I'd like to make a few suggestions. Has anyone determined whether the DNA testing site with the reduced rates is valid? If so, then that puts us on a deadline if we're going to get the ball rolling on this. First- I'd like to suggest that someone either be chosen or volunteers to coordinate this-preferrably with experience in either handling this sort of thing or with DNA testing (despite the fact that I'm making suggestions, I have experience in neither and am not volunteering myself) Second-that once that person has been chosen, then those of us who wish to donate then first PLEDGE the amount they wish to donate to the volunteer-that way if not enough interest or action takes place it will eliminate the bother for the volunteer to have to return money to those donating? That way, we'll also have an idea whether enough is being pledged to actually make this feasible at this time? Third-I'd suggest that the pledges be made directly to the volunteer OFF-LIST-that way the volunteer will receive the pledge directly to him and not have to wade through the list and sort out who's pledging? This will keep it better organized for that person-also in this time of belt-tightening it might be more comfortable for some to make their pledges anonymously (so to speak) directly to the volunteer and not to the list-perhaps more will respond? Fourth-Once someone is chosen, a deadline is set for the pledges to be given to the volunteer so that we can have an idea whether this is going to fly at this time? The volunteer can keep us apprised of the total and that way we'll know if this is a go or not. It may be, that we won't be able to get this project off the ground at this time, and may have to defer it to some future date. Fifth-It's my understanding that we need male DNA responders who have a direct line to our ancestors-we need to determine how many lines we represent and possibly what lines we want to focus on and what lines have already been tested-to avoid redundancy. It would be stupid if two descendants of say Robert & Winnie get tested while a descendant of say Ralph Kilgore of GA doesn't and so on. We need to focus our resources. What do you think? Sincerely, Vickie

I have contributed to a couple of different projects this year. I am not an authority on DNA but more than willing to do my part. One of my projects had an offer for only $75 which three of us split; on another one there were 5 of us and we contributed $25. There seems to be a larger group here so mybe it could be less? Also it depends on the marker as to the cost? I think it should be at least a 37 marker? Is $150 a ballpark figure? Are there at least 15 on this list that would/could contribute $10? I think Vickie has summed it up very well. I think $150 may be the going rate for 37 markers, and we probably can;t get it together in time to take advantage of the September 30th deadline for the reduced rate??? So who's on first!!! lol Who is our 'in residence authoity' on DNA!!! A comment on testing two from the same line, that sometimes turns up a surprise... So not even that is a waste??? Sherry ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vickie Miller" <[email protected]> To: "Kilgore" <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2008 7:59 AM Subject: [KILGORE] DNA Testing > I'd like to make a few suggestions. Has anyone determined whether the DNA > testing site with the reduced rates is valid? If so, then that puts us on > a deadline if we're going to get the ball rolling on this. > First- I'd like to suggest that someone either be chosen or volunteers to > coordinate this-preferrably with experience in either handling this sort > of thing or with DNA testing (despite the fact that I'm making > suggestions, I have experience in neither and am not volunteering myself) > Second-that once that person has been chosen, then those of us who wish to > donate then first PLEDGE the amount they wish to donate to the > volunteer-that way if not enough interest or action takes place it will > eliminate the bother for the volunteer to have to return money to those > donating? That way, we'll also have an idea whether enough is being > pledged to actually make this feasible at this time? > Third-I'd suggest that the pledges be made directly to the volunteer > OFF-LIST-that way the volunteer will receive the pledge directly to him > and not have to wade through the list and sort out who's pledging? This > will keep it better organized for that person-also in this time of > belt-tightening it might be more comfortable for some to make their > pledges anonymously (so to speak) directly to the volunteer and not to the > list-perhaps more will respond? > Fourth-Once someone is chosen, a deadline is set for the pledges to be > given to the volunteer so that we can have an idea whether this is going > to fly at this time? The volunteer can keep us apprised of the total and > that way we'll know if this is a go or not. It may be, that we won't be > able to get this project off the ground at this time, and may have to > defer it to some future date. > Fifth-It's my understanding that we need male DNA responders who have a > direct line to our ancestors-we need to determine how many lines we > represent and possibly what lines we want to focus on and what lines have > already been tested-to avoid redundancy. It would be stupid if two > descendants of say Robert & Winnie get tested while a descendant of say > Ralph Kilgore of GA doesn't and so on. We need to focus our resources. > > What do you think? > Sincerely, > Vickie > > ------------------------------- > 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 >