Also may not be able to crate one due to adoption or a full one due to that. On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Diana Gale Matthiesen <[email protected]>wrote: > I just sent the message below to the FTDNA HelpDesk. Perhaps if > enough of us press FTDNA to "remind" FF clients to upload a GEDCOM, > they might install the feature. Also... > > I'm going on a campaign to individually email all my FF matchees who > haven't uploaded GEDCOMs to please do so. Perhaps if these people get > enough requests, they will get off their butts and do it. > > Diana > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Diana Gale Matthiesen [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2012 9:37 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: not uploading GEDCOMs > > > > Every time I work on my FamilyFinder Matches, I become exasperated > > at how many test subjects have not uploaded GEDCOMs to their > > accounts. What is the point of being tested if you don't share your > > ancestry?!!! > > > > Where the match is 4th cousin or closer, I have been emailing my > > matchees asking them to please upload a GEDCOM, but this is a lot of > > work, and I feel I can only do it once. I have a better solution... > > > > Please set up the FTDNA software to send an email reminder ONCE A > > MONTH to everyone who has been FF tested and not uploaded a GEDCOM. > > (The same goes for people who have not entered surnames or earliest > > ancestors.) > > > > We are spending a great deal of money on DNA testing, and it's hard > > to maintain enthusiasm for recommending it when you have to tell > > prospective clients there's a high probability your genetic matches > > won't do you any good because they're not sharing their ancestry. > > > > And there is a related issue... > > > > I had an ENORMOUS amount of trouble getting my (perfectly standard) > > GEDCOM file to upload. A less persistent person might have given > > up, but I did not. Part of the problem is that the server doesn't > > tell you that the file didn't upload, much less why it didn't. The > > page just bounces back to the client's home page, and some > > inexperienced users are not even going to realize their file didn't > > upload. PLEASE, at least return an ERROR MESSAGE, so the client > > realizes their GEDCOM didn't upload. > > > > Diana > > > > ______________________________ > 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 >

If someone is adopted, they could at least upload a GEDCOM with a single individual in it named, "Adopted SMITH" - or whatever the surname is. This would save time and trouble for them and their matchees. I have 19 pages of matches, so anything that would save time is helpful. Diana > From: Mike Colton > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2012 10:27 AM > > Also may not be able to crate one due to adoption > or a full one due to that. >

I agree Mike .... I am assisting several folks who are either adopted or have an adoption in their line that has been their biggest brick-wall.   And many of them eagerly (and with great excitement) paid their money, took the test and now are uncertain (or are at least struggling) as to what to do.  I can understand the enthusiasm that may have brought them into the game.   When I run into someone with significant matches to our group of kits I always try to include them as collaborators if they are willing.  Including adoptees ...  My theory is that eventually we will have enough pieces to the puzzle to at least be able to offer deep ancestral story lines even if we can't provide near-term names.    In the meantime I find that by working in collaboration with these folks who show interest I learn a lot and that helps build my understanding of how best to apply these tests in the real world.    It's not without its faults but it seems to be at least one successful and rewarding strategy. And, I think we shouldn't jump past the fact that w e are all still learning how to best apply these Family Finder tools.  There is no one singular cookbook way to do this.   And while I agree that GEDCOM's and / or Pedigrees are great ..... a simple (but comprehensive) surname list is a great and often sufficient  start.    My suggestions to struggling test participants are always step-wise ..... 1.  develop a complete surnames list and enter it into FTDNA (or other vendors) files as they allow.   Then ... as time permits   2.  Build your pedigree ..... stretching your genealogically imposed need to proof everything to its limits .... just don't declare it all to be fact and don't post it on-line as fact.  And .... in those spare moments of time .....  3.  Build out your family files as far as you can along as many lines as you can ... with particular emphasis on working out sibling lines of more ancestral family to include spouses and at least a generation or two downstream ... which allows you to pick up on other potentially matching surnames from present day testing.    Surnames that are NOT in your direct line but ones that IF (and when) TESTED will in all probability match your targeted surname group. Now, that said .... even in my own situation I have so many kits (both recruited cousins and collaborators) in the files ... over 50 at present ..... it's difficult at best to work matches AND do upgrades while trying to conduct normal day-to-day business at the same time.     So, as in most everything we do these days ... most of us are behind on more things than we would like to admit.     Now, when someone contacts me and engages in a polite conversation about our matches I can re-direct if necessary to help fill in those GEDCOM / Pedigree / surname gaps if they exist and if I can do anything to accomodate.    But, I find it almost as interesting that even with a LOT of test kits out there that the number of "incoming" contacts is much much fewer than I ever anticipated.   It's my "out-going" communications that generate most of my activity.   And I believe this is the case because MOST folks just simply don't know what to do ... where to go .... who to turn to and have the normal human emotion of not wanting to look badly in public / or public communications.     I've never been hindered by that burden.    I can look "stupid" most anywhere and be ok with it as look as I'm trying. So .... I think a one page outline of "best practices"  .... would be very useful.   It could be distributed as a "cheat-sheet" to folks who have been waited to get a sense of what to do next.    And, we could provide it to our matches as a pro-active gesture that shares our experiences with them in a way that might just prod them to those so needed next steps.     This is complicated stuff .... the more we can help uncomplicate it for the masses the more productive our own efforts will be ....    

This is my problem. My ggrandfather was adopted and my uncle did a DNA test in family dna. I have nothing past him just census showing he was adopted. I can download gedcom but would only show to him. I have him listed. Virginia Parr -----Original Message----- From: John F Smeltzer <[email protected]> To: autosomal-dna <[email protected]> Sent: Sun, May 13, 2012 9:56 am Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] FF clients not uploading GEDCOMs - Suggestion I agree Mike .... I am assisting several folks who are either adopted or have an doption in their line that has been their biggest brick-wall. And many of hem eagerly (and with great excitement) paid their money, took the test and now re uncertain (or are at least struggling) as to what to do. I can understand he enthusiasm that may have brought them into the game. When I run into omeone with significant matches to our group of kits I always try to include hem as collaborators if they are willing. Including adoptees ... My theory is hat eventually we will have enough pieces to the puzzle to at least be able o offer deep ancestral story lines even if we can't provide near-term names. n the meantime I find that by working in collaboration with these folks who how interest I learn a lot and that helps build my understanding of how best o apply these tests in the real world. It's not without its faults but it eems to be at least one successful and rewarding strategy. And, I think we shouldn't jump past the fact that w e are all still learning how o best apply these Family Finder tools. There is no one singular cookbook way o do this. And while I agree that GEDCOM's and / or Pedigrees are great ..... simple (but comprehensive) surname list is a great and often sufficient start. My suggestions to struggling test participants are always step-wise .... 1. develop a complete surnames list and enter it into FTDNA (or other endors) files as they allow. Then ... as time permits 2. Build your edigree ..... stretching your genealogically imposed need to proof everything o its limits .... just don't declare it all to be fact and don't post it n-line as fact. And .... in those spare moments of time ..... 3. Build out our family files as far as you can along as many lines as you can ... with articular emphasis on working out sibling lines of more ancestral family to nclude spouses and at least a generation or two downstream ... which allows you o pick up on other potentially matching surnames from present day testing. urnames that are NOT in your direct line but ones that IF (and when) TESTED ill in all probability match your targeted surname group. Now, that said .... even in my own situation I have so many kits (both recruited ousins and collaborators) in the files ... over 50 at present ..... it's ifficult at best to work matches AND do upgrades while trying to conduct normal ay-to-day business at the same time. So, as in most everything we do these ays ... most of us are behind on more things than we would like to admit. ow, when someone contacts me and engages in a polite conversation about our atches I can re-direct if necessary to help fill in those GEDCOM / Pedigree / urname gaps if they exist and if I can do anything to accomodate. But, I ind it almost as interesting that even with a LOT of test kits out there that he number of "incoming" contacts is much much fewer than I ever nticipated. It's my "out-going" communications that generate most of my ctivity. And I believe this is the case because MOST folks just simply don't now what to do ... where to go .... who to turn to and have the normal human motion of not wanting to look badly in public / or public communications. 've never been hindered by that burden. I can look "stupid" most anywhere nd be ok with it as look as I'm trying. So .... I think a one page outline of "best practices" .... would be very seful. It could be distributed as a "cheat-sheet" to folks who have been aited to get a sense of what to do next. And, we could provide it to our atches as a pro-active gesture that shares our experiences with them in a way hat might just prod them to those so needed next steps. This is complicated stuff .... the more we can help uncomplicate it for the asses the more productive our own efforts will be .... ______________________________ or answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: ttp://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html ------------------------------ o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of he message