2004 Jul 14: by at least this date, FTDNA was offering 37-marker Y-DNA STR tests.
2006 Mar 20: by at least this date, FTDNA was offering 67-marker Y-DNA STR tests.
2008 Dec: because the FTDNA ROSE project web site was not displaying results online — either publicly or to its members — and because the RFA Rose Family Bulletin was still printing charts with only 25 markers (see Dec 2008 issue), Diana Gale MATTHIESEN — another descendant of John ROSE and 2C1R of Seymour ROSE — created the "Open Rose DNA" pages on her genealogy web site to display her own ROSE family DNA data and that of anyone else who wanted their data made public. I might add that, because I was putting the results online, Christine ROSE cancelled my membership in the RFA and ended my subscription to the Bulletin. I had to depend on other project members to send me copies of the Bulletin, so I could update the web site, which they did.
2009 Apr: the Rose Family Bulletin (see Apr 2009 issue) increased the number of markers reported in their charts from 25 to 37.
2011 Apr 10: by at least this date, FTDNA was offering 111-marker Y-DNA STR tests.
2011 Nov 11: David W. BROWN passed away. Some time during the next six months, FTDNA and the RFA parted company.
I was not privy to the goings on between FTDNA, the RFA, and the ROSE Project administrators. I was involved to the extent that I was one of the people objecting to the fact that test results were not on public display. You had to pay for a subscription to the Rose Family Bulletin (i.e., you had to join the RFA) to receive test results, despite the fact that it is against FTDNA policy for project administrators to charge members for their services. Because the Bulletin had to be printed in hard copy, there was often a long delay between the time results returned and their appearance in the newsletter. In the RFA's version of what happened, the difficult part to understand is the issue being made over display of "the charts" (project test results). Allowing public display of project test results on the FTDNA-provided web site (this one) amounts to clicking a single checkbox — the server compiles the results table from the database automatically. Yes, project members must be grouped manually, which is a significant undertaking in a project this large, but researchers would have welcomed — and I believe had a right to — public display of results, whether or not they had been subgrouped. If what the RFA meant was making digital images of "the charts" from the Bulletin and getting them online, then, yes, that would have taken some time and effort, but it wasn't necessary to do it that way, nor would it have been desirable because their 8½" x 11" format didn't have room for 67 markers, much less 111.
I might also mention, here, that I have never disputed that Christine ROSE and the RFA opened the FTDNA ROSE DNA Project, nor have I ever been aware that anyone else has disputed it. Nor have I ever disputed or known anyone else to dispute that the major reason for the immediate and ample success of the project was due to the RFA tapping its huge membership base for testing. In my opinion, however, I do believe the RFA appeared (and still appears) to have an undue sense of "ownership" of the project, its data, and its members, as if proof of having opened it was all the evidence needed to prove they had a right to own it — and profit from it.
2012 May 7: the project came under the management of Marcia BROWN and Nora PROBASCO; the new administrators displayed and grouped test results on the project's FTDNA web site. Diana Gale MATTHIESEN ceased updating her "Open Rose DNA" web site.
2015 Jul 31: Marcia BROWN left as administrator; Nora PROBASCO remained as the sole administrator.
2017 Feb 21: Nora PROBASCO resigned due to health concerns and invited Diana Gale MATTHIESEN to become project admin; she accepted.
2017 Mar 2: the format of the FTDNA web site was updated to the newer, more graphical "groups" interface, which includes an "Activity Feed" allowing "semi-private" communication between project members.
2017 Mar 3: the "Open Rose DNA" web pages now have a dedicated web site with its own domain, Open-Rose-DNA.info. Both project web sites — the web site here at FTDNA and the one on Open-Rose-DNA.info — will remain open and be updated. The OpenRose web site will be used to augment the FTDNA web site, not replace it.