Search for content in message boards

New Problem: DNA Matches With Large Trees

Replies: 10

New Problem: DNA Matches With Large Trees

Posted: 8 Jan 2013 4:31PM GMT
Classification: Query
Edited: 8 Jan 2013 4:32PM GMT
Not really! We used to complain about tiny trees in this forum, so a few minutes ago, when I got a message from someone chastising me for having too large of a tree, I had to laugh.

This happened over at "another company" after I invited the person to share genomes. Here's one line from his reply that made me smile:

"Your tree is quite large, including siblings and their spouses - making it hard for others to find common ancestors."

This person seems very nice and polite, and they're also experienced with genetic genealogy (!), so I'm just amazed.
He even advised that, in addition to not including siblings, shared trees shouldn't go past the ggg-gp level. (FWIW, he seems to have viewed my tree here on Ancestry, so I can't even blame that other company's horrid GEDcom interface.)

You have to laugh...

The title of this post is meant to be a joke, but it does remind me of how a few people here have complained about huge trees as a likely sign of someone who just copies and pastes everything.

I admit that I've seen a few DNA matches with 40,000-person trees and instantly rolled my eyes. But really, that's unfair of me (at least until I actually spy missing/wonky sources).

After taking the test, I started working harder on adding more cousins, mostly from the past 120 years, and only those which are easy to document. (Ya gotta love the Texas birth and death online databases, esp. the actual images of death certificates - squee! - but I digress.) I've barely touched a smidge of one side of the family and still have added at least 1200 cousins in the past few months. That puts me at nearly 10,000 people, which is more than what 95% of my matches have, I'd say. Maybe people are now rolling their eyes at my number!

Anyway, that's today's PSA: "Don't hate on the huge trees!" :)
SubjectAuthorDate Posted
Shari S. 8 Jan 2013 11:31PM GMT 
jbarry6899 9 Jan 2013 1:36AM GMT 
chi1k 9 Jan 2013 1:27PM GMT 
SerenoaBarb 9 Jan 2013 3:09PM GMT 
smsitton 9 Jan 2013 3:32PM GMT 
sherburl 9 Jan 2013 3:55PM GMT 
Smilebird 9 Jan 2013 6:01PM GMT 
jbarry6899 9 Jan 2013 8:25PM GMT 
karenmartin74... 9 Jan 2013 8:45PM GMT 
MJ782 10 Jan 2013 5:27AM GMT 
per page

Find a board about a specific topic

  • Visit our other sites:

© 1997-2014 Ancestry.com | Corporate Information | New Privacy | New Terms and Conditions