New Filter for Family Finder

[Peter MacDonald]

Hello,

I was wondering if it would be possible in some point in the future to provide a Family Finder filter that will only pull-up matches that have downloaded a Gedcom?

I believe that such a filter would be a great incentive for Family Finder participants to download their ancestral Gedcoms.


Peter

[1798]

Hello,

I was wondering if it would be possible in some point in the future to provide a Family Finder filter that will only pull-up matches that have downloaded a Gedcom?

I believe that such a filter would be a great incentive for Family Finder participants to download their ancestral Gedcoms.


Peter

Some people got dna tested for different reasons and if they didn't enter their family names they have their reasons and you should respect that.You are trying to force them.You are unbelievable!!!!

[Thinus]

Hello,

I was wondering if it would be possible in some point in the future to provide a Family Finder filter that will only pull-up matches that have downloaded a Gedcom?

I believe that such a filter would be a great incentive for Family Finder participants to download their ancestral Gedcoms.


Peter

Great idea Peter

[AngeliaR]

Inclusion - Exclusion

If there was a filter that pulled up only those who loaded trees, it would be easier to work unknown lineages.

However, it would also NOT include people in the report who simply do not know their heritage and surnames.

I don't see that as "forcing" people to input data they don't want to share or can't. If they have tested for a reason other than sharing genealogical information, that's ok too. But, why should it be acceptable for that preference to impact someone else's experience who DOES want to work their tree?

[WCoaster]

I agree, Angelia. Some people don't yet have information to share (adoptees and those whose parents couldn't or wouldn't tell them much), and others have personal reasons for not posting a tree. They might still be interested in discovering connections through triangulation, or in some cases might be willing to share some information with some of their matches. I'll take whatever I can get! And I'd rather my matches be honest and objective than that they feel pressured to produce a bogus gedcom or surname list on demand.

If we treat one another with consideration and respect, maybe more people would be willing to test - and share their data.

[Peter MacDonald]

Some people got dna tested for different reasons and if they didn't enter their family names they have their reasons and you should respect that.You are trying to force them.You are unbelievable!!!!

1798 (?) sorry as I couldn't find another name to refer to you,

I am unbelievable I guess. I fully understand that people do DNA Testing for a vast array of reasons, which I fully respect.

The reason that I have done DNA testing is to learn of my genetic ancestry and to connect to those that I share a connection with. I would hope that others would be respectful of my desire to connect with individuals with interests similar to my own. A filter that shows only those individuals who have posted a GEDCOM of their pedigree (which in my opinion is an indication that they wish to interact with others that they matched with) would save people time who wish to connect with matches (who hold similar interests).

As well, it would save people from receiving unwanted emails.

1798, in conclusion I am unbelievable…….UNBELIEVABLE at coming up with great ideas Thank you for the complement, it is greatly appreciated.

[Peter MacDonald]

If there was a filter that pulled up only those who loaded trees, it would be easier to work unknown lineages.

However, it would also NOT include people in the report who simply do not know their heritage and surnames.

I don't see that as "forcing" people to input data they don't want to share or can't. If they have tested for a reason other than sharing genealogical information, that's ok too. But, why should it be acceptable for that preference to impact someone else's experience who DOES want to work their tree?

Regardless of what anyone knows about their surnames or Heritage they can still post a GEDCOM. It would be rather easy as the Tester would be named private and the mother and father could be simply listed as "Unknown" for First and Surname.

I would be more than happy to assist any matches to the best of my ability as this indicates that the individual is looking to connect and share.

I have to admit that I have not been 100% focused on Family Finder Results as of yet do to other commitments. This said I have been able to verify a number of my family branches through the test which is fantastic. I sure that once I focus more specifically on my Family Finder results many connections will be made and information shared.

[JohnG]

I notice that some of my matches go through the same stages I did. Send in the sample, get results, then put in the gedcom. That means when we first match someone we are treeless. I guess we could be nudged to post that tree while we are waiting, but in addition to new matches it would be great to have a filter -'new gedcoms or surnames added'.

I do write a lot of folks who have no tree and the ones who answer fall into two categories. "I don't have a tree" and "I have a tremendous tree and it is posted elsewhere."

Of the ones who do not answer, probably 10-25% have trees that can be found on the web, some in multiple contradictory versions, which is probably why they did not post them. Others have very helpful trees and postings.

[WCoaster]

Sorry...think I misunderstood.

I apologize for not reading Angelia's post more carefully. I think I misunderstood what she was saying. I wouldn't want to see anyone "filtered out" because of missing or minimal data.

[Inge]

A filter that shows only those individuals who have posted a GEDCOM of their pedigree (which in my opinion is an indication that they wish to interact with others that they matched with) would save people time who wish to connect with matches (who hold similar interests).

I react exactly opposite to the Gedcom question. I take it that people who upload Gedcoms want to exchange data without personal interaction. In most cases I do not contact people who have Gedcoms and I generally don´t need to as I already have their information. I will share my own tree with people who respond to emails or who contact me. I also leave a message in the "about me" field.

I think there should be a box that one ticks to let matches know if one wishes to communicate or be left alone.

[ajmr1a1]

Surname list

I wish FTDNA would make it easier to post surname lists for those of us who manage multiple kits.

I can download the surname list to a csv or excel file, however, I can't simply upload the same surname list to another member's kit. (who shares all the same surnames)

Currently, I would have to do this one surname at a time for 25+ surnames x 6 kits. Way too tedious.

[Peter MacDonald]

I react exactly opposite to the Gedcom question. I take it that people who upload Gedcoms want to exchange data without personal interaction. In most cases I do not contact people who have Gedcoms and I generally don´t need to as I already have their information. I will share my own tree with people who respond to emails or who contact me. I also leave a message in the "about me" field.

I think there should be a box that one ticks to let matches know if one wishes to communicate or be left alone.

Inge,

Good idea.

[madman]

The lastname / surname lists gets posted automatically if you upload a family tree.

I wish FTDNA would make it easier to post surname lists for those of us who manage multiple kits.

I can download the surname list to a csv or excel file, however, I can't simply upload the same surname list to another member's kit. (who shares all the same surnames)

Currently, I would have to do this one surname at a time for 25+ surnames x 6 kits. Way too tedious.

[royfarnol]

I've already pointed out the problems and dangers of gedcoms so to force people to supply one is plain ridiculous.

You could be forcing folk to produce one which would be even more suspect. You could even force people to make up one completely just to abide by the rules and get what they are after.

I refuse to supply any gedcom until such time as my DNA results have backed it up. That will take time.

There are some people who will never be able to supply a gedcom because they simply do not have the information and may never get it.

There are people who do not want to supply a gedcom for a myriad of reasons.

Was it Vladimir Putin who brought this up?

[John McCoy]

No, it was not.

GEDCOM files are by far the simplest, most direct way to communicate what we think we know about our ancestry to our potential matches. When I sort through my (almost all of them distant) matches, it's the ones with GEDCOM files that attract my attention, because (if the web site is working correctly, and the places and dates are showing as they should), I can quickly see if there is something worth exploring further. Given a potential 4th or 5th cousin match and no ancestral information, I usually won't bother unless there is some other factor involved. For those very rare second cousins or better, the GEDCOM is wonderful, but if there is any clue at all, I'll contact them right away in any case.

Collaboration works best when we are forthcoming.