Communities now split by parent (for those with a subscription)

[Loderingo]

Ancestry now split communities by parent for those who have subscribed.

Some of my communities have changed - all my kits, which correctly had Devon and Cornwall have lost it.  However, some other kits have gained new communities (mine now has New York settlers and another has Tasmania settlers (this seems to come and go).  Also gained a few new sub-communities.

The parental split seems reasonable but there are a few anomalies.

- one kit has Essex as unassigned
-one kit has Mid Wales as both sides but the parent community Wales is paternal only.

[JonikW]

Ancestry now split communities by parent for those who have subscribed.

Some of my communities have changed - all my kits, which correctly had Devon and Cornwall have lost it.  However, some other kits have gained new communities (mine now has New York settlers and another has Tasmania settlers (this seems to come and go).  Also gained a few new sub-communities.

The parental split seems reasonable but there are a few anomalies.

- one kit has Essex as unassigned
-one kit has Mid Wales as both sides but the parent community Wales is paternal only.

Thanks for that. I used to be able to view a very broad personal breakdown by parent (only my Dad has tested but this looked accurate, with Wales in green):



But I hadn't checked back in a while and tonight I see they've put a padlock on that and I'd have to join to see it again:

[JonikW]

Wow, I'm obviously behind on developments. I can't even see shared matches without paying now. That was an essential tool for me. Fortunately, I've had no good new matches at Ancestry in a long time and I've already done all the work possible on my existing ones. 

I wouldn't have bothered testing with Ancestry if this had been the case when I tested, and I won't be recommending Ancestry to anyone again except in the unlikely event they change this. I'd previously thought this was the best of all the tests I've paid for.

I understand the need for profits but depriving existing users of a tool they previously had as part of the package is very poor service from Ancestry as far as I'm concerned.

Amusingly, I see Ancestry won't even let me find out how my Dad is related to me without paying now: "How are you and [Dad's name removed by me here] connected? Find out with match relationship tools." Even I might have been able to work out what's behind the stated 50% relationship for myself.

[rmstevens2]

Guess I need to take some screen shots, because I am thinking of not renewing my Ancestry subscription.

[Jalisciense]

Yes, for us the Mexicans in México happened the same; thb I didn't expect they would do sooner because AncestryDNA just started to send their kits here like 1-2 years ago, not enough time to many of us to buy it (And the majority of people aren't that interested about races/ethnicities and the DNA kits are expensive for the average mexican family, they have another priorities).

Besides we receive bad and very limited matches 'cause not many Mexicans tested with DNA tests here.

So this was a bad move on their part, greed won over them.

[Riverman]

To block shared matches is a no-go and tabou breaking of a tabou. Very bad move. I have a subscription and multiple tests there, but it will diminish the sites attractiveness for many and deter people from buying more there. A nasty move.

[Rufus191]

Ancestry now split communities by parent for those who have subscribed.

Some of my communities have changed - all my kits, which correctly had Devon and Cornwall have lost it.  However, some other kits have gained new communities (mine now has New York settlers and another has Tasmania settlers (this seems to come and go).  Also gained a few new sub-communities.

The parental split seems reasonable but there are a few anomalies.

- one kit has Essex as unassigned
-one kit has Mid Wales as both sides but the parent community Wales is paternal only.

Well, honestly, I am not sure I have a problem with it. Yes we did pay $$ for the test, but I wouldn't say that was an exhorbitant amount and probably only barely covers the cost of the kit, all the computing and lab work involved and the return shipping i.e. from the UK that means shipping to Ireland, then shipping to the US. For a MyHeritage or FamilyTreeDNA kit, you have to pay your own return shipping from the UK, which is about £8 / $10 tracked to the US lab. As a free user, I must have used 100s of hours of their server time going through and sorting matches. And they have introduced very useful new features such as the SideView facility, and also greatly improved on the ethnicity estimations . The DNA only sub seems fairly priced, but if you look around, you should be able to get a good deal on the World sub for a year.

[leonardo]

Wow, I'm obviously behind on developments. I can't even see shared matches without paying now. That was an essential tool for me. Fortunately, I've had no good new matches at Ancestry in a long time and I've already done all the work possible on my existing ones. 

I wouldn't have bothered testing with Ancestry if this had been the case when I tested, and I won't be recommending Ancestry to anyone again except in the unlikely event they change this. I'd previously thought this was the best of all the tests I've paid for.

I understand the need for profits but depriving existing users of a tool they previously had as part of the package is very poor service from Ancestry as far as I'm concerned.

Amusingly, I see Ancestry won't even let me find out how my Dad is related to me without paying now: "How are you and [Dad's name removed by me here] connected? Find out with match relationship tools." Even I might have been able to work out what's behind the stated 50% relationship for myself.

I understand your point, but for me, Ancestry is by far the best tool in my genealogical search and thus the best bang for my buck. This is not only because it has the most matches for me but also because it has the most significant matches, along with some interesting tools. As for trying to milk $ from me, some of the other options out there have done similar things. Take 23AndMe, aside from having my data hacked and they therefore no longer show anything significant for matches, including shared matches and even ancestry composition reports, I get this when I sign in :"Because you were tested on an earlier version of the 23andMe genotyping chip, you do not have current reports and updates: UPGRADE." I have version chip #3 from 2013 so I am not getting much, unless I pay $ and upgrade. FTDNA's Family Finder has almost no significant matches for me. Of the three with whom I have tested, FTDNA has by far the least matches and their tools for autosomal matches aren't very good either. There are other testing sites of course and I don't know what they charge or continue to charge for their services.

[geebee-1015]

I might have a little more confidence in this feature if not for the fact that my daughter inherited not a single one of her mother's four communities.  She also inherited one community that neither parent has -- although this community does show up under the "paternal" tab.

Keep in mind that while my daughter only inherited half of her mother's DNA, this inheritance includes some very long segments -- even some that amount basically to entire chromosomes.  So it's actually somewhat difficult to see why she didn't inherit any of her mother's communities, especially when out of my five she inherited three.

Curiously, the two of my communities that my daughter didn't inherit are not only closely connected to each other, they happen to include the region in which my daughter's maternal grandfather was born, and in which his family lived for generations.  It's actually a community my wife herself should have, but doesn't.

[Mabrams]

I used to have 5 or 6 Communities, all from the eastern US.

But I've lost most of them.  I am down to two, plus one sub community.  Both are maternal.  Somehow no paternal, despite (or maybe because of?)  my paternal side being super Colonial. 

No point in toggling from All to Maternal as they are identical. And the paternal side is a stunning visual whitish blank map.

~~~~

SideView is extremely accurate on phasing my actual matches.  All other implementations are infotainment.

[geebee-1015]

I used to have 5 or 6 Communities, all from the eastern US.

But I've lost most of them.  I am down to two, plus one sub community.  Both are maternal.  Somehow no paternal, despite (or maybe because of?)  my paternal side being super Colonial. 

No point in toggling from All to Maternal as they are identical. And the paternal side is a stunning visual whitish blank map.

~~~~

SideView is extremely accurate on phasing my actual matches.  All other implementations are infotainment.

To be fair, I do have a larger number of more closely related matches on my father's side.  Specifically, I have five first cousins; nine 1st cousins once removed; three half 1st cousins; and one 1st cousin twice removed.  Nearly all of my paternal ancestors back to colonial days were born and raised in Pennsylvania.

My paternal communities include:

1. Early Pennsylvania Settlers - paternal

• Early Settlers of North-Central Pennsylvania
  
• Early Settlers of Western Pennsylvania
  

2. Pennsylvania, Eastern Ohio, Northern West Virginia & Maryland Settlers - paternal

• Bedford, Blair & Huntingdon County Pennsylvania Settlers
  
• Central Pennsylvania Settlers
  
• Northern West Virginia, Southern & Eastern Pennsylvania & Northern Maryland Settlers
  
• Southern Central Pennsylvania Settlers
  

By contrast, my mother's ancestry is basically split in several directions.  Her father's immigrant ancestry has ties to Virginia and Kentucky, as well as having a small Indigenous American component from Virginia or North Carolina.  (Not Cherokee.  Possibly Catawba or Saponi.)

My mother's mother's ancestry consisted primarily of relatively recent immigrants.  By that I mean that three of my grandmother's grandparents were immigrants:  both grandfathers were from Menorca, and one grandmother was from Alsace-Lorraine.  The other grandmother was of colonial-era French, Swiss, and Irish descent.  She also had an Indigenous American ancestor in the form of a woman who was owned by/married to one of the French colonists.  

My maternal communities include:

1. Virginia & Eastern Kentucky Settlers

• Cumberland Valley, Kentucky Settlers
  
• Eastern Kentucky Settlers
  

2. Appalachian Settlers of Kentucky

• Owsley to Knott & Leslie County Settlers
  

3. Western Gulf States Settlers - maternal

• Gulfport, Mississippi to Mobile, Alabama Gulf Coast Settlers
  

The first two connect with my grandfather, while the third connects with my grandmother.

My daughter has both of the communities I have from my father, as well as the community I have from my maternal grandmother.  She does not have either of the communities I inherited from my maternal grandfather, but in their place -- as far as I can determine -- Ancestry has substituted my daughter's Delaware Valley, Chesapeake & Midwest Settlers.  

Looking at the region map, a bit of northern Virginia is include in the Delaware Valley portion, and a bit of northern Kentucky is included in the Midwest portion.  It would be nice if Ancestry provided a list of all matches who also have this ancestry (same for the others, too).

[geebee-1015]

Something I find a bit peculiar is that in talking about "Common communities of your closest matches" Ancestry notes that "You may still be connected to some of these communities, even though we can't tell how."

This may be a reasonable statement in general, but my daughter's closest matches include both of her parents.  It should be obvious -- even to Ancestry -- how a daughter might be connected to her mother's communities!

In fact, logically if a mother is truly connected to a given community or has a given set of relatives, so must her daughter be.  I mean, 100% of my wife's relatives are also my daughter's relatives, as are 100% of mine -- even though she only inherited half of our DNA!

[leonardo]

My communities through my mother are all domestic, i.e., USA, while the 2 for my father come from across the pond. 3 out of 4 of my father's grandparents were immigrants who came to Pittsburgh for work. The 4th came from the farms of Venango County, while my mother's were mostly here, at least in western PA, for a while.

[JonikW]

My communities through my mother are all domestic, i.e., USA, while the 2 for my father come from across the pond. 3 out of 4 of my father's grandparents were immigrants who came to Pittsburgh for work. The 4th came from the farms of Venango County, while my mother's were mostly here, at least in western PA, for a while.

Interesting thing about my uncle's communities that I mentioned once on AG: he moved to Australia as a young man in, I think, the very early '60s, and still lives in Sydney where he now has several grandchildren. Among his communities, Ancestry assigned him New South Wales Settlers, which as far as I can tell must be purely for the benefit of testers in future generations. 

We have no other links with Oz beyond anything else a typical Brit might have, and my dad (his brother) only has English and Welsh regions. That assignment strikes me as a good decision and farsighted of them.

[Nqp15hhu]

Most of my matches including myself lost the Scottish lowlands community, even the ones with high Scottish percentages.

I didn’t gain any new communities from this update.