I don't think the answer is black or white. I think it depends... It is the project admin who took the initiative to open the project and who provides the labor (and even funds) to maintain and advance it, so they are the ones who get to define it. FTDNA allows projects targeted at individual families or geographic locations, and if someone wants to hold to those limits, they can -- and a scanning of projects names shows there are many such specific projects. I don't think these projects should be disparaged just because the admin decided to work only on their own family. On the other hand, I agree with you, entirely, that if someone "takes" a surname, with no stated limitations, they are obligated to serve the entire surname for the simple reason that FTDNA doesn't allow duplications. Surname projects are a limited resource, so if you start one or take on one, I agree that you've an obligation to serve it well or resign and let someone else do a better job. Sad to say, there are a number of projects in this category, that is, with "passive" admins who appear to be little more than figureheads, who *ought* to let the project go, but won't. Diana > -----Original Message----- > From: y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-projects- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Ralph Taylor > Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2010 3:42 PM > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] Y-DNA-PROJECTS join authorization > > Re: "It's my project." > > That raises, I believe, an interesting question, worth examining further: > > To what extent does a project "belong" to the project administrator and to what extent is > serving as the admin a "public trust"? > > While attending the October conference of project admins, it became clear that, for some > admins, their projects were private fiefdoms -- theirs to do with as they chose and for > the sole purpose of furthering their own family histories. To one who runs a project > which includes many people to whom I can't possibly be related, the thought makes me > shudder. > > That puts me more in the "public trust" camp than the "My Project" camp. > > -ralpht_/) > >

The FTDNA database doesn't simply not provide "detailed search capability," it doesn't allow access of any kind, to the public or even to project admins. It supplies results tables to projects using the FTDNA-supplied web sites, visible to anyone with an internet, without having to join anything, but no one outside of FTDNA employees can actually search or browse the database. I haven't found access at Ancestry.com all that easy. I wasn't tested there and haven't had anyone else tested there, and besides, I'm female, so I had to phony up a set Y-DNA test results to join a surname group. I wonder how many other sets of results in the Ancestry database are phony? I don't see any way to view results unless I join a group, and all the groups I've tried to join are "private." In some cases, I've asked to join and never heard back. In what way is the "entire database" accessible? I just checked a group I belong to at DNA-Ancestry.com, and when I search on the surname, I get 50 hits. When I go to the surname group, there are only 15 members. Doesn't this imply that there are 35 individuals tested, with this surname, who haven't joined the group? How would I see their results? By the way, the same thing happens in the FTDNA database: not everyone tested has joined a project, but you know they're in the database because they show up when you search for a project from the FTDNA Home Page. I know of no way to contact any of these or know their results, unless you happen to match one of them and they respond to your email. I think one failing of the Matches tab at FTDNA is that it doesn't give the Kit# of your matchee, so unless you are a full match with someone, you won't necessarily know where the differences lie, unless they respond to your email. Diana > -----Original Message----- > From: y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-projects- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Charles Acree > Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2010 8:42 AM > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] Y-DNA-PROJECTS join authorization > <snip> > > Rick has asked how to access Ancestry.com's public DNA data base. I was speaking as a > project administrator and contrasting it with FTDNA's data base, which doesn't provide > detailed search capability - that function being delegated to its Y-Search facility, which > contains a subset of persons tested. Ancestry's data base is resident at > http://dna.ancestry.com/welcome.aspx. To access it, one must have an account with > Ancestry, an established genetic profile (through testing or entry) and a group > membership. One can then search by either profile or name - by asking for a list of > matches in descending order or by searching for a specific name to compare test results. > Everyone tested at Ancestry is included in its data base and one doesn't need to join > different groups to see various individual results. > > Charles Acree >

John, Thank you for expressing your agreement on the issue of Join Authorization, but I'm afraid in the case of releasing identity... Signing the Release simply means the person is willing to share their name and email address with their matches in the FTDNA database and in the privacy of their member page at FTDNA. It does not give license to the project admin to reveal these to anyone, for any reason, much less to display them on a public web site. Please read the FTDNA Privacy Policy and the linked Release: http://www.familytreedna.com/privacy-policy.aspx IMO, you are taking a legal risk upon yourself, personally, by revealing the identities and email addresses of your project members. I wouldn't touch this one with a ten-foot pole. If someone contacts me and wants to get in touch with a project member, I email their request to the member and let the member decide whether or not to respond. I strongly advocate this policy, and for an additional reason... If projects are revealing the names and addresses of test subjects, how confident can potential FTDNA customers be that their identity won't be revealed? You may be losing potential members, for yourself and for other projects, without even being aware of it. Diana > -----Original Message----- > From: y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-projects- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of John A. Blair > Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2010 1:57 PM > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] join authorization > > I'm John Blair, Project Administrator for the Blair DNA Project and I completely agree with > Diane. > > The purpose of the Blair DNA Project is to further the genealogical research of the Blair > surname (through DNA testing), not simply to provide discounted DNA tests to people > with the surname Blair. > > The Blair DNA Project is a give and take proposition. In order to get something out of the > project you must be willing to put something into the project. > > The primary thing that a participant must put into the project (besides his DNA) is his > pedigree chart. He must also allow me to post his kit number, test results, and oldest > known Blair ancestor on the Blair DNA website. > > In return, I promise not give out any other information without the participant's written > permission. All participants (especially those with matches) are strongly encouraged to > fill out and sign an Information Release Form, allowing me to publish their name, email > address and pedigree chart (minus living information). If they don't want their name and > email address published I will act as the contact and direct specific member queries to > them. > > If a person is not willing to abide by these requirement or won't provide the pedigree > information they will not be allowed in the project and can buy their DNA test directly > from FTDNA or some other company and pay the full non-project price. > > /*Scottish DNA - Better than Life Insurance* > /*John* > ------------------------------------ > John A. Blair > Haywards Heath, England > _http://blairdna.com_ > _mailto:j_blair@blairdna.com_ > BLAIR DNA Project Administrator > > On 12/4/2010 3:29 AM, Gregory Morley wrote: > > Diane, I respectfully disagree with you. Why must there be reciprocity in a voluntary > project? Why must you have leverage over researchers who do not wish to disclose their > research? Why must you kick them out if they don't cooperate with your demands? > > > > I will agree with you if you're implying that it's frustrating to see 67 alleles without > knowing the pedigree associated with the contributor. But it's fallacious reasoning to > suggest that participants who don't reveal should not be helped. It's not an either-or; it's > a logical choice and one all of us reserve the right to exercise. > > > > Put it another way: What is the breadth and depth of data are you willing to disclose to > participants who provide fully to you their Y-DNA results? Do you reciprocate and offer > them all of your research including those persons still living, or just the deceased? > > > > Regards, > > > > Gregory Morley > > > > > > > > On Dec 3, 2010, at 7:23 PM, Diana Gale Matthiesen wrote: > > > > I have "authority" over my group, too. What I can't control is > > whether or not someone gives me their lineage. What do you do if > > someone doesn't give you their lineage? Withholding membership is the > > *only* leverage I have, short of kicking them out of the project, which isn't the desired > goal. > > > > As for Ancestry.com being a "superior lab," I won't bite on that one. > > > > Diana > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From:y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-projects- > >> bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Charles Acree > >> Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 6:09 PM > >> To:y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > >> Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] join authorization > >> > >> It sound like FTDNA is injudiciously biting the hands that have so > >> obligingly > >> > > fed it. > > > >> Please excuse me for rubbing it in, but we simply don't have such > >> problems > >> > > with our > > > >> projects (called "groups') at Ancestry.com. > >> > >> As project administrator there, I exercise full approval authority. > >> I'm able > >> > > to display test > > > >> results in multiple configurations that I consider helpful. And I > >> fully > >> > > control material > > > >> contributed to our group's home page. It's rare when things don't > >> run > >> > > smoothly; and > > > >> when they don't, we enjoy the benefit of consistently friendly, > >> responsive and cooperative assistance. Moreover, searches for > >> matches are far easier within Ancestry.com's public data base, and we > >> have the benefit of a superior lab, > >> > > which > > > >> provides us more precise test results (including partial STR repeats > >> when > >> > > applicable) in > > > >> convenient numerical order. > >> > >> Charles Acree > >> > >> > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email > > toY-DNA-PROJECTS-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 > > toY-DNA-PROJECTS-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 Y-DNA-PROJECTS- > request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject > and the body of the message

There's a mistake in "..contrasting it with FTDNA's data base, which doesn't provide detailed search capability - that function being delegated to its Y-Search facility, which contains a subset of persons tested." The mistake is the implication that FTDNA clients & project admins can not search the FTDNA database of ~100,000 Y-STR result sets for matches; they can. Any FTDNA client (whether or not a project participant) who's agreed to share information can search FTDNA's database, as can any project administrator on behalf of participants who've agreed to share. The "matchees" must have consented to this release of information; most FTDNA clients consent (else, they'd be unable to search). Clients & admins need Y-search only to find matches with those tested by other providers; FTDNA-hosted Y-search is to allow FTDNA clients (& others) to find matches with both those who are & those who are NOT in the FTDNA database. (Or, the unusual case in which a FTDNA client has not agreed to FTDNA sharing, but has input into Y-search.) For an individual client, it's simple to find matches in the FTDNA database: Log on to www.familytreedna.com with kit number & password and click the "Matches" link on the "My FTDNA" page. A list of matches to the client meeting specific criteria will appear. The matches list will be divided by (1) Number of markers compared and (2) Genetic distance. The list gives the name and e-mail address of the matchee with a link to FTDNATiP (a TMRCA calculator) and a GEDCOM if uploaded. {BTW, I like the new GEDCOM display.} Depending on the client's personal settings & test level, the list might not include certain comparison levels (e.g., 12-marker matches). If the client has chosen to see only matches with own surname, that restriction will be applied to the search. If the client has chosen to see matches with any surname, the list include all surnames with matches. {Note: This surname restriction bit is the biggest problem I see with the searches. Some of our participants don't realize implications & thus miss significant matches. OOTH, some aren't interested in NPEs.} For a project admin, it's necessary -- after logging onto the GAP page -- to navigate to the participant's "My FTDNA" page, then do the search as if the participant. In either case, the entire FTDNA database of consenting client results is searched, subject only to consents & restrictions the client (or admin) imposes. Hopefully, this sets the record straight on FTDNA database searching. -ralpht_/)

Re: "It's my project." That raises, I believe, an interesting question, worth examining further: To what extent does a project "belong" to the project administrator and to what extent is serving as the admin a "public trust"? While attending the October conference of project admins, it became clear that, for some admins, their projects were private fiefdoms -- theirs to do with as they chose and for the sole purpose of furthering their own family histories. To one who runs a project which includes many people to whom I can't possibly be related, the thought makes me shudder. That puts me more in the "public trust" camp than the "My Project" camp. -ralpht_/)

Charles wrote: "Please excuse me for rubbing it in, but we simply don't have such problems with our projects (called "groups') at Ancestry.com. "As project administrator there, I exercise full approval authority. I'm able to display test results in multiple configurations that I consider helpful. And I fully control material contributed to our group's home page. It's rare when things don't run smoothly; and when they don't, we enjoy the benefit of consistently friendly, responsive and cooperative assistance. Moreover, searches for matches are far easier within Ancestry.com's public data base, and we have the benefit of a superior lab, which provides us more precise test results (including partial STR repeats when applicable) in convenient numerical order." This statement invites an objective comparison. In a "Fools rush in" moment, let me give it a try. On the plus side, Ancestry tests 6 markers in its "46" panel that are not on any of FTDNA's standard panels and the marker reporting order (DYS number) is more intuitive than that of FTDNA. On the minus side -- for at least some projects -- it allows user-submitted results and does not require results from any lab. I'm not sure how public that "public database" is. A cross-provider comparison of a pair of Y-STR results of 67 FTDNA markers with "46" Ancestry markers, yields only 31 markers to compare >98% of the time. (Only about 1.5% of men have a copy of any of 13 multi-copy markers included in the "46" count, e.g., 464e-k. FTDNA does not count these markers in its panel offerings, but does report the alleles when marker copies are found.) User-submitted results should be considered a serious problem. The "garbage in, garbage out" principle renders matching & match interpretation suspect. For example, at least one participant in a Ancestry DNA surname project has (apparently user-submitted) Y-STR results that are impossible; the user has just picked numbers at random to enter. (The entered values yield a 0.0% probability of fitting ANY haplogroup.) Failure to require actual DNA test results undermines the very purpose of a DNA project. Whether it's the number of STRs for particular loci or the presence/absence of certain SNPs, DNA results are the foundation. As a health care executive (now retired), I learned one is on shaky ground to say one laboratory is superior to another without solid evidence. All labs have tight quality-control mechanisms and regard accuracy of results as sacred; any decent lab will re-run analyses yielding suspicious results. As a side note, providers (especially including FTDNA) are now moving to implementing NIST standards for testing & reporting Y-STR; this will resolve the "rounding up or rounding down" issue & result in fractional alleles being reported. (It will also give us admins something new to gripe about. :~) However, Ancestry has changed reporting protocols over the years and these changes are not fully documented; a set of results from one year is not necessarily directly comparable to a set from another year. FTDNA has also changed protocols, but has revised its results database to reflect the changes; results may be compared directly regardless of test date. I've yet to find the "public database" at Ancestry DNA -- and I'm a participant in one of its projects. As a participant in both Ancestry & FTDNA projects, I see many more online tools to help me at FTDNA than at Ancestry. I can find matches that the project admin didn't (not necessarily members of my project) and have the FTDNA server run TMRCA probability calculations on them. FTDNA has undertaken an ambitious remake of its information technology operation. It's essentially replacing a patchwork of temporary fixes & workarounds with a 21st century system. It isn't done yet and some things aren't perfect. All-in-all, we FTDNA project admins may gripe about some things not working as well as we'd like or are used to. Perhaps, we gripe because we've become accustomed to such great support. -ralpht_/)

That is all very well when everything is working properly. BUT until the system is fixed to enabled life to return to normal you are all finding reasons why not to use a facility that is available to you. I have used it in my project, and without any recriminations from the participant. It is a matter of not what you do but how you do it. I would rather have a doubtful member join until data is available to sort out where they belong and help them by guiding them to where they should go and x them from your project where they do not belong Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <DianaGM@dgmweb.net> To: <y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2010 11:32 AM Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] Y-DNA-PROJECTS join authorization >I agree that it's unlikely the project admin would remove someone, but the >x is > there to allow the *member* to leave if they want. > > Test subjects are allowed to leave any project they want at any time they > want, > except if they joined at the group price, in which case, they cannot leave > all -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. We are a community of 7 million users fighting spam. SPAMfighter has removed 5639 of my spam emails to date. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len The Professional version does not have this message

I'm John Blair, Project Administrator for the Blair DNA Project and I completely agree with Diane. The purpose of the Blair DNA Project is to further the genealogical research of the Blair surname (through DNA testing), not simply to provide discounted DNA tests to people with the surname Blair. The Blair DNA Project is a give and take proposition. In order to get something out of the project you must be willing to put something into the project. The primary thing that a participant must put into the project (besides his DNA) is his pedigree chart. He must also allow me to post his kit number, test results, and oldest known Blair ancestor on the Blair DNA website. In return, I promise not give out any other information without the participant's written permission. All participants (especially those with matches) are strongly encouraged to fill out and sign an Information Release Form, allowing me to publish their name, email address and pedigree chart (minus living information). If they don't want their name and email address published I will act as the contact and direct specific member queries to them. If a person is not willing to abide by these requirement or won't provide the pedigree information they will not be allowed in the project and can buy their DNA test directly from FTDNA or some other company and pay the full non-project price. /*Scottish DNA - Better than Life Insurance* /*John* ------------------------------------ John A. Blair Haywards Heath, England _http://blairdna.com_ _mailto:j_blair@blairdna.com_ BLAIR DNA Project Administrator On 12/4/2010 3:29 AM, Gregory Morley wrote: > Diane, I respectfully disagree with you. Why must there be reciprocity in a voluntary project? Why must you have leverage over researchers who do not wish to disclose their research? Why must you kick them out if they don't cooperate with your demands? > > I will agree with you if you're implying that it's frustrating to see 67 alleles without knowing the pedigree associated with the contributor. But it's fallacious reasoning to suggest that participants who don't reveal should not be helped. It's not an either-or; it's a logical choice and one all of us reserve the right to exercise. > > Put it another way: What is the breadth and depth of data are you willing to disclose to participants who provide fully to you their Y-DNA results? Do you reciprocate and offer them all of your research including those persons still living, or just the deceased? > > Regards, > > Gregory Morley > > > > On Dec 3, 2010, at 7:23 PM, Diana Gale Matthiesen wrote: > > I have "authority" over my group, too. What I can't control is whether or not > someone gives me their lineage. What do you do if someone doesn't give you > their lineage? Withholding membership is the *only* leverage I have, short of > kicking them out of the project, which isn't the desired goal. > > As for Ancestry.com being a "superior lab," I won't bite on that one. > > Diana > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-projects- >> bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Charles Acree >> Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 6:09 PM >> To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] join authorization >> >> It sound like FTDNA is injudiciously biting the hands that have so obligingly >> > fed it. > >> Please excuse me for rubbing it in, but we simply don't have such problems >> > with our > >> projects (called "groups') at Ancestry.com. >> >> As project administrator there, I exercise full approval authority. I'm able >> > to display test > >> results in multiple configurations that I consider helpful. And I fully >> > control material > >> contributed to our group's home page. It's rare when things don't run >> > smoothly; and > >> when they don't, we enjoy the benefit of consistently friendly, responsive and >> cooperative assistance. Moreover, searches for matches are far easier within >> Ancestry.com's public data base, and we have the benefit of a superior lab, >> > which > >> provides us more precise test results (including partial STR repeats when >> > applicable) in > >> convenient numerical order. >> >> Charles Acree >> >> > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-PROJECTS-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 Y-DNA-PROJECTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >

Doing next to nothing gets a likewise response. Cliff. "May the best you've ever seen, Be the worst you'll ever see," >From A Scots Toast by Allan Ramsay -----Original Message----- From: y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Diana Gale Matthiesen Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 11:37 PM To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] join authorization I recommend we do not bug Bennett. We've been asked to use the Feedback option on our GAPs to make "suggestions." I think that's what we should do. IMO. Diana > -----Original Message----- > From: y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-projects- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of DNAforBrowns@aol.com > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 9:10 PM > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] join authorization > > In a message dated 12/3/2010 8:26:01 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, Diana > Gale Matthiesen (DianaGM@dgmweb.net) writes: > > >> The more of us who complain, the more likely it is that something > >> will be done about it. > > > Absolutely correct. But just make sure your complaints go directly to > Bennett Greenspan, maybe with "cc's" to Max and the "info" address. > > I know Bennett believes in the old "customer is always right" philosophy. > So if he's made aware that so many project administrators are unhappy, > frustrated and even angered by this problem, I can't imagine that we > won't see > favorable action. > > Best regards, > > Jim Brown (James Armistead Brown, Jr.) Administrator, Brown DNA Study > Administrator, Knox DNA Project > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-PROJECTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Since the GAP 2 change I have been unable to even send a reply to a join request entered in the FTDNA systems...I have reported this numerous times but get the same reply that IT has fixed the problem...now I received this email the other day...notice the line "Barring the cleaning out..."... ========================= ">>Dear Family Tree DNA Group Administrator We have found that over the past two weeks at least one join Request has been sent to your project, yet it has not be answered. Of course when someone sends a “Join Request” it means that his or her inquiry, if properly administrated, can result in an immediate new kit ordered within your project. However if the Join Request is not replied to interest quickly fades and the potential opportunity fades as well. Answering is simple. Under the Project Administration section of your GAP 2.0 is a link for Join Authorization. Follow that link to View Join Requests. Click on READ, to see the message and in the space provided below the message you may write a reply to the requester and at that moment you may accept or Deny the request. Barring the cleaning out of these unanswered email messages we will be forced to remove “Join Request” privileges from your Project. If you have questions and need a personal ‘walk through’ of the GAP 2.0 please email info@familytreedna.com and explain your questions, leave a phone # and one of our staff will contact you for a walk through. Your Family Tree DNA Staff<< Thanks for the email....but I have tried many times to answer the join request from my GAP page but the system does not send the reply...I continue to receive error messages...I have reported the problem numerous times using the feedback but the problem has not been corrected...so the problem is on your "end" and NOT with my end..." Raymond Stoudt

Have you every used this facility My Project Groups BritishIsles x I2* x Sprague x T2 x If you click on the x on the members home page it deletes them from the project and then a box comes up for a reason for leaving the project To my mind there is no once your in your in forever. If they do not meet the criteria for the project, and that would include the aims of the project one click and they are gone. You get a notice to say they have left the project so if they try to rejoin you have an even bigger stick. Bob -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. We are a community of 7 million users fighting spam. SPAMfighter has removed 5639 of my spam emails to date. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len The Professional version does not have this message

Another complaint that is with IT The last Time I tried to donate it still wasn't working. keep putting in feedback. If we give up they will take their time Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ralph Taylor" <rt-sails@comcast.net> To: <y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2010 7:42 AM Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] Y-DNA-PROJECTS FTDNA Oonline Donation Procedure > Has anyone had recent experience with online donations to the project > general fund? Are members/participants able to donate? > > A couple of our members reported trying to make donations online and being > unable to complete the process. It's been reported to FTDNA, but I'm > wondering how high a priority the fix is. > > -ralpht_/) > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > Y-DNA-PROJECTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. We are a community of 7 million users fighting spam. SPAMfighter has removed 5639 of my spam emails to date. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len The Professional version does not have this message

HTML does work have a look at the bottom left if the typing panel there are 3 icons. The middle one (if I remember correctly) is for HTML Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "RT" <rtx@cox.net> To: <y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2010 5:43 AM Subject: [Y-DNA-projects] Hit counters in FTDNA's new project web pages? > Since HTML doesn't work in the tool provided for web page content, is > there a way to make a hit counter such as Statcounter work in the > project's FTDNA website? > > not that I have time to look through the stats any more... > > Thanks > Richard Thrift > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > Y-DNA-PROJECTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. We are a community of 7 million users fighting spam. SPAMfighter has removed 5639 of my spam emails to date. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len The Professional version does not have this message

I posted my message relating my positive experience as a project administrator at Ancestry.com not merely to be provocative in this forum of FTDNA enthusiasts, but to help coax/shame FTDNA a bit to amend new procedures that have caused several of you to complain. I fully agree with Diana that, if a project is to achieve any worthwhile objectives and not merely spin its wheels offering discounts, prospective participants must obviously share their known lineages. Personally, I've never experienced a problem in this regard, because participants have become attracted to our Y-DNA surname project as a result of viewing our independent (non-Ancestry) website or of being directly targeted for recruitment. By the time they order their test, I've invariably learned from them and from follow-up research all that's necessary. There's never been any need for leverage. Randall tell us that he has served as an administrator with both Ancestry.com and FTDNA and that his experience with the latter has been far more satisfactory. For whatever reason, I haven't encountered his problems. To each his own. Ancestry is comparatively unregimented - a characteristic that has merits as well as frustrations. I'd certainly encourage Richard to remove all members from his Ancestry group who haven't tested or provided pedigrees. Rick has asked how to access Ancestry.com's public DNA data base. I was speaking as a project administrator and contrasting it with FTDNA's data base, which doesn't provide detailed search capability - that function being delegated to its Y-Search facility, which contains a subset of persons tested. Ancestry's data base is resident at http://dna.ancestry.com/welcome.aspx. To access it, one must have an account with Ancestry, an established genetic profile (through testing or entry) and a group membership. One can then search by either profile or name - by asking for a list of matches in descending order or by searching for a specific name to compare test results. Everyone tested at Ancestry is included in its data base and one doesn't need to join different groups to see various individual results. Charles Acree

LOL!  I'm a project Admin on both companies for my surname and I have to say that Ancestry.com's  DNA projects are a mess. No matter what you put in the project description at Ancestry  people join with little or no understanding of what a Y DNA project is or what it can or can't do.  Like "Can you tell me if I'm eligible for a tribal roll" which has Nothing to do with our surname or project.  I specifically say you need to be tested to join and 90% of the join requests have no testing or tests ordered.  I encourage anyone who asks to go to FTDNA to test.  They are easier to deal with as an Admin and the whole process is transparent to me the admin from start to finish.  In Ancestry I just get random results dumped on me and over 100 join requests from clueless people want to join my project.  In addition as a poster I get about 1 email a month from someone along the lines of it looks like we are related from our DNA posted on Ancestry.com.  They give no details and no matter how I work my replies I get no response back.   I finally figured out that they are thinking anyone who posts results or has them tested with Ancestry with the same surname is related no matter what the result is.  It is maddening.  I worked for over a year to try and bring some order to that project and finally gave up.  I now let anyone join who wants no matter how odd the request and I let anyone post their results or not.  Anyone with my surname who posts results on Ancestry gets asked by me if I can post their results on my other project. My project is hosted at World Families Network so I can post any result there.  FTDNA on the other hand has been totally supportive to me as an Admin.  The whole process from adding new members, to ordering the tests, the step by step testing process and the final reporting is seamless and painless for me as the admin.  The website is easy to use.  I think if you were an Admin at FTDNA you would see what a joy it is to admin a project there.  As someone who does both the choice is not even close. I'm sorry but I'll take FTDNA over the chaos of Ancestry anytime. Randall Stafford ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Acree" <acreegenealogy@sbcglobal.net> To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com Sent: Friday, December 3, 2010 5:09:28 PM Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] join authorization It sound like FTDNA is injudiciously biting the hands that have so obligingly fed it.  Please excuse me for rubbing it in, but we simply don't have such problems with our projects (called "groups') at Ancestry.com. As project administrator there, I exercise full approval authority.  I'm able to display test results in multiple configurations that I consider helpful. And I fully control material contributed to our group's home page.  It's rare when things don't run smoothly; and when they don't, we enjoy the benefit of consistently friendly, responsive and cooperative assistance.  Moreover, searches for matches are far easier within Ancestry.com's public data base, and we have the benefit of a superior lab, which provides us more precise test results (including partial STR repeats when applicable) in convenient numerical order. Charles Acree ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-PROJECTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

In six years of running six projects, I've only once had someone join just to get the discount -- and I didn't have to kick him out because he left the project as soon as his results returned, which is what told me that must have been the reason he joined. That is not the reason I require authorization to join. I require authorization to join for two reasons: 1. To screen out inappropriate requests to join, such as being the wrong gender or not being descended from the appropriate ancestor on a direct line. In my Danish geographic project, I weed out people who only suspect they are Danish because I require a proven Danish origin to join, which means two-out-of-three applicants to Danish Demes are disallowed. Having "Viking" ancestry seems to be a favorite family legend, so I get a lot of requests with no foundation. Do I really want all these disallowed requests piling up on my GAP? Nearly all the males requesting to join a geographic project have already been tested for their surname project, so I'm not standing in the way of them being tested or preventing them from getting a group discount. I'm just making certain their patrilineal line ancestor is really Danish. And do I really want their test results showing up on the FTDNA web site, immediately, so they're online while their request is being resolved? -- which may be days or weeks or maybe never if they don't respond to my emails. If all you run is Y-DNA surname projects, you may not be needing the level of screening I need because few of your applicants will have already been tested. And you can see from their name that they're male and the right surname, so letting them in is a slam dunk. 2. To get their lineages, without which their results are useless. Diana > -----Original Message----- > From: y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-projects- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of RT > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 9:36 PM > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Subject: [Norton AntiSpam]Re: [Y-DNA-projects] Y-DNA-PROJECTS join authorization > > I agree with Bob's outlook. > > It is human nature for the admin to become upset when the person joining takes > advantage of the project to solely gain a tiny discount. Some admins more than others. > But it's only a tiny discount after all, not worth getting upset about. People will be > people (which often is not saying much). > > And I'm going back immediately to my largely ignored Ancestry.com sub-project and > post that if you are not tested OR don't provide a pedigree you WILL be removed from > membership in the project. > > Richard Thrift > > > ---- Bob May <tpibob44@bigpond.com> wrote: > That is all very well when everything is working properly. > BUT until the system is fixed to enabled life to return to normal you are all finding > reasons why not to use a facility that is available to you. > I have used it in my project, and without any recriminations from the participant. It is a > matter of not what you do but how you do it. > I would rather have a doubtful member join until data is available to sort out where they > belong and help them by guiding them to where they should go and x them from your > project where they do not belong Bob

> -----Original Message----- > From: y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-projects- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Gregory Morley > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 10:30 PM > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] join authorization > > Diane, I respectfully disagree with you. Why must there be reciprocity in a voluntary > project? Because I'm the volunteer, these are my projects, and I believe in fairness. > Why must you have leverage over researchers who do not wish to disclose their > research? If they don't want to share their research, why should they expect anything from me -- or anyone else? > Why must you kick them out if they don't cooperate with your demands? I've never kicked anyone out. I just don't let them in. > I will agree with you if you're implying that it's frustrating to see 67 alleles without > knowing the pedigree associated with the contributor. It's more than "frustrating," the results are useless, so why should I waste my time with them? > But it's fallacious reasoning to > suggest that participants who don't reveal should not be helped. Where does it say I'm required to help selfish people? I'm not running for sainthood. > It's not an either-or; it's > a logical choice and one all of us reserve the right to exercise. It has nothing to do with "logic." It's my project. I do the work, I incur the expense, and I set the criteria. No one has a *right* to join my project. > Put it another way: What is the breadth and depth of data are you willing to disclose to > participants who provide fully to you their Y-DNA results? All the test data and lineages from all my projects (and more) are available to anyone with an internet connection, both at the FTDNA versions of my project web sites and the versions on my own domains, which I maintain at my own expense. I run "open" projects. > Do you reciprocate and offer > them all of your research including those persons still living, or just the deceased? If you want to see how I "reciprocate" to my members, you can peruse my projects from the DNA Hub: http://dgmweb.net/DNA/DNA-hub.html I do not ask for information on living persons. I do ask to know the number of generations between the test subject and the first revealed (as in deceased) person in their line. In actual fact, I've never had anyone supply less than their entire line, but I don't ask for their entire line. If someone supplies information on living persons, I delete it -- I don't want the responsibility of having it in my possession, and I certainly don't intend to share or display it. All I'm asking of my members is what they ought to be willing to do in the first place if they are seriously interested in making advances in their genealogy using DNA testing -- and in being fair to other researchers who are already sharing with them. Diana

I recommend we do not bug Bennett. We've been asked to use the Feedback option on our GAPs to make "suggestions." I think that's what we should do. IMO. Diana > -----Original Message----- > From: y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-projects- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of DNAforBrowns@aol.com > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 9:10 PM > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] join authorization > > In a message dated 12/3/2010 8:26:01 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, Diana Gale > Matthiesen (DianaGM@dgmweb.net) writes: > > >> The more of us who complain, the more likely it is that something will > >> be done about it. > > > Absolutely correct. But just make sure your complaints go directly to > Bennett Greenspan, maybe with "cc's" to Max and the "info" address. > > I know Bennett believes in the old "customer is always right" philosophy. > So if he's made aware that so many project administrators are unhappy, > frustrated and even angered by this problem, I can't imagine that we won't see > favorable action. > > Best regards, > > Jim Brown (James Armistead Brown, Jr.) > Administrator, Brown DNA Study > Administrator, Knox DNA Project >

It isn't that I don't want these people in my project, it's that I want to get their lineage as painlessly as possible. After six years of running six projects -- first without, then with, requiring authorization to join -- I have found withholding membership is the best tool I have to get a member's lineage. I'm not complaining about the new GAP because I'm stubborn, I'm complaining because it has turned my well tuned, efficient system into a royal PITA. I could easily make the problem of missing lineages go away by kicking out members who don't supply them. For me, it's not the desired solution to the problem. YMMV. Diana > -----Original Message----- > From: y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-projects- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Bob May > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 9:04 PM > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] Y-DNA-PROJECTS join authorization > > That is all very well when everything is working properly. > BUT until the system is fixed to enabled life to return to normal you are all finding > reasons why not to use a facility that is available to you. > I have used it in my project, and without any recriminations from the participant. It is a > matter of not what you do but how you do it. > I would rather have a doubtful member join until data is available to sort out where they > belong and help them by guiding them to where they should go and x them from your > project where they do not belong Bob

Just a follow-up to my last email. The link is now working and I (as my wife) was able to respond to the request for more information. This system still does not give the Project Administrator an email address for the join requester the way the old system did which means the requester and the PA must communicate through the form on the website rather than being able to directly the way we use to. This is a pain in the a%%. I will bring this to FTDNA attention, but from other comments I read they don't seem too interested in changing this. /*Scottish DNA - Better than Life Insurance* /*John* ------------------------------------ John A. Blair Haywards Heath, England _http://blairdna.com_ _mailto:j_blair@blairdna.com_ BLAIR DNA Project Administrator On 12/3/2010 5:32 PM, John A. Blair wrote: > I just ran an experiment. I went to the Blair DNA Join request form and > requested to join the Project using my wife's name and email address. > This request was sent to my Blair DNA email address with a link back to > the the request form. The email I received did NOT include the email > address of the person requesting to join the project. > > I then went back to the form and selected more information and asked for > pedigree information. The following was sent to my wife's email address: > > Message From Blair Group Administrator: > Please send me more information about your Blair pedigree > Click this link to reply to the message: > http://www.familytreedna.com/project-join-request.aspx?id=b51dc5f9-8f89-47db-9604-??a?????0???& > (this link has been altered) > > Thank you, > Family Tree DNA > > When I followed the link it took me back to a page that had no useful > information and no possible way to reply to my request for more information. > > I have sent a copy of this message to Family Tree DNA. > > /*Scottish DNA - Better than Life Insurance* > /*John* > ------------------------------------ > John A. Blair > Haywards Heath, England > _http://blairdna.com_ > _mailto:j_blair@blairdna.com_ > BLAIR DNA Project Administrator > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-PROJECTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >