GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-12 > 1135458632


From: "Drew Baumann Roberts" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] New R1b and its subclades Haplogroup Project Launched
Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2005 13:11:03 -0800
In-Reply-To: <006501c608b9$87c95b10$62a1bbd8@MyAirplane>


Amen, brother...

I thought I linked to the Testosterone Email-List!

Cheers,

On 24 Dec 2005 at 11:39, Wil Husted wrote:

> Robert et al.,
>
> Why don't you guys set up a page for this scintillating conversation?
> It made a left turn way back where the road turned right. At least
> give it a relevant Subject so that others can be forewarned and ignore
> it if they so choose.
>
> Wil Husted
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert Stafford" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2005 7:44 AM
> Subject: Re: [DNA] New R1b and its subclades Haplogroup Project
> Launched
>
>
> > Charles,
> >
> > You are forgetting about the many one-sided responses from FTDNA
> > adherents to any question about choosing a lab. They all present
> > FTDNA as the answer to every project, regardless. The list
> > obviously needs balance. However, you seem intent on forcing people
> > who disagree with your view off the list.
> >
> > I present all sides. I don't say that my lab is best for all
> > people. I
> > have always noted that FTDNA is the most economical for mtDNA
> > testing. I always pointed out their strengths in ancient ancestry,
> > when they were the leader.
> >
> > Thus, my posts are always factual, fair and balanced. No one ever
> > seems
> > to dispute my facts. In fact, most responses from FTDNAers avoid
> > facts and launch into exactly the same diatribe you did
> >
> > I become a little suspicious when I hear the same lines from
> > different
> > people. It reminds me of the politicians who appear on TV
> > repeating exactly the same lines. It is well-known that they are
> > given talking points by their party before they appear.
> >
> > Clearly price is one of the most important factors, as all firm,
> > and
> > ISOGG, have price comparisons on their sites. Turnaround time and
> > reliability of results is often mentioned on the list. These seem to
> > be universal considerations. As this is a public forum, anyone can
> > add his or her criteria. However, they should do it in a fair and
> > balanced manner, rather than implying that FTDNA is the only one
> > offering a particular service, when they are not.
> >
> > Other factors are particular to a project administrator and hard to
> > quantify. One person told me she likes to feel important when
> > dealing with a testing company. This is a subjective factor. It
> > isn't even on the radar for me, but appears to be important to
> > others.
> >
> > Bob Stafford
> >
> > charles <> wrote: Bob:
> >
> > Or is this spat too in addition to giving you a chance to spout how
> > other labs are cheaper just another part of your tactics to muddy up
> > the very simple announcement I made about my new R1b Haplogroup
> > Project this a.m. You've sure done your part to drag this thread off
> > topic.
> >
> > ______________________________
>
> ______________________________



This thread: