Open Thread Thursday: WDYTYA Season 2 Celebrities

The NBC show announced it's lineup for this coming season, which will start in January.

Gwyneth Paltrow, Tim McGraw, Rosie O'Donnell, Steve Buscemi, Kim Cattrall, Lionel Richie, Vanessa Williams, and Ashley Judd.

So this week,the Geneablogger's Open Thread Thursday focuses on that:

* Given the celebrity lineup just announced for WDYTYA, in your opinion are there any surprises? Any disappointments?

* How do you feel about the use of celebrities on WDYTYA instead of ordinary, everyday people?

* Does it seem that WDYTYA has a “formula” that is uses in selecting celebrities for each season? Such as at least one “polarizing” personality? Specific ethnicities? Specific ages (again, there is not one person under 40 this season)?

* Do you find it possible to watch a segment with a celebrity you dislike, setting aside your feelings, just to see the genealogical research aspect and family history stories?

* If you could select seven celebrities for a season of WDYTYA, who would you select? And if possible, tell us why you would select each person.

Surprises? Well, I'm rather surprised to see Kim on there, given that she did one for the UK version. I can't help wondering if it will be the same, just re-dubbed, or if we'll get more on a different side of her family, as that episode was very focused.

Disappointments definitely. The mix of sexes and ethnicities is almost exactly the same, and there are no "other" races this time, just like last time. I'd like to see someone with native heritage. Or Asian-American. I'm beginning to feel like their focus is on finding people who have big stories that lead to some huge American historical event, which bugs me, because that shouldn't be what this show is about. I'd rather see it show that we're ALL not from here, rather than prove we all are--because we aren't.

I think the use of celebrities is just fine. I mean, they have lives, too. If there's one thing the UK version showed me its that celebrities have every bit as much of varied lives as "everyday" people. And at least this way it draws in people who might otherwise see genealogy as a boring pursuit. Might even get them interested in looking into their own.

Formula--still a bit too soon, aside from the fact that the mix of sexes and ethnicitie sseems almost exactly the same as last years. And my comment above about the focus on American history.

After watching 5 or so seasons of the UK one, which included many people I didn't know at all, and several who grated on me during watching, plus one specifically from the US last year who I didn't like herself, I can definitely say that who it is doesn't matter to me as much as the story. I'm always most interested in those that reflect one aspect or another of my own family history, though I will say that so far of all the episodes I've watched, Stephen Fry's from the UK series is still my favorite.

My Top 20:

1. John Stamos
2. Bill Cosby
3. Stephen Spielberg
4. Leonard Nemoy
5. Robert Downey Jr
6. Lee Pace
7. Mark Dacascos
8. George Takei
9. Levar Burton
10. Tim Gunn
11. Harrison Ford
12. Lou Diamond Phillips
13. Emily and/or Zooey Deschanel
14. Mariska Hargitay
15. Kristin Chenowith
16. Jodie Foster
17. Drew Barrymore
18. Whoopi Goldberg
19. Carrie Fisher
20. Cher

Big names probably either wouldn't want to do it, or wouldn't have time, so that leaves out Spielberg (as much I as I'd love to see his for the Jewish aspects), RDJ, Harrison Ford, and Drew Barrymore (though hers would be huge fun to watch).. Jodie Foster's awfully private, so that leaves her out as I doubt she'd agree, busy or not. Bill Cosby, Whoopi, and Cher are iffy, I don't know if they'd be willing/up to it/have time, but they'd be fun to watch.

So that leaves

1. John Stamos
2. Leonard Nemoy
3. Lee Pace
4. Mark Dacascos
5. George Takei
6. Levar Burton
7. Tim Gunn
8. Lou Diamond Phillips
9. Emily and/or Zooey Deschanel
10. Mariska Hargitay
11. Kristin Chenowith
12. Carrie Fisher

Tim, Emily, and Mariska are all pretty busy with their shows, and Zooey's pretty busy these days too, so if I leave them off, that makes nine. I think George would be more likely to agree than Leonard, and better to only have one original Trek star anyway, so that's eight. Carrie swings between too busy and not busy enough, and Kristin's always busy these days, but that leaves me with no girls, so let me backtrack. My dream would probably be this:

1. John Stamos
2. Mark Dacascos
3. George Takei
4. Lou Diamond Phillips
5. Emily Deschanel
6. Kristin Chenowith
7. Carrie Fisher

Of course, that's the actor edition...I just realized I have no authors or news people or musicians on there at all... And of course, I would easily change any of them for Whoopi instead. Hers would be a hoot.

Open Thread Thursday – Running Multiple Genealogy Software Programs

Geneablogger's Open Thread Thursday this past week was:
· Which genealogy software program do you use and why?
· If you use more than one program, list them and tell us why you use more than one program.
· How do you “sync” multiple programs? Do you simply enter the data more than one time? Do you export data from one program and import into another?
· What do you think about the inter-changeability of data between genealogy software programs? Do you fear data loss if you export your data and import into a different program? What improvements would you like software makers to make?

I've used a number of different programs, but I'm only going to cover five plus one online tree, ignoring the ones I've tested or otherwise only used once, because otherwise I could go on for ages.

When I started in genealogy, I got myself a copy of Brother's Keeper. I didn't know much about genealogy software, but I figured starting with a free program was best. After a couple of years, I got a copy of Family Tree Maker (FTM), and since then, that has been my program of choice, though I'm no longer as happy with it as I was. I currently use Family Tree Maker 2006, and I doubt I will upgrade it again, though I might if I find the 2008 version. I also now use Family Tree Builder (FTB) and The Master Genealogist (TMG) (which I'm still learning), and I still have a copy of Legacy on my computer that I've used for a few months now.

At the moment, FTM is still my main program, though I'm working with TMG in hopes that it will become my major program. I've been entering everything into the program from scratch using all the paper copies of my documents, since I was quite lax with citations in FTM, and since the stuff in FTM has become quite a mess from merging multiple files together over the years. At the moment, when I test out a program, I use the gedcom from FTM to transfer in what I have about my family, though I am hoping that in the future, I will used the one from TMG.

FTB I use mostly as a search engine, with a gedcom pulled from FTM at the moment, though I do occasionally (if I'm searching for someone specific) update information to get better results. I'd love to see a major overhaul of this program, as I think it's the best of the three (not including BK and Legacy, which is basically a FTM clone aside from reports), but doesn't have the functionality of either. I think if the program improves, it could well become my main program—to the point where I might be willing to pay for it.

For my online tree, I use Geni, though after the first entry, the site is very slow and clunky. I like that people can be connected to events regardless if they're primaries to the event or just witnesses, and would love a software that would allow the same. I've not paid for the site, so I can't be sure if entry gets any easier with a paid account (though I don't believe it does), so I tend to go through spurts of adding people by hand, which is time-consuming, and therefore I tend to put it off more than I should.

I think compatibility is not a huge issue, as gedcoms are pretty good at storing the basic information, though I'm not sure as far as citations go yet (see above), and if you have added any custom fields, that can cause issues as well.

My biggest issue with software is how clunky citations still are, and how "Western" (ie US-oriented) the programs are. I know that's partially because I live in the US, and that's where I'm buying my software, but it seems to me there are plenty of people in the US who have Scandinavian family, and/or other ancestral groups where naming practices are very different from in the US (ie, the Scandinavian patronymic system).

Most programs still seem stuck in the 90's, but maybe that's just me expecting too much from them yet. I'm glad most come with an online component these days, but I'd like to see a more user-friendly system in place. I'd like to see a system that asks you questions and fills in the fields for you. I know when I started, I didn't even know where to put a lot of the information I had, and because of that, I'm still learning new things every day. I'd even love it to ask questions when you add a new branch to your tree that might guide you in your search, and would set up that branch with the basic appropriate information, instead of having to thumb through tons of "possible" citations for baptisms and christenings for my Jewish family. I'd also like to see a way of recording events that include all the people at the event, not just two – weddings being a prime example of this.

I think software needs a major overhaul to be updated to today's genealogist. There are so many different types of families out there—the software itself should be able to understand this and compensate for it, so that we don't have to deal with all these nuances ourselves.