CarolB08
LostCousins Member
Thats spooky Rhian because I had an email today to say that mine was just started to be tested. We will see how long that will take
-
Only registered members can see all the forums - if you've received an invitation to join (it'll be on your My Summary page) please register NOW!
-
It's easier than ever before to check your entries from the 1881 Census - more details here
Just ordered my DNA test kit
- Thread starter CarolB08
- Start date
That really only applies to members who have entered a relatively small number of relatives. The higher your Match Potential the more accurate it is likely to be.
For example, someone with a Match Potential of 1 (the current minimum requirement for membership of this forum) will have found 1 new relative on average, but the actual number found could be anywhere between 0 and perhaps 3 or 4 - thus anywhere between 0% and 400% of the average.
But a member with a Match Potential of 10, who an average should have found 1o new relatives will probably have found between 5 and 15, ie somewhere between 50% and 150% of the average.
What happens, in effect, is that by reaching out to more cousins you're increasing the chance that your cousins are 'average'.
CarolB08
LostCousins Member
Rhian, I was wondering if you or your partner read German? I am trying to fill out as much as I can on my Dads tree and I do not have any idea which of the towns written on his DP papers and his entry to the UK papers are his home town. But as I do not read German its a bit tricky
Just got my partners results in, never got an email informing me they had started testing.
Somewhat disappointed with the results, but they were similar to what I expected. Only 43 4th cousins, none closer than 4th, no idea how many matches they claim to have made further away the fist page just allows me to load a send page but no idea how many pages there are. Ethnicity results are the expected rubbish, 39% British (more than I apparently am with 500 years of recorded British ancestors plus one Dane) this is for someone born in Nederland with two grandparents Germanic, one line from Ostpreußen where they all lived for at least 250 years, the country where they lived is now in what Ancestry term East Europe but they do not list the country, the other grandparent was from Preußen, in what is now Germany. Fom the two Nederland grandparents there are at least 3 lines of Germanic descent. The timeline view shows nothing East of Germany.
As for matches I will go through Peters masterclass expecting nothing, I may be happily surprised. I did see a name near the top of the list, same family name as paternal grandmother which might be worth looking at. At least he has a tree, all 21 people, though I cannot see their pedigree or Surnames, in fact the only thing I can do from there is buy a subscription, which will never happen. Other results are inline with expectations 30 people with no trees on the first page, 10 not logged in for over a year, average size of linked trees from the others is less than 200.
I am now going to spend the day starting Peters class, unless it all gets to depressing.
Somewhat disappointed with the results, but they were similar to what I expected. Only 43 4th cousins, none closer than 4th, no idea how many matches they claim to have made further away the fist page just allows me to load a send page but no idea how many pages there are. Ethnicity results are the expected rubbish, 39% British (more than I apparently am with 500 years of recorded British ancestors plus one Dane) this is for someone born in Nederland with two grandparents Germanic, one line from Ostpreußen where they all lived for at least 250 years, the country where they lived is now in what Ancestry term East Europe but they do not list the country, the other grandparent was from Preußen, in what is now Germany. Fom the two Nederland grandparents there are at least 3 lines of Germanic descent. The timeline view shows nothing East of Germany.
As for matches I will go through Peters masterclass expecting nothing, I may be happily surprised. I did see a name near the top of the list, same family name as paternal grandmother which might be worth looking at. At least he has a tree, all 21 people, though I cannot see their pedigree or Surnames, in fact the only thing I can do from there is buy a subscription, which will never happen. Other results are inline with expectations 30 people with no trees on the first page, 10 not logged in for over a year, average size of linked trees from the others is less than 200.
I am now going to spend the day starting Peters class, unless it all gets to depressing.
jorghes
LostCousins Superstar
Give it time Rhian - the results will keep updating and thus will change. The first day or two won’t have the full results. And at some point they’ll update the results to the more accurate version (who knows how long that will take).
I’ll cross my fingers that you get a few shared ancestor hints, as they’re fun.
I’ll cross my fingers that you get a few shared ancestor hints, as they’re fun.
While waiting for Ancestry to get their act together I Uploaded the data to some other sites. Gedmatch seems to have broken itself trying to comply with GDPR laws, several thousand matches but gedcom checks seem to be a problem. Someone suggested MyHeritage were better for ethnicity and relationship calculations, ethnicity was worse than Ancestry 70% British 20% North African no Germany or East Europe but they did give 1900 matches in 10 minutes, including a first cousin, who is not known, so obviously a second or third cousin at least. FTDNA cannot read the data from Ancestry so nothing to see there.
I did contact the Ancestry 4th cousin that shows as a match, even though he does not show in a search of matches. Turns out he is in fact a granduncle that I had lost track of when he emigrated in 1960. Still cannot get further with Peters masterclass as search results show nothing. I though I had read that I should be able to see the names in trees of DNA matches, but I cannot see anything other than a subscribe page.
I did contact the Ancestry 4th cousin that shows as a match, even though he does not show in a search of matches. Turns out he is in fact a granduncle that I had lost track of when he emigrated in 1960. Still cannot get further with Peters masterclass as search results show nothing. I though I had read that I should be able to see the names in trees of DNA matches, but I cannot see anything other than a subscribe page.
GEDCOMs at GEDmatch have always been pretty useless - I've never found anything useful in one. I've removed mine.
You say the search results show nothing. Do you mean that you don't get any search results? If you do get search results then everything's working fine.
Bear in mind that unless you have an Ancestry subscription you won't be able to see anyone else's tree without their permission - in effect they're all private. If you try to look at a public tree (but haven't been invited to view it by the owner) then you will be asked to subscribe.
I do not get any search results, just 'no results found.' This applies with any search name, including ones I know exist as I am in contact with the tree owner.
I seem to recall someone saying that you could see a list of names for public trees if they were a DNA match, otherwise it just makes testing a useless waste of money.
I seem to recall someone saying that you could see a list of names for public trees if they were a DNA match, otherwise it just makes testing a useless waste of money.
I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't work. I've just logged into the account I use for my mother-in-law's DNA results - like you she doesn't have an Ancestry subscription. If I search for one of the surnames in her tree I get 113 results, if I search for another surname I get 103 results.
No, you can't see the names, but it doesn't make testing a waste of money - you're in the same position as if your cousin had a private tree, ie you have to correspond with them. Is that so bad?
I do get swamped with 'hints' that are pointless, either obviously the wrong person or I have already got the fact and source, I still get 'no results found' searching for any name which seems to imply nobody has a public tree, or indeed any tree, which causes to masterclass to fail at the first step.
Corresponding with potential cousins is no problem, provided they answer, and that is the big problem. Maybe not knowing a common name makes them reluctant to reply but from experience of sending 10 to 20 requests to potential cousins every week I get maybe one reply a week, sometimes one a month. Each mail I send does include copies of some of my research around potential matches with links to sources so it is not just a vague 'are we related?' mail.
To be honest I am so disappointed with the way genealogy is developing I am thinking of abandoning 40 years of research and filling my day with something more challenging and interesting.
Corresponding with potential cousins is no problem, provided they answer, and that is the big problem. Maybe not knowing a common name makes them reluctant to reply but from experience of sending 10 to 20 requests to potential cousins every week I get maybe one reply a week, sometimes one a month. Each mail I send does include copies of some of my research around potential matches with links to sources so it is not just a vague 'are we related?' mail.
To be honest I am so disappointed with the way genealogy is developing I am thinking of abandoning 40 years of research and filling my day with something more challenging and interesting.
It's impossible that not one of your thousands of DNA cousins has a tree. but in any case you can see who has a tree and who doesn't, and how many people there are in their tree.
Since nobody else has reported this problem - even though my Masterclass was first published last year - I can only hazard a guess, but I wonder whether you're using incorrect parameters when searching?
For example, you can't use wildcards, and when you enter a birthplace you need to select it from the list that appears as you type. Generally I omit birthplaces as most people don't have them in their tree for every relative. Try a search for 'smith' - that should produce a fair number of results.
Also, I notice you talk about searching by name - remember it's a surname search.
If you haven't identified any common surnames or common birthplaces in their tree it's certainly far less likely that they'll respond.
But in general most of the people with Ancestry trees who don't respond probably haven't seen the email from Ancestry - I aim to follow-up a couple of weeks later with a copy of the original email. Even LostCousins members don't always respond immediately (most frequently those with Hotmail addresses). Those who don't have trees rarely respond even if they get the email, but then those cousins won't pop up anyway when you use the strategies in the Masterclass.
Most people who test but don't have an Ancestry subscription have a cousin who does - you can always appoint them as a Manager of your tree.
CarolB08
LostCousins Member
Finally after months of agonising and changing my mind, thanks to Peters latest newsletter and the Royal Wedding I have ordered a DNA test kit from Ancestry
Last night in my Brothers words "I nagged him into buying a DNA test kit" so now I will wait with baited breath and great interest to see how our results differ or agree with each other
Just after my last post my satellite internet got hit by a meteor so I could not reply to anything.
When searching for matches I have tried using the name of one of the matches given, just the surname and no place, I got no hits at all, I have tried dozens of potential surnames, and even Smith, with no results. Today I tried again and there is even less life, there is no search carried out and no message of nothing found, I just stay looking at the search form.
When I contact potential cousins, found other ways than Ancestry, they get fully sourced mini trees of the possible relationship paths, not only names and places but other sourced facts and 95% do not bother to reply, even after years, though I do occasionally see people posting the data online as if it was their research.
When searching for matches I have tried using the name of one of the matches given, just the surname and no place, I got no hits at all, I have tried dozens of potential surnames, and even Smith, with no results. Today I tried again and there is even less life, there is no search carried out and no message of nothing found, I just stay looking at the search form.
When I contact potential cousins, found other ways than Ancestry, they get fully sourced mini trees of the possible relationship paths, not only names and places but other sourced facts and 95% do not bother to reply, even after years, though I do occasionally see people posting the data online as if it was their research.
The Surname search works fine for me when I'm using Opera. But when I used Chrome just now the message "Feature unavailable" was displayed - so, of course, nothing happened. You don't mention the "Feature unavailable" message, but I suspect it's there somewhere.
Use a different browser (or clear the data from your existing browser) and I suspect all your problems will go away.
I don't send information like that until I've had a response - it's not necessary and, as you've found, it often leads to disappointment.
CarolB08
LostCousins Member
Well last Friday my Brother's results came in, I was very interested to see how our ethnicity results differ but are also so similar;
I am 59% Europe East he is 69%
I am 19% Ireland Scotland and Wales he is 11%
I am 10% Europe West he is 22%
I am 6% Scandinavian he is 1%
We share 2,800 cms across 71 dna segments and have made contact with a possible second cousin who has to be on my Mum's side and a more distant cousin who has to be on my Dad's side.
I am 59% Europe East he is 69%
I am 19% Ireland Scotland and Wales he is 11%
I am 10% Europe West he is 22%
I am 6% Scandinavian he is 1%
We share 2,800 cms across 71 dna segments and have made contact with a possible second cousin who has to be on my Mum's side and a more distant cousin who has to be on my Dad's side.
jorghes
LostCousins Superstar
I have similar differences with both my brothers when it comes to Ancestry's percentages.
Good luck on the new DNA links and any possible hints to further discoveries!
In case anyone unfamiliar with DNA is wondering how two people who are descended from precisely the same ancestors can - apparently - have different ethnic backgrounds, it's a result of the way in which our parents mix our grandparents' DNA before passing it on to us. Whilst we inherit 50% of our autosomal DNA from each of our parents, and they got 50% from each of their parents, this doesn't mean that 25% of our DNA came from each of our grandparents.
canadianbeth
LostCousins Star
I finally "bit the bullet" and ordered one too. It is on the way.