Gregg A very well thought out process, designed to make it easy for our atMatches to easily recognize our Common Ancestor. I use a similar process and have about a 75 percent (eventual) response rate with Family Finder, but only about 30 percent with Relative Finder. By far, the FF matches are more serious about genealogy. I like to include a Patriarch if I feel that most genealogists will recognize him - the aha! factor is very powerful - if someone sees their ancestor on my list, they will respond quickly. I think it is imperative to include at least as many of your 512 ancestors as you can. Between FF & RF I have over 1,300 matches. I'm using those to map segments on my chromosome. I estimate about 200-250 segments per parent, or 400-500 total. Although some ancestors will provide more than 1 segment, it seems many of the 512-level ancestors (8th cousins) will show up. If you have some sticky segments that tend to last for extra generations, it could come from a generation or two further back. As a further check of this, you probably have about 1600cM from each parent. Dividing by 7.7cM (for the FF cutoff) you get about 200 such segments, or 400 for both parents. You'd need at least some 8th cousins for these segments. Thanks again for outlining a great process. Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On May 13, 2012, at 4:16 PM, Gregg Bonner <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Listmates, > > I have done some research on this, which was mostly in the form of asking for a copy of people's intro email (for those whom I contacted first), and asking them their email response rates. Then with a little subjective correlation analysis, I came up with the following guidelines: > > 1. Make your introductory email VERY succinct. > > I know you or I might read a tome for each and every match, but most people won't. The worst thing you can do is give an email which immediately evokes the "too long; didn't read" response. I recommend something along the lines of the following for the introduction: > > "Dear $name_of_match, > > FTDNA tells me that $name_of_match and I share significant stretches of DNA. I'd like to exchange lists of ancestral surnames to see if we can find our common ancestor from whom these DNA stretches originated." > > (I use the actual name of match instead of "you" because people may have several proxy samples they administrate under the same email address, and you may not match them all...so that may save a round of emails that would otherwise call for a disambiguation of who the match is to - but I digress....) > > 2. Include your list of ancestral surnames right there in the intro email. Do not make anyone click any link. Do not make them hunt down your public tree on ancestry. > 3. Make your list of ancestral surnames alphabetical. They know what they are looking for. Make it easy to find. > 4. Make your list of ancestral surnames short, to the point where it is realistic to believe that any shared DNA could have come from the surname on the list. > > The reader should be able to look at the list and determine if he has any interest in the surnames on the list more or less instantly. I know people will say that they emailed their match, and by comparing surnames, they found their common ancestor who was born in 1530. Probably not. You probably just didn't find the more recent ancestor who was the real origin of that shared DNA. By making a mile-long list of surnames, you are probably making it less likely that they will read them. > > So, for my part, I include (paste a copy of) an HTML table that gives just 32 surnames (in my cases, I tested my mom and my dad, so it is 32 ancestral surnames for each of them - I just give the 32 for which parent of mine they matched in the intro email). That number of ancestors from a parent takes me to 5th cousins, which I think is about the limit of the test's resolving power. > > The table is two columns, with the alpha surname list left, and on the right the migration path. The considerations for the rightward column are these: > > A. Adding the number of characters to the number of characters in the surname should not exceed 72. I don't want the text to wrap to the next line and mess up the register...for cases where their email client isn't set up to handle HTML tables well (similar to this rootsweb list). > B. Since you won't have enough characters to describe the migration path completely, it should concentrate on where that surname was in the timeframe from about early 1700s to 1850s or so. Earlier than 1700, and the test isn't really picking that up as a match, and later than 1850 or so, then you are close enough cousin that your match should "scream out", and you'd probably know who the person was anyway. > C. Pack as much information as you can in the 60-something character spaces you have for migration path. > > I think it is important to NOT put a patriarch's name. If you list George Surname, and that is one generation above their Fred Surname, and they don't know about George, then they could think, "well, mine's not George, so I'm not interested". A matching surname and the right place at the right time will get a response if anything will. > > 5. The only thing I add to the very brief intro (above), and the 32-row-long two-column table that follows is the plea for them to respond with their own list of ancestral surnames, articulating the rationale that they might not see a connection, but you could very well recognize their surname as an important collateral line to yours, and thus extend their ancestral line, even though they would not have noticed it. > > My response rate is inexplicably low, but it seems still better than most. I have a 25% response rate that is almost immediate, and that improves to about 40% with a 2nd email (after a month or two, I send out a "I think maybe your spam filter got my first email" message). There has not been enough time for me to do a 3rd yet, and eventually I will send out a weekly email to non-bouncing addresses for 10 to 15 consecutive weeks (and then write those off and remove them from the email list). I suspect that my total response rate will approach 50%. > > Gregg Bonner > P.S. To see the surname tables I describe in their intended HTML format, see the 2nd and 3rd table at this URL: > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~gbonner/DNA/FF/email.html > > P.P.S. To see this tabular information in this message, in a way that will most likely lose format, and get mangled beyond all readability, see below (in my emails, the surnames are shaded according to genetic closeness - to see what I mean, click the link above): > > [to dad's matches] > > D. W. Bonner (FTDNA# 209176) > shade code = 1st cousin 2nd cousin 3rd cousin 4th cousin 5th cousin > [--?--] Chatham, NC late 1700s - 1830s > Aiken SC; GA; AL > Armstrong Augusta, VA 1710s; Mecklenburg, NC 1760s; Bedford Co., TN 1840s > Bonner Pr Geo, VA 1700s; Troup, GA 1830s; Chambers, AL 1850s; OK > Brigance PA, Sumner Co., TN 1810s; Bedford Co.,TN > Brown Meriwether, GA > Buchanan Augusta, VA 1730s-1770s; Sumner, TN 1810s; White, IL 1840s > Bussey Calvert, MD 1730s; SC 1790s; Bedford, TN 1800s > Carlisle IRE 1700s; SC late 1700s; AL 1800s > Chappell VA 1700s; Troup, GA 1800s > Connelly Chester, SC 1790s; Troup, GA 1830s; Randolph, AL 1890s > Cottle NC 1800s; Monroe, GA 1830s; Chambers, AL 1860s > Formby VA; Troup, GA > Gant Bute, NC 1750s; Abbeville, SC 1800s; Bedford, TN 1850s > Grant Abbeville, SC 1790s; Randolph Co., AL 1840s > Hamble Bedford, TN early 1800s > Jones #1 Troup, GA 1830s; Chambers, AL 1840s; OK 1930s > Jones #2 Guilford, NC 1770s; Sumner, TN 1800s > Jones #3 GA; AL; (AR) > Lemaster SC 1700s; AL 1800s > Lentz Fairfield, SC 1750s; Rowan, NC 1780s; Bedford, TN 1850s > Mayfield Warren/Bute, NC 1760s; Granville Co., NC 1780s > Moore VA 1700s; Troup, GA 1800s > Neeley NC; Bedford, TN > Pickle Orange, NC 1780s; Bedford, TN 1850s; Marshall, TN 1900s > Rutledge Georgia or Alabama 1800s > Shearin Bute, NC; Bedford, TN > Sikes Halifax, VA 1760s; Lunenburg; GA 1790s; Bedford/Rutherford, TN > Springer SC 1700s; Bedford, TN 1800s > Stephenson Amherst, VA 1700s; Bedford, TN 1800s > Williams #1 NC 1780s; Sumner, TN 1810s; Bedford, TN 1850s; OK 1930s > Willingham Lunenburg, VA 1700s; Columbia, GA 1810s; Randolph, AL 1860s > > === > > [to mom's (Happy Mother's Day, Mom!) matches] > > Ann Simpson (FTDNA# 227381) > shade code = 1st cousin 2nd cousin 3rd cousin 4th cousin 5th cousin > [--?--] probably DE > Apperson VA 1600s-1700s; Davidson, TN 1800s > Barrett (Baltimore?) MD 1760s; Ohio Co., KY 1810s-1860s > Buck Schleswig-Holstein > Classen Schleswig-Holstein > Coleman Cumberland/Buckingham, VA 1750s; Davidson, TN; Logan, KY > Dutch Franklin Co., PA 1790s-1810s; Preble Co., OH 1830s > Fleagle Bucks, PA 1740s, Frederick, MD 1770s; Preble, OH 1850s > Gentry VA?; KY?; Gibson, IN > Haack Schleswig-Holstein 1600s-1890s; IA; OK > Harder Schleswig-Holstein > Harris Rutherford, TN > Hartwig Schleswig-Holstein > Jones #4 Rutherford/Davidson Cos., TN 1810s-1860s; St. Louis 1830s > Jones #5 Ohio, KY > Keith Hardin Co., KY 1820s; Ohio Co., KY 1860s > Knowles Sussex, DE 1750s; Greene, GA 1810s; Gibson, IN 1850s > Kraage Schleswig-Holstein > Maassen Schleswig-Holstein > Mills Frederick Co, VA 1740s; Guilford, NC 1770s; Jay Co., IN > Phelps Rutherford/Davidson Cos., TN 1810s-1860s; St. Louis 1830s > Ramey France 1600s; Westmoreland, VA 1700s; Frederick, VA 1800s > Reed Greene, GA 1800s; Gibson, IN > Schlosser GER; PA; OH? > Smitz Adams Co.(?), PA 1800s; Lancaster, PA; Preble Co., OH 1860s > Smotherman ENG; VA; Rutherford, TN; OK > Spore Frederick, VA; Gibson, IN; OK > Swallow Kent Co., DE 1740s; Stokes, NC 1780s; Montgomery, OH > Waack Schleswig-Holstein > West MD; Rutherford, TN? > Wheeler Sussex, DE 1730s; Kent, DE; NC 1790s > Williams #2 Brunswick Co., VA 1790s, Rutherford Co., TN 1840s > > The right-hand side evolves to improve as I find better ways to cram information into 60-something character spaces. > > So much for being succinct.... > > > > ______________________________ > 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 [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message