Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2012-02 > 1329779119

From: "Kenneth Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] I1 query--Deep Clade?
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 16:05:19 -0700
References: <><1F794FB05B924D5ABA04C8FB8059D153@kenPC><> <59E9294476BF4933907DB727B1730FE9@kenPC><><00c801ccf020$3616def0$a2449cd0$>
In-Reply-To: <00c801ccf020$3616def0$a2449cd0$>

-----Original Message-----
From: Diana Gale Matthiesen
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2012 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] I1 query--Deep Clade?

Ken and I are at opposite ends of the spectrum here because I
encourage my members to be SNP tested.

[[Typical of your misrepresentation when characterising alternative
positions. I and others encourage snp testing when it matters or
contributes (and even subsidize same when required to get things done), but
I don't encourage the I1 deep clade package which is basically a hopelessly
out of date product and rarely adds information to the hobby. The deep
clade could be an acceptable deal in other haplogroups; that's for those
specializing elsewhere to judge. It is just a huge money machine for the
company in I1 and some other I subhaplogroups. KN]]

a deep clade test can get you as many as a dozen SNP tests
for the price of three SNPs a la carte. It's a bargain. [[what an argument!
Buying snps you don't need is a bargain because of the quantity of them? 0
times a big number still equals zero. KN ]]

I do wonder how happy FTDNA would be if they knew one of their project
admins was actively discouraging people from testing

[[you misrepresent again; it is not general testing, it’s a specific
low-value product which should be discouraged. KN]],

There are two diametrically opposed camps on this issue, and we are
not likely to come to an agreement, so please let's not turn this into
an extended debate. [[Then why did you just produce an extended debate? KN]]

This thread: