View Full Version : Ancestry DNA contacts
Best mate now has nearly 450 PAGES of DNA contacts. And no computer.
I can see where the relationship lies for some of them, even if their research does not go back as far as hers does.
But is it worth making the contact in those cases? She hasn't a computer, so I'd be doing the slog.
My gut feeling is that unless the family is really exciting, I leave well alone.
Also, has anyone found a way of marking the contacts, so you remember how important each is, and why? I'm adding notes, but this doesn't seem the most efficient way.
Olde Crone
09-09-18, 13:34
Off the top of my head......could you utilise ahnentafel numbers? If you put the closest relative's number next to each contact, would that help? Or do you mean how useful the contact is in terms of knowledge?
OC
Well I sent about 10 messages via Ancestry to the closest DNA matches on one line and - zilch - not one reply - even gave them my email address in case they couldn't send message via ancestry.
I'd like to be able to sort the results into categories from useful to dross. There is a tagging system: tagged/untagged. This does not seem adequate.
As for how useful the contact is...... well some MAY be decended from Merlin, but I really don't want to know. And if they are decended from John Smith of Gasworks Street, they probably don't want to know.
I don't want a thousand conversations, but it's challenging to decide who might be a good contact without wading through all of them.
Thanks, Julie.
I've been in touch with two good contacts so far (and best mate sent a dispiriting email to a third who I shall have to pummel and say exactly how they are related)
But I know I'm not brilliant at the tantalising email to the right person either. Especially as I'm writing on her behalf.
On one line I have connected to half sister who of course I knew. A grandson of my half great aunt and a man that was adopted who was looking for his family - I have an inkling of him being a descendant of great grandfather's brother who died and two of his sons were sent to Canada under the Children's migrant scheme. I couldn't give him any answers so haven't heard from him again.
Olde Crone
09-09-18, 16:38
At the risk of sounding like an old misery, this is one of the off-putting snags about dna testing I find. Just like conventional research, you make contact or are approached by people who know little or nothing but are hoping you know everything.
My brother has a dna contact at second cousin level. Her tree is a wondrous work of fantasy with 22,000 people on it, not one of whom we recognise, nor is there any impelling geographical connection. I feel disinclined to sort out her tree for her in order to discover how we might be connected.
OC
I have found out how to remove those distant cousins who have neither tree nor shared matches, but with 450 pages each of 50 entries, I may be some time:D
Olde Crone
10-09-18, 17:06
Hmmmm. Hot matches, anyone?
OC
I am wading through pages of matches - some don't even have a family tree, so there is no point in even looking at them. Some I can tell from their surname where I think they belong, others no idea. Even some of those with a small tree on ancestry, there are no common surnames, so I can't tell where the match is, but 4th-6th cousin range says before anyone came to Australia.
On GEDmatch, most of the trees I can look at have ancestors who were born in USA back in the 1600s and 1700s, and don't go any further, so they are useless too.
And very few people answer the messages or emails, its so frustrating. I did get some replies, which was nice, but we generally don't stay in touch regularly. I check how long it is since they logged into ancestry - that will tell if they are researching or not. My niece says she did her DNA because her boyfriend did his and has never looked at it. I told her to log in and make me her manager.
Di
Hmmmm. Hot matches, anyone?
OC
Oh, how true!
And what I am finding weird is that A may match to B, but not B to A. How does that work?
Hmmmm. Hot matches, anyone?
OC
Not matches were a doddle compared with this, OC. I have cleared over 20 pages of weak links. Only another 400plus to go....
Trying to determine whether I'd want to do this for my own tree :D
I am wading through pages of matches - some don't even have a family tree, so there is no point in even looking at them.
Don't assume that! I contacted the first match on my list although she didn't have a tree - turned out she was a first cousin of my paternal grandmother, whom my dad had some recollection of although they'd lost contact decades ago. Despite the lack of an online tree, she had clearly done some research, and was also able to share memories of family members whom she had known. If even a few more of my matches yield as much information as that one, the cost of the test will have been more than worth it.
Do the above comments suggest if you don't have your tree online people won't contact you about potential DNA matches?
My tree of 10,000 people and 35 years work (all done by me or OH and not poached from others) isn't online anywhere and won't be any time soon, but I had considered having a DNA test done. Now I'm wondering if it would be a waste of money.
Olde Crone
14-09-18, 07:26
450 pages x 50 names = 22500 people. How meaningfully can one person be related to 22500 other people?
OC
I'm working my way through those 22k matches.
If someone shows with only a moderate chance of being related, has an odd name, has no tree AND doesn't match with anyone else, I wouldn't look at them. And might miss a good contact.
But some people have no trees, but do link with lots of people. Those I would be interested in.
kiterunner
15-09-18, 09:10
I've just got my results and I am encouraged to see they have got my father right. Not sure about the ethnicity estimate though. Now to look through the rest of the matches...
I've just got my results and I am encouraged to see they have got my father right.
I suppose there must be a percentage of people where that doesn't happen. ;(
I suppose there must be a percentage of people where that doesn't happen. ;(
That was one of the reasons Best Mate was nervous about having it done.
kiterunner
18-09-18, 18:59
Phoenix, how can you tell how many pages of contacts there are, please?
I've found that the ones who come up with "hints" confirm various lines of my tree, but I'm not getting anywhere much with trying to sort out the rest of them. So many with no tree or a very small tree, and even where there are several "shared matches" in a group, I haven't managed to figure out the connection yet. Still trying to figure out the best way to work through them.
Where you have a page number, change it to something different and see if you still have matches.
I'm deleting the no tree/no match type in an attempt to getting the results into a manageable form.
If there is no tree but a match, I'll try the match, to see if that leads to a tree.
I swear there is a fh gene. There are whole clusters round some of best mate's ancestors, but complete blanks on other lines.
kiterunner
18-09-18, 22:55
Thanks, Phoenix. I have more than 475 pages then, but not figured out exactly how many yet.
I have eliminated some 40 pages. Just another 400 odd to go.
Sue from Southend
19-09-18, 12:41
Thanks, Phoenix. I have more than 475 pages then, but not figured out exactly how many yet.
:eek: I'm waiting for my DNA test results (apparently they're in the lab) and am finding these figures a bit scary! How on earth do you find time to do anything else apart from trawling through all these matches???
:eek: I'm waiting for my DNA test results (apparently they're in the lab) and am finding these figures a bit scary! How on earth do you find time to do anything else apart from trawling through all these matches???
I don't!!!
The filtering tools are rudimentary.
Shared matches give a guide, but it's so frustrating when people have no trees and you have to work through shared match after shared match to try to find the common theme. Only to discover that their research hasn't hopped back across the pond.
I've had my results for a few weeks but haven't managed to find a way to sort/manage them in a productive way yet!
Sue from Southend
19-09-18, 17:22
Thanks for that Jay! You've filled me with confidence:d
As much as I hope that I'll break down some brick walls I have a sneaking suspicion that all my matches will be with all the dodgy trees that I already know exist on Ancestry!
Having waded through a tree largely consisting of Woden, Queen Guin, and people born in 10AD, I could wish that people would park their fantasies elsewhere. But we have broken down two critical brickwalls in my friend's tree. We sort of knew who the people were, but didn't dare test the theory. Now we know we are right!
kiterunner
20-09-18, 15:40
I have just found out I'm in a "DNA Circle":
DNA evidence shows you’re likely a descendant of Margaret Foster because you are part of her DNA Circle, which includes 5 of her probable descendants.
Who is in a DNA Circle?
Circle members share DNA with other members of the circle.
Circle members all have family tree evidence that they are direct descendants of Margaret Foster.
Your DNA matches some or all members of this DNA Circle.
Not sure why I'm not in DNA Circles for any of my other ancestors yet (I mean the ones where it has come up with DNA matches to other of their descendants), but maybe ancestry takes a long time to figure them out.
Hmm, so although I may be able to work out a common ancestor by logic, Ancestry demands a tree. And none of the 22k plus and counting people who share scraps of DNA with my mate have put up adequate trees yet. Oh joy.
maggie_4_7
21-09-18, 16:23
I have just found out I'm in a "DNA Circle":
DNA evidence shows you’re likely a descendant of Margaret Foster because you are part of her DNA Circle, which includes 5 of her probable descendants.
Who is in a DNA Circle?
Circle members share DNA with other members of the circle.
Circle members all have family tree evidence that they are direct descendants of Margaret Foster.
Your DNA matches some or all members of this DNA Circle.
Not sure why I'm not in DNA Circles for any of my other ancestors yet (I mean the ones where it has come up with DNA matches to other of their descendants), but maybe ancestry takes a long time to figure them out.
Does that mean that the DNA is confined to a couple of generations and then stops, the DNA strand has been eventually wiped out by the influx of others?
I have no idea what I am talking about :)
kiterunner
21-09-18, 17:30
I don't think that's it, Maggie, but apparently "DNA Circles" is still in beta (really, I feel that the whole of ancestry's website should be classed as beta testing at the moment, though.)
I think there may be a flaw in the logic of this DNA Circles idea though, since surely you could just end up with a group of people who are all related and have all copied their tree from someone who was wrong?
kiterunner
02-10-18, 23:02
Wow, I've just found someone in my list of matches where the shared ancestors are my 9xg-grandparents and his 7xg's. Making us 8th cousins twice removed! I'm impressed by that. Though of course there could be another connection somewhere else that I haven't spotted yet.
vBulletin® v3.8.7 PL3, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.