There's the question of how to deal with a multitude of views of a family. A site could present a consensus view. But just the number of concurring viewpoints does not justify a particular view. Some views are more worthwhile than others. Thus it would be good to weight particular views on the reputation of the one putting forward (or evaluationg) a view. But just how to do that is unclear.

One bug in GEDCOM Analyzer is that a CHANge record corrupts the displayed death date (with the Change date).

Another issue is that if two people have the same name (eg from different generations), the cross-file comparison shows miscompares between the different people, even though the corresponding people's entries match.

In any case, it is hard to get a good overview of how two GEDCOMs differ when they are from totally disparate sources (even when they cover mostly the same people).

What kinds of GEDCOM comparison programs are there out there? I know about GEDCOM Analyzer, but are there any others? Analyzer is of limited helpfulness. I think multiple levels of comparison may be needed. First, showing whether there are trees that overlap at all. Then for one tree, the nature of the overlap. Then a list of people that seem to be unduplicated and those seemingly duplicated. Then differences in details of individuals.

What this culture needs is a good 5 cent persistent publishing mechanism. The problem here is persistence. I'm talking hundreds of years here.

Online is best (for access). Indexed so that it can be found. It can be replicated, which is one of the keys to persistence. Storage is pretty cheap now, but how can you keep it on line and yet be assured of having it persist (and be available) for many decades?

Time flies like an arrow.
Fruit flies like a banana.
Who knows who will like this over time.
Time files us between cosmic bookends.