GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-01 > 1136908327
Subject: Re: [DNA] Private Databases, Semi-Private Databases, Public Databases, and Su...
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 10:52:07 EST
In a message dated 01/10/06 6:51:04 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> I worry ... I don't know how much Mark does ... about the possibility
> of a nasty political surprise. If I were running things, a prime
> imperative would be how to make sure that nobody knows of these,
> especially me! (The way it is now, with me only as assistant, this is
> automatic). That way I could in good consicence say that we have a
> remarkably good record of fidelity.
> How to do this? Actually, now with the Genographic Project, it's
> trivial. An administrator can simply say "If you are the least bit
> afraid of an NPE ... **OR** if you have a paper trail back to Somerled,
> even if you are SURE it is good, don't consent to join our FTDNA
> project, but pay the $95 to the NGS for their test. Don't tell me.
> If you match, just enroll in our project from the NGS. If you don't ...
> if I ever contact you again, don't say you tested, just waffle. I'll
> never know."
> Doug McDonald
That's an interesting approach, which could be used with a twist by another
project. I forget the surname now, but it was a famous immigrant ancestor, and
everyone with the same surname wanted to link to him. This was very early in
the days of DNA testing, and the coordinator may have changed his policy, but
he restricted knowledge of the ancestral haplotype, for fear that people might
"forge" their Y chromosome credentials if the haplotype was made public. With
the Genographic Project, the coordinator could tell them to submit their Y DNA
results, blind to the knowledge of what they were supposed to be.