1
Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing / Re: None of my DNA matches have ever contacted me
« on: Wednesday 01 October 25 16:55 BST (UK) »
Weirdly in the middle of this thread I had somebody message me out of the blue this morning !
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing / Re: None of my DNA matches have ever contacted me
« on: Monday 29 September 25 20:53 BST (UK) »
If there is a 1% chance of pre-dna paternal confusion, that's 50 erroneous entries.
Zaph
That may well be true (I imagine it's a bit worse than that), but we're not looking at the whole tree just the link between the dna match and our tree, one branch, a handful of generations or so. And we know from the fact they are a dna match that there's a link somewhere.
3
Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing / Re: Thrulines query
« on: Monday 29 September 25 20:13 BST (UK) »
Cutting and Pasting is exactly what so called AI does, there is no intelligence involved, all the rest is the invention of Marketing Departments across the world.
A Computer Lecturer I know insists on calling it MR (Machine Regurgitation). I keep that in mind when I'm looking at Thrulines and Common Ancestors. Another computer term is apt - GIGO - Ancestry seemingly does no curation on the trees it uses as input.
A Computer Lecturer I know insists on calling it MR (Machine Regurgitation). I keep that in mind when I'm looking at Thrulines and Common Ancestors. Another computer term is apt - GIGO - Ancestry seemingly does no curation on the trees it uses as input.
4
Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing / Re: None of my DNA matches have ever contacted me
« on: Monday 29 September 25 19:29 BST (UK) »
I also feel 5000 is too low a cutoff these days, but that's probably because my tree currently sits at 15,300. Here's the case for the defense -
It was at 2000 just before I took the dna test, I've always included siblings at every level because I like to research families rather than individuals.
After the dna test I just continued this practice while building down to dna matches.
As the trees going down are multiple and expanding outwards the overall size grew rapidly and I thought about leaving out the siblings but there are two big advantages.
Firstly Ancestry's Common Ancestors often picks up links to these siblings after I have added the match I found, often through private trees or private people in public trees. That actually happened again today.
Secondly I have a confidence test for people in my tree which is if a person has dna links via three of their children I consider them proven (still not sure about that word in a genealogical context, I want to see the maths).
I would say then 20,000 for the cutoff but I do know of one lady in New Zealand whose tree is very, very good who has well over that. She started as a school project and is now in her 60's. She was one of my Ancestry messaging contacts to get back on point.
It was at 2000 just before I took the dna test, I've always included siblings at every level because I like to research families rather than individuals.
After the dna test I just continued this practice while building down to dna matches.
As the trees going down are multiple and expanding outwards the overall size grew rapidly and I thought about leaving out the siblings but there are two big advantages.
Firstly Ancestry's Common Ancestors often picks up links to these siblings after I have added the match I found, often through private trees or private people in public trees. That actually happened again today.
Secondly I have a confidence test for people in my tree which is if a person has dna links via three of their children I consider them proven (still not sure about that word in a genealogical context, I want to see the maths).
I would say then 20,000 for the cutoff but I do know of one lady in New Zealand whose tree is very, very good who has well over that. She started as a school project and is now in her 60's. She was one of my Ancestry messaging contacts to get back on point.
5
Scotland / Re: Worst possible outcome
« on: Monday 29 September 25 14:47 BST (UK) »
Jon_ni, slow down man, I'm still working my way through all the legal stuff you linked above trying to get my head around the implications. So far my take is that the Tribunal totally sat on the fence, it's a legal Re-Use and it's a legal Refusal so the Appeal must be both allowed and dismissed. Ain't our legal system great !
Scanning the annual report the highlight has to be somebody registered an "AI Tartan"
Scanning the annual report the highlight has to be somebody registered an "AI Tartan"
6
Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing / Re: None of my DNA matches have ever contacted me
« on: Monday 29 September 25 14:19 BST (UK) »
A fellow Simpson's fan
7
Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing / Re: None of my DNA matches have ever contacted me
« on: Monday 29 September 25 13:55 BST (UK) »
Zaphod - Never really thought about it, I just get these messages from time to time. I suppose it's related to how many matches you have, I started with 16,000 and it''s crept up to 26,000 over the years but I've spoken to Americans who have over 100,000. Some (very small) percentage of them are curious enough to make contact.
It's the two that didn't reply to me that were really strange, one was a 2nd cousin whose grandmother I knew quite well and the other was a self-proclaimed professional genealogist. The latter changed the name of the account, made the tree private, and changed the name on the managing account, all immediately after I contacted them and all very peculiar. My theory is they were charging for their work and didn't want to be seen receiving information from me.
PS. Not sure I would know how to make myself interesting !
It's the two that didn't reply to me that were really strange, one was a 2nd cousin whose grandmother I knew quite well and the other was a self-proclaimed professional genealogist. The latter changed the name of the account, made the tree private, and changed the name on the managing account, all immediately after I contacted them and all very peculiar. My theory is they were charging for their work and didn't want to be seen receiving information from me.
PS. Not sure I would know how to make myself interesting !
8
Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing / Re: None of my DNA matches have ever contacted me
« on: Monday 29 September 25 11:36 BST (UK) »
Zaphod, I think you're just a bit unlucky with your matches.
I've totted mine up and since I tested nine people have contacted me out of the blue on Ancestry and three on MyHeritage. It's been a totally mixed bag ranging from people who basically wanted it done for them to two or three who were really great and helped me a lot. I think of the contact system as a useful but fairly minor part of Ancestry and was using it well before my dna test but only very occasionally. It has been useful to me but very sporadically, my last useful contact was three years ago.
I've initiated contact with sixteen people, and have had a reply from all but two. From what other people have said that looks to be high, but I do try to select carefully and also try to ask a specific question. For me it's never about recent people so that takes the personal out of it I suppose.
I've totted mine up and since I tested nine people have contacted me out of the blue on Ancestry and three on MyHeritage. It's been a totally mixed bag ranging from people who basically wanted it done for them to two or three who were really great and helped me a lot. I think of the contact system as a useful but fairly minor part of Ancestry and was using it well before my dna test but only very occasionally. It has been useful to me but very sporadically, my last useful contact was three years ago.
I've initiated contact with sixteen people, and have had a reply from all but two. From what other people have said that looks to be high, but I do try to select carefully and also try to ask a specific question. For me it's never about recent people so that takes the personal out of it I suppose.
9
Scotland / Re: Worst possible outcome
« on: Thursday 25 September 25 21:30 BST (UK) »
Moffats by the hundred, a handful of Prides and the odd Gordon. Starting with James Moffat and Janet Kaidgley m. 1661 in Lasswade
Your PPS is what my main point of complaint is, why can't they offer a subscription ?
Also why do you see bulk discount as preferable, I see the opposite. Since I just want to read the records before I download. My downloads would probably decrease compared to now since I wouldn't have to fish in the dark, I'd only download the record I was looking for.
Your PPS is what my main point of complaint is, why can't they offer a subscription ?
Also why do you see bulk discount as preferable, I see the opposite. Since I just want to read the records before I download. My downloads would probably decrease compared to now since I wouldn't have to fish in the dark, I'd only download the record I was looking for.