saying they will contact me in 24 hours. Absolutely nothing. I don't mind if there is a problem, but just have the courtesy to respond even if the answer is we can't do anything at the moment.

I have to say I've never had such appalling service from them before, but this really is poor now. I also certainly haven't been offered any extension either to my membership. Considering I've been a member since they started I think the current state of affairs has been very poor and it seems they are big enough that they can afford to alienate their members. Well good luck FMP because the way things are going I won't be renewing my membership or recommending you.

[Pam Downes]

Re posts #48 and #59 about Jon Bauckman of WDYTYA asking FMP questions I've had a reply from him.
It appears his inbox imploded (quelle surprise!)with questions people want answers to, and he's compiled a list of 10 key questions which he's sent to FMP. The questions cover
- Broken/missing search features in general
- Refunds and extended subscriptions
- The CEO's response

He hopes to publish the replies on the WDYTYA website tomomrrow.

Pam