Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1267273142

From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Call to participants in ALL geographic andhaplogroupprojects: fill in your ancestry
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 07:19:02 -0500
References: <6CA684698FBC4145B8434B57357D77F7@PC>
In-Reply-To: <6CA684698FBC4145B8434B57357D77F7@PC>


I totally agree that the usefulness of DNA test results is diminished, virtually
to nothing, without an accompanying lineage, or at least the identity of the
earliest patrilineal or matrilineal ancestor -- except, of course, for the test
subject. If everyone else is supplying their lineage data, the value of that
information becomes a one-way street for the person who doesn't. But I believe
the need for lineage information applies to surname projects, as well, not just
geographic or haplogroup projects.

I run six DNA projects and, ultimately, I believe it's the project admin's
responsibility to see that their members supply at least the identity of their
earliest ancestor. If my members don't fill in the information or fill it in
well enough, I enter/re-enter it, myself.

Because I require confirmation for someone to join my projects, I have usually
obtained their earliest ancestor, if not their entire line, before I even give
them the join link, which is a very good reason to require confirmation. As
many of us know, once someone has joined (and gotten the group discount of the
price of testing), you may never hear from then again.

If they're a novice and don't know their genealogy, I will "do" their genealogy
for them, as far back as I can get it. I do it for the sake of the project,
even though this sometimes amounts to dozens of hours and some out-of-pocket
expense on my part. I also let it be known that one perk of joining my projects
is that members get my full assistance with their line's genealogy, as an
incentive to join and be tested.

It is a sad thing that several large projects (common surnames) have admins who
make no apparent effort to provide even the earliest ancestors, much less their
lineages. These projects frustrate me greatly because, as common surnames, I
have them in my pedigree. The attitude of these admins seems to be that I don't
need to know the lineages of anyone, except my matchees, and I can get that,
myself, by emailing them. It doesn't seem to occur to them that, sometimes,
being able to eliminate a line is as useful as connecting to one -- or that a
high percentage of test subjects don't respond to attempts to contact them.

DNA testing is, for most people, an expensive proposition. It's a shame that
the value of that testing can be so diminished by "uninvolved" project admins
and selfish members. And then, of course, there are the projects that not only
don't display earliest ancestor or lineage information, they don't display
results, at all. [Insert rant here.]


> -----Original Message-----
> From: On Behalf Of Lancaster-Boon
> Sent: Saturday, February 27, 2010 3:27 AM
> To:
> Subject: [DNA] Call to participants in ALL geographic and
> haplogroupprojects: fill in your ancestry
> I am quite surprised, going through the membership, just how
> many people decrease the value of their membership in big
> projects by giving absolutely no ancestral information.
> I think it is not just a big minority, but actually the vast
> majority. This community can do better, I know for sure.
> Please everyone, do remember to take the 5 seconds, plus
> extra 5 seconds to work out how to abbreviate enough to
> fit in the box. :)
> By the way, British and Irish counties (like American states)
> have standard abbreviations:
> Best Regards
> Andrew

This thread: