Ancestry.com was set up by USians for USians, no one else _ appears _ to count to them. I confess I'm a little puzzled about why that's an issue with so many people.   I don't see what's wrong with a company catering to the population among which it founded itself.  If Ancestry.com had been set up in India, I would expect it to have a heavily Indian content; if it had been set up in Scotland, I'd expect a Scottish tilt; and if it had been done by the French, a French slant.  It happens to have been set up by someone in Utah, which has a vested interest in genealogy. I *WILL* fault Ancestry for (a) turning itself into Ancestry.com and (b) being tunnel-visioned when they began on-line advertising.  Someone surely ought to have figured out that an open forum in International waters might need a better advertisement than Find Your Family Here .  Not even the Mormons' Granite Mountain claims to have EVERYONE's family so why should Ancestry? I note that Scotland's People doesn't seem to have much that doesn't concern Scotland.  Are they in the same tar-brushed category as Ancestry?  And if not, WHY not? Cheryl-the-puzzled