RootsWeb: GENEALOGY-DNA-L Re: [DNA] Problems with some surname project admins

GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2011-11 > 1321038121

From: Bill <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Problems with some surname project admins
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 14:02:01 -0500
References: <DEDCC72F374144CBA14F391D0350122D@RayHardyPC><0f3e01cca018$7b5f3c80$721db580$@org><201111110245.pAB2juDU014396@mail.rootsweb.com><REME20111110231520@alum.mit.edu><1321007892.32868.YahooMailNeo@web28207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><BEAB5992-8898-4455-922C-29BEE351677F@earthlink.net><83F4A691-B642-43F1-A8F9-638DFBFE6E07@verizon.net><185B8742-1769-4DD7-8211-8EC86F88E9FB@earthlink.net><BE3B4121-1387-46FF-BF76-A01C9290C730@verizon.net>
In-Reply-To: <BE3B4121-1387-46FF-BF76-A01C9290C730@verizon.net>

Yes, but others do. So a solution would be a method of contacting people blind. If they don't want to be contacted, then they set their flag so that they can't be. If they do want to be contacted, then they get notified that someone wants to speak to them, and they can choose whether to reveal their email to them or not. Works well on WeRelate. Bill On Nov 11, 2011, at 1:55 PM, Jim Bartlett wrote: > Bill, > > Some participants don't want to be contacted, and specifically > request their contact info not be made public. If we don't honor > this, we lose some potential participants, and our credibilty. > > Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! > > On Nov 11, 2011, at 10:04 AM, Bill <> wrote: > >> Yes, its hardly fair to criticize a project for not meeting someone >> else's expectations when those expectations have not been made clear >> by FTDNA. >> >> Personally, I'd prefer that every YDNA project publicly display at >> least the Patriarch information, plus the patriarchs son through whom >> descent is traced. >> >> It would also be nice to be able to contact the kit owner without >> going through a middleman who may or may not be present/paying >> attention. WeRelate uses a system where people can contact various >> users through a forwarding system---the email address is kept >> hidden. If the user doesn't want to be contacted they can deny >> permission for emails to be forwarded. I'm not quite sure why it was >> set up that way, but it's an effective system and ensures against >> unwanted intrusions. >> >> Bill >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Nov 11, 2011, at 9:25 AM, Jim Bartlett wrote: >> >>> Good thoughts, Bill. >>> >>> I wonder if there shouldn't be a published list of expectations: >>> ones that new customers would expect of their project and the >>> Admins; and ones the Admins agree to in order to become an Admin - >>> these expectations should be the same. We can't go overboard here, >>> but there should be some basics. >>> >>> Customer should expect results to be grouped; Admin should group >>> results. >>> >>> Customer should be able to contact others in the group; Admin >>> should forward email to matches. >>> >>> Admin should have/show Patriarchs; customer should provide Ancestry >>> to Admin (at least several generations) >>> >>> Customer may remain private; Admin must not link customers to >>> results without permission. >>> >>> Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! >>> >>> On Nov 11, 2011, at 6:42 AM, Bill <> wrote: >>> >>>> There seem to be a lot of projects that do this or something >>>> like it. >>>> >>>> There are probably some legitimate reasons for doing this., perhaps >>>> grounded in fears concerning releasing members YDNA data. This >>>> seems >>>> to be the case for one surname project I've looked at, based on a >>>> group decision of the early members when the project was newly >>>> formed. While the YDNA data itself is available for inspection, >>>> the >>>> genealogical information is not. That pretty much makes it >>>> impossible for anyone other than project members to do anything >>>> genealogical with the data. Interestingly, they'll let you join >>>> the >>>> project (and get access to the family history) for a >>>> contribution to >>>> their YDNA fund. >>>> >>>> While I don't agree with the "concerned with Big Brother" >>>> philosophy >>>> at work in that project, I suppose it is the right of those whose >>>> YDNA is being examined to close-hold their DNA data. >>>> >>>> But I encounter a LOT of projects where the only information >>>> provided >>>> the public in the earliest ancestor field is the surname, and I >>>> suspect they are not all that concerned with the privacy >>>> considerations. Your comment 'my data, all mine', may be on target >>>> in some cases. >>>> >>>> Its one thing to exclude non-project members from the data, but its >>>> another to not meet the needs of the project members. I suspect >>>> those with the 'my data, all mine' attitude are also not meeting >>>> the >>>> needs of the project members. They probably don't get many >>>> complaints though, as most people wouldn't know what to expect >>>> beyond >>>> "here's your results". Which is to say, there are probably more >>>> than >>>> a few people who come away from YDNA studies with "well, that's >>>> a big >>>> whoopee-do. Remind me next time not to waste money like this." >>>> >>>> Which perversely, may be the reason FTDNA doesn't take a harder >>>> line >>>> on this subject. They may not be getting that many complaints--- >>>> just >>>> a lot of quietly annoyed clients who don't know enough to know they >>>> aren't getting what they should be getting. >>>> >>>> Bill >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA- >>> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes >>> in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY- >> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA- > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message