Blueberries and Blackberries

 I have made a decision - I am going to grow blueberries and blackberries next spring! And I will try to grow more huckleberries but that's pretty difficult.

“fictionalizing”

 

I am writing to request formal review of a collaboration post currently appearing on the Thomas Bailey Christian FamilySearch profile dated August 3, 2025, which repeatedly characterizes genealogical disagreement as “fictionalizing” and “falsifying” without presenting any primary-source documentation to substantiate those conclusions.

While FamilySearch properly allows differing interpretations, the use of loaded and accusatory language such as “fictionalizing,” “falsifying,” and “giving false and fictional parents” constitutes a reputational allegation rather than a neutral genealogical position. These statements are presented without citation to contemporary records created during the lifetime of Thomas Bailey Christian that would objectively disprove all alternate hypotheses.

The post further implies misconduct by unnamed contributors while offering only mathematical speculation about descendant numbers, which does not constitute historical proof under accepted genealogical standards.

I respectfully request that FamilySearch review whether the continued display of unsourced accusatory language in the collaboration section complies with platform policies regarding respectful collaboration, neutrality, and evidence-based genealogy. Disagreement over parentage is a normal part of genealogical research; accusations of “fictionalizing” rise beyond scholarly disagreement when no primary proof is attached.

My goal is not censorship of differing views, but restoration of a neutral, documentation-based environment consistent with FamilySearch standards.

Pattern of Harm Arising from WikiTree’s Gamified Editorial System

This summary outlines a documented pattern of harm affecting Indigenous-descendant families, oral-tradition–based genealogists, and cultural-historical record-keepers on the WikiTree platform. These harms arise not from isolated user conflicts but from structural features of WikiTree’s gamified contribution system, which incentivizes behaviors that directly undermine cultural integrity, descendant rights, and genealogical accuracy.

---

I. Systemic Incentive Structure

WikiTree’s platform awards users with points, badges, rank status, challenges, and achievement-based privileges. These mechanisms prioritize:

• volume of edits over quality of research,

• speed of intervention over cultural competency, and

• platform rank over lived descendant knowledge.

This reward structure functions as a gamified hierarchy that elevates high-activity users to de facto authority positions absent any credentialing in Indigenous studies, oral-tradition methodology, or cultural-heritage ethics.

---

II. Resulting Harmful Behaviors

The gamified incentives predictably produce specific behaviors that have already caused measurable cultural injury:

1. Premature or Unsupported Declarations of “Fictional” Ancestors

High-rank editors, rewarded for aggressive profile “cleanup,” frequently label longstanding Indigenous ancestors as “fictitious” or “invented,” even when those ancestors are documented in colonial records, military reports, diplomatic correspondence, family oral traditions, and established local histories.

2. Defamatory Categorization Practices

Editors routinely assign individuals—including respected family historians—to categories such as “Shawnee Heritage Fraud” without evidentiary basis, genealogical review, or cultural consultation. These labels constitute reputational harm, especially when applied against descendants’ objections.

* Hokolesqua (Chief Cornstalk) is well-documented - see his Wikipedia page

In addition to Chief Cornstalk the "fraud" category lists: Bluesky, Newa, Wissecapeway (Black Beard). All of these people are documented in spite of Wikitree's accusations.

This is just four. I have decided to crowd-source documentation of each person Wikitree claims is "fraud." Because I believe this is defamation and reputational harm and I will be submitting my list to my lawyer. The project I have named Reputational Harm List

3. Disregard for Oral Traditions and Elder-Sourced Histories

Because gamification rewards rapid editing rather than contextual understanding, platform incentives systematically devalue oral tradition and elevate uninformed editorial intervention. This constitutes a pattern of erasure of Indigenous narrative forms.

4. Overriding and Silencing Descendant Communities

Editors with high badge counts routinely override descendants’ corrections, remove culturally grounded information, and issue bans or blocks against those attempting to defend their own lineage. This produces an asymmetry of power where game points—not expertise or kinship—determine editorial control.

When I comment that what they do goes against their own policies my comment is deleted and my account is banned. I have saved all my public comments to archive.org

5. Use of Policy as a Mechanism of Suppression

Policies are frequently invoked selectively or inconsistently to justify removal, alteration, or suppression of Indigenous genealogical data, while similar practices by high-rank editors remain unchallenged. This reflects a pattern of misuse of platform authority.

---

III. Cultural and Community Impact

The above behaviors result in:

• Cultural erasure: Deletion, alteration, or delegitimization of Indigenous ancestors and oral-historical narratives.

• Reputational harm: Publicly branding historians and family elders as fraudulent without evidentiary review.

• Emotional harm to descendants: Silencing familial knowledge, undermining ancestral identity, and disregarding community memory.

• Distortion of the historical record: Allowing gamified incentives to drive genealogical conclusions rather than evidence and cultural context.

This constitutes a recognizable pattern under cultural-heritage frameworks of non-consultative interference, unauthorized narrative control, and platform-enabled erasure.

---

IV. Conclusion

The harm is not incidental. It is a structural outcome of WikiTree’s gamified design, which grants unqualified editors disproportionate authority and incentivizes behaviors that directly conflict with standards of cultural respect, genealogical ethics, and descendant rights.

Rectifying this pattern requires:

1. Review of gamification mechanisms and their impact on culturally sensitive histories;

2. Removal or regulation of defamatory categories;

3. Implementation of descendant-rights and cultural-consultation protocols;

4. Accountability measures for misuse of editorial authority.

---

This was written by Catherine dee Auvil with help from ChatGTP on December 5th 2025

Wikitree sucks

 

OK, I think I have finally made a breakthrough in Cornstalk Genealogy. I have been fighting all summer because Wikitree and FamilySearch both post numerous errors on their profiles of people in our family and they disregard the oral tradition passed down through our family historians. I have thought and thought about this and one of the sticking points is that FamilySearch has a cool feature called "View Relationship" that everyone enjoys and is very useful for people who are investigating our DNA. But then people write horrible things in "collaborations" and flying monkeys (see below) detach our relatives from each other "breaking the chain" when we try to use "View Relationship." Well, now I have a plan. All this winter I am going to be working on a new, fresh tree at Ancestry. Ancestry does not have "View Relationship" feature but they do have a very easy method to download your GEDcom. And in the spring, in order to use the VR feature I will either upload it to my new website Cockacoeske.org (which has the VR feature) OR it is possible that the private trees at FamilySearch (CETs) will have this feature by then. Either way I will make the 1st OFFICIAL CORNSTALK FAMILY TREE GEDcom available to all our family. You can download the tree and then you can edit your own however you like. 

I am going to be working on this all winter. Be patient! Catherine dee Auvil December 1 2025

1st OFFICIAL CORNSTALK FAMILY TREE by CdA

Discuss at Reddit

r/OFFICIALCORNSTALK

this is part of a larger project

THE CORNSTALK PROJECTS by CdA

...........................................................

I am being bullied by Wikitree at Thomas Bailey Christian profile and flying monkeys are taking the lies to FamilySearch. I am going to try to resolve this behind the scenes. If you are involved - if you are a descendant of Thomas Bailey Christian, then email me if you want to see my private notes. auvil.catherine@aol.com and read: Flying monkeys in the genealogy community

🌿 PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT FROM THE CORNSTALK FAMILY 🌿
So apparently a few editors over on WikiTree have decided that one of our family historians “invented” our ancestor Hokolesqua (Chief Cornstalk) — and that therefore he is “fictitious” or even “fraud.” He is just one of our ancestors declared "fictitious" by Wikitree.

😂 Bold move, considering Chief Cornstalk appears in Virginia colonial records, military reports, diplomatic accounts, local histories, and, oh yes … has been part of our family’s oral tradition for generations. Pro tip: it takes about five seconds to check his Wikipedia page.

Since some folks online seem confused, we opted for the simplest solution:

👉 We created the OFFICIAL CORNSTALK FAMILY TREE on Ancestry.
If you want the link, just Google: “deeAuvil blog”

 – Catherine dee Auvil – December 1 2025.”

We welcome discussion and debate, but we will never abandon a family tree preserved for centuries or tolerate anyone labeling our ancestors “fictitious” or our historians “fraudulent,” because that crosses into erasure — 

And we’re refusing any erasure aimed at our elders or our lineage — we’re not sitting politely while you twist their history into your Indigenous erasure project.”

#CornstalkFamily #FamilyHistory #OralTraditionMatters #RespectOurAncestors #Genealogy #NativeHistory #CornstalkLegacy #WeKnowWhoWeAre

Update December 1 2025

I uploaded the announcement to Hokolesqua (Chief Cornstalk's) profile at Wikitree and they responded that Hokolesqua (Chief Cornstalk) is not listed as fraud but look for yourself he is listed in their Category: Shawnee Heritage Fraud. This "category" needs to be removed. And they would not let me reply. And they banned my account. They consistently block me and remove my comments but I do save everything at archive.org and I will put all that together some day.

Small update: In addition to Hokolesqua, they claim Bluesky, Newa, Wissecapeway (Black Beard) are fraudulent - "invented" by our family historians. That's balderdash - I can present documentation for each! Why is this my job? I believe this is defamation of our family historians and reputational harm. See my Google Doc "The Cornstalk Projects" for more information.

Home

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Catherine dée Auvil (@deeauvil)

Genealogy collaboration by email

 There are two ways I can think of to collaborate by email. Please scroll to bottom where I write about my inspiration.

Evernote provides each user with a unique email address that allows you to forward messages or attachments directly into your default notebook. You will find yours in "Account info..."

Tell your collaborators to CC ALL emails to the Evernote email address. If you don't want it to go to your default notebook designate another notebook in the subject line. If you want the email to go to the notebook "Mary" write @Mary in the subject line.

Using gmail (or any extra email address) What I would do is get an email address that you use for NOTHING else but your collaboration with one person. Then have your collaborator send emails directly to that address.

WAIT! Get Permission to share!

If you are going to share email correspondance in a folder online for anyone to see you need permission! Here is an example email asking for permission:

Subject: Permission to Share Family History Emails in Public Dropbox

Dear [Name],

Thank you again for the helpful information you've shared about our family history. I’m organizing all the correspondence I’ve received into a Dropbox folder that will be public, so that other relatives and researchers can access it — both now and in the future.

I'd like to ask your explicit permission to include your emails in that public folder. This would mean:

• Anyone with the link can read your messages.

• The folder will remain available long-term, and may be downloaded or cited by others.

• I would include your name as the author of your emails, unless you ask me to remove or anonymize it.

If you're comfortable with this, could you please reply with a line like:

“You have my permission to include my emails in a publicly viewable Dropbox folder for family history purposes.”

If you'd prefer I limit access or only share certain messages, I’ll gladly honor that. Just let me know.

Thanks again for your generosity and for being part of preserving our family’s story.

Warmly,
[Your Name]
[Your contact info, if needed]

Here is a second email if you would like to include the emails in a book you are writing:

Subject: Request for Permission to Share Family History Emails (Dropbox, Book, or Website)

Dear [Name],

Thank you again for the valuable information you’ve shared about our family history. I’m working on organizing and preserving this material so that it can benefit others — both now and in the future.

I’d like to request your permission to do two things with the emails you’ve sent me:

---

1. Include your messages in a public Dropbox folder

This folder would be:

• Publicly viewable (anyone with the link can read it)

• Shared with family members and genealogy researchers

• Archived long-term as a resource for others

2. Quote or reference your messages in future publications

This may include:

• A family history website

• A printed or digital book or article, including works that may be offered for sale

---

If you’re comfortable with this, you can simply reply with something like:

“You have my permission to include my emails in a public Dropbox folder and to quote them in any future family history projects, including publications that may be sold.”

If you’d prefer to limit how or where your words are used, or if you’d like to stay anonymous, I’ll absolutely respect that — just let me know.

Thank you again for your kindness and generosity in helping preserve our shared history.

Warmly,
[Your Full Name]
[Optional: your email, phone, or project website]

What inspired me to start an email collaboration is the work of Agnus Pearlman.

ALL of her MASSIVE amount of genealogical notes has been archived at OCCGS. I know this because she has written about my ancestor, Thomas Bailey Christian of Indian Creek, Virginia. What is beautiful is there are several collections of correspondence she had with friends about different family lines. It is so vast that is very hard to describe. I have thought about the many email conversations I have had but I didn't save them! I think they would be so interesting for people in the future to read. Well, what I am doing is starting now! And what I want to ask you is just go check out the "Agnus Pearlman Project" and see if your family is in there. I'm posting here because a lot of the work is about Virginia. But ... you just have to see for yourself! Hopefully find your family or get inspired to archive your genealogy conversations!

Compiled Research Agnus Pearlman Project

Surnames & Mononyms

 When beginning your genealogy journey, it’s wise to decide early on which version of a surname you’ll use consistently. This is especially important if you rely on tagging systems—such as Evernote—for organizing your research.

For example, in my own family I have relatives with the surname appearing as Skaggs, Scaggs, and Skegs. Early on, I chose to tag every related note simply as “Skaggs” to keep things uniform. Otherwise, I’d have to remember to search three different tags every time I wanted to find information on that family line—a needless complication.

I was going to write here on what the consensus is on which box to add a mononym, first name or surname? But it seems there is no consensus.  So I will do more research and come back to this.

Wikipedia: Mononyms

Wikipedia: List of legally mononymous people

One last thing about surnames - it has been a recent trend in my family that if we only have a mononym or a firstname for someone we will add their tribe to the surname OR their father's mononym as the surname (for example "Rachel Cornstalk") at first I didn't like this, it seemed inaccurate, but now I see the use for it - just trying to keep track of fathers! So now I like it.