GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1119897189


From: "Gary Rea" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Macro vs. Micro View of Genetic Genealogy
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 13:33:09 -0500
References: <19c.36350303.2ff1796c@aol.com>


Point taken, Ann, but, no, I didn't follow her thread, as I'm not really
interested in technical minutae. As for starting my own thread..., well, I
believe I just did that, didn't I? Sarcasm aside, I've started plenty of
threads on this list and participated in many more. Still, it's a legitimate
gripe I'm making, as you've ackowledged, and I'm certainly not the first,
nor the only one to voice it. Funny, though, the very people who say they
don't want someone else telling them what to discuss are the very same folks
who have shut out those of us who want to discuss topics other than R1B
mutations.

Gary


----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 10:46 AM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Macro vs. Micro View of Genetic Genealogy


> In a message dated 6/27/05 7:47:11 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
>
> writes:
>
>> I don't know about you, but it seems evident to me that this list has
>> been
>> completely taken over by those whose focus is entirely upon the very
>> broad-brush picture of ancestry provided by MtDNA studies, as opposed to
>> the reason
>> most of us got into genetic genealogy in the first place; i.e., to use
>> Y-DNA
>> data in conjunction with our "paper trail" research to find specific
>> ancestors
>> with known names. Whatever happened to that?
>
> You are not alone in your sentiments, but I have a different perspective.
> Back in the olden days, when I was list administrator, one of the list
> guidelines
> read:
>
> =====
>
> *YOU* SHAPE THE LIST BY YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS. If you have a question, you
> can
> be sure there's a lurker who is glad that somebody else spoke up. If no
> one is
> discussing your favorite topic, start a new thread.
>
> =====
>
> In that light, did you follow the recent discussion about Sue Waite's
> project
> and the possibility of parallel mutations? That's an important topic for
> all
> surname project administrators. Did you have anything to contribute --
> whether
> an opinion of your own, or a question about the definition of parallel
> mutations, which lurkers might be hesitant to ask? If you are silent when
> such
> topics arise, that naturally tilts the percentage of messages in a
> different
> direction.
>
> Or how about starting a thread of your own, which you can easily recognize
> from a good subject line? Or if that's not satisfactory, how about
> starting your
> own mailing list (at RootsWeb, Yahoo, or Google) where you can define and
> limit the scope yourself. You could have a ready-made audience.
>
> Ann Turner
>
> ______________________________


This thread: