GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-05 > 1115050563
From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Newbie: National Geographic, Relative Genetics, DNA Heritage,Family Tree DNA etc
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 10:16:03 -0600
David, I explained the difference very clearly in my message. It is the
difference between promoting a company in assertions of fact language,
versus qualifications such as "in my opinion...." If the consensus on the
list aligns with your perspective, then I'll just get more assertive in
describing what I view as the advantages of alternative testing companies in
order to create a little more balance on the list.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 9:52 AM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Newbie: National Geographic, Relative Genetics, DNA
Heritage,Family Tree DNA etc
> "Control such misuse" - give me a break. Two posts ago you were extolling
the virutues of DNA Heritage. Why are your comments unsullied, and those of
Bill "misuse"? Robert asked for an opinion and he got it from people who
are not connected in any way to the companies noted in the posts.
> David F.
> -------------- Original message --------------
> > Bill, The wording that many use on this list to promote FTDNA really
> > bothers me. It is often done without a "in my judgment" or "from my
> > experience", etc., and therefore comes across as an assertion of fact.