AncestryDNA News: You Can Now Opt Out of Matches

AncestryDNA News: You Can Now Opt Out of Matches

Ancestry announced they will now allow you to opt out of viewing and being viewed by your DNA matches. We've got the details on what that means for you.

AncestryDNA announced yesterday that they will now be giving members the ability to choose of whether or not to view and be viewed by their DNA matches. So what exactly does this mean for you?

AncestryDNA Ancestry DNA Opt Out Matches

In a blog posted yesterday by Ancestry.com, the company made the announcement that while they consider the ability to find possible DNA matches to be one of their most beneficial services, they  respect the critical importance of privacy and the ability for members to control their own data. While many of their 6 million members love having discovering possible DNA matches and family members, this ability makes controlling your own data incredibly simple. By accessing your DNA Settings page and adjusting your DNA Match List setting to ‘no’, you can ensure that no one will see you in their list of possible matches. If existing members wish to continue seeing their matches, and continue having their information shared on match lists, you need to make no changes, as the automatic setting on your account will be ‘yes’.

If you find value in the DNA Match Lists that Ancestry provides, fear not. This move towards additional privacy options in no way means that the company is moving away from helping people find possible family members, as they noted in the closing of their blog:

“We have heard from many of our customers that they quickly find one of the best ongoing benefits of our service is the opportunity to discover new family connections and seeing how connected you are to others around the world.  We will continue to invest in this capability and emphasize it as a reason to use our service. As the largest consumer DNA database, by far – close to three times the size of the next largest – we want to always provide the best opportunity to find new potential family members.”

If you’d like to read the full blog on the topic, it’s located here.

Related Products

4 Comments

Leave a Reply

ALL COMMENTS

  1. Question: Why is it never mentioned that a person has more than one grandfather in their genealogical history? For example, a person may learn that their grandfather was John Jones. But everyone has two grandfathers – one on their mother’s side and one on their father’s side. Yet, only one is usually mentioned.
    Each previous generation adds 2 more grandfathers. Thus, everyone has two grandfathers and four great-grandfathers. Extending this sequence: Each person has two grandfathers, four great-grandfathers, eight great-great-grandfathers, sixteen great-great-great-grandfathers, thirty-two great-great-great-great-grandfathers and so on.
    It makes little sense to claim importance for a person’s 6th great grandfather, since they have sixty-four of them! When someone says “My 6 th great grandfather fought at Gettysburg,” you should reply, “Which one? You have 64 of them.”

    • Don,

      I’m not sure who you’re following to get that impression. I have never come across anyone who only acknowledged one grandfather in their genealogical research. There are times when a person may only be speaking of one out of x number (depending on the generation), but I don’t think those people are implying that this is their ONLY grandfather.

      Also, your math is incorrect. You stated “Each previous generation adds 2 more grandfathers.” This is inaccurate; each generation you go further back, the number of grandparents doubles, not adds 2.

      You also said, “…a person’s 6th great grandfather, since they have sixty-four of them…” Actially, for 6th great-grandPARENTS, a person would have 256; however, if we are just speaking of 6th great-grandFATHERS, an individual has 128 of those.

  2. They do not mention that everyone has two grandfathers because everyone knows it. If someone says, I broke my finger, you do not exclaim: “It makes little sense to claim importance for a person’s [finger] since they have ten of them”. So, officiously replying” Which one? You have [10] of them. ” is hardly impressing anyone with such obvious knowledge.