Ancestry Thrulines ... er, inconsistancy

[MrRational]

Most of the links follow through the generations as the tree is built. Yes? (almost 30,000 now btw)
But some/many will show missing tree links ... those shaded places inside the dotted line box.
Everyone with me?

The questions are about when we DO have those 'missing links' in the tree...
when Thrulines doesn't recognize that person or the relationship... Q1: Why not?
Q2: Can we 'fix' it? (Is some basic setting not being triggered ?)

Thanks

[BoSox 15]

Without knowing your specific example, maybe the user's tree that is being used for a Thrulines comparison has that individual set to "living" and is therefore private to you.

I was adding some folks to my tree last week and noticed some people born in the late 1800s were defaulting to "living". I'm not sure if it was something I was doing on my end but I found it odd and makes me wonder how many other people are in my tree listed as "living" that I just didn't notice when reviewing.

[MrRational]

Originally Posted by BoSox 15

Without knowing your specific example...

I'd assume that ANY tree could be the example.
I'm using mine because I KNOW the details; have them all in the tree.
They all start with the dna match cousin...

...were defaulting to "living".

Thanks for the reply.
That's a plausible avenue to check. I'll report back.

back/eta: We can call that type one (see image). But these say 'private'.
The tougher ones ... well, using a sibling in that same tree I do see a records conflict.

If anyone knows the issue(s) is more than this stuff please chime in!
Thanks again.

[aries63]

If the death date isn't filled in, they default to "living".