Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Group Administrator Guidelines for FTDNA Projects

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by Jim Barrett View Post
    To me, this says, "You always represent Family Tree DNA as the testing company of choice even when you don't think so." In other words, LIE! You aren't even given the choice of not replying.

    Another Jim
    I must say I agree with both Jims here. Janine's first post was not reassuring to me. Janine has personally been great helping with the current GAP and website crisis but not sure there is real understanding that for some of us "represent Family Tree DNA as the testing company of choice even when you don't think so" would not be an option.

    Maybe it is the Baby Boomer in me,which does not allow "Even when you don't think so", dunno, but I am really trying to figure out how best to let go some of my groups.
    It is a lot of work and now it seems unappreciated.8 years later that seems kind of sad,because if I did not have loyalty to FTDNA many of these 400 people would not be part of my groups or maybe even part of FTDNA. I recruited and facilitated terms for many of them to test.
    Maybe I am misunderstanding what is being said, I hope so..
    Last edited by Kathleen Carrow; 19 March 2014, 08:05 AM. Reason: had more to say

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Kathleen Carrow View Post
      Maybe it is the Baby Boomer in me,which does not allow "Even when you don't think so", dunno, but I am really trying to figure out how best to let go some of my groups.
      Kathleen,

      I've been using FTDNA since 2002. If I didn't like them I wouldn't still be around. But if there is a case where I feel another company is a better choice for a person I will tell them that is what I think.

      I just checked the link for the "new" guidelines and the statement I referred to appears to be gone. I hope so!

      Comment


      • #93
        Say What?

        I just found another statement I find very amusing.

        Ideally, let members know that their questions will be answered within X number of days. This will help set expectations and avoid disappointment.
        I guess this is a "Do as I say, not as I do."

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by jrcrin001 View Post
          Rebekah,

          I wrote with slight modifications ...

          Suggestion:
          I would like to see these options on the member's FTDNA personal results page with an option check type box allowing ...

          1) I give my permission to the Group Administrator to use my provided genealogical lineage for comparison purposes.

          2) I will allow upgrades by the Group Administrator, if paid by the project. I understand they will send me an email notification prior to upgrading, in case I change my option before the test is ordered.

          3) I give permission so that my FTDNA DNA results will be posted on the project Non-FTDNA website.

          4) I will allow the Group Administrator to be my beneficiary, IF no other beneficiary is designated or such designated beneficiary declines via email or in writing to FTDNA.

          Clarification;
          This would be on the member's personal results page under myFTDNA - Account Settings - Project Administrator Settings - Choose the amount of access to my settings and information that Project Administrators have. This is in addition to what is there now.

          Add a check type box for the above four items for each project the member joined. See Suggestions above.

          When a member quits a project, the options for that project go away. When a member joins a project, the options appear.

          In this manner, FTDNA members can make an informed choice for themselves regarding the options given to each Group Administrator for each group joined.

          I also suggest that a link be added to go to a FAQ explaining or clarifying these GA options.

          John R. Carpenter
          Carpenter Cousins Project
          http://carpentercousins.com

          Carpenter Cousins Y-DNA Project
          http://www.carpentercousins.com/carpdna.htm

          Carpenter Cousins Y-DNA Project lineage page
          http://www.carpentercousins.com/generallineage.htm

          As well as this reccomendation
          Many years ago, Bennett and Catherine Borges (ISOGG) developed basic ethical Group Administrator guidelines. These have been updated and monitored by ISOGG leadership.

          See:
          http://www.isogg.org/wiki/ISOGG_Proj...tor_Guidelines

          I think tick boxes are absolutely essential and I hope FTDNA implements them soon. I also hope that they make it easy for all existing customers to be messaged easily for their consent or not for same.

          Kelly Wheaton
          Wheaton DNA Project
          Rehoboth, MA DNA Project

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by Jim Barrett View Post
            Kathleen,

            I've been using FTDNA since 2002. If I didn't like them I wouldn't still be around. But if there is a case where I feel another company is a better choice for a person I will tell them that is what I think.

            I just checked the link for the "new" guidelines and the statement I referred to appears to be gone. I hope so!
            Jim
            Thanks for pointing that out to me. I've been using FTDNA since 2005 and I feel the same.
            Kath

            Comment


            • #96
              I think you are right about that statement being removed. However, would like to strongly suggest a "Last Edited" date would be helpful -- looking at it, it seems to indicate that is (still) the version from Jan. 1, 2014.


              Another problem area, that some have mentioned, is, under things you are NOT to do:
              "Use member information or e-mail address to send any correspondence unrelated to the Group Project." -

              any suggestions on how to phrase it so it means what they want to say, but does not technically mean you cannot contact your sibling or cousin [for example] about anything other than the Group Project -- you should be able to talk to folks you know about anything you want to talk to them about. Also, as a regular user, I can contact anyone to say, hey are you my cousin so-and-so, or etc. - seems unfair a Project Adminstrator should lose that ability with regard to anyone who joins (or asks to join?) their project - BUT ....

              Comment


              • #97
                That is because I, as the editor, reverted to the Jan 1 2014 version yesterday morning at the request of Nir. More to come as Bennett, Janine, and Nir work on the issues raised by the community.
                Originally posted by loobster View Post
                I think you are right about that statement being removed. However, would like to strongly suggest a "Last Edited" date would be helpful -- looking at it, it seems to indicate that is (still) the version from Jan. 1, 2014.....

                Comment


                • #98
                  One Last Thought

                  While the review of guidelines is underway one last thought may be useful.

                  It is true that FTDNA must balance business, legal and scientific goals in hosting DNA projects. It is also true that project administrators must balance their roles as loyal customers, family historians and citizen-scientists. Both need the flexibility to achieve their objectives in an environment of collaboration and trust.

                  That's all from me for a while.

                  Jim

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Rebekah Canada View Post
                    That is because I, as the editor, reverted to the Jan 1 2014 version yesterday morning at the request of Nir. More to come as Bennett, Janine, and Nir work on the issues raised by the community.
                    Bennett is always fair, as I am sure Nir and Janine must be also..

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by jbarry6899 View Post
                      While the review of guidelines is underway one last thought may be useful.

                      It is true that FTDNA must balance business, legal and scientific goals in hosting DNA projects. It is also true that project administrators must balance their roles as loyal customers, family historians and citizen-scientists. Both need the flexibility to achieve their objectives in an environment of collaboration and trust.

                      That's all from me for a while.

                      Jim
                      Yes, that's it. What I think happened in the proposed changes is that trust and respect seemed to be replaced with something that almost felt adversarial. Here's hoping that things will get back to normal and meet the needs of all.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Kwheaton View Post
                        Yes, that's it. What I think happened in the proposed changes is that trust and respect seemed to be replaced with something that almost felt adversarial. Here's hoping that things will get back to normal and meet the needs of all.
                        Yes. As I said back toward the beginning of this discussion--If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Since then, we have had multiple fixes proposed, despite little explanation of what is broke. Since one of the Peter Principles is that in any organization paperwork (including regulations) will increase 5% per year even if no business is done, I am sure this endeavor will not go away. Minimal damage might be check boxes as John C proposed, but what to do about the 50-75% of members who wouldn't respond if you told them they won a pot of gold?

                        Comment


                        • GA Guidelines - What GAs do

                          Paul wrote;
                          "... but what to do about the 50-75% of members who wouldn't respond if you told them they won a pot of gold?"

                          GAs who have been around awhile deal with people who join but never respond. We have members who have to be hand held, educated and those who have wrong or warped information. We need learn how to work, educate and inform our members.

                          GAs often step up when no one else was interested to organize confusing information into a rational explanation. GAs lead by example. What we do or not do has an impact.

                          To many GAs, we set aside a few hours a week or so to work on the project. Some GAs with multiple projects or larger projects work many more hours. GAs regulate their time and those wise enough have co-GAs or assistants to share the work load.

                          In any work, there is time to step back and let the next generation of GAs step forward. We need to groom our successors.

                          Hopefully I, and other GAs like me have set up a system that is self sustaining and can run independent of its creator.

                          Having a FTDNA version is a good backup for those with external web pages. Those who rely on just the FTDNA version, consider yourself lucky. GAs asked for FTDNA help and received it for these pages years ago. You are welcome!

                          Finally - You can lead a horse to water, but you can not make it drink. But, prepare the horse to drink by doing the activity that encourages drinking water - then the horse will partake.

                          The key is learning and doing what is needed to get the member to participate. Some take time and such. And some may need someone else to get through to them. Not one technique fits all.

                          Last comments regarding GA Guidelines.

                          Make them GUIDE LINES and not iron fast rules.

                          Use language to encourage, guide and educate.

                          Provide a warning that FTDNA reserves the right to remove GAs who stray from the guidelines.

                          Always remember that ... There is a big difference between volunteer and employee. And a huge difference between consumer/user of services provided and provider of such.

                          Best wishes to all GAs and those writing the GA Guidelines.

                          John R. Carpenter

                          Comment


                          • Data Mining and Screen Scraping

                            FYI, in context of recent discussion of guidelines:

                            https://dna-explained.com/2014/04/06...ight-or-wrong/

                            Jim

                            Comment


                            • Moving Some Posts

                              Hi All,

                              I want all of you to enjoy freedom of speech and talk this out. However, I am going to move all posts after Jim's that are not directly related to FTDNA's GAP Guidelines here:
                              http://forums.familytreedna.com/showthread.php?t=34742

                              Comment


                              • Admin assistance to members

                                Back to the GAP guidelines and our ability to assist project members. I truly do understand the need for security, confidentiality and control measures.

                                However, as admins we still need to be able to do more than direct members back to customer support. It would make the process smoother and less frustrating for everyone if there was a way to select permission levels at the kit/account level, change them at will, and available from the time of account set up.

                                This weekend, and because I was reading the forum and aware of "issues" I kept emails of my familly member's correspondence with me. She had requested my assistance on her behalf with her account. At my request, she also confirmed her current address. These became screenshots that were submitted in order for me to be able to provide the support that was asked for. This is no longer a "what if" theoretical discussion, folks. This is now reality. Documentation of intent and authorization may well be needed going forward.

                                I will keep future emails so I will have documentation on requests, but this isn't an optimal solution because it forces an extra layer of processing that should not be necessary. I can't imagine the impact to larger projects.

                                We (and FTDNA by extension) should be looking for ways to make things easier not more complex even while protecting individual data and interests.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X