Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-03 > 1111455770

From: "William Hurst" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] GENEALOGY-DNA mailing list is up for adoption
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 20:42:50 -0500
References: <BAY21-F245B08F26DBECF4668A356854D0@phx.gbl> <>

Gee, I take a few hours off and I come back and the place is falling apart at the seams! Really, I can't imagine this list without Ann running it. I'm on many other lists where I don't even know who the administrator is. The Hurst list, for example, works quite well with no visible management. But this place? Not a chance. Somebody has to issue those "END OF THREAD" messages. We can't thank Ann enough for the work she has done or the nonsense she sometimes has to put up with.

So now the trend seems to be to split up the list. I can see that that might be necessary to find new administrators. All the attention has been given to Y-DNA with the split along STR/SNP lines. My thought went to mtDNA, where there is no similar way the make the split. (And I would NOT like to see the list split between Y-DNA and mtDNA as has been suggested in the past.) The recent discussion Ian, David and I had on haplogroup K would probably fall under the new list, Anthropology-DNA, or whatever it's called; but I, for one, have found mtDNA useful for proving relationships just a few generations back.

It has been said that if the list is split we who would subscribe to both would get the same number of messages as we get now. I predict there will be at least some duplication of messages such as "What's with batch 103," etc. I often get the same postings on three or four county lists now.

I would prefer that the list stay together, but I'll admit it will probably be easier in this case to find two administrators than one. I do recommend that the near-term genealogy list keep the name Genealogy-DNA. If there is a new name, would be have to resubscribe? What would happen to the Archives?

Bill Hurst

This thread: