RootsWeb.com Mailing Lists
Next Page
Total: 20/125
    1. [ROSE-DNA] Re: additional groups annotated
    2. Diana Gale Matthiesen
    3. In addition to Groups S and S1, I've finished annotating some additional Groups on the "Groups and Progenitors" page, namely: A2, K2, K3, M, M2, N, T, T1, T2, TX, TY, W, and 47 and I've partially annotated these groups: K, K1, MM If you have a group that you particularly want done, please let me know. Diana > -----Original Message----- > From: Diana Gale Matthiesen [mailto:DianaGM@dgmweb.net] > Sent: Monday, December 24, 2018 11:07 AM > To: ROSE-DNA@rootsweb.com > Subject: [ROSE-DNA] Group S > > When I assumed administration of this project (Feb 2017), I decided to leave > intact a listing of groups and progenitors created by the former > administrators: > > https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/rose/about/results > > A few days ago, someone queried me about "Group S" referring to the above web > page. In examining Group S, I realized I needed to edit the page if I were to > respond accurately to his query, even though it had been my original intent to > leave the page untouched. And I further realized that I probably should do > this > for every group. I have, in one respect, already made most of the revisions, > but they show up on the "DNA Results" page: > > https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Rose?iframe=yresults > > not the listing of groups and progenitors, which makes it hard to see what > changes have been made. > > One reason I had not planned to do this earlier is that I didn't want to turn > the changes into a pointed criticism of the former admins. I realize, now, > that > it's not a good idea to leave misleading or erroneous groupings online, yet I > don't wish to delete the information entirely because many have gotten "used > to" > using these groupings - for years, which makes them of historical value. > So... > > I have revised Group S - and Group S1. Please visit the page, noting the > "legend" to the text color at the top, then scrolling down to these groups. > First, please note that there's no particular relationship between Group S and > Group S1 beyond the fact that both are Haplogroup R1b-M269 the most common > haplogroup in northwestern Europe, by far, and the most common haplogroup in > the > project. > > Only one member in Group S has tested 67 markers - the descendant of Thomas > Jefferson ROSE - so he becomes the "anchor" for the group. To be added to the > group, a person needs to match him. None of the others has tested 67 markers, > so their matches will remain "suspect" until they do. > > Thomas Jefferson ROSE is at the top of the list, and beneath him is a name in > blue. He's a new member, and he matches 36/37. A match at this level is > likely > to hold at 67 markers, but still possibly may not, so an upgrade to 67 markers > is needed. > > The next individual is in greyed out text. With a match of only 24/25, he > cannot be confidently joined to the group. The match could easily fall apart > at > 37 or 67 markers. Obviously, he, too, needs to upgrade. > > The next three individuals have names in red. Each has tested 25 markers, and > at 12 markers they match this and other ROSE groups, but these matches fall > away > entirely at 25 markers, proving they do not belong in Group S or any other > ROSE > group, for the present. > > So, bottom line, of the original five members of Group S, three do not belong, > at all, and the forth only weakly matches the "anchor" for the group. In > other > words: this was not really a group, at all. I would have placed all of them > in > the "no match" category. With the addition of the new member, we may have a > group, so I'm not going to abolish it. But for the two of you who have not > upgraded to 67 markers, please do so. > > I appreciate that the original admins were greatly handicapped by having only > 12 > and 25 markers available when the project opened and that the desire to have > matches and create groups biased them towards lowering the threshold for > matching. But testing has progressed, so I hope this example will encourage > those of you who haven't upgraded your testing to 67 markers to please do so. > > FTDNA is having their annual Holiday Sale (ending December 31st), so this is a > great time to upgrade. > > Diana

    12/26/2018 11:17:00
    1. [ROSE-DNA] Re: Group M2
    2. Diana Gale Matthiesen
    3. Mike, Yes, you should be. As I replied to Sandra, you and Tom are a tight STR match, at 107/111, and while he hasn't tested your BY30489 SNP, he has tested positive to a SNP that is just one step upstream, BY3301. Diana > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Rose [mailto:mike@mikeroselawfirm.com] > Sent: Monday, December 24, 2018 1:06 PM > To: Sandra Marsh; rose-dna@rootsweb.com > Cc: Mike Rose > Subject: [ROSE-DNA] Re: Group S > > Diana, > > Given what Sandra Rose says below about my testing results at the 111- > marker level, should Tom Rose and I be in the same group? > > Thanks. > > Mike Rose > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sandra Marsh <Smarsh34@cinci.rr.com> > Sent: Monday, December 24, 2018 11:27 AM > To: rose-dna@rootsweb.com > Cc: Mike Rose <mike@mikeroselawfirm.com> > Subject: RE: [ROSE-DNA] Group S > > Mike Rose has tested at the 111-marker level and matches Tom Rose. His kit > number is: 6781. He has also taken the Big-Y. > Sandy Rose Marsh >

    12/25/2018 04:06:01
    1. [ROSE-DNA] Re: Group M2
    2. Diana Gale Matthiesen
    3. Mike is in "Old" Group M2: https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/rose/about/results I've now "done" Group M2, and both Mike (#6781) and Tom (#4428) are a solid match at 107/111. The other two individuals have only tested 25 markers, which is not sufficient to prove membership in the group; they will have to upgrade to prove a genetic relationship. (Please see discussion on the page.) Diana > -----Original Message----- > From: Sandra Marsh [mailto:Smarsh34@cinci.rr.com] > Sent: Monday, December 24, 2018 11:27 AM > To: rose-dna@rootsweb.com > Cc: mike@mikeroselawfirm.com > Subject: [ROSE-DNA] Re: Group S > > Mike Rose has tested at the 111-marker level and matches Tom Rose. His kit > number is: 6781. He has also taken the Big-Y. > Sandy Rose Marsh

    12/25/2018 01:19:08
    1. [ROSE-DNA] Re: Group S
    2. Mike Rose
    3. Diana, Given what Sandra Rose says below about my testing results at the 111-marker level, should Tom Rose and I be in the same group? Thanks. Mike Rose -----Original Message----- From: Sandra Marsh <Smarsh34@cinci.rr.com> Sent: Monday, December 24, 2018 11:27 AM To: rose-dna@rootsweb.com Cc: Mike Rose <mike@mikeroselawfirm.com> Subject: RE: [ROSE-DNA] Group S Mike Rose has tested at the 111-marker level and matches Tom Rose. His kit number is: 6781. He has also taken the Big-Y. Sandy Rose Marsh -----Original Message----- From: Diana Gale Matthiesen [mailto:DianaGM@dgmweb.net] Sent: Monday, December 24, 2018 11:07 AM To: ROSE-DNA@rootsweb.com Subject: [ROSE-DNA] Group S When I assumed administration of this project (Feb 2017), I decided to leave intact a listing of groups and progenitors created by the former administrators: https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/rose/about/results A few days ago, someone queried me about "Group S" referring to the above web page. In examining Group S, I realized I needed to edit the page if I were to respond accurately to his query, even though it had been my original intent to leave the page untouched. And I further realized that I probably should do this for every group. I have, in one respect, already made most of the revisions, but they show up on the "DNA Results" page: https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Rose?iframe=yresults not the listing of groups and progenitors, which makes it hard to see what changes have been made. One reason I had not planned to do this earlier is that I didn't want to turn the changes into a pointed criticism of the former admins. I realize, now, that it's not a good idea to leave misleading or erroneous groupings online, yet I don't wish to delete the information entirely because many have gotten "used to" using these groupings - for years, which makes them of historical value. So... I have revised Group S - and Group S1. Please visit the page, noting the "legend" to the text color at the top, then scrolling down to these groups. First, please note that there's no particular relationship between Group S and Group S1 beyond the fact that both are Haplogroup R1b-M269 the most common haplogroup in northwestern Europe, by far, and the most common haplogroup in the project. Only one member in Group S has tested 67 markers - the descendant of Thomas Jefferson ROSE - so he becomes the "anchor" for the group. To be added to the group, a person needs to match him. None of the others has tested 67 markers, so their matches will remain "suspect" until they do. Thomas Jefferson ROSE is at the top of the list, and beneath him is a name in blue. He's a new member, and he matches 36/37. A match at this level is likely to hold at 67 markers, but still possibly may not, so an upgrade to 67 markers is needed. The next individual is in greyed out text. With a match of only 24/25, he cannot be confidently joined to the group. The match could easily fall apart at 37 or 67 markers. Obviously, he, too, needs to upgrade. The next three individuals have names in red. Each has tested 25 markers, and at 12 markers they match this and other ROSE groups, but these matches fall away entirely at 25 markers, proving they do not belong in Group S or any other ROSE group, for the present. So, bottom line, of the original five members of Group S, three do not belong, at all, and the forth only weakly matches the "anchor" for the group. In other words: this was not really a group, at all. I would have placed all of them in the "no match" category. With the addition of the new member, we may have a group, so I'm not going to abolish it. But for the two of you who have not upgraded to 67 markers, please do so. I appreciate that the original admins were greatly handicapped by having only 12 and 25 markers available when the project opened and that the desire to have matches and create groups biased them towards lowering the threshold for matching. But testing has progressed, so I hope this example will encourage those of you who haven't upgraded your testing to 67 markers to please do so. FTDNA is having their annual Holiday Sale (ending December 31st), so this is a great time to upgrade. Diana _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/rose-dna@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

    12/24/2018 11:06:21
    1. [ROSE-DNA] Re: Group S
    2. Sandra Marsh
    3. Mike Rose has tested at the 111-marker level and matches Tom Rose. His kit number is: 6781. He has also taken the Big-Y. Sandy Rose Marsh -----Original Message----- From: Diana Gale Matthiesen [mailto:DianaGM@dgmweb.net] Sent: Monday, December 24, 2018 11:07 AM To: ROSE-DNA@rootsweb.com Subject: [ROSE-DNA] Group S When I assumed administration of this project (Feb 2017), I decided to leave intact a listing of groups and progenitors created by the former administrators: https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/rose/about/results A few days ago, someone queried me about "Group S" referring to the above web page. In examining Group S, I realized I needed to edit the page if I were to respond accurately to his query, even though it had been my original intent to leave the page untouched. And I further realized that I probably should do this for every group. I have, in one respect, already made most of the revisions, but they show up on the "DNA Results" page: https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Rose?iframe=yresults not the listing of groups and progenitors, which makes it hard to see what changes have been made. One reason I had not planned to do this earlier is that I didn't want to turn the changes into a pointed criticism of the former admins. I realize, now, that it's not a good idea to leave misleading or erroneous groupings online, yet I don't wish to delete the information entirely because many have gotten "used to" using these groupings - for years, which makes them of historical value. So... I have revised Group S - and Group S1. Please visit the page, noting the "legend" to the text color at the top, then scrolling down to these groups. First, please note that there's no particular relationship between Group S and Group S1 beyond the fact that both are Haplogroup R1b-M269 the most common haplogroup in northwestern Europe, by far, and the most common haplogroup in the project. Only one member in Group S has tested 67 markers - the descendant of Thomas Jefferson ROSE - so he becomes the "anchor" for the group. To be added to the group, a person needs to match him. None of the others has tested 67 markers, so their matches will remain "suspect" until they do. Thomas Jefferson ROSE is at the top of the list, and beneath him is a name in blue. He's a new member, and he matches 36/37. A match at this level is likely to hold at 67 markers, but still possibly may not, so an upgrade to 67 markers is needed. The next individual is in greyed out text. With a match of only 24/25, he cannot be confidently joined to the group. The match could easily fall apart at 37 or 67 markers. Obviously, he, too, needs to upgrade. The next three individuals have names in red. Each has tested 25 markers, and at 12 markers they match this and other ROSE groups, but these matches fall away entirely at 25 markers, proving they do not belong in Group S or any other ROSE group, for the present. So, bottom line, of the original five members of Group S, three do not belong, at all, and the forth only weakly matches the "anchor" for the group. In other words: this was not really a group, at all. I would have placed all of them in the "no match" category. With the addition of the new member, we may have a group, so I'm not going to abolish it. But for the two of you who have not upgraded to 67 markers, please do so. I appreciate that the original admins were greatly handicapped by having only 12 and 25 markers available when the project opened and that the desire to have matches and create groups biased them towards lowering the threshold for matching. But testing has progressed, so I hope this example will encourage those of you who haven't upgraded your testing to 67 markers to please do so. FTDNA is having their annual Holiday Sale (ending December 31st), so this is a great time to upgrade. Diana _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/rose-dna@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

    12/24/2018 09:27:15
    1. [ROSE-DNA] Group S
    2. Diana Gale Matthiesen
    3. When I assumed administration of this project (Feb 2017), I decided to leave intact a listing of groups and progenitors created by the former administrators: https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/rose/about/results A few days ago, someone queried me about "Group S" referring to the above web page. In examining Group S, I realized I needed to edit the page if I were to respond accurately to his query, even though it had been my original intent to leave the page untouched. And I further realized that I probably should do this for every group. I have, in one respect, already made most of the revisions, but they show up on the "DNA Results" page: https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Rose?iframe=yresults not the listing of groups and progenitors, which makes it hard to see what changes have been made. One reason I had not planned to do this earlier is that I didn't want to turn the changes into a pointed criticism of the former admins. I realize, now, that it's not a good idea to leave misleading or erroneous groupings online, yet I don't wish to delete the information entirely because many have gotten "used to" using these groupings - for years, which makes them of historical value. So... I have revised Group S - and Group S1. Please visit the page, noting the "legend" to the text color at the top, then scrolling down to these groups. First, please note that there's no particular relationship between Group S and Group S1 beyond the fact that both are Haplogroup R1b-M269 the most common haplogroup in northwestern Europe, by far, and the most common haplogroup in the project. Only one member in Group S has tested 67 markers - the descendant of Thomas Jefferson ROSE - so he becomes the "anchor" for the group. To be added to the group, a person needs to match him. None of the others has tested 67 markers, so their matches will remain "suspect" until they do. Thomas Jefferson ROSE is at the top of the list, and beneath him is a name in blue. He's a new member, and he matches 36/37. A match at this level is likely to hold at 67 markers, but still possibly may not, so an upgrade to 67 markers is needed. The next individual is in greyed out text. With a match of only 24/25, he cannot be confidently joined to the group. The match could easily fall apart at 37 or 67 markers. Obviously, he, too, needs to upgrade. The next three individuals have names in red. Each has tested 25 markers, and at 12 markers they match this and other ROSE groups, but these matches fall away entirely at 25 markers, proving they do not belong in Group S or any other ROSE group, for the present. So, bottom line, of the original five members of Group S, three do not belong, at all, and the forth only weakly matches the "anchor" for the group. In other words: this was not really a group, at all. I would have placed all of them in the "no match" category. With the addition of the new member, we may have a group, so I'm not going to abolish it. But for the two of you who have not upgraded to 67 markers, please do so. I appreciate that the original admins were greatly handicapped by having only 12 and 25 markers available when the project opened and that the desire to have matches and create groups biased them towards lowering the threshold for matching. But testing has progressed, so I hope this example will encourage those of you who haven't upgraded your testing to 67 markers to please do so. FTDNA is having their annual Holiday Sale (ending December 31st), so this is a great time to upgrade. Diana

    12/24/2018 09:06:44
    1. [ROSE-DNA] multiple copies of Bulk Emails from ROSE DNA project
    2. Diana Gale Matthiesen
    3. ROSE DNA project members are messaging me that they are getting multiple copies of the same Bulk Email messages. There are two reasons I can think of that would cause this. 1) Your email address is a Contact on more than one Kit. 2) You have more than one email address on your own account, and both are addresses that send email to you. You can turn off Bulk Emails for an account by logging in, then over on the left, clicking on "Manage Personal Information," then choosing "Match and Email Settings." Then click the "No" radiobutton under "Project Email Settings." If you leave one address active on one account, you should get only one copy of each Bulk Email. If you still get multiple copies, I don't know what to do about it beyond either hitting, "Del," or turning them off entirely. I'm a volunteer administrator for the ROSE Y-DNA surname project, not an employee of FTDNA. Once I "Submit" a Bulk Email to FTDNA for approval, it's out of my hands, and I have nothing to do with the process of actually sending it. Anyway, I'm going to back off on the Bulk Emails in preference to messaging on this list, which I think is a better venue for discussion - provided project members subscribe. Bulk Emails are a one-way street. Diana ROSE Y-DNA Surname Project Admin

    03/20/2017 07:45:16
    1. [ROSE-DNA] deep SNP testing, even at 111 STR markers
    2. Diana Gale Matthiesen
    3. The example I mentioned in my message of a few minutes ago comes from Old Group II, Haplogroup E-L117, in the ROSE project - do a Find in your browser on "Old Group II" (without the quotes): https://www.familytreedna.com/public/rose/default.aspx?section=ycolorized Four of the six members descend from Nicholas ROSE of Paris, while two of them descend from William ROSE of Connecticut. The latter two believe their roots are English, not French. Their match at 111 markers is close suggesting they do have a near common ancestor. However, coincidences do happen, even at 111 markers. For a conclusive, irrefutable answer, they can do deep SNP testing. Because the issue is of importance to the two Connecticut descendants, I recommend the one who tested 111 markers take the BigY test. I make this recommendation because, if you have a SNP difference, it's probably going to be very much downstream of L117 among newly discovered SNPs and probably not in any of the E SNP packs, which test only known markers. Likewise, I recommend the French ROSE who tested 111 markers be the one to take the BigY for his family. When the terminal SNPs are known, the other family members' need only test the single SNP(s) to prove their relationship. Deep SNP testing, like the BigY, is the key to your ethnicity and deep ancestry. Diana

    03/20/2017 03:59:34
    1. [ROSE-DNA] how do I purchase a SNP test at FTDNA?
    2. Diana Gale Matthiesen
    3. I've asked ROSE Y-DNA project members to ask me their general testing questions, here, rather than emailing me privately. While I've managed to reduce the membership of the ROSE project from over 1000 to less than 700 - by removing females and males who are not ROSE on their patrilineal line - that's still a lot of members to answer individually. The question I've just been asked by a ROSE project member is how you know what SNP test to take. If you login to your member page and there's a SNP pack available for you, FTDNA will probably have put an ad for it just below the "Y-DNA" section of the page. If there isn't such an ad - and there isn't one for the example I'll use in my next message - you can ask here, on the list. Another valuable resource for advice on SNP testing is your Haplogroup project administrator. Please do join your haplogroup project. Click "Projects" on your account menubar, then choose, "Join a Project," from the menu. Then scroll down to the "Y-DNA HAPLOGROUP PROJECTS" header and click the letter of your haplogroup. If it's not clear which one of offered projects is the correct one, you can ask here on the list; or you can ask the project admin. There may also be a mailing list or "group" for your haplogroup. I'll make up a list of them covering the haplogroups in the ROSE project and post it here. To order the SNP pack offered on your member page, just click the blue button with the price on it. These typically range from $99 to $119 depending on the number of SNPs in the pack. These are real bargains over testing SNPs individually (at $39 a whack). The SNP packs test only known SNPs, and you will likely have to take more than one, plus individual SNPs, before you get near your terminal, personal SNPs. Testing in stages may ease the sticker shock of taking the BigY ($575), but you may end up spending more in the long run, especially if you do as many end up doing: purchasing the BigY, anyway, so all the money spent on SNP packs was essentially wasted. The BigY is an exploratory test. It tests all known SNPs and looks for new ones - this is how it discovers your personal, novel SNPs. You may want to have one member of your group or family take the test, with others chipping in. When the results come back, other family members can take just the terminal SNP ($39). Over on the lower left of your member page is a "Learn More" button that will offer you additional information about the BigY, along with a blue, "Order Now" button. Hope this helps, Diana ROSE-DNA ListAdmin ROSE Y-DNA Surname Project Admin

    03/20/2017 03:38:50
    1. [ROSE-DNA] ROSE DNA Project has new admin
    2. Diana Gale Matthiesen
    3. Those of you who are members of the FamilyTreeDNA ROSE Y-DNA surname project have already heard this announcement, but in case any of you have not, the project has a new administrator. Nora Probasco was forced to resign due to health concerns, so she invited me to adopt the project, and I accepted. One of her ROSE kin was the first member of the ROSE project to join back in 2002, so she has served the project in one role or another for almost 15 years. I'm sure you'll want to join me in thanking her for her dedication: Thank you, Nora! The most obvious change to the project is that I converted the project web pages to the new format: https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/rose/about And I'm sure you'll notice, first, the beautiful banner photo donated by Charles H. ROSE III. Another project member, Roger ROSENTRETER, has donated three additional images, and I'll be rotating them every month or so, so you can see them all. If you have a rose image you'd like to see in the banner, you can email me one - at least 1366 x 250 pixels, in those proportions (I can crop a larger image, but enlarging a smaller one blows the quality). The new format allows for an Activity Feed where project members can message when they're logged in: https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/rose/activity-feed As you can see, the project has a Co-Admin, Timothy Lee ROSE, who is taking on the job of reviewing Join Requests - to be certain new members are males surnamed ROSE and to obtain earliest ancestor information and patrilineal line genealogies. For all the years the ROSE project has been open, no such screening took place, and people were allowed to join at will. This had led to a bulging, unwieldy project with many members whose inclusion was not really relevant to them or the project. You will also notice the number of members in the project, once over 1000, has dropped to 825. This is due mainly to my having removed all the female test subjects in the project. This caused a bit of kerfuffle, but the fact is, females have no Y-chromosome, so there is no point in belonging to an all-male Y-DNA project. The way a female participates in a Y-DNA project is to be the Contact for a male relative. Yes, I know this seems a tad sexist, but sometimes biology does rule. I'm now in the process of removing males who are not ROSE on their patrilineal line, so the membership number will continue to decline for awhile. And you will notice there's something wrong with the "colorized" version of the results page: https://www.familytreedna.com/public/rose/default.aspx?section=ycolorized It got munged somewhere along the line, and I'm unable to edit it from the GAP (Group Administrator's Page). I contacted FTDNA, and they're having trouble fixing it, but are aware of it and (allegedly) working on it. Lastly, I will be opening a new web site for the project using TNG (The Next Generation) software. If you are skilled with this software and would like to help with the project, I would welcome an additional Co-Admin as TNG geek. Well, this is enough news for now. I hope ROSE genealogists will be pleased with the changes. Diana (new) ROSE Y-DNA Surname Project Admin ROSE-DNA ListAdmin

    03/09/2017 04:25:54
    1. [ROSE-DNA] display of results at FTDNA ROSE project
    2. Diana Gale Matthiesen via
    3. Just a heads up... When FTDNA revamped their web site interface, they made data NOT showing on the project results page the default. If you want your data to show up here: https://www.familytreedna.com/public/rose/default.aspx?section=yresults and you don't see it there, now (check both pages), then you need to change one of the Privacy settings on your FTDNA account. Login to your account at FTDNA, then, on the left under "Your Account," click the "Manage Personal Information" link. Then click the "Privacy and Sharing" tab on the far right. Under "My DNA Results," make certain the answer to this question, "Who can view my DNA results in group project?" is "Anyone." If it says, "Project Members," then your results will not show up on the above Results page, which you want them to do. Displaying results on the above linked page used to be the default, so all you are doing is putting things back the way they were before. Diana

    02/06/2016 02:56:19
    1. Re: [ROSE-DNA] Beneficiary Information
    2. Don Rose via
    3. Thanks Diana, I did this last year. My son will be taking over for me when I kick off. Don Rose On May 3, 2015 11:12 AM, "Diana Gale Matthiesen via" <rose-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > The sudden and unexpected death of a member of one of my projects prompts > me to > remind you to fill in the "Beneficiary Information" on your FTDNA member > account. > > To do so, please login to your FTDNA account and click "Manage Personal > Information" (orange text) on the left of your home page, under the "Your > Account" heading. Then click the "Beneficiary Information" tab. You will > need > to fill in the Name, Phone, and E-mail address of the beneficiary. > > Legally, your heirs will be able to gain control of the account, anyway, > but > filling in the Beneficiary Information will mean they won't have the > burden of > proving to FTDNA that they're the member's legal heir. It also means you > can > specify which of your heirs gains control of the account. > > And, of course, your FTDNA account should be mentioned in your will as > part of > your estate, to be certain your heirs are aware of it. > > Diana > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ROSE-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

    05/04/2015 06:16:24
    1. [ROSE-DNA] Beneficiary Information
    2. Diana Gale Matthiesen via
    3. The sudden and unexpected death of a member of one of my projects prompts me to remind you to fill in the "Beneficiary Information" on your FTDNA member account. To do so, please login to your FTDNA account and click "Manage Personal Information" (orange text) on the left of your home page, under the "Your Account" heading. Then click the "Beneficiary Information" tab. You will need to fill in the Name, Phone, and E-mail address of the beneficiary. Legally, your heirs will be able to gain control of the account, anyway, but filling in the Beneficiary Information will mean they won't have the burden of proving to FTDNA that they're the member's legal heir. It also means you can specify which of your heirs gains control of the account. And, of course, your FTDNA account should be mentioned in your will as part of your estate, to be certain your heirs are aware of it. Diana

    05/03/2015 08:09:53
    1. Re: [ROSE-DNA] FTDNA sale on BigY and Family Finder
    2. George Rose
    3. Hi Diana, Thanks for the heads up on these tests. I have just ordered the Big Y on behalf of the (7) Ross/Roses in the L513 C2R category at: http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R-L21-1113Combo/default.aspx?vgroup=R-L21-1113Combo&section=yresults (second page at 111 markers) If only some of the many remaining Roses/Rosses would test further to L513 I think it likely they would also fit the C2R group. The Administrators' are silent (as usual it seems). I would have thought they could provide a mass mailing to select groups on occasion but that seems not to be the case. Anyway, glad to see you back with us. I have much respect for your views. Will you be updating the Roses of Kilravock on your website soon? Best wishes George F Rose -----Original Message----- From: Diana Gale Matthiesen Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 5:24 AM To: ROSE-DNA@rootsweb.com Subject: [ROSE-DNA] FTDNA sale on BigY and Family Finder Family Tree DNA is having a sale on two very important tests: the BigY and FamilyFinder, each with a significant discount. Strictly speaking, neither of these tests is within the scope of a Y-DNA Surname project, which is based on STR (short tandem repeat) testing, while the BigY and FF tests are based on SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) testing. My interest in DNA testing is entirely within a genealogical, not anthropological, time frame; and for genealogical purposes, STR testing of the male Y-chromosome has proven to be a powerful tool for supporting paper pedigrees, debunking erroneous ones, and breaking through "brick walls," connecting families genetically that were (and may remain) unconnected on paper. Prior to this point, I have not been a champion of Y-DNA SNP testing or FF testing because I felt their use was limited for genealogical purposes. I no longer feel this is the case... With the BigY, Y-DNA SNP testing is reaching down into genealogical time showing promise that it can identify individual lines in families, something STR testing has only occasionally been successful in doing. The problem with the BigY is that it produces so much data, trying to analyze it has proven overwhelming. FTDNA has just announced a forthcoming tool that will make this analysis *much* easier. I have BigY tested three of my cousins, and each has *hundreds* of novel SNPs (previously unknown SNPs) that can be used to trace lines in their families. I am greatly looking forward to the new tool to analyze them. In the case of the FF test, I've tested myself and several near cousins, and while we dramatically matched each other, I was initially underwhelmed with the remainder of the matching. Of course, this was due to so few people having taken the test when it first appeared. Things have changed, and enough people have taken the test that I can attest to its usefulness. In particular, it allows females to participate on an equal footing with males. I especially urge women to take the test. In the case of FF, the most useful strategy is to test yourself, both of your parents, and as many siblings as you can. By testing both parents, you have a much easier time separating which of your genetic segments came from which side of your family, and the more siblings tested, the more such segments can be identified. Bottom line: I urge you to take advantage of these sales, which end on Father's Day. Diana ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROSE-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

    06/11/2014 05:24:32
    1. Re: [ROSE-DNA] FTDNA sale on BigY and Family Finder
    2. Diana Gale Matthiesen
    3. I wish I could promise you I will update the ROSE pages, soon, but I'm afraid that is unlikely. These BigY results have completely re-vamped the Y-DNA haplotree, and it is going to take me months to update all my projects and web pages (over 900 of my web site pages are devoted to DNA!). I haven't written off updating the Rose pages, it's just that I'm not the official admin of the Rose Project, while I am the official admin for ten other FTDNA projects. Those ten projects always have priority, and my "to do" list has just become very long. Sorry. Diana > -----Original Message----- > From: rose-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:rose-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On > Behalf Of George Rose > Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 10:25 AM > To: rose-dna@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [ROSE-DNA] FTDNA sale on BigY and Family Finder > > Hi Diana, > > Thanks for the heads up on these tests. > I have just ordered the Big Y on behalf of the (7) Ross/Roses in the L513 > C2R category at: > > http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R-L21-1113Combo/default.aspx?vgroup=R-L21- > 1113Combo&section=yresults > (second page at 111 markers) > > If only some of the many remaining Roses/Rosses would test further to L513 I > think it likely they would also fit the C2R group. > The Administrators' are silent (as usual it seems). I would have thought > they could provide a mass mailing to select groups on occasion but that > seems not to be the case. > > Anyway, glad to see you back with us. I have much respect for your views. > Will you be updating the Roses of Kilravock on your website soon? > > Best wishes > George F Rose > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Diana Gale Matthiesen > Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 5:24 AM > To: ROSE-DNA@rootsweb.com > Subject: [ROSE-DNA] FTDNA sale on BigY and Family Finder > > Family Tree DNA is having a sale on two very important tests: the BigY and > FamilyFinder, each with a significant discount. Strictly speaking, neither > of > these tests is within the scope of a Y-DNA Surname project, which is based > on > STR (short tandem repeat) testing, while the BigY and FF tests are based on > SNP > (single nucleotide polymorphism) testing. > > My interest in DNA testing is entirely within a genealogical, not > anthropological, time frame; and for genealogical purposes, STR testing of > the > male Y-chromosome has proven to be a powerful tool for supporting paper > pedigrees, debunking erroneous ones, and breaking through "brick walls," > connecting families genetically that were (and may remain) unconnected on > paper. > Prior to this point, I have not been a champion of Y-DNA SNP testing or FF > testing because I felt their use was limited for genealogical purposes. I > no > longer feel this is the case... > > With the BigY, Y-DNA SNP testing is reaching down into genealogical time > showing > promise that it can identify individual lines in families, something STR > testing > has only occasionally been successful in doing. The problem with the BigY > is > that it produces so much data, trying to analyze it has proven overwhelming. > FTDNA has just announced a forthcoming tool that will make this analysis > *much* > easier. I have BigY tested three of my cousins, and each has *hundreds* of > novel SNPs (previously unknown SNPs) that can be used to trace lines in > their > families. I am greatly looking forward to the new tool to analyze them. > > In the case of the FF test, I've tested myself and several near cousins, and > while we dramatically matched each other, I was initially underwhelmed with > the > remainder of the matching. Of course, this was due to so few people having > taken the test when it first appeared. Things have changed, and enough > people > have taken the test that I can attest to its usefulness. In particular, it > allows females to participate on an equal footing with males. I especially > urge > women to take the test. > > In the case of FF, the most useful strategy is to test yourself, both of > your > parents, and as many siblings as you can. By testing both parents, you have > a > much easier time separating which of your genetic segments came from which > side > of your family, and the more siblings tested, the more such segments can be > identified. > > Bottom line: I urge you to take advantage of these sales, which end on > Father's > Day. > > Diana > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ROSE-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROSE-DNA- > request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the > subject and the body of the message

    06/11/2014 05:22:04
    1. [ROSE-DNA] FTDNA sale on BigY and Family Finder
    2. Diana Gale Matthiesen
    3. Family Tree DNA is having a sale on two very important tests: the BigY and FamilyFinder, each with a significant discount. Strictly speaking, neither of these tests is within the scope of a Y-DNA Surname project, which is based on STR (short tandem repeat) testing, while the BigY and FF tests are based on SNP (single nucleotide polymorphism) testing. My interest in DNA testing is entirely within a genealogical, not anthropological, time frame; and for genealogical purposes, STR testing of the male Y-chromosome has proven to be a powerful tool for supporting paper pedigrees, debunking erroneous ones, and breaking through "brick walls," connecting families genetically that were (and may remain) unconnected on paper. Prior to this point, I have not been a champion of Y-DNA SNP testing or FF testing because I felt their use was limited for genealogical purposes. I no longer feel this is the case... With the BigY, Y-DNA SNP testing is reaching down into genealogical time showing promise that it can identify individual lines in families, something STR testing has only occasionally been successful in doing. The problem with the BigY is that it produces so much data, trying to analyze it has proven overwhelming. FTDNA has just announced a forthcoming tool that will make this analysis *much* easier. I have BigY tested three of my cousins, and each has *hundreds* of novel SNPs (previously unknown SNPs) that can be used to trace lines in their families. I am greatly looking forward to the new tool to analyze them. In the case of the FF test, I've tested myself and several near cousins, and while we dramatically matched each other, I was initially underwhelmed with the remainder of the matching. Of course, this was due to so few people having taken the test when it first appeared. Things have changed, and enough people have taken the test that I can attest to its usefulness. In particular, it allows females to participate on an equal footing with males. I especially urge women to take the test. In the case of FF, the most useful strategy is to test yourself, both of your parents, and as many siblings as you can. By testing both parents, you have a much easier time separating which of your genetic segments came from which side of your family, and the more siblings tested, the more such segments can be identified. Bottom line: I urge you to take advantage of these sales, which end on Father's Day. Diana

    06/10/2014 10:24:46
    1. [ROSE-DNA] $10 coupon from FTDNA
    2. Diana Gale Matthiesen
    3. Just in case you haven't noticed... If you have not uploaded a GEDCOM to your FTDNA member page, there is a $10 coupon on your member page, which you will receive for uploading your GEDCOM. Given that you should be uploading one *anyway*, this is a nice little enticement. I have an FAQ on creating one for upload, and I do recommend creating one just for this purpose: http://dgmweb.net/DNA/General/FAQs.html#GEDCOM If you've only been Y-DNA tested, you need to supply only your patrilineal line genealogy. If you've only been mtDNA tested, you need to supply only your matrilineal line genealogy. If you've been FamilyFinder tested, you need to supply as complete a GEDCOM as possible. It's a matter of debate whether you should include tentative or iffy connections in your pedigree. I've seen mis-leading errors in client's GEDCOMs, so my recommendation is to include only your proven connections. Don't waste that Coupon, it's good on future testing! Diana

    12/08/2013 10:32:21
    1. Re: [ROSE-DNA] ROSE-DNA Digest, Vol 5, Issue 7
    2. Nora Probasco
    3. Jackie, if you are considering either test, I would order now as today is the last day of FTDNA's sale at the prices I listed. Nora On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Nora Probasco <nprobasco@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Jackie, > > I see where your Y-DNA test is in Group V of the Rose DNA Project. The > maternal test is the mtDNA. If you take just the standard mtDNA test > (Hvr1/Hvr2) it will only give you your ancient haplogroup which involves > thousands of years and is not good for a genealogical time frame. In other > words, it will not help you find meaningful matches in the last thousand or > more years. The best test in mtDNA is the full sequence which is currently > selling for $219 through today. However, understand that there are still > not that many who have taken the full sequence and its genealogical use is > still in its infancy. I took the test to be a pioneer to see what it will > eventually do for me. > > However, if you have a well developed family tree for most of your > ancestors, the better test would be the Family Finder currently selling for > $199. This will give you matches across all your ancestors back several > generations. It will still require researching together with each of your > matches, but offers you more than the mtDNA full sequence for now. The > advantage of this test is if you have a match that lists many of their > surnames, you can research any of the surnames you match. > > I hope this helps. > > Nora Probasco > Volunteer Group Administrator - Family Tree DNA > Rose DNA Project > > > On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 3:00 AM, <rose-dna-request@rootsweb.com> wrote: > >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: FTDNA Sale (Jackie Madden ) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 21:49:41 -0700 >> From: "Jackie Madden " <yackiejay@msn.com> >> Subject: Re: [ROSE-DNA] FTDNA Sale >> To: <rose-dna@rootsweb.com> >> Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP3682F78DEE4C42F882BB649ABD50@phx.gbl> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> >> Diana, >> I am a member and have done the 67 marker test. I would like to do the >> Maternal test but don't know what it's called or how much it costs. Can >> you >> please advise me so I can get the test. Thank you, Jackie Rose Madden >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: rose-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:rose-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com >> ] >> On Behalf Of Diana Gale Matthiesen >> Sent: Monday, July 09, 2012 10:55 AM >> To: ROSE-DNA@rootsweb.com >> Subject: [ROSE-DNA] FTDNA Sale >> >> FamilyTreeDNA is again offering it's "Sizzling Summer Sale" prices. >> If you've been considering getting tested or upgrading your existing >> tests, now's the time to do it because these discounts are substantial >> - and temporary. >> >> New Kits.........................Group Price.....SALE PRICE >> Y-DNA-12..............................$ 99...........$ 59 >> Y-DNA-37..............................$149...........$129 >> Y-DNA-67..............................$239...........$199 >> Family Finder.........................$289...........$199 >> mtDNA Full Sequence (FMS).............$299...........$219 >> Family Finder + Y-DNA-37..............$438...........$328 >> Family Finder + mtDNAPlus (HVR1+2)....$438...........$328 >> Comprehensive (FF + FMS + Y-DNA-67)...$797...........$617 >> SuperDNA (FMS + Y-DNA-67).............$518...........$438 >> >> If you are already a project member of the project, the following >> upgrades are on sale. >> >> Upgrades..........,,..........Group Price.....SALE PRICE >> 12 to 37 Markers...................$109...........$ 70 >> 25 to 37 Markers...................$ 59...........$ 35 >> 25 to 67 Markers...................$159...........$114 >> 37 to 67 Markers...................$109...........$ 79 >> 37 to 111 Markers..................$220...........$188 >> 67 to 111 Markers..................$129...........$109 >> mtHVR1 to Mega (FMS)...............$269...........$209 >> mtHVR2 to Mega (FMS)...............$239...........$199 >> >> To place an upgrade order, first click the orange "Order Upgrade" >> button at the upper right, then choose the orange, "Current Special >> Offers," button on the next page. Only the tests you are eligible for >> will show up (i.e., if you've already taken a test, it won't show up >> as available, on either the standard price list or sale price list). >> >> All orders must be placed and paid for my 11:59 p.m., Sunday, July >> 15th, 2011, to receive the sale prices. >> >> If you have questions or need assistance, please don't hesitate to >> contact me. >> >> Diana >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> ROSE-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes >> in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> >> >> End of ROSE-DNA Digest, Vol 5, Issue 7 >> ************************************** >> > >

    07/15/2012 04:14:30
    1. Re: [ROSE-DNA] ROSE-DNA Digest, Vol 5, Issue 7
    2. Nora Probasco
    3. Hi Jackie, I see where your Y-DNA test is in Group V of the Rose DNA Project. The maternal test is the mtDNA. If you take just the standard mtDNA test (Hvr1/Hvr2) it will only give you your ancient haplogroup which involves thousands of years and is not good for a genealogical time frame. In other words, it will not help you find meaningful matches in the last thousand or more years. The best test in mtDNA is the full sequence which is currently selling for $219 through today. However, understand that there are still not that many who have taken the full sequence and its genealogical use is still in its infancy. I took the test to be a pioneer to see what it will eventually do for me. However, if you have a well developed family tree for most of your ancestors, the better test would be the Family Finder currently selling for $199. This will give you matches across all your ancestors back several generations. It will still require researching together with each of your matches, but offers you more than the mtDNA full sequence for now. The advantage of this test is if you have a match that lists many of their surnames, you can research any of the surnames you match. I hope this helps. Nora Probasco Volunteer Group Administrator - Family Tree DNA Rose DNA Project On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 3:00 AM, <rose-dna-request@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: FTDNA Sale (Jackie Madden ) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 21:49:41 -0700 > From: "Jackie Madden " <yackiejay@msn.com> > Subject: Re: [ROSE-DNA] FTDNA Sale > To: <rose-dna@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP3682F78DEE4C42F882BB649ABD50@phx.gbl> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Diana, > I am a member and have done the 67 marker test. I would like to do the > Maternal test but don't know what it's called or how much it costs. Can > you > please advise me so I can get the test. Thank you, Jackie Rose Madden > > -----Original Message----- > From: rose-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:rose-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] > On Behalf Of Diana Gale Matthiesen > Sent: Monday, July 09, 2012 10:55 AM > To: ROSE-DNA@rootsweb.com > Subject: [ROSE-DNA] FTDNA Sale > > FamilyTreeDNA is again offering it's "Sizzling Summer Sale" prices. > If you've been considering getting tested or upgrading your existing > tests, now's the time to do it because these discounts are substantial > - and temporary. > > New Kits.........................Group Price.....SALE PRICE > Y-DNA-12..............................$ 99...........$ 59 > Y-DNA-37..............................$149...........$129 > Y-DNA-67..............................$239...........$199 > Family Finder.........................$289...........$199 > mtDNA Full Sequence (FMS).............$299...........$219 > Family Finder + Y-DNA-37..............$438...........$328 > Family Finder + mtDNAPlus (HVR1+2)....$438...........$328 > Comprehensive (FF + FMS + Y-DNA-67)...$797...........$617 > SuperDNA (FMS + Y-DNA-67).............$518...........$438 > > If you are already a project member of the project, the following > upgrades are on sale. > > Upgrades..........,,..........Group Price.....SALE PRICE > 12 to 37 Markers...................$109...........$ 70 > 25 to 37 Markers...................$ 59...........$ 35 > 25 to 67 Markers...................$159...........$114 > 37 to 67 Markers...................$109...........$ 79 > 37 to 111 Markers..................$220...........$188 > 67 to 111 Markers..................$129...........$109 > mtHVR1 to Mega (FMS)...............$269...........$209 > mtHVR2 to Mega (FMS)...............$239...........$199 > > To place an upgrade order, first click the orange "Order Upgrade" > button at the upper right, then choose the orange, "Current Special > Offers," button on the next page. Only the tests you are eligible for > will show up (i.e., if you've already taken a test, it won't show up > as available, on either the standard price list or sale price list). > > All orders must be placed and paid for my 11:59 p.m., Sunday, July > 15th, 2011, to receive the sale prices. > > If you have questions or need assistance, please don't hesitate to > contact me. > > Diana > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ROSE-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > End of ROSE-DNA Digest, Vol 5, Issue 7 > ************************************** >

    07/15/2012 04:12:37
    1. [ROSE-DNA] FW: Rose MtDNA
    2. Diana Gale Matthiesen
    3. Hello Carol, My mtDNA results are on my web site: http://dgmweb.net/DNA/mtDNA-T-haplotree-DGM.html This won't have anything to do with my ROSE ancestry (or yours) because my ROSE ancestor is my paternal grandmother. I didn't inherit her mtDNA, I inherited that of my maternal grandmother. Because a woman's surname changes with every generation, it simply isn't possible to have surname projects for women. All you can have is an mtDNA haplogroup subclade project. The most genealogically useful test for us females is FTDNA's FamilyFinder test, which is on sale through midnight tonight. You don't need to join a project to order the FamilyFinder test as a new FTDNA client: http://www.familytreedna.com/ Diana > -----Original Message----- > From: Carol Rymes [mailto:carol@rymes.net] > Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 8:15 AM > To: rose-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com > Subject: Rose MtDNA > > Hello: > > How do I compare my MtDNA with you? I tested with Genebase. > > My oldest known Maternal ancestor > is Louisa Rose born in Va. about > 1804. > > Thank You, > > Carol Myers Rymes > > Sent from my iPhone

    07/15/2012 03:34:21