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

Yea, in mine grief I have opportuned; verily, I have pled that contact info be returned unto us forthwith. On Dec 3, 2010, at 6:53 PM, Cliff. Johnston wrote: > Yup, it's the squeaky wheel that gets the grease. Keep quiet about it and > nothing will change. If enough people complain consistently then Benny-boy > will get off his butt and do something. It's up to you all. Get busy. > > 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 > DNAforBrowns@aol.com > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 8:10 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 > > > ------------------------------- > 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 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

Yup, it's the squeaky wheel that gets the grease. Keep quiet about it and nothing will change. If enough people complain consistently then Benny-boy will get off his butt and do something. It's up to you all. Get busy. 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 DNAforBrowns@aol.com Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 8:10 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

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 projects, they have to remain in at least one. In other words, if they're down to belonging to one project, it won't have an x next to it. At least that's how it has worked in the past, I haven't tried it lately. I think people are less offended by being denied membership during the join process, than by being kicked out after they were let in. It's just human nature to get upset when something you thought you had is then taken away from you. If someone who is eligible for my project joins, then later leaves, then later comes back and wants in, I will let them in, no questions asked. 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 7:14 PM > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] Y-DNA-PROJECTS join authorization > > 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 > > > > ------------------------------- > 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

Yes I have reported this 25/11 it was forwarded to IT dept Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <DianaGM@dgmweb.net> To: <Y-DNA-PROJECTS@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 7:59 PM Subject: [Y-DNA-projects] Current Balance > Have you noticed that the "Current Balance" of your General Fund is blank > on > your FTDNA project home page? You can see it in your GAP, but not on the > public > page. > > Diana > > > > > ------------------------------- > 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 5635 of my spam emails to date. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len The Professional version does not have this message

Diana 2. I agree but under the present circumstances whilst the system isn't working at least you aren't loosing them if you approve them all and you then have their email address and you can sort things out with them. If you continue on the contract me line you are just loosing them. In my mind although it isn't what you want at least you have gained direct contact and access to the data Better than not getting them at all Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <DianaGM@dgmweb.net> To: <y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 7:57 PM Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] join authorization > 1. I have, but haven't posted the responses. They all amounted to, "we > will > pass this suggestion on to IT." We all need to complain about this if > there's > going to be any improvement in the situation. > > 2. If I'm going to simply approve everyone, I lose the main purpose of > requiring approval: to get their lineage out of them. If you don't get > it > then, you may never get it, and I consider test results without a lineage > worthless. Approving their request to join doesn't mean they'll follow > through > and buy a kit, so I may not get their email address that way. I don't > think > FTDNA realizes how much hand-holding some people require before they'll > make the > plunge, and if they just disappear, I've no way to reach them. > > 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 3:36 AM >> To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] join authorization >> >> Two points >> !. From the number of complaints and no one quoting a response from FTDNA >> how > many >> of you have put in feedback on this >> >> 2. Would it not be better to use the approve button and having them in >> the > project and >> sorting it out and even finding the correct project for them and latter > unjoining them if >> necessary than loosing them altogether if the system isn't working. If >> you > accept them >> you get there email address. >> >> Bob > > > ------------------------------- > 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 5635 of my spam emails to date. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len The Professional version does not have this message

The more of us who complain, the more likely it is that something will be done about 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: Friday, December 03, 2010 6:18 PM > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] join authorization > > 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. >

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 >

Two points !. From the number of complaints and no one quoting a response from FTDNA how many of you have put in feedback on this 2. Would it not be better to use the approve button and having them in the project and sorting it out and even finding the correct project for them and latter unjoining them if necessary than loosing them altogether if the system isn't working. If you accept them you get there email address. Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marleen Van Horne" <msvnhrn@jps.net> To: <y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 3:29 PM Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] join authorization > Diana, > > I have done exactly what you suggest. Got no reply from the potential > subscriber. > > Marleen > > ------------------------------- > 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 5623 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 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: "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 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

Charles, Can you elaborate where this "public data base" that can be searched for matches at Ancestry is located? When I have searched Ancestry's DNA links all I get is a name of the person who tested, and (maybe) a haplogroup, and no marker values to compare. For an uncommon surname project I run through FTDNA, only one person of that surname has tested with Ancestry and they are E1b1b1, which makes me suspect they are probably a match with my lineage, but I see no way to see there markers to know for sure, and no way to contact that person. For other surnames, I see multiple "groups" for the same surname. To see the actual results you have to "join" all those groups. I have 27 surnames in which someone with whom I share a common ancestor has tested with FTDNA, and that I follow the projects. There are at least that many more surnames that I wish someone would test. When you take 50 different surnames, and consider all the multiple surname projects you have to "join" at Ancestry just to see the results that's well over 100 projects to join. I consider that chaos the way Ancestry does DNA. Yes, there may be individual projects that are done well (but not for any of my surnames) and having to "join" 100 different projects to see results is ridiculous. For the few I have tried to "join" I usually never get a response from the administrator. Ancestry's "groups" appear more oriented toward if it's not your surname, you can't join and you can't see the results. From what I have seen, Ancestry seems to think people are interested in only their surname, and not the hundreds of other surnames in their ancestry. Rick Saunders ________________________________ From: y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Charles Acree Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 4:09 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 ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 426/3294 - Release Date: 12/03/10

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

No plans to change it? Talk about hubris. FTDNA seems to forget they can't treat volunteers like employees... I have a dual geographic project where both men and women can join, but with strict requirements as to the geographic origin of the earliest ancestor. Despite all the explanation of the requirements on the project's web sites, I still get two or three unacceptable applicants for every acceptable one. This is the project where the new GAP is a special nightmare. Diana > -----Original Message----- > From: y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-projects- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Marleen Van Horne > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 9:59 AM > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] join authorization > > Bob, > > Once people are approved, you loose control of their membership, by that, I mean you > have no conventional genealogy to help others. Almost all of the rejects do not hane the > right sex or yDNA for the project. > > I did send a feedback message and was told they hane no plans to change the situation. > > Marleen Van Horne > > ------------------------------- > 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

My experience, too. You don't get their email address until after they've joined. My current workaround it to use the More Information option, then, in the textbox, to ask them to please contact me directly, giving my email address. I don't ask them for any information, I just ask them to contact me by email. So far, it's working. Of course, I then copy the fact that the interchange took place into an email sent to myself, so I have a record I can store in Outlook. Diana > -----Original Message----- > From: y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-projects- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of John A. Blair > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 12:32 PM > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] join authorization > > 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-960 4- > ??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.

Well, we know they got at least two complaints... > -----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 5:30 AM > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] Current Balance > > Yes I have reported this 25/11 it was forwarded to IT dept Bob > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <DianaGM@dgmweb.net> > To: <Y-DNA-PROJECTS@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 7:59 PM > Subject: [Y-DNA-projects] Current Balance > > > > Have you noticed that the "Current Balance" of your General Fund is blank > > on your FTDNA project home page? You can see it in your GAP, but not on the > > public page. > > > > Diana > >

Unless I'm missing something, just accepting them doesn't give me their email address, not unless they go ahead and purchase a kit. And the bottom line is, I do not want to accept someone without a lineage. Yes, I would rather lose them. I have found that someone who is uncooperative at the point of joining becomes *less* cooperative once they're in the project -- and have gotten the discount on their testing. My only leverage with them is to withhold the thing they want: membership in the project. I made the mistake when I first started my projects, six years ago, of not requiring join authorization. Some people joined, and then never once responded to a single email from me. In many cases, knowing their identity, I was able to "do" their genealogy, myself, but in some cases I couldn't, so those people remain, to this day, without a lineage or even earliest ancestor. STR data without a lineage are useless. It's a one way street, helping only the test subject and no one else. They've a right to be tested and hide their lineage, if they want, but not if they want to join my projects. They share with their fellow researchers, or they can't enjoy the benefits of project membership. I work my butt off for my projects, so there has to be some reciprocity here. Building a project isn't simply about the number of members, it's about the quality of the members' data, and that includes both their STR results *and* their lineage. And, now, FTDNA has made the most difficult part of running a project -- extracting lineages from prospective members and staying organized -- even harder. And not a little harder, *much* harder. I haven't, so far, touched on the issue of trying to keep message exchanges for the project organized. Piling all the join requests into a single folder on my GAP is already chaos. Wait til it contains hundreds of messages! I file all exchanges with a prospective member (and later actual member) in an individual folder in Outlook. That way, even if they contact me years after joining, I can scan their folder and remind myself who they are and what has transpired. So, now I get to hunt through hundred of entries in my GAP to review our interchange? I do have a workaround, but it's definitely a *work* around. For every entry in the Join Authorization list, there is an email I've sent to myself, including the text of the message and what it was about, to be filed in the prospective member's folder in Outlook -- to be turned into a member's folder if they follow through and join. It's a PITA to do, but it will be less of a PITA in the long run with everything well organized, as it always has been. 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 5:29 AM > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] join authorization > > Diana > 2. I agree but under the present circumstances whilst the system isn't working at least > you aren't loosing them if you approve them all and you then have their email address > and you can sort things out with them. > If you continue on the contract me line you are just loosing them. > In my mind although it isn't what you want at least you have gained direct contact and > access to the data Better than not getting them at all Bob

I've been following the discussion on join authorization, though our project doesn't require admin approval to join; Taylor is an open project. (I've sent only two of these -- as recruiting devices.) Yet another example, I guess, of differences between projects. Bob's comments re: " sorting it out" & un-joining if necessary seemed to have merit. From a marketing perspective, the more obstacles in the way, the fewer participants a project gets. However, it seems to me that the procedure should be implemented properly if the policy of admin approval for joining is to continue. Some projects appear dependent on the mechanism; for them, this is crucial support. -ralpht_/)

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_/)