Thanks Kirsten, I have thought about it. The one big reason I want to contact Westcotts is to compare DNA. It may be that I don't find Westcott matches because we simply don't match. Of the three Westcotts I have found at the Littleton Project we don't have a lot in common: 9/12, 10/12, 18/25. Another surname match at SMGF is 9/42. What I have found is matches with two Adams: one is 42/43 (SMGF), and the other is 34/37 (FT). The latter does show up in my matches at FT. I am the "in-betweener" for these two. I have not given up the idea that we may still be Westcotts. I just don't know enough yet. But the way it looks to me now is we are Adams with a name change to Westcott in the 1700's or before. But I still entertain the idea of a Westcott surname project. It may be a little difficult to attract people to it because the popular idea is that all Westcotts descend from Stukley Westcott of Providence, RI, or one of his nephews. For this reason I'm sure many don't even think of getting a DNA test. I have not been able to convince my own second cousin to get a DNA test, and that we may not descend from Stukley Westcott. It's shocking to him after a life of believing in this descent. There is also always the possibility that there are different and unrelated Westcott families from ancient times. This can't be ruled out without further study. I'm still thinking about it. Fred On 7/9/10, dnalister@comcast.net <dnalister@comcast.net> wrote: > > > > Hi Fred, > > > > > I think I may be talking to the originator of the Westcott surname project. > It sounds to me like you are already working pretty hard on genetic > genealogy as it relates to Westcott families, so why not contact FTDNA about > opening a Westcott surname project? Once a project is opened, you might find > that even Westcott test participants who haven't responded to any prior > messages end up joining it, and FTDNA would be happy to forward messages for > you to Westcott kit contacts that aren't yet in the project on a regular > basis. Keep in mind the possibility that some of those Westcott kits at > FTDNA may not be for Westcott males that have done Y DNA testing. Of course, > you might want to be in touch with those other people anyway. They might > have male relatives that can test, and they might have results for other > tests that would be of interest to you. I had no website experience > whatsoever when I first became a project administrator, but I found the > FTDNA pages for project administra! > tors easy to use. Good luck to you! > > > > > Kirsten Saxe > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "fred westcott" <westcott.fred@gmail.com> > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Sent: Friday, July 9, 2010 2:49:18 PM > Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] finding matches at FT > > Hi > Sharon and Kirsten, > Thanks both for the information. I have a better understanding of it now. > It's a little frustrating. None of my surname have shown up in > matches. I know there are at least 7 as per the surname search on the > FT home page. We do not have a surname project. Three show up in one > project that FT lists, but have only 12, 12, and 25 markers. I already > know the one with 25 markers and he has no plans to upgrade. But I've > been told there are two who have 67 markers and these I have not been > able to find. > > Thanks for the help ! > Fred > > On 7/8/10, Sharon Fontenot <smfgen@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi again - >> >> One of the other factors may be that an individual also checks the levels >> - >> number of markers - at which his haplotype is compared. If he chooses not >> to compare at 12 markers or 25, I don't think you'll see him on your match >> >> list except in the 37 and 67 marker matches. >> >> Sharon >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 10:27 AM, <dnalister@comcast.net> wrote: >> >>> Hi Fred and Sharon, >>> >>> Sharon is right, and I can tell you about a related quirk. You noted that >>> >>> 11/12 matches did now show up on unless a project including them was >>> selected. I had the same question you had at one time. With the 11/12 >>> matches, I'm not even sure whether they will show up even if both parties >>> >>> have selected entire database matching. It may be that a project >>> including >>> both has to be selected by the person viewing matches for the match to >>> show >>> up. I wish that I could find a complete explanation of the criteria that >>> are >>> used to select matches for display. I think most people don't even notice >>> >>> that there is some complexity to the display of matches. Some must be >>> missing some important matches as a result. >>> >>> Kirsten Saxe >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Sharon Fontenot" <smfgen@gmail.com> >>> To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com >>> Sent: Thursday, July 8, 2010 10:12:30 AM >>> Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] finding matches at FT >>> >>> Hi Fred - >>> >>> There are two sets of selections at play here, your choice and that of >>> the >>> men you are matching. The differences you see *depending on which project >>> >>> is selected* is because not all of your matches are comparing against the >>> >>> entire database as you are. My uncle has a 66/67 out of surname match who >>> >>> it appears only compares with the R-M222 Haplogroup Project, his name & >>> email only appears in my uncle's matches list if the R-M222 Haplogroup >>> Project is the one I have selected. >>> >>> Sharon >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 8:53 AM, fred westcott <westcott.fred@gmail.com >>> >wrote: >>> >>> > I am having difficulties learning how to find matches at FT. In >>> > Preferences I selected "entire database" yet my matches vary with >>> > either one of four projects that I have joined depending on which one >>> > is selected. And they do not vary consistently. If the surname >>> > project, Adams, is selected I will get 724 exact matches of 12 markers >>> > (of 727 possible if another project is selected) only one of which is >>> > an Adams, but in the next category , 12 markers GD 1, there are six >>> > Adams and no other names. There can be up to 126 names in this >>> > category depending on which project is selected. >>> > Is there a way of deselecting all short of opting out of all projects ? >>> > >>> > >>> > What am I missing or doing wrong ? >>> > >>> > ------------------------------- >>> > 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 >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> 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 >> > > ------------------------------- > 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 >

Hi Sharon and Kirsten, Thanks both for the information. I have a better understanding of it now. It's a little frustrating. None of my surname have shown up in matches. I know there are at least 7 as per the surname search on the FT home page. We do not have a surname project. Three show up in one project that FT lists, but have only 12, 12, and 25 markers. I already know the one with 25 markers and he has no plans to upgrade. But I've been told there are two who have 67 markers and these I have not been able to find. Thanks for the help ! Fred On 7/8/10, Sharon Fontenot <smfgen@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi again - > > One of the other factors may be that an individual also checks the levels - > number of markers - at which his haplotype is compared. If he chooses not > to compare at 12 markers or 25, I don't think you'll see him on your match > list except in the 37 and 67 marker matches. > > Sharon > > > > On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 10:27 AM, <dnalister@comcast.net> wrote: > >> Hi Fred and Sharon, >> >> Sharon is right, and I can tell you about a related quirk. You noted that >> 11/12 matches did now show up on unless a project including them was >> selected. I had the same question you had at one time. With the 11/12 >> matches, I'm not even sure whether they will show up even if both parties >> have selected entire database matching. It may be that a project including >> both has to be selected by the person viewing matches for the match to >> show >> up. I wish that I could find a complete explanation of the criteria that >> are >> used to select matches for display. I think most people don't even notice >> that there is some complexity to the display of matches. Some must be >> missing some important matches as a result. >> >> Kirsten Saxe >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Sharon Fontenot" <smfgen@gmail.com> >> To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com >> Sent: Thursday, July 8, 2010 10:12:30 AM >> Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] finding matches at FT >> >> Hi Fred - >> >> There are two sets of selections at play here, your choice and that of the >> men you are matching. The differences you see *depending on which project >> is selected* is because not all of your matches are comparing against the >> entire database as you are. My uncle has a 66/67 out of surname match who >> it appears only compares with the R-M222 Haplogroup Project, his name & >> email only appears in my uncle's matches list if the R-M222 Haplogroup >> Project is the one I have selected. >> >> Sharon >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 8:53 AM, fred westcott <westcott.fred@gmail.com >> >wrote: >> >> > I am having difficulties learning how to find matches at FT. In >> > Preferences I selected "entire database" yet my matches vary with >> > either one of four projects that I have joined depending on which one >> > is selected. And they do not vary consistently. If the surname >> > project, Adams, is selected I will get 724 exact matches of 12 markers >> > (of 727 possible if another project is selected) only one of which is >> > an Adams, but in the next category , 12 markers GD 1, there are six >> > Adams and no other names. There can be up to 126 names in this >> > category depending on which project is selected. >> > Is there a way of deselecting all short of opting out of all projects ? >> > >> > What am I missing or doing wrong ? >> > >> > ------------------------------- >> > 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 >> >> ------------------------------- >> 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 >

Hi Fred and Sharon, Sharon is right, and I can tell you about a related quirk. You noted that 11/12 matches did now show up on unless a project including them was selected. I had the same question you had at one time. With the 11/12 matches, I'm not even sure whether they will show up even if both parties have selected entire database matching. It may be that a project including both has to be selected by the person viewing matches for the match to show up. I wish that I could find a complete explanation of the criteria that are used to select matches for display. I think most people don't even notice that there is some complexity to the display of matches. Some must be missing some important matches as a result. Kirsten Saxe ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sharon Fontenot" <smfgen@gmail.com> To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com Sent: Thursday, July 8, 2010 10:12:30 AM Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] finding matches at FT Hi Fred - There are two sets of selections at play here, your choice and that of the men you are matching. The differences you see *depending on which project is selected* is because not all of your matches are comparing against the entire database as you are. My uncle has a 66/67 out of surname match who it appears only compares with the R-M222 Haplogroup Project, his name & email only appears in my uncle's matches list if the R-M222 Haplogroup Project is the one I have selected. Sharon On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 8:53 AM, fred westcott <westcott.fred@gmail.com>wrote: > I am having difficulties learning how to find matches at FT. In > Preferences I selected "entire database" yet my matches vary with > either one of four projects that I have joined depending on which one > is selected. And they do not vary consistently. If the surname > project, Adams, is selected I will get 724 exact matches of 12 markers > (of 727 possible if another project is selected) only one of which is > an Adams, but in the next category , 12 markers GD 1, there are six > Adams and no other names. There can be up to 126 names in this > category depending on which project is selected. > Is there a way of deselecting all short of opting out of all projects ? > > What am I missing or doing wrong ? > > ------------------------------- > 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

Hi again - One of the other factors may be that an individual also checks the levels - number of markers - at which his haplotype is compared. If he chooses not to compare at 12 markers or 25, I don't think you'll see him on your match list except in the 37 and 67 marker matches. Sharon On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 10:27 AM, <dnalister@comcast.net> wrote: > Hi Fred and Sharon, > > Sharon is right, and I can tell you about a related quirk. You noted that > 11/12 matches did now show up on unless a project including them was > selected. I had the same question you had at one time. With the 11/12 > matches, I'm not even sure whether they will show up even if both parties > have selected entire database matching. It may be that a project including > both has to be selected by the person viewing matches for the match to show > up. I wish that I could find a complete explanation of the criteria that are > used to select matches for display. I think most people don't even notice > that there is some complexity to the display of matches. Some must be > missing some important matches as a result. > > Kirsten Saxe > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sharon Fontenot" <smfgen@gmail.com> > To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com > Sent: Thursday, July 8, 2010 10:12:30 AM > Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] finding matches at FT > > Hi Fred - > > There are two sets of selections at play here, your choice and that of the > men you are matching. The differences you see *depending on which project > is selected* is because not all of your matches are comparing against the > entire database as you are. My uncle has a 66/67 out of surname match who > it appears only compares with the R-M222 Haplogroup Project, his name & > email only appears in my uncle's matches list if the R-M222 Haplogroup > Project is the one I have selected. > > Sharon > > > > On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 8:53 AM, fred westcott <westcott.fred@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > I am having difficulties learning how to find matches at FT. In > > Preferences I selected "entire database" yet my matches vary with > > either one of four projects that I have joined depending on which one > > is selected. And they do not vary consistently. If the surname > > project, Adams, is selected I will get 724 exact matches of 12 markers > > (of 727 possible if another project is selected) only one of which is > > an Adams, but in the next category , 12 markers GD 1, there are six > > Adams and no other names. There can be up to 126 names in this > > category depending on which project is selected. > > Is there a way of deselecting all short of opting out of all projects ? > > > > What am I missing or doing wrong ? > > > > ------------------------------- > > 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 > > ------------------------------- > 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 having difficulties learning how to find matches at FT. In Preferences I selected "entire database" yet my matches vary with either one of four projects that I have joined depending on which one is selected. And they do not vary consistently. If the surname project, Adams, is selected I will get 724 exact matches of 12 markers (of 727 possible if another project is selected) only one of which is an Adams, but in the next category , 12 markers GD 1, there are six Adams and no other names. There can be up to 126 names in this category depending on which project is selected. Is there a way of deselecting all short of opting out of all projects ? What am I missing or doing wrong ?

Hi Fred - There are two sets of selections at play here, your choice and that of the men you are matching. The differences you see *depending on which project is selected* is because not all of your matches are comparing against the entire database as you are. My uncle has a 66/67 out of surname match who it appears only compares with the R-M222 Haplogroup Project, his name & email only appears in my uncle's matches list if the R-M222 Haplogroup Project is the one I have selected. Sharon On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 8:53 AM, fred westcott <westcott.fred@gmail.com>wrote: > I am having difficulties learning how to find matches at FT. In > Preferences I selected "entire database" yet my matches vary with > either one of four projects that I have joined depending on which one > is selected. And they do not vary consistently. If the surname > project, Adams, is selected I will get 724 exact matches of 12 markers > (of 727 possible if another project is selected) only one of which is > an Adams, but in the next category , 12 markers GD 1, there are six > Adams and no other names. There can be up to 126 names in this > category depending on which project is selected. > Is there a way of deselecting all short of opting out of all projects ? > > What am I missing or doing wrong ? > > ------------------------------- > 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 response: I just saw the below quote on another forum. So, his own son was a GD of 2 at 12 markers with himself, which really isn't considered a match at all. Meanwhile, is a GD of 2 at 67 which is right on target. A GD of 2 at 25 isn't very conclusive either for R1b1b2 folks. 37 is probably more than sufficient for verifying someone you know is a close genealogical relation, but for searching for people in general, be they the same surname or not, or looking for deeper ancestral clusters or origins, 67 markers is needed. ---> The R-L21 Plus Project Admin posted this on 6 July: My own youngest son and I are a 65/67 match. And what was really mind-bending was that the 2 mutations came in the first 12 markers! Rich ---> fenega@connpoint wrote on 12 June: a point I failed to make earlier. I alluded to this but it didn't translate, so I'll state it more clearly. 23 men match my husband in the 12 marker test, so if we only tested 12 markers, then we'd assume we only had 23 matches. another 4 show up in the 25 marker test, 2 of whom do not show up in the 12 marker test. if we'd only tested 12 markers we'd have no idea these two men were related to us. another 11 show up in the 37 marker test, 5 of which do not show up in 12 or 25 marker testing. so you cannot say that it does no good to test further, some people only show up with further testing. I didn't mention the 67 marker man because he also shows up in the 37 marker test, but if someone were to show up in the 67 marker test with no mention of them in previous tests, that would make my point even further. but at this time my husband has what appears to be (from the larger number of mutations on his dna) a much older, longer seperated, perhaps, lineage than the rest of the lines in group 2 at Moore-worldwide ydna test results. he does belong, but his connection is older than the rest, and he has no relatives who tested. there is a family story of single son descent-large families with lots of girls but only one surviving son. so it may be a long time before we find male Moore relatives, and it may be that there aren't any. this case is one example, and certainly other dna test results will show something of the same pattern. it is the people with higher marker matches that are closer matches. no, less markers is not sufficient. this is especially so for the R1b lot, but is important for every haplogroup. to put it simply, you catch more with a bigger net. Cornelia

Ybase is being taken down, to be rebuilt. They are asking for input on the new design: http://www.ybase.org/newsite.asp Diana

Martha wrote in part, "... the larger the project the more time it's going to take. I love doing this, but I'm growing concerned about the time commitment." "More hands make light work." You need a co-administrator or two to help with the workload. My job with TFG (Taylor Family Genes) is largely participant & external relations (& queries) along with general problem recognition, identification & solving. I have four excellent co-admins who handle much of the work: 1. The matching tasks are handled by a co-admin for whom it's her sole duty. 2. Another co-admin publishes the project's blog (newsletter) 3. Another looks at matters from a business perspective and advises me. He's also excellent at spotting errors. 4. A fourth is the retired admin who's stayed on as an advisor, especially on how we got here. 5. Before becoming admin, I handled the project's external (from FTDNA) website, a task I've retained. Spreading the work around allows an admin to do more than merely put out brushfires. It creates the space to look ahead and be proactive. Fortunately, delegation is a skill I've had some practice at. -ralpht_/)

Debbie made some excellent points. 1. "...the presentation of some DNA projects is still a big factor." How true! She mentioned that sometimes websites emphasize only a small part of the "universe" and by implication discourage others who may -- if only we thought sufficiently broadly -- be valuable to the project. 2. "... no attempt .. made to research and understand the surname in its country of origin is not likely to inspire confidence in the ability of the administrator to recruit in other countries." Amen! Some surnames have confused and diverse origins & histories. But failing to help participants (especially potential participants) understand their name's history seems a denial of the premise on which surname projects are based. 3. "[UK residents] are much more likely to participate if they think they are contributing their DNA to a global study of a surname which is aiming to find out about the origins and evolution of the surname." May I steal that one? I like the sound of "a global study to find out about the origins and evolution of the surname." -ralpht_/)

On Jul 4, 2010, at 2:31 PM, Ralph Taylor wrote: > May I steal that one? I like the sound of "a global study to find out about > the origins and evolution of the surname." Me too! How about a Creative Commons license? ;-) Lisa

The problem that Frederic describes of people thinking they have little hope of a match is part of the problem, but the presentation of some DNA projects is still a big factor. If a DNA website is set up and all the content is about Virginia or New England or is sponsored by the X family association of America, people aren't even going to wade through the pages to find out who has been tested. They just won't think the project is relevant to them. The fact that no attempt has been made to research and understand the surname in its country of origin is not likely to inspire confidence in the ability of the administrator to recruit in other countries. The sheer size of some these American genetic groups is also a big problem. I have a large group from 1600s Virginia in my Cruwys/Cruse/Crews project which I have hidden towards the bottom of the Y-results page so that people don't get put off when looking at the results. Despite the group's size it is after all just one of many different genetic families, and ultimately a subset of a UK line. In answer to Martha's question I think you need to think in terms of the benefit for the potential testee. I don't think anyone in the UK would be particularly interested in taking a DNA test just to help American "immigrants to find their roots". They are much more likely to participate if they think they are contributing their DNA to a global study of a surname which is aiming to find out about the origins and evolution of the surname. Debbie Kennett

G'day We Aussies have some of the same issues as the USA in connecting with UK cousins. I have 56x 12 marker matches: 1 is from Australia, 1 is from NZ, 0 from the UK. Part of the problem might be marketing. I have never seen an advertisement for FTDNA in any Australian publication, genealogy or otherwise. Not one. I don't know what the situation is with FTDNA/iGenea marketing to the UK. Anyway I have recently asked FTDNA to cast their net a bit wider. Cheers Brent

Brent may have put his finger on another aspect of the problem when he wrote: "I don't know what the situation is with FTDNA/iGenea marketing to the UK." Those of us administering FTDNA-sponsored projects depend at least partly on the company's brand-name recognition and credibility. A bit of FTDNA advertising could assist project credibility. (Hint. Hint.) <G> -ralpht_/)

Thank for some very good responses. Good suggestions. As to: "People living in Europe know where they came from (may still be living in the ancestral regions), so feel no need to test." I have a little bit of a quibble with that. What people may believe is not necessarily so. There are some in the US whose families have been in the same county longer than many in Europe. When one looks at the history of Europe, one sees much population movement through the ages. Wars, famines, Plague, religious changes, the Industrial Revolution -- all caused people to move to different places. Europeans haven't been quite as "settled" as we might imagine. If they think they "know where they came from" they could easily be wrong. I look at European history and see a continental population in flux, from pre-history to the present. Let's take three examples, Huguenots, Palatines and the Plague: * Louis IV of France issued the Edict of Fontainebleau in 1685, expelling from 210,000 to (as he claimed) 900,000 Huguenot Protestants from France. Only a few of these came to the Americas; many went to other parts of Europe, especially including England. * The Palatinate (roughly today's Rheinland-Pfalz federal state of Germany) has been de-populated and re-populated many times. It suffered the curse of being in between warring armies practicing "scorched earth" policies. After each destruction, the fertile soil would attract new people from Switzerland, France and other areas. It wasn't until after the famine of 1708 that Palatines began arriving in America. * The Black Plague hit Europe (for the first time in several hundred years) in 1348 and struck several more times until the mid-1450s. Up to 40% of the population was suddenly gone. Panicked city-dwellers fled to the countryside; serfs whose masters had died started looking for work where someone could pay them; masters whose serfs had died were willing to hire strangers. A huge circulation of the population put families in places they'd never been before. (And, BTW, gave us surnames.) We tourists may look at a 12th century castle and think it was manned by ancestors of the same people living in the area now. Maybe, maybe not. >From the perspective of recruiting participants, though, the historical reality matters less than what they believe. A person who "knows" is less likely to learn than one who's curious. European DNA might reveal some surprising things to the participants. How to convey that? -ralpht_/)

Ralph Speaking as a British project admin I don't think there is a specific problem recruiting in the UK. In my experience there will always be people who don't want to have their DNA taken for one reason or another (eg, privacy, religious concerns, fear of an unwanted discover), but these issues are not confined to British people. With regards to UK marketing, for the past two years Family Tree DNA have attended the big three-day "Who do you think you are? Live" show in London, and on both occasions the stall was swamped. The feedback was very positive and there was a huge amount of interest in DNA testing. FTDNA only tend to advertise in journals when someone writes an article on DNA testing. Nevertheless there are some issues which are specific to the UK: 1) Fluctuating exchange rates. The pound has been very weak in recent years making the kits proportionately much more expensive. The 37-marker test costs about £105 now compared with about £95 a year ago. I remember when the 37-marker kits dropped in price from $189 to $149, and the saving was almost completely wiped out by a fall in the value of the pound. In contrast, I understand that the exchange rate for the Australian dollar is currently very favourable. 2) Lack of telephone support. It's quite a daunting prospect sending your DNA off to a foreign country. Not everyone is adept at using e-mail and the internet, but an expensive trans-Atlantic call would be out of the question for most people. I have two people in my Devon project who would not be there if they hadn't been able to pick up the telephone and call me so that they could have all their questions answered. I have suggested to FTDNA that they should set up a freephone number for UK enquiries but nothing ever happened. Perhaps it would have more effect if the suggestion is received from a number of people. FTDNA do have an arrangement with IGENEA. IGENEA have a UK telephone number, but their kits are almost 50% more expensive than buying direct from FTDNA in America. 3) The presentation of so many American DNA project websites is not conducive to the recruitment of UK participants. I get people who are interested in DNA testing and my heart sinks when I visit the relevant surname project website. Inevitably the focus will be on "connecting with cousins in the UK" or with sorting out the myriad lines in Virginia or New England. If the UK is mentioned at all it is only as an afterthought. You look at the results page and all you see is a long list of cryptic American state abbreviations for the most distant common ancestor. It is very difficult if not impossible to try and persuade someone from the UK to take a DNA test in such circumstances. 4) People take a DNA test in the hope of advancing their family history or understanding more about their surname. If you are in the UK and your line is from, say, Devon you will be interested in finding out if you have any matches with people with your surname from Cornwall and Somerset. You do not want to take a test to find out if you're related to the Smiths of Virginia or the Browns of Texas. With specific regard to the Taylor project, I think in the first instance you would need to sponsor tests for a few Brits as there is currently very little incentive for any UK Taylors to test. You would also need to take a proactive approach to seek out potential candidates. I would also suggest that you make the most of the few Brits that you do have, by moving them right up to the top of the Y-DNA results page. I had to scroll right down to group 24 before I could find a mention of a UK place name. Alternatively it might be an idea to establish a separate DNA Project for UK Taylors and restrict entry only to people with documented pedigrees to specific towns, villages or counties in the UK. Then at least they wouldn't be swamped by all the American lines. Another big problem is the sheer size of the American lines. One emigrant can have literally thousands of descendants. You often see American projects with huge matching groups of twenty or thirty people which you just don't get with the English lines. Incidentally, I note in your group 24 that you have Kit no. 84433 with a line from Holsworthy, Devon. Perhaps you could encourage him to join my Devon project: http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Devon If you want to see a good example of an American DNA project that is doing a good job at recruiting UK participants I suggest you take a look at the Phillips DNA project website: http://www.phillipsdnaproject.com In this case they've made a conscious effort to ensure that the content has a global balance. These are just my thoughts. I hope they are of some use. Best wishes Debbie Kennett http://www.familytreedna.com/public/CruwysDNA

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science_and_environment/10475018.stm Patrick Holland

Do you have any Y-DNA tests done for your Johnsons in the Brampton area? Cliff. Johnston "May the best you've ever seen, Be the worst you'll ever see;" from A Scots Toast by Allan Ramsay ----- Original Message ----- From: "Karen Johnson" <karenj@ca.inter.net> To: <y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 8:27 AM Subject: Re: [Y-DNA-projects] Country of Origin Participation > For my personal Johnson surname project, I have this situation. > Thomas Johnson b circa 1740 had two sons who married. > Thomas b 1771 and Benjamin b 1774. For the descendants of > Thomas Jr., who are in England, Canada, and the U.S., I have > had no problem in getting people to participate. > For the descendants of Benjamin there are 5 living males who are > in England. Not even 1 of them will consent to having their DNA > tested, even though I offered to pay. I was approaching them > through their wives, who are the genealogists in the family. The > wives were all for it, but not the men. > > Karen Johnson > Brampton, ON > Canada > > > > > ------------------------------- > 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

For my personal Johnson surname project, I have this situation. Thomas Johnson b circa 1740 had two sons who married. Thomas b 1771 and Benjamin b 1774. For the descendants of Thomas Jr., who are in England, Canada, and the U.S., I have had no problem in getting people to participate. For the descendants of Benjamin there are 5 living males who are in England. Not even 1 of them will consent to having their DNA tested, even though I offered to pay. I was approaching them through their wives, who are the genealogists in the family. The wives were all for it, but not the men. Karen Johnson Brampton, ON Canada

The "problem" you are describing has nothing to do with being in the UK. It has to do with people thinking they have little hope of a match. It is the same problem faced with some small projects I administrate. When only one person has tested, it's hard to get number two to test, because they see little chance of a match. When you finally get number two, the same problem is faced to get number three, and so on at each step of the way. Once you get more people to test, the project takes a life of its own as far as who it is "easy" to get to test and who remains "hard" due to geography. Geographic problems with getting people to test are when they think they have little hope of a match. My SHORT DNA project has 58 members (about 15 when I took it a few years ago). Three are from the UK, which is exactly the same number as from northern states: THREE. I know there are SHORTs living in the northern US, it is not a "regional" name. I monitor the SHORT mail list and message boards, but trying to get someone from a northern state to test when they look at the results and see all the southern lines is hard, because they think they have little or no chance of a match. It's the same problem in microcosm that I faced when I took over, or in small projects of just getting ANYONE to test. Of course the "problem" snowballs. Someone with a southern line may now feel they have a good chance for a match, so they test, which makes the results even more lopsided to having a southern slant. Getting someone with a northern line (or UK line) to test is the exact same problem as with getting ANYONE in a small project to test: little perceived chance of a match, because everyone is waiting for OTHERS to take the first step and test, and then they MIGHT test when they see enough results that they think they might have a chance at a match. Rick Saunders -----Original Message----- From: y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-projects-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Debbie Kennett Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 6:21 AM To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com Subject: [Y-DNA-projects] Country of Origin Participation <snip> 3) The presentation of so many American DNA project websites is not conducive to the recruitment of UK participants. I get people who are interested in DNA testing and my heart sinks when I visit the relevant surname project website. Inevitably the focus will be on "connecting with cousins in the UK" or with sorting out the myriad lines in Virginia or New England. If the UK is mentioned at all it is only as an afterthought. You look at the results page and all you see is a long list of cryptic American state abbreviations for the most distant common ancestor. It is very difficult if not impossible to try and persuade someone from the UK to take a DNA test in such circumstances.