Why not?

[rmstevens2]

I hope the subject of this thread is not offensive. If for some reason it is, dear mods or admins, please delete it. I certainly don't mean it to be offensive.

I understand that every member here has the right to keep secret whatever he or she wants to keep secret. Got that. But what I am wondering is why many members don't list their Y-DNA and/or mtDNA haplogroups in their profile, so that the information shows up on the left side of the screen, underneath their screen name. 

What advantage to hackers, pirates, etc., can come from learning your Y-DNA and/or mtDNA haplogroup?

Let me know. If what you say sounds dangerous enough, I will delete that information from my own profile.

I like listing my info there, I guess because I am pleased with it and don't mind displaying it. That doesn't mean I think it's any better than anyone else's, just that I am happy about it and like for others to see it.

[AimSmall]

Posting Freak... never seen that designation.

I like it!

I'll have to go see what all designations exist in the forum.

[rmstevens2]

Posting Freak... never seen that designation.

I like it!

I'll have to go see what all designations exist in the forum.

I saw that. I guess if the shoe fits . . .

BTW, I really like this forum, so being a "Posting Freak" here is cool.

[AimSmall]

Ok... went and looked.

Here are the current Group settings...

Newbie	0
Junior Member	1
Member	2
Senior Member	250
Posting Freak	750

We might have to consider some additional levels...  seems very weighted to the newcomers.

[Cejo]

But what I am wondering is why many members don't list their Y-DNA and/or mtDNA haplogroups in their profile, so that the information shows up on the left side of the screen, underneath their screen name.

For me, it was simply a matter of not knowing where the option was, and not being interested enough to find it. This thread prompted me to do so. (User CP > Edit Profile, which in retrospect seems pretty obvious)

[rmstevens2]

But what I am wondering is why many members don't list their Y-DNA and/or mtDNA haplogroups in their profile, so that the information shows up on the left side of the screen, underneath their screen name.

For me, it was simply a matter of not knowing where the option was, and not being interested enough to find it. This thread prompted me to do so. (User CP > Edit Profile, which in retrospect seems pretty obvious)

Great! Like what you have!

At least one of the lines in my pedigree is M222.

[Kale]

I don't think I find myself in a whole lot of debates on haplogroups with a TRMCA less than say 10kbp, so it's not of huge interest to me in the first place (plus it's a pretty common one, R-L2), but also if it's not listed, people are less likely to (wrongly) accuse bias in favor of said haplogroup and derail a discussion.

[Capsian20]

I hope the subject of this thread is not offensive. If for some reason it is, dear mods or admins, please delete it. I certainly don't mean it to be offensive.

I understand that every member here has the right to keep secret whatever he or she wants to keep secret. Got that. But what I am wondering is why many members don't list their Y-DNA and/or mtDNA haplogroups in their profile, so that the information shows up on the left side of the screen, underneath their screen name. 

What advantage to hackers, pirates, etc., can come from learning your Y-DNA and/or mtDNA haplogroup?

Let me know. If what you say sounds dangerous enough, I will delete that information from my own profile.

I like listing my info there, I guess because I am pleased with it and don't mind displaying it. That doesn't mean I think it's any better than anyone else's, just that I am happy about it and like for others to see it.

Maybe are cares about autosomal more than Y-DNA and mtDNA , although i believe mtDNA and YDNA and autosomal all are important

[Jalisciense]

In my case because Idk my mtDNA haplogroup (Or my father's) xd

[rmstevens2]

I don't think I find myself in a whole lot of debates on haplogroups with a TRMCA less than say 10kbp, so it's not of huge interest to me in the first place (plus it's a pretty common one, R-L2), but also if it's not listed, people are less likely to (wrongly) accuse bias in favor of said haplogroup and derail a discussion.

Aha! Now at long last you have revealed it! ;-)

I think the suspicion of bias is always a given in these debates, whether one reveals his own Y-DNA and mtDNA haplogroups or not. Every male knows that every other male has them, whether they're kept secret or not.

[Jalisciense]

Ok... went and looked.

Here are the current Group settings...

Newbie	0
Junior Member	1
Member	2
Senior Member	250
Posting Freak	750

We might have to consider some additional levels...  seems very weighted to the newcomers.

Now I don't want to reach the 750 posts lmao

[Rober_tce]

In my case I give less importancy to my haplogroups because are more common between iberian population, but I will may write it in my profile

[JonikW]

I too like it when members disclose their haplogroups because it’s useful to see where people are coming from when they argue for things.

On the subject of the posting designations, I’m not keen on the current set-up. “Posting freak” might make sense for someone who reaches that level in a week but it would be nonsense in the case of someone else who reaches the 750 posts over 10 years. 

Likewise, someone could reach “senior member” level by posting 250 pieces of pointless guff over a short period of time, while others among the best quality posters here might only share a pearl of wisdom once every few months.

I don’t see a need for different categories at all given that we can all see other members’ joining dates and judge them by the quality of their posts. I’m an egalitarian at heart, and for me “member” would work for everyone across the board.

[Albruic]

I too like it when members disclose their haplogroups because it’s useful to see where people are coming from when they argue for things.

On the subject of the posting designations, I’m not keen on the current set-up. “Posting freak” might make sense for someone who reaches that level in a week but it would be nonsense in the case of someone else who reaches the 750 posts over 10 years. 

Likewise, someone could reach “senior member” level by posting 250 pieces of pointless guff over a short period of time, while others among the best quality posters here might only share a pearl of wisdom once every few months.

I don’t see a need for different categories at all given that we can all see other members’ joining dates and judge them by the quality of their posts. I’m an egalitarian at heart, and for me “member” would work for everyone across the board.

It is actually impressive. I thought it would take years before someone reached "Posting Freak," which was originally "Posting God" at 600 posts, but I changed the name and the number. We can also make personalized designations, so you can remain as a "Member" forever if you want to, we can explore that in many ways.
Mine is unique, though. :-)

[Cejo]

I too like it when members disclose their haplogroups because it’s useful to see where people are coming from when they argue for things.

On the subject of the posting designations, I’m not keen on the current set-up. “Posting freak” might make sense for someone who reaches that level in a week but it would be nonsense in the case of someone else who reaches the 750 posts over 10 years. 

Likewise, someone could reach “senior member” level by posting 250 pieces of pointless guff over a short period of time, while others among the best quality posters here might only share a pearl of wisdom once every few months.

I don’t see a need for different categories at all given that we can all see other members’ joining dates and judge them by the quality of their posts. I’m an egalitarian at heart, and for me “member” would work for everyone across the board.

A measure of "quality" might consist of the ratio of likes to posts. This would add an interesting perspective vs. sheer number of posts, though it would not be egalitarian, and I'm kind of into that, too. Also not sure if that would even be easy to implement.