Moderator Control Panel ]

Ancestry Dna

Share your thoughts with your fellow family historians – and the Who Do You Think You Are? Magazine team – here

Re: Ancestry Dna

Postby ksouthall » Mon Aug 28, 2017 5:38 pm

I have had responses from people but everyone has the right to keep their tree private if they want to. People don't have to share their trees but they could still share information through messages and comparing notes. Sometimes the match isn't obvious if the relationship is not very close, or if the other person has not traced very far back or if one of the trees has any mistakes.

One of my close matches (1st or 2nd cousins) has 5 people, including himself, in his family tree. Living people are hidden so I can only see one name so I haven't contacted him yet as he I have no idea how we are connected. Also, I have spent a lot of time and money on research and, without wishing to sound mean, I'm not sure I want to give it all away to a stranger without getting to know them a bit better first and without them putting in a bit of effort too.

I have shared information with another second cousin as the sharing has been reciprocal.

People will share as long as they're not expected to give years of work away on a plate without finding out new information from their new relative.
ksouthall
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:26 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Ancestry Dna

Postby meekhcs » Mon Aug 28, 2017 7:20 pm

Kathryn - I agree with you regarding tree privacy. Mine is private for various reasons, one of which is the time, money and effort I have spent on it,and I certainly would not open up a private tree just because someone asked me to!
At the same time illigitimacy can be difficult to research. Very often you may not have info to exchange asyou are trying topiece things together, yet when a DNA match comes up the only hope of furthering your research is if that match will answer the question you pose. They don't have to open up their trees in order to do this. Very often it is simply do they have surname x y or z in their tree, and, depending on their answer, you can hopefully open up a discussion with them.
Questions have to be asked with care for obvious reasons but anyone who tests their DNA with FH sites must realise that people are testing to find Family connections, but that a prime reason for searching for a connection will be illegitimacy.
Sally
meekhcs
 
Posts: 1495
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:43 pm
Location: england

Re: Ancestry Dna

Postby ksouthall » Mon Aug 28, 2017 10:06 pm

Sally,
I agree with your point that

meekhcs wrote:...illegitimacy can be difficult to research.


However, doesn't your point that
meekhcs wrote:...Very often you may not have info to exchange as you are trying to piece things together
make it harder to ask the right questions?

I have a case where a girl in service had an illegitimate son. All I have is her name and no clues about who the father was. I can't conclusively identify her before or after the birth in the censuses. I might be able to get within one or two generations of tracing her by posing the
meekhcs wrote:...do they have surname x y or z in their tree?


The problem would be in identifying who the father was as, if I had no surnames to go on and with no paper trail to back it up, how could I be sure I had the right father for this person? Again, it might be possible to confirm the family to within a couple of generations but not necessarily the actual person.

I was contacted by one of my matches on Ancestry but cannot find the link to her family, looking at both our trees. She has gone back to 5 x great-grandparents in most lines (over 2000 family members) and I have gone back a similar amount, or further. Most of her ancestors seem to have come from Suffolk whereas I have no known connections there. The link must either be further back or one of us has got our family tree wrong, unless there is an instance of illegitimacy that hasn't been accounted for. If we both have paper trails that appear to back up our family trees, how do we work out where the link is?

On the subject of my AncestryDNA matches, I have worked out some rough statistics, as follows:-

Matches with no family tree on Ancestry - 54%
Matches with 10 or fewer family tree members - 11%
Matches with between 11 and 100 family tree members - 10%
Matches with between 101 and 1000 family tree members - 10%
Matches with between 1001 and 10,000 family tree members - 13.5%
Matches with over 10,000 family tree members - 2.5%

This is based on 178 matches. Percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number so the total adds up to 101% not 100%.

Of the above trees, only 8% are locked.

NB. When trying to find the matched individual in a tree, there could be several matches due to intermarrying within families.

It appears that, in my case, the majority of my AncestryDNA matches (85%) do not have enough available information for me to be able to work out where the match would be. In these instances, I would not share my family tree with them.

It has also been hard to find the exact match with some of the larger family trees, particularly those trees which seem to have used other Ancestry trees as their sources rather than original records.

It seems to me that AncestryDNA is useful for confirming known connections and could be useful when trying to solve illegitimacy cases when you have some information to go on. However, it appears that a lot of people might have taken the AncestryDNA test in order for someone else to magically provide them with a family tree. Perhaps I am wrong on this, but my matches show 75% of matches with either no family tree or fewer than 100 family tree members. Has anyone else spotted a similar pattern or do you match up with people with larger trees?

Katherine
ksouthall
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:26 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Ancestry Dna

Postby richaldis » Tue Aug 29, 2017 10:31 am

I think my frustration isn't that people keep their trees private - I can think of a number of very good reasons why people might want to do so - but that people don't remove their results from Ancestry (which you can do) but aren't interested in engaging in even the most minimal way with others.

I've always seen tracing your family tree as a collaborative exercise and I'm always happy to do research or look-ups for others, even if they don't have any connection with me, if I have the time.
richaldis
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 2:51 pm

Re: Ancestry Dna

Postby AdrianB38 » Tue Aug 29, 2017 11:40 am

I confess to being baffled by people taking a DNA test and then not talking to anyone. What is the point? Apart from the highly dubious ethnicity / origin angle?

Sent from my MotoG3 using WDYTYA Forum mobile app
Adrian
AdrianB38
 
Posts: 2469
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: Ancestry Dna

Postby meekhcs » Tue Aug 29, 2017 12:54 pm

However, doesn't your point that

meekhcs wrote:
...Very often you may not have info to exchange as you are trying to piece things together

make it harder to ask the right questions?


Yes Katherine it does. I should have said "proven info". In contacting people re DNA matches we have to lay out the whole story in the hope they will respond.

Richaldis and Adrian exactly!

Sally
meekhcs
 
Posts: 1495
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:43 pm
Location: england

Previous

Return to Genealogy chat


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest