Well, you know, I've seen a lot of diversified and interesting clubs (and now internet groups) go through many of the aches as this one seems to be experiencing at the moment and subsequently collapse. I'd hate to see another administrator of a very viable group go by the way side because of an apparent discontent among a few who want to change the scope of the project as it was originally defined. As in all groups, there are at times discussions which do not appeal to everyone. No two people let alone a group are going to agree 100% of the time or on every issue. Not everyone has the understandings of all or even some. Everyone is on a computer with a functioning delete key. Belonging to this club beyond the defining parameters as we know them is by choice. No one is forced to participate or even join. You know the Clans and Septs of our ancestors about which this exercise of DNA testing involves were members of their groups on a criteria which rarely involved blood relatedness as the main requirement for belonging. We as their descendants now have fully come to terms with that. Some want to redefine not only this club but our ancestors as well; and we've seen a certain amount of those discussions regarding how X group could or could not been associated with Y group because of what our pathetic understandings or misunderstandings are over a thousand + years later based on the few scribed accounts often contradictory of one another and scribed hundreds of years after the fact and/or in some cases invention. It is my most candid estimation that the Clans & Septs in part allowed their own destruction by invading forces who wanted to change them through the same kind of behaviors which has been exhibited by some thus far from time to time with-in this group: ie killing off the rulers, dividing the followers with name changes and dissension, enforcing rule changes with bullying and humiliation, and the majority just wanted to get on with life and acquiesced after doing their best to hang in to defend their way of life. Ironically among the descendants now for some time is the call to revive our heritages; however, our behavior, if evidenced by some of the recent activity of this list, has not changed much. I see no need to change the definition of who is in the club and who isn't. It is the collective efforts of the many which gives this site its appeal to those who participate. It is unfortunate that the few who believe that they are the real club because they have + SNP and every one who is unambiguous, considered by the testing firm as unambiguous by definition are not. Individuals could spend for an upgrade if it were important enough to them to test their unambiguous result, and the majority would test out the positive SNP, and what has been accomplished? I am not minimizing the importance of making certain if there is any doubt; however since this group was never set up on those parameters I also see no need for it to be redefined. None of that is going to impede the research. The research will continue with further discoveries and redefinitions as it has over the last 11 years. This group is full of highly intelligent, interesting, knowledgeable and motivated, people with a variety of skill sets and accomplishments; it is through the diversity of talent that all societies survive. Now whether or not some of you may believe that my once again choice of sticking out my neck and inviting reprisal for doing so is appropriate or not, I don't really care. This needed to be said by someone. Susan On 10/13/2011 3:00 AM, dna-r1b1c7-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Summary of a distracting series (Lochlan@aol.com) > 2. Re: Summary of a distracting series (Lochlan@aol.com) > 3. Re: M222 and WTY (Lochlan@aol.com) > 4. Re: M222 and WTY (tuulen) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:51:43 -0400 (EDT) > From: Lochlan@aol.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Summary of a distracting series > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Message-ID:<5d756.2d3b0d69.3bc773ff@aol.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > > > > In a message dated 10/12/2011 11:20:52 A.M. Central Daylight Time, > pconroy63@gmail.com writes: > > John, > > The answer is, you possibly are, but since other McLoughlin's are also > close > to the Modal STR values and are tested negative for M222, then only passing > an M222 SNP test will give you the answer to your question - it's as simple > as that. > > This is really our only source of disagreement and it's one that can be > settled one way or the other with a full explanation of what those P25 results > really mean. I'm not really sure how to do that however. Not yet any > way. I already gave my opinion on what the results mean. I don't think any > of them have been tested for M222. > > > John > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:57:56 -0400 (EDT) > From: Lochlan@aol.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Summary of a distracting series > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Message-ID:<5f972.b3ed61a.3bc78384@aol.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > > I spent some time checking received lab results for the project. Paul's > results are interesting. He shows: > > R1b1a2a1a1b4b P25+ M343+ M269+ M222+ M207+ M173+ SRY2627- P66- M73- M65- > M37- M18- M160- M153- M126- > > But he also shows two different SNP tests. > > 1. P25 12/16/2004 > 2, DSNP-R1b 6/23/2006 > > > As of 12/16/2004 he would have been listed, based on result 1, as P25 and > R1b1 just like the other samples in question. He would still be listed as > that today if he had not taken the DSNP test two years later. > > I looked at the McLaughlin sample in question (there is only one). 25105. > On 4/19/2007 he shows a P25 test identical to Paul's. But he never > upgraded to the DSNP test or what FTDNA later began calling the DCLADE test. > This sample has not been tested for M222 or any other SNP other than P25. > > The same thing is true of the Doherty sample. He also only tested for > P25 in 8/1/2005. He never had another SNP test or Deep Clade test. He too > is still P25. > > At about the same time the McLaughlin sample was tested for P25 other DSNP > tests were reported. > Bernard Morgan of this list had one done in April 2007 and the results were > reported as follows: > > R1b1a2a1a1b4b P25+ M343+ M269+ M222+ M207+ M173+ SRY2627- P66- M73- M65- > M37- M18- M160- M153- M126- > > > The P25 SNP results reported in the project are essentially orphans that > have never been upgraded or checked for any SNP except P25. I will stand by > that deduction, It could easily be verified through FTDNA should anyone > desire to do so. (assuming you can find a way to ask the question). These > are not examples of M222 negative samples that just happen to match the > M222 STR pattern. > > There are some out there. Possibly more we don't know about. Perhaps > even some in the project although I think the likelihood of that is extremely > low. > > If someone would be so kind as to relieve me of any responsibility for > the M222 project you could do what you wish with it. Make everyone take an > SNP test. Drop all untested samples from the project. David Wilson > wouldn't care. He's retired anyway. He asked me a few months ago to try and > replace him. No luck yet. > > > > John > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 20:29:26 -0400 (EDT) > From: Lochlan@aol.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] M222 and WTY > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Message-ID:<60979.4c6b48c4.3bc78ae6@aol.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > > > > In a message dated 10/12/2011 1:56:22 A.M. Central Daylight Time, > tuulen@gmail.com writes: > > Apparently I am M222, according to Family Tree, but I have no idea as > to what WTY could be. > > Not that I need a detailed explanation, but what is WTY and what could > WTY determine? > > If WTY indeed is relevant, then I would be glad to make a financial > contribution. > > I don't think anyone else responded to this. WTY is an initiative by > FTDNA to find new SNPs (Walk on the Y). I first heard of it several years > ago and it has found a lot of new SNPs but none for the M222s tested to date. > Ken Nordtvedt at the time didn't think any new SNPs would be found > downstream of M222 since it was such a young clade by comparison with most > others. After testing three Irish samples it's doubtful anything would be found > in testing more. Scottish samples? Who knows? > > > John > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 22:27:20 -0400 > From: tuulen<tuulen@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [R-M222] M222 and WTY > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: > <CABbuToxG6nDBKX-DWWax-trC2hvfEpGhyo2O9j83qm=hAQCyuA@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > John, > > Thank you. > > The Internet is a haven for abbreviations, and sometimes I can figure > out or guess what abbreviations stand for, but then sometimes I cannot > make heads or tails of them. > > Doug > > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 8:29 PM,<Lochlan@aol.com> wrote: >> >> In a message dated 10/12/2011 1:56:22 A.M. Central Daylight Time, >> tuulen@gmail.com writes: >> >> Apparently I am M222, according to Family Tree, but I have no idea ?as >> to what WTY could be. >> >> Not that I need a detailed explanation, but ?what is WTY and what could >> WTY determine? >> >> If WTY indeed is relevant, ?then I would be glad to make a financial >> contribution. >> >> I don't think anyone ?else responded to this. ?WTY is an ?initiative by >> FTDNA to find new SNPs (Walk on the Y). ? I first heard ?of it several years >> ago and it has found a lot of new SNPs but none for the ?M222s tested to date. >> ?Ken Nordtvedt at the time didn't think any new SNPs ?would ?be found >> downstream of M222 since it was such a young clade by ?comparison with most >> others. ?After testing three Irish samples it's ?doubtful anything would be found >> in testing more. ?Scottish samples? ? Who knows? >> >> >> John >> >> >> ?R1b1c7 Research and Links: >> >> http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/ >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to DNA-R1B1C7-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > ------------------------------ > > > > End of DNA-R1B1C7 Digest, Vol 5, Issue 337 > ****************************************** >