GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives
Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-05 > 1115055497
From:
Subject: Re: [DNA] Newbie: National Geographic, Relative Genetics, DNA Heritage,Family Tree DNA etc
Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 17:38:17 +0000
Ken:
That seems perfectly reasonable to me. Listers deserve the advantage of different perspectives. My viewpoint is very colored by my research goals, which indeed may not be those of many on this List.
David F.
-------------- Original message --------------
> 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.
>
> Ken
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From:
> To:
> Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 9:52 AM
> Subject: Re: [DNA] Newbie: National Geographic, Relative Genetics, DNA
> Heritage,Family Tree DNA etc
>
>
> > Ken:
> >
> > "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.
>
>
>
> ==============================
> Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the
> areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months.
> Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx
>
This thread: