Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2011-11 > 1320522207

From: Wilcox Lisa <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Problems with some surname project admins
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 12:43:27 -0700
References: <> <> <004e01cc9883$aa8b5ee0$ffa21ca0$> <> <> <> <00b601cc9b7f$335b11e0$9a1135a0$@com> <><00c301cc9bc1$e94a3610$bbdea230$><060001cc9bd7$31042190$930c64b0$@com>
In-Reply-To: <060001cc9bd7$31042190$930c64b0$@com>

Yes, the competing projects option is also likely to create problems for a some very dedicated and competent admins.

Yes, there are already guidelines and help resources for admins, but you have to hunt for them on the FTDNA website.

Yes, ideally, FTDNA would provide a broader range of upfront educational resources.

AND it still wouldn't solve the problem. I hope that Marianne and anyone else at the conference this weekend will be able to tell us that it included a session or two devoted to new admins --entirely missing from last year's gathering. Heck, a well-designed online interactive short-course would be wonderful but, as Diana already noted, disinterested admins won't take advantage of any proactive forms of guidance.

"Requirements" was probably the wrong word to use. Let's say "intervention triggers" for FTDNA. Perhaps:
- A record of X email notifications unanswered for Y days or more
- No GAP log-ins for Z months
- No kit orders for Q years
Response would need to be modified for small projects, and uncommon surnames.

Evidently Max already has some kind of intervention process, and I assume there are criteria for project adoption. Perhaps we just ask Max if we can be helpful in ways beyond simply reporting concerns.


This thread: