RootsChat.Com

Each of us has a responsibility to treat information about other people with basic respect.

If the original request was consistent with the supposed purpose and ethos of Rootschat it would not need to be done by PM.

Anonymous requests for personal information about living people raise immediate red flags with me.

I think the time has come for me to call it a day with Rootschat.

Photos in the MH alert context include images of original records.

I think that acknowledging that you have come to the end of reliable records for a particular line can be the sign of an honest researcher. In some places the records just aren’t there for ordinary working people beyond a certain date, if they kept out of court, Parish support and did not own or lease property or leave wills, and perhaps moved around.

However I would also wholeheartedly endorse the “go wide” approach suggested by Craclyn. I appreciate you may already be doing this but perhaps go even wider than you have?

Following up siblings and cousins and their children can open up many more doors, including those leading backwards. Evidence which may be weak for your immediate line may look quite different when you have the picture for the wider family.

Part of going wide can include DNA testing. This will confirm ( or otherwise) your paper trail and is also likely to suggest new avenues of research.

Good luck.

Scroll down in this link to get to the table on page 4:
https://thegeneticgenealogist.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Shared_cM_Project_2017

No, you don’t have to pay for a separate subscription. You can just have a DNA account, with no ongoing charges.

I have put up limited trees (mostly direct line only) on the sites I have tested with/uploaded my data to. I consider these provide enough names and dates for DNA matches to get a preliminary view as to where a potential match might be and they can contact me for more info. They don’t include photos, stories, or associated documents.

I probably need to add a couple more generations to these limited online trees, however, because I underestimated how far back matches can take you. I have two examples of matches where our common ancestors were born about 1760s - 1780s, yet the amount of DNA we share is comparable to, or greater than, that shared with known third cousins with shared ancestors born in the 1840 s. Cousin marriages appear to be responsible.

I have withheld my name and the names of my parents and grandparents  - these are only relevant to very close matches who would know this information anyway. Contrary to some comments I have seen on Rootschat, withholding these names does not appear to affect the operation of tools such as the Theory of a Relativity or Through lines. 

If you don’t want to put any family tree information at all on line, or only want a private tree which no one else can see, then I agree there is no point testing. I suppose people who do this can freeload off the information from their matches, but they will still miss out on much of the value of testing. I don’t bother contacting matches with no trees or private trees as I assume they either have no interest in family history ( no tree) or no interest in sharing/collaboration ( private trees).

DNA helped me find out the father of my illegitimate 2 x great grandfather ( it led me to the right paper trail) - I am very, very glad I have tested. I was also able to help a match identify his unknown great grandparents. Again, it was a combination of DNA plus traditional research. It is helping me confirm other working theories and explore new avenues.

I hope you find a way to address your concerns so you can experience the exhilaration of the world DNA testing opens up, but I do understand that it is not something everyone wants to do.