new beta on ancestry dna results

[Sinann]

Hi
Have been reading your comments with interest, and went back to Ancestry lab and turned on the Beta feature for grouping ancestors.  Looks great, but I am completely unable to scroll down the page!  No side bar, mouse doesn't work, Page up/Page down doesn't work.  Have completed Feedback for Ancestry with this information.

I will have to switch back to the old format, which is a shame because I really wanted to try the new one out (which I had previously turned off because the filter had to be reapplied after each view of a match - also reported via Feedback).

Ms_C

That happened to me for a while yesterday but corrected itself when I reloaded the page.

[ms_canuck]

Thanks for the suggestions to delete cookies from Ancestry - that seems to have fixed the scrolling problem on my laptop (Chrome).  It was working fine on the iPad though (Safari).

Ms_C

[Rezillo]

I have a slightly different scrolling problem. Autoscrolling is working in most views except when selecting the Common Ancestor filter. I'm getting only 20 matches for All, Close or Distant matches.

All gives me 20 and scrolls no further, Close gives me 20 and Distant a different 20, so there should be at least 40 in 'All' (I did have around 60). Take off the Common Ancestor filter and autoscrolling works.

I've tried cache and cookie clearance, plus I've filled in some beta feedback.

John

[LizzieL]

LizzieL, Try clearing your Ancestry cookies. If that does not help then you will probably need to contact them to find out why you are not getting ThruLines.

Clearing cookies  didn't chanke anything, but at your suggestion, I did contanct Ancestry. After quite a delay and me sending several screenshots of the problem, I have at last got thru-lines. Just came suddenly with new style profile. I got one spurious link due to person having wrong parents on their tree, but we had our a link on another line, where again they had wrong parents - they hadn't bothered to check mum's maiden name. But I had 20 plus correct ones, spent all yesterday double checking lots of trees. I've now confirmed a couple of marriages I wasn't completely sure about (right name, right time period but location seemed a bit far away from where I expected.)

[pharmaT]

I've been wondering how the thru-lines algorithm work. My thru-lines suggest a specific couple are my4x grt grandparents as this is who is on ONE of the public tree.  This is the wrong couple, I have the correct couple on my tree and a few of the other public trees have the same couple I do. So I wonder what makes them give more weight to one tree over another?  I had previously thought they went with what the most trees had.

[Pheno]

I have similar PharmaT with a particular couple who I know are correct but who differ to those that most other people have on their tree and so ancestry presents the other couple as potential ancestors for me on thrulines.  However I just wonder whether any of those other people get presented with my couple as their potential ancestors.  It would be interesting to specifically compare.

Pheno

[hurworth]

I've been wondering how the thru-lines algorithm work. My thru-lines suggest a specific couple are my4x grt grandparents as this is who is on ONE of the public tree.  This is the wrong couple, I have the correct couple on my tree and a few of the other public trees have the same couple I do. So I wonder what makes them give more weight to one tree over another?  I had previously thought they went with what the most trees had.

pharmaT - I can tell from your posts over the years that YOUR tree should be the one that gets used for your Thrulines and for the trees of your cousins, but there is no rhyme nor reason for how Ancestry selects the tree to use. 

I've been rather irked by fact that some large, copied and poorly researched (and ridiculous) trees are being offered to me as alternative ancestors on Thrulines.  I can tell that you're thorough in your research and particular about detail. 

If you've researched your ancestors well and are as confident as you can be about your research (there's always the chance of a NPE up any line, which mucks up the genetics) then I wouldn't place much weight on the potential ancestors Thrulines provides if you have better information.  But Thrulines has found some distant cousins descended from ancestors I have in my tree which is good.   

Quite a few lines I have in my trees differ from what my relatives think is their lineage.  This is because they've copied info from old trees of others and are not aware of updates.  Some of these updates are due to very recent findings thanks to DNA matching that have taken links back to the 1700s.

[ggrocott]

I still have no Thrulines, despite contacting Ancestry twice, all I get is
'Thank you for contacting Ancestry in regards to ThruLines, and issues therewith.

I apologise for the delay in getting back to you.

We are aware of the issue with messages and the message center; I am not able to provide any time frame for a resolution at this time, but we are working hard to correct it as soon as possible.

The availability and functionality of ThruLines and shared ancestor hints may vary during the testing (beta) phase, any issues with ThruLines and shared ancestor hints should be corrected once we iron out any faults etc.

Have a nice day!'

I might have a nice day researching if Ancestry could get its act together but ...................................!

[pharmaT]

I have similar PharmaT with a particular couple who I know are correct but who differ to those that most other people have on their tree and so ancestry presents the other couple as potential ancestors for me on thrulines.  However I just wonder whether any of those other people get presented with my couple as their potential ancestors.  It would be interesting to specifically compare.

Pheno

What confuses me about this particular couple is that in this case most trees either have this couple or no one, only one of the public trees has the wrong couple  If it was the other way round the algorithm would have made sense to me. Maybe all the private trees have the wrong couple.


I've never based my research on other trees, I only look out of curiosity and being curious in general I am also curious how algorithms work.