RootsWeb.com Mailing Lists
Total: 1/1
    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