GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1117775029


From: John Carr <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Genographic participants
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 22:04:22 -0700
References: <429FC5B1.1010307@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <429FC5B1.1010307@comcast.net>


On Jun 2, 2005, at 7:51 PM, Bonnie Schrack wrote:

> John, Max sent that message you quoted to *all* the surname project
> admins. I think your specific query to him might need a reply that
> isn't so general. It might be taking him a day or so to get to it,
> seeing as how they must be up to their ears in work to take care of
> right now. Just my guess -
>
> Bonnie Schrack
>

I did suggest to FTDNA that an e-mail to all project admins was in
order so we were not left guessing, if this was his response to that,
good. With over 2000 surname and geographic projects, I suppose they
may be a bit inundated with questions, let alone thousands of DNA
samples to keep track of. If they had 30,000 participants back in
April, increasing at a few thousand per month and collected 40,000 more
in May, their business has rocketed, hasn't it. Have to stop for a
second to take in the magnitude of all that is going on with FTDNA as a
result of the Genographic project. I was told all the senior staff
were out of the office earlier this week, so they do seem to be rather
busy, not surprising.

Why should we complain just because we have a couple more participants
;-).


Georgia Kinney Bopp wrote:

All these new participants and the talk seems to be mainly about how to
turn them away.

Not to turn them away, but the best way to handle the situation. We
don't want to discourage them.

John Carr


This thread: