Author Topic: Dis- and advantages of adding a tree to DNA results  (Read 5376 times)

Offline Mart 'n' Al

  • RootsChat Leaver
  • RootsChat Pioneer
  • *
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
Dis- and advantages of adding a tree to DNA results
« on: Sunday 30 December 18 17:50 GMT (UK) »
I've got my test results on various sites, but with no accompanying tree.  I don't want my research stolen. Should I,
 
A. Stop worrying and provide it as completely as possible.
B. Just provide basic pedigree.
C. Not provide it?

Martin

Offline UK4753

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 137
    • View Profile
Re: Dis- and advantages of adding a tree to DNA results
« Reply #1 on: Sunday 30 December 18 18:05 GMT (UK) »
B.

Otherwise, why take the tests at all?

 :)
Wiltshire: JONES, BANKS
Yorkshire: FEVERS, SCALES
Kent:  RUMLEY, NIGH
London:  HUGHES, NIGHTINGALE

Offline davidft

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,209
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Dis- and advantages of adding a tree to DNA results
« Reply #2 on: Sunday 30 December 18 18:14 GMT (UK) »
B.

Otherwise, why take the tests at all?

 :)


I agree with this, but even then it can be hard work getting responses.

There again if no one put a tree up where would we be?
James Stott c1775-1850. James was born in Yorkshire but where? He was a stonemason and married Elizabeth Archer (nee Nicholson) in 1794 at Ripon. They lived thereafter in Masham. If anyone has any suggestions or leads as to his birthplace I would be interested to know. I have searched for it for years without success. Thank you.

Offline jillruss

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,824
  • Poppy
    • View Profile
Re: Dis- and advantages of adding a tree to DNA results
« Reply #3 on: Sunday 30 December 18 19:01 GMT (UK) »
I've got my test results on various sites, but with no accompanying tree.  I don't want my research stolen. Should I,
 
A. Stop worrying and provide it as completely as possible.
B. Just provide basic pedigree.
C. Not provide it?

Martin

I understand your concerns. I was in the same boat as you when I first did the DNA test. Once bitten etc - I'd had my tree well and truly hijacked by more than one person in the Genes Reunited days. At first I put a full tree on Ancestry but made it private, then I came to the same conclusion as the other replies. I compromised by including a public tree which contained the main 'players' in my tree but didn't include the 'peripherals'.

I'd like to say its made a difference, but I'd be lying! I could already make the private tree available for others to see if we'd already made contact and - quite honestly - most people are either lazy or just plain ignorant. I don't think I've ever been contacted by anyone on Ancestry DNA - its always been me doing the contacting, and then I'd guess that more than 50% of those don't bother to reply.

Perhaps I've just been unlucky but I think this is about par for the course for everyone.

So, my advice would be:- be prepared to be the instigator of any contact you want to make and don't bother too much about the tree - just put up a few names and locations.

I hope I'm not being too curmudgeonly (my favourite word of the moment) and pessimistic - I've had quite a lot of success finding relatives through DNA testing, including a couple of natural fathers but I have put the hours in!!  ::)

What's that old saying? You have to speculate in order to accumulate!
HELP!!!

 BATHSHEBA BOOTHROYD bn c. 1802 W. Yorks.

Baptism nowhere to be found. Possibly in a nonconformist church near ALMONDBURY or HUDDERSFIELD.


Offline Finley 1

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,538
  • a digital one for now real one espere
    • View Profile
Re: Dis- and advantages of adding a tree to DNA results
« Reply #4 on: Sunday 30 December 18 19:28 GMT (UK) »
I had contact ONCE  from my Nephew.. who I have known since the day he was born..


xin

Offline Sinann

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,813
    • View Profile
Re: Dis- and advantages of adding a tree to DNA results
« Reply #5 on: Sunday 30 December 18 19:43 GMT (UK) »
I went for option B, because just about ever one here complains about matches not having a tree online
didn't make any difference, I still have to make the first contact and as I can't see their trees (the two or three that have one), it feels kinda pointless.

Offline Raybistre

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 352
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Dis- and advantages of adding a tree to DNA results
« Reply #6 on: Sunday 30 December 18 19:47 GMT (UK) »
Can't see the point of doing all that research into your ancestry and then hiding it away. Yes, I've done lots of work on mine and spent some money too, but I want that work to be recorded not to die with me. If somebody else benefits from the work I've done so what, maybe they will take it a stage farther.
Ray

Offline Bobby G

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 75
    • View Profile
Re: Dis- and advantages of adding a tree to DNA results
« Reply #7 on: Tuesday 01 January 19 02:19 GMT (UK) »
Yep, as others as said put up a basic gedcom.

I have my DNA/Gedcom and on all the DNA sites. What I do is add a basic Gedcom, which I updated (replace with a new one) every 6 months, 1 year or whenever i feel like it.

There is no reason not put one up. Living folks are removed/kept private and you are only using basic BMD info anyway.
Researching Gambrill www.gambrillfamilytree.com Gedmatch T909876 Join our Gambrill FB Group

Offline kinnigit

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 24
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Dis- and advantages of adding a tree to DNA results
« Reply #8 on: Tuesday 01 January 19 05:43 GMT (UK) »
I'd go for A or B if you want to get the best from your DNA results. I find more people are initiating messages regarding matches these days.  There was an initial problem that Ancestry wouldn't notify you of a new message so that if you didn't notice the icon changing you wouldn't know you had a new message. This seems to be fixed now.
I personally don't bother contacting anyone with a private tree as they generally won't reply. Matches with no trees also are low priority.
I believe in sharing my research as knowledge grows when it is shared and verifiable facts can't be "stolen".