She's not in the group. Another cousin sent it to her.
Spike's Bitches 49: As usual, I'm here to help you, and I... are you naked under there?
Spike-centric discussion. Lusty, lewd (only occasionally crude), risqué (and frisqué), bawdy (Oh, lawdy!), flirty ('cuz we're purty), raunchy talk inside. Caveat lector.
Oooof. I'm sorry, Hil -- that just sucks.
This side of the family is a ton of people -- my great-grandmother was the third of 12 children in her family, and nine of those kids had kids of their own, so just by the time you get to my mom's generation, it's several dozen people -- so I figured that posting a chart to keep track of who was who might be useful.
It is useful, Hil. She is just ridiculous. People don't get that a locked post isn't available to the world at large.
I just don't even get what she thinks that anyone would do with that information.
Why not fill out her family tree anyway and put in some stupid, obvious mistakes, like double the number of children and add a few random spouses. Then forward for her input and claim it's all public record.
Just if you want to wave that red flag at the angry bull, that is.
I just checked, and found that she's on at least three other public trees on various genealogy websites. (Or, at least, her parents are, plus two children -- it doesn't show names for living people.)
I guess she figured if it's a security question like oldest cousin or mothers middle name or something?? But yeah, hard to hide.
Yeah, seems like ignoring her is a good idea.
I sent back a message, "Thanks for reaching out! If you want to be excluded from the family tree, that's fine. I'd never share any information that anyone was uncomfortable sharing."
I did not point out that all of this information was easily available.