It seems ftdna has begun to screw up (I mean change some apples into oranges or broccoli) their BigY data presentation. A few people who had BigY results released months ago, each with about 300 novel variants or so, just had their BigY results “released” again today. But now, on rerelease, they only show about 110 “novel variants” each. I would guess, although have not checked yet, that 2/3 of their old “novel variants” have been moved into their “known snps” files because someone somewhere has given these NVs names. This makes it extremely inefficient to now compare BigY results for peoples’ results of before and of after this change. Or alternatively, any research spreadsheets developed with the old categorization will have to some how have to be altered to take into account that about 2/3 the NVs now are in a different collection. ftdna said they would discuss this with us before doing this, but apparently they forgot to do so. I wrote the new head technical fellow at ftdna months ago pointing out what a mess just such a move would produce. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net

Kenneth, Anthony in I-M223 has had his Novel Variants go from 240 down to just 3, Da Silva from 269 to 68, Styri from 245 to 134 and Elders from 220 to 59. On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Kenneth Nordtvedt <knordtvedt@bresnan.net> wrote: > It seems ftdna has begun to screw up (I mean change some apples into > oranges or broccoli) their BigY data presentation. A few people who had > BigY results released months ago, each with about 300 novel variants or so, > just had their BigY results “released” again today. But now, on rerelease, > they only show about 110 “novel variants” each. I would guess, although > have not checked yet, that 2/3 of their old “novel variants” have been > moved into their “known snps” files because someone somewhere has given > these NVs names. > > This makes it extremely inefficient to now compare BigY results for > peoples’ results of before and of after this change. Or alternatively, any > research spreadsheets developed with the old categorization will have to > some how have to be altered to take into account that about 2/3 the NVs now > are in a different collection. ftdna said they would discuss this with us > before doing this, but apparently they forgot to do so. > > I wrote the new head technical fellow at ftdna months ago pointing out > what a mess just such a move would produce. > > > > > > Kenneth Nordtvedt > > Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: > http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Opps I made an error Anthony went from 240 to 82 On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:41 AM, Wayne R. Roberts <i.m223.roberts@gmail.com> wrote: > Kenneth, > > Anthony in I-M223 has had his Novel Variants go from 240 down to just 3, > Da Silva from 269 to 68, Styri from 245 to 134 and Elders from 220 to 59. > > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Kenneth Nordtvedt <knordtvedt@bresnan.net > > wrote: > >> It seems ftdna has begun to screw up (I mean change some apples into >> oranges or broccoli) their BigY data presentation. A few people who had >> BigY results released months ago, each with about 300 novel variants or so, >> just had their BigY results “released” again today. But now, on rerelease, >> they only show about 110 “novel variants” each. I would guess, although >> have not checked yet, that 2/3 of their old “novel variants” have been >> moved into their “known snps” files because someone somewhere has given >> these NVs names. >> >> This makes it extremely inefficient to now compare BigY results for >> peoples’ results of before and of after this change. Or alternatively, any >> research spreadsheets developed with the old categorization will have to >> some how have to be altered to take into account that about 2/3 the NVs now >> are in a different collection. ftdna said they would discuss this with us >> before doing this, but apparently they forgot to do so. >> >> I wrote the new head technical fellow at ftdna months ago pointing out >> what a mess just such a move would produce. >> >> >> >> >> >> Kenneth Nordtvedt >> >> Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: >> http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >

On 30/05/2014 8:41 AM, Wayne R. Roberts wrote: > Kenneth, > > Anthony in I-M223 has had his Novel Variants go from 240 down to just 3, Da > Silva from 269 to 68, Styri from 245 to 134 and Elders from 220 to 59. > I have just posted the following on the ftDNA FB page - let's see if they respond T "I have seen several comments from Project leaders on chatgroups / forums that there has been an overnight massive change in people with known Big Y's data - one person has had his novel variants drop from 240 to 3, another from 220 to 59. There are some very frustrated and cranky group leaders and researchers out there and one of the biggest gripes is a lack of answers as to how and why this has happened. These people had spent hours/days/weeks working through massive spreadsheets and overnight things had disappeared or was re-named. Some very senior researchers are threatening to walk away from the projects which would be a tragedy for those of us who struggle to understand the science. Can anyone respond in this public forum ?"