GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-11 > 1289248717
From: Jim Bartlett <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] "Relationship Range" Confidence Level
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 15:38:37 -0500
Thanks for your input. After looking at the Trees of many others, I have now built one which includes only my ancestors. My matches can scroll through the index and they should have an exact match on at least one, and they don't have to look at a lot of extraneous folks.
By being persistent, and making my surname list as easy to review as I can, I hanging right now at 2/3 response rate. This includes several folks who don't know their ancestry ( or very little of it) and some who claim to have no ancestors outside of their country (which may be true).
I'm now gearing up for Phase 2: looking for a time/place intersection between my and my FF match ancestral lines, focused on finding some candidate families for my ancestors with no known surname, or no name at all (each of our ancestors came from a man & woman pair), and sooner or later we all run out of ancestral names. Perhaps we can tease another one out with the FF matches.
Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime!
On Nov 8, 2010, at 1:37 PM, William L Harvey <> wrote:
> Harold & Jim,
> Here is a copy of a post I just placed on DNA-Forums. Covers what you
> are interested in, but, as usual for me, more verbose to get the thought
> across :
> As a precursor let me say that I have a strong "Colonial" background on
> my fathers' side. In addition, when I started researching and entering
> my findings on computer I made the decision to include much info on
> siblings of my ancestral lines - such as their spousal names and detail
> about their children. I think both of the above facts have nicely
> enhanced my finding of distantly related folks through the use of
> autosomal DNA.
|Re: [DNA] "Relationship Range" Confidence Level by Jim Bartlett <>|