Hi Connie, The Family Finder matching algorithm's strict thresholds make the product far less useful for African-Americans. I recommend transferring your project participants' DNA data to GEDmatch.com and comparing them there, if you have not already. The big issue with Family Finder is that African-Americans' actual genetic relatives are in the Family Finder database, but the algorithm is not matching them. That can taint even the simplest autosomal DNA project. I have resisted testing at Family Finder for that reason. Very Respectfully, Shannon On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 2:23 PM, <Rvsailor@aol.com> wrote: > CeCe, thank you for your input. I feel a bit better now knowing this > information. > > This family is so confusing and is made even more so by what appears to be > two of the family slaves (both reported as mulatto in 1870) marrying. > They had different mothers and appear to have different fathers which > could > be two of the sons or grandsons who owned the family slaves. Their > granddaughter, a test participant who matches both white and slave > descendants, has > only a 29% West African, 12% Middle East and 59% European mixture. She is > shown as a 2nd cousin to one of the white descendants which is most likely > a false indication. They share 220 cM total, with 45 cM as the longest > match. They match on 9 different chromosomes with 17 segments but common > matches are all over the place and no patterns yet. In 1840 the father > slave > owner had nearly 70 slaves when he died. These 70 slaves continued to be > owned by three different sons over the next 25 years. > > This granddaughter matches the aunt of my most recent FF match at a 2nd to > 4th cousin level with 106 cM total and longest block of 40. It is evident > that I need many more test participants! > > Thanks. > > Connie Bradshaw > > > > In a message dated 12/5/2013 12:36:26 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, > cecemoore@hotmail.com writes: > > >From working on the DNA results for the guests on "Finding Your Roots", I > have learned that this low number of matches in Family Finder is not at > all unusual for African Americans. I am currently working with a kit with > the same admixture percentages as you > mention and the number of matches is comparable to what you are > reporting. It appears to be directly proportional - the less European > admixture that an African American has, the less matches they have in > Family > Finder. Apparently, this is because Family Finder requires, not only a > longest segment of around 7 cM, but a total cM count of 20 cM to be > reported as > a match (total of all shared segments of 1 cM and above). African > Americans > tend not to share these very small segments with their matches, so many of > their matches with segments under 20 cM do not get reported. > > What would be the presumed level of cousinship between the descendants of > the slave owner and the slave descendants? If it is further out than 2nd > cousins, then it would be expected that some will show matches and some > will > not. > > CeCe Moore > www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com > > > > From: Rvsailor@aol.com > > Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 12:18:02 -0500 > > To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com > > Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] Family Finder Matches > > > > I just got the results back from a FF test kit that I sponsored for a > man > > that believes he shares ancestral lines with a white slave owner. His > > population finder indicates 84% West African (Yoruba) and 16% European. > He is > > matching three other test participants known to be descendants of slaves > > > owned by this same white slave owning family but he does not match any > of the > > known white descendants of the slave owners. Two of his matches do also > > match several of the white descendants. The third is a close relative > (his > > aunt from his paternal line and the last living in that generation) > that had > > the same none matches with the white descendants. His aunt's > population > > finder indicated 66% West African (Yoruba) and 34% European. > > > > > > What is very odd is that he only had a reported 14 matches TOTAL. His > > aunt had over 60 total matches. I have never seen a FF test have so > few > > matches and am wondering about the quality of his test sample. Has > anyone else > > seen the number of total matches this low? Thanks. > > > > Connie Bradshaw > > > > > > > ______________________________ > For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please > see: > http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the > subject and the body of the message > > > > ______________________________ > For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: > http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- Mr. Shannon S. Christmas Chief Market Advisor | Design Strategist The Christmas Collective <http://thechristmascollective.com/> Strategic Real Estate and Land Use Solutions New York, NY | Washington, DC P: 212.433.0586 | 202.618.1687 F: 1.888.788.5984 shannon.christmas@thechristmascollective.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/shannonchristmas/

CeCe, thank you for your input. I feel a bit better now knowing this information. This family is so confusing and is made even more so by what appears to be two of the family slaves (both reported as mulatto in 1870) marrying. They had different mothers and appear to have different fathers which could be two of the sons or grandsons who owned the family slaves. Their granddaughter, a test participant who matches both white and slave descendants, has only a 29% West African, 12% Middle East and 59% European mixture. She is shown as a 2nd cousin to one of the white descendants which is most likely a false indication. They share 220 cM total, with 45 cM as the longest match. They match on 9 different chromosomes with 17 segments but common matches are all over the place and no patterns yet. In 1840 the father slave owner had nearly 70 slaves when he died. These 70 slaves continued to be owned by three different sons over the next 25 years. This granddaughter matches the aunt of my most recent FF match at a 2nd to 4th cousin level with 106 cM total and longest block of 40. It is evident that I need many more test participants! Thanks. Connie Bradshaw In a message dated 12/5/2013 12:36:26 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, cecemoore@hotmail.com writes: >From working on the DNA results for the guests on "Finding Your Roots", I have learned that this low number of matches in Family Finder is not at all unusual for African Americans. I am currently working with a kit with the same admixture percentages as you mention and the number of matches is comparable to what you are reporting. It appears to be directly proportional - the less European admixture that an African American has, the less matches they have in Family Finder. Apparently, this is because Family Finder requires, not only a longest segment of around 7 cM, but a total cM count of 20 cM to be reported as a match (total of all shared segments of 1 cM and above). African Americans tend not to share these very small segments with their matches, so many of their matches with segments under 20 cM do not get reported. What would be the presumed level of cousinship between the descendants of the slave owner and the slave descendants? If it is further out than 2nd cousins, then it would be expected that some will show matches and some will not. CeCe Moore www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com > From: Rvsailor@aol.com > Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 12:18:02 -0500 > To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com > Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] Family Finder Matches > > I just got the results back from a FF test kit that I sponsored for a man > that believes he shares ancestral lines with a white slave owner. His > population finder indicates 84% West African (Yoruba) and 16% European. He is > matching three other test participants known to be descendants of slaves > owned by this same white slave owning family but he does not match any of the > known white descendants of the slave owners. Two of his matches do also > match several of the white descendants. The third is a close relative (his > aunt from his paternal line and the last living in that generation) that had > the same none matches with the white descendants. His aunt's population > finder indicated 66% West African (Yoruba) and 34% European. > > > What is very odd is that he only had a reported 14 matches TOTAL. His > aunt had over 60 total matches. I have never seen a FF test have so few > matches and am wondering about the quality of his test sample. Has anyone else > seen the number of total matches this low? Thanks. > > Connie Bradshaw > ______________________________ For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Two of my cousins uploaded their Family Finder results to GEDmatch about a year ago.  They have a large number of atDNA matches but no X chromosome matches there.  Can I assume they did not upload their X chromosome files?  Can I simply instruct them to upload them without causing any confusion for the GEDmatch software? Thanks and sincerely, Peter Peter J. Roberts

I just got the results back from a FF test kit that I sponsored for a man that believes he shares ancestral lines with a white slave owner. His population finder indicates 84% West African (Yoruba) and 16% European. He is matching three other test participants known to be descendants of slaves owned by this same white slave owning family but he does not match any of the known white descendants of the slave owners. Two of his matches do also match several of the white descendants. The third is a close relative (his aunt from his paternal line and the last living in that generation) that had the same none matches with the white descendants. His aunt's population finder indicated 66% West African (Yoruba) and 34% European. What is very odd is that he only had a reported 14 matches TOTAL. His aunt had over 60 total matches. I have never seen a FF test have so few matches and am wondering about the quality of his test sample. Has anyone else seen the number of total matches this low? Thanks. Connie Bradshaw

>From working on the DNA results for the guests on "Finding Your Roots", I have learned that this low number of matches in Family Finder is not at all unusual for African Americans. I am currently working with a kit with the same admixture percentages as you mention and the number of matches is comparable to what you are reporting. It appears to be directly proportional - the less European admixture that an African American has, the less matches they have in Family Finder. Apparently, this is because Family Finder requires, not only a longest segment of around 7 cM, but a total cM count of 20 cM to be reported as a match (total of all shared segments of 1 cM and above). African Americans tend not to share these very small segments with their matches, so many of their matches with segments under 20 cM do not get reported. What would be the presumed level of cousinship between the descendants of the slave owner and the slave descendants? If it is further out than 2nd cousins, then it would be expected that some will show matches and some will not. CeCe Moore www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com > From: Rvsailor@aol.com > Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 12:18:02 -0500 > To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com > Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] Family Finder Matches > > I just got the results back from a FF test kit that I sponsored for a man > that believes he shares ancestral lines with a white slave owner. His > population finder indicates 84% West African (Yoruba) and 16% European. He is > matching three other test participants known to be descendants of slaves > owned by this same white slave owning family but he does not match any of the > known white descendants of the slave owners. Two of his matches do also > match several of the white descendants. The third is a close relative (his > aunt from his paternal line and the last living in that generation) that had > the same none matches with the white descendants. His aunt's population > finder indicated 66% West African (Yoruba) and 34% European. > > > What is very odd is that he only had a reported 14 matches TOTAL. His > aunt had over 60 total matches. I have never seen a FF test have so few > matches and am wondering about the quality of his test sample. Has anyone else > seen the number of total matches this low? Thanks. > > Connie Bradshaw >

There was mention at the conference that they are in the works. -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Karen Hodges Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 1:23 AM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] FTDNA's promised updates... Thanks for posting CeCe. Do you know if X DNA tools or matches might be in future updates? Karen On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:33 AM, CeCe Moore <cecemoore@hotmail.com> wrote: > FTDNA has some terrific updates today, including the ability to download ALL matching segment data! > > Details here: > > http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2013/12/ftdna-releases-updates-in-resp onse-to.html > > CeCe Moore > www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com > > > > ______________________________ > For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: > http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ______________________________ For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Ron The DNA follows the biological/blood lines. You need to only look at the biological Tree - how the DNA is passed down from generation to generation. That will quickly give you your answers. Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Dec 4, 2013, at 11:16 PM, RON SINCLAIR <rsinclair123@rogers.com> wrote: > > Hi Group - Newby needing some help here. > I got lucky a couple of days ago. I tested with 23andme in the last year, upgrading to the newer chip, primarily for the medical results. Then arrived the email through 23andme saying I had a likely relative finder match. Low and behold it was right. Here's where I'd like some help. > Hugh and Elizabeth married in Scotland in 1805. Over the next 20+ years they had 10 children The first was a girl, Catherine and the last was a boy Alexander born in 1827. The whole tribe moved to Canada in the 1830's. I descend from Catherine. My new cousin descended from Alexander. For both of us it was 5 generations up from us to Hugh and Elizabeth. But on my side there is a hiccup. Elizabeth had an "oopsie' child named Robert in 1828 that was raised as a Sinclair and I descend from Robert. > My contact also descended from a first born girl, Alexander's first daughter. > So how's this work? I was surprised that the autosomal blew right past the fact that I was not a Sinclair from the YDNA point of view - but then as I said I'm a newby on the autosomal side. > My take is both my cousin and I must have got our matching stuff from GGG GM Elizabeth. > What say ye? > Thanks > Ron Sinclair >

http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/extras/molgen/auto_dna.html This is a great tutorial with quick (about 2 minutes each) video clips explaining types of DNA.  Watch the one on autosomal DNA to better understand your results.  You need only to match DNA from one parent/grandparent to be a cousin. On Thursday, December 5, 2013 12:28 AM, Tim Janzen <tjanzen@comcast.net> wrote: Dear Ron,     If I am reading your message correctly you have two lines of descent from this family: 1.  You descend from Hugh's and Elizabeth's daughter Catherine. 2.  You descend from an unknown man and Elizabeth's son Robert. If the above is correct then in theory about 2/3 of the autosomal DNA you share with your cousin would have come from Elizabeth and about 1/3 of it would have come from Hugh.  This is assuming that you don't share ancestry within the past 300 to 500 years on another ancestral line with your cousin. However, you need to keep in mind that the transmission of autosomal DNA from your ancestors down to you happens in a random fashion so that it is possible that all of the DNA your cousin and you share in common could have come from Hugh and all of it could have come from Elizabeth.  You would have to do careful chromosome mapping with other cousins (descendents of the ancestors of Hugh and Elizabeth) to sort this out. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of RON SINCLAIR Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 8:17 PM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] A question for the knowledgeable   Hi Group - Newby needing  some help here. I got lucky a couple of days ago. I tested with 23andme in the last year, upgrading to the newer chip, primarily for the medical results. Then arrived the email through 23andme saying I had a likely relative finder match. Low and behold it was right. Here's where I'd like some help. Hugh and Elizabeth married in Scotland in 1805. Over the next 20+ years they had 10 children The first was a girl, Catherine and the last was a boy Alexander born in 1827. The whole tribe moved to Canada in the 1830's. I descend from Catherine. My new cousin descended from Alexander.  For both of us it was 5 generations up from us to Hugh and Elizabeth. But on my side there is a hiccup. Elizabeth had an "oopsie' child named Robert in 1828 that was raised as a Sinclair and I descend from Robert. My contact also descended from a first born girl, Alexander's first daughter. So how's this work? I was surprised that the autosomal blew right past the fact that I was not a Sinclair from the YDNA point of view - but then as I said I'm a newby on the autosomal side. My take is both my cousin and I must have got our matching stuff from GGG GM Elizabeth. What say ye? Thanks Ron Sinclair ______________________________ For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Dear Ron, If I am reading your message correctly you have two lines of descent from this family: 1. You descend from Hugh's and Elizabeth's daughter Catherine. 2. You descend from an unknown man and Elizabeth's son Robert. If the above is correct then in theory about 2/3 of the autosomal DNA you share with your cousin would have come from Elizabeth and about 1/3 of it would have come from Hugh. This is assuming that you don't share ancestry within the past 300 to 500 years on another ancestral line with your cousin. However, you need to keep in mind that the transmission of autosomal DNA from your ancestors down to you happens in a random fashion so that it is possible that all of the DNA your cousin and you share in common could have come from Hugh and all of it could have come from Elizabeth. You would have to do careful chromosome mapping with other cousins (descendents of the ancestors of Hugh and Elizabeth) to sort this out. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of RON SINCLAIR Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 8:17 PM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] A question for the knowledgeable   Hi Group - Newby needing  some help here. I got lucky a couple of days ago. I tested with 23andme in the last year, upgrading to the newer chip, primarily for the medical results. Then arrived the email through 23andme saying I had a likely relative finder match. Low and behold it was right. Here's where I'd like some help. Hugh and Elizabeth married in Scotland in 1805. Over the next 20+ years they had 10 children The first was a girl, Catherine and the last was a boy Alexander born in 1827. The whole tribe moved to Canada in the 1830's. I descend from Catherine. My new cousin descended from Alexander.  For both of us it was 5 generations up from us to Hugh and Elizabeth. But on my side there is a hiccup. Elizabeth had an "oopsie' child named Robert in 1828 that was raised as a Sinclair and I descend from Robert. My contact also descended from a first born girl, Alexander's first daughter. So how's this work? I was surprised that the autosomal blew right past the fact that I was not a Sinclair from the YDNA point of view - but then as I said I'm a newby on the autosomal side. My take is both my cousin and I must have got our matching stuff from GGG GM Elizabeth. What say ye? Thanks Ron Sinclair

At Chromosome Browser, I have tried to Download All Matches to Excell, but nothing happens. I tried on several kits. Mary Lou On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Dwight Holmes <dwightrholmes@gmail.com>wrote: > Ann - > This bit (batch downloads for Ch Browser) was news to me (I haven't been > paying much attention at all the last 6+ months or so). Is this supposed > to be operational? I found the link on my Ch Browser page (Download All > Matches to Excel (CSV Format)) but when I click on it absolutely nothing > happens! Nada!! This would be so awesome! THANKS! > > Dwight > > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Ann Turner <DNACousins@aol.com> wrote: > > > > > Another big announcement in that post was batch downloads for Chromosome > > Browser. > > > > > ______________________________ > For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: > http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

  Hi Group - Newby needing  some help here. I got lucky a couple of days ago. I tested with 23andme in the last year, upgrading to the newer chip, primarily for the medical results. Then arrived the email through 23andme saying I had a likely relative finder match. Low and behold it was right. Here's where I'd like some help. Hugh and Elizabeth married in Scotland in 1805. Over the next 20+ years they had 10 children The first was a girl, Catherine and the last was a boy Alexander born in 1827. The whole tribe moved to Canada in the 1830's. I descend from Catherine. My new cousin descended from Alexander.  For both of us it was 5 generations up from us to Hugh and Elizabeth. But on my side there is a hiccup. Elizabeth had an "oopsie' child named Robert in 1828 that was raised as a Sinclair and I descend from Robert. My contact also descended from a first born girl, Alexander's first daughter. So how's this work? I was surprised that the autosomal blew right past the fact that I was not a Sinclair from the YDNA point of view - but then as I said I'm a newby on the autosomal side. My take is both my cousin and I must have got our matching stuff from GGG GM Elizabeth. What say ye? Thanks Ron Sinclair

I've tried the Download All Matches at Chromosome Browser too, for several kits, and nada for me too. Mary Lou On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Dwight Holmes <dwightrholmes@gmail.com>wrote: > Ann - > This bit (batch downloads for Ch Browser) was news to me (I haven't been > paying much attention at all the last 6+ months or so). Is this supposed > to be operational? I found the link on my Ch Browser page (Download All > Matches to Excel (CSV Format)) but when I click on it absolutely nothing > happens! Nada!! This would be so awesome! THANKS! > > Dwight > > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Ann Turner <DNACousins@aol.com> wrote: > > > > > Another big announcement in that post was batch downloads for Chromosome > > Browser. > > > > > ______________________________ > For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: > http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

FTDNA has some terrific updates today, including the ability to download ALL matching segment data! Details here: http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2013/12/ftdna-releases-updates-in-response-to.html CeCe Moore www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com

except that it inserted *my* middle name as the middle name of all 584 of my matches!! (this is a little disturbing!) On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Dwight Holmes <dwightrholmes@gmail.com>wrote: > Never mind - seems to have been a problem with Chrome. I got it to work > using IE. Thanks again! > > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Dwight Holmes <dwightrholmes@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Ann - >> This bit (batch downloads for Ch Browser) was news to me (I haven't been >> paying much attention at all the last 6+ months or so). Is this supposed >> to be operational? I found the link on my Ch Browser page (Download All >> Matches to Excel (CSV Format)) but when I click on it absolutely nothing >> happens! Nada!! This would be so awesome! THANKS! >> >> Dwight >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Ann Turner <DNACousins@aol.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> Another big announcement in that post was batch downloads for Chromosome >>> Browser. >>> >> >

Never mind - seems to have been a problem with Chrome. I got it to work using IE. Thanks again! On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Dwight Holmes <dwightrholmes@gmail.com>wrote: > Ann - > This bit (batch downloads for Ch Browser) was news to me (I haven't been > paying much attention at all the last 6+ months or so). Is this supposed > to be operational? I found the link on my Ch Browser page (Download All > Matches to Excel (CSV Format)) but when I click on it absolutely nothing > happens! Nada!! This would be so awesome! THANKS! > > Dwight > > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Ann Turner <DNACousins@aol.com> wrote: > >> >> Another big announcement in that post was batch downloads for Chromosome >> Browser. >> >

Ann - This bit (batch downloads for Ch Browser) was news to me (I haven't been paying much attention at all the last 6+ months or so). Is this supposed to be operational? I found the link on my Ch Browser page (Download All Matches to Excel (CSV Format)) but when I click on it absolutely nothing happens! Nada!! This would be so awesome! THANKS! Dwight On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Ann Turner <DNACousins@aol.com> wrote: > > Another big announcement in that post was batch downloads for Chromosome > Browser. >

Katie I couldn't agree more which is why Ancestry's stance is so puzzling. They've now dug a deep hole for themselves. If they want to enter any other markets people will be so overwhelmed with all the American matches that they are likely to very discouraged by the whole process. However, there's nothing to stop you testing with 23andMe and Family Tree DNA. FTDNA have the advantage on the international market because their test works out much cheaper. 23andMe send all their kits out by courier which effectively almost doubles the cost of the test. Testing multiple family members through 23andMe is therefore out of the question, but is a viable proposition with FTDNA. FTDNA also have the advantage because of all the international geographical projects that they host: http://www.isogg.org/wiki/Geographical_DNA_projects There is a project for the Netherlands: http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Netherlands I don't know how many of these projects accept Family Finder results. Debbie

My sentiments exactly, Debbie. Not only do family trees ignore country boundaries but I would have thought a crucial part of DNA interest in the US would be for the descendants of immigrants to trace their origins BEYOND the borders and back to where their family hailed from. What better way to do this than compare with a database full of people from OUTSIDE the Americas? What am I talking about? There IS no other way! I've been very much hoping to add my autosomal DNA to the Ancestry database, as well as those of FTDNA and 23andMe, but no go for the foreseeable future, for reasons best known to Ancestry. I saw recently that Mundia seem to be interested in our willingness to test, so I thought maybe Ancestry are going to set up testing based in Europe, through Mundia, to add to their American database. Sounded interesting and I hoped it was coming closer. However.... after hearing how little use it has been to you, I'll maybe not be so keen any more. Thanks for your input. Katie de Haan Born UK resident in The Netherlands -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] Namens Debbie Kennett Verzonden: woensdag 4 december 2013 13:34 Aan: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Onderwerp: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] Ancestry vs the rest The major limitation of the AncestryDNA test, apart from the lack of segment matching information, is that it is only available in the US. As one of the few non-Americans in their database I have found their test to be essentially useless. I have pages and pages of matches with very distant cousins in America and no chance of ever finding a genealogical connection with any of them. Family trees do not respect country boundaries and it is a very short-sighted move on Ancestry's part to sell their test exclusively in the US market. Debbie ______________________________ For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I've ended up being more proactive about contacting 23andMe matches than FTDNA, simply because I can't do a thing at 23andMe without seeing where they match. And, with my detailed boilerplate letter, I get a decent number of responses there. At FTDNA, I haven't contacted as many, in part because few responded initially and in part because the matches are relatively distant and often dismiss people who aren't obviously part of their tree. This makes it pretty difficult to figure out which people are related through Scots who emigrated 100 or more years before mine and which are connected to the guy who got the Scottish immigrant pregnant, whose ancestry is not really certain (I'm beginning to wonder if yes, he's the man I think but that he was adopted or some such thing.). Thus, I'm really following Jim Bartlett's practice and trying to get things mapped out as well as I can. There are people on this list who match my mother, and I'd be delighted to hear from any of you (or who match me or anyone else I've got). We don't necessarily have to locate the MRCA; sometimes just determining the country of origin or ethnicity is progress. Karla On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Jim Bartlett <jim4bartletts@verizon.net>wrote: > I second Tom's perception. I sent messages to over 100 AncestryDNA Matches > in the first year. I stopped sending messages this past year; and have > received only 2. > > The same is the case at FTDNA and 23andMe, but I usually send emails and > messages to them as soon as the Matches are posted, so there is little > opportunity for them to contact me first. And at both of these, the > response rate is somewhat higher - and persistence pays off. > > Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! > > On Dec 4, 2013, at 12:50 PM, "Tim Janzen" <tjanzen@comcast.net> wrote: > > > Dear Paul, > > My perception is that only about 1% or less of people who have tested at > > Ancestry.com, 23andMe, and FTDNA's Family Finder actively pursue contact > > with their matches in those databases. Perhaps a higher percentage than > > this are pursuing contact with their closest matches, but in all of the > > accounts that I monitor, I don't get very many people contacting me > either, > > particularly from Ancestry.com. I haven't even contacted all of my > family's > > Ancestry.com matches yet due to personal time constraints. In any case, > I > > do plan to eventually contact my family's matches at Ancestry.com and > > encourage them to upload their raw data files to GEDmatch so that I can > see > > the matching HIR data. > > Sincerely, > > Tim Janzen > > > > ______________________________ > For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: > http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I second Tom's perception. I sent messages to over 100 AncestryDNA Matches in the first year. I stopped sending messages this past year; and have received only 2. The same is the case at FTDNA and 23andMe, but I usually send emails and messages to them as soon as the Matches are posted, so there is little opportunity for them to contact me first. And at both of these, the response rate is somewhat higher - and persistence pays off. Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Dec 4, 2013, at 12:50 PM, "Tim Janzen" <tjanzen@comcast.net> wrote: > Dear Paul, > My perception is that only about 1% or less of people who have tested at > Ancestry.com, 23andMe, and FTDNA's Family Finder actively pursue contact > with their matches in those databases. Perhaps a higher percentage than > this are pursuing contact with their closest matches, but in all of the > accounts that I monitor, I don't get very many people contacting me either, > particularly from Ancestry.com. I haven't even contacted all of my family's > Ancestry.com matches yet due to personal time constraints. In any case, I > do plan to eventually contact my family's matches at Ancestry.com and > encourage them to upload their raw data files to GEDmatch so that I can see > the matching HIR data. > Sincerely, > Tim Janzen