I have cleaned up my spread sheet, arrived at some unexpected conclusions, and am doing my writeup.
I have some comments on the conversation.
1. You do NOT HAVE to submit Big Y results to Y Full. There is atleast one other service that will extract the SNPs, or you can learn how to do it yourself. Everyone in the AS121210 cluster had issues with YFull. They're in Russia. They provide no details about themselves, no phone number, and no contact address, on their web site. Some of us had concerns about the privacy of data. They seem to do good work, but I don't care for their setup or their attitude. What is more, it is plain wrong to do what the haplogroup I project admins are doing, which is getting people to do Y DNA testing and then telling them they have to pay YFull $49 to get the results!
Project admins ought to be capable of extracting SNPs from BAM files themselves. There are utilities out there for doing that.
Most people doing this work are going to belong to large R1b clades or large I1a clades, not brand new and tiny new branches of haplogroup I1 where little work has been done, like AS121210 - but we've begun to make the effort. We can atleast see who shares what, and what we DON'T share, and then argue about how old that is. It can certainly provide useful information about the relative time when branches branched off. Unfortunately the first line to split off was probably the Jewish family, and we won't be able to get them to do a Big Y.
2. Someone asked about what kind of DNA testing she would use to get results. I'm not sure what results she wants and that would determine what testing she would use.
Mitochondrial DNA won't usually identify recent relatives because it changes over time periods of thousands and not hundreds of years. It can sometimes usefully rule people in and out as relatives or ancestors.
For recent relatives, 3rd cousins or closer, who are not of your paternal line, usually one does autosomal DNA. Autosomal DNA can identify, or confirm, ancestors at times as far back as the 16th century, but not at all reliably. At that distance one also runs into the liklihood of sharing more than one ancestral couple, and results that there is no way to make sense of. I keep appearing to be descended from the Rev. Thomas Hooker family. The Hooker family repeatedly lived where my people lived, but.... we'd need better evidence than that if they shared more than the word of God with their congregations.
For one's male line, one usually starts with 37 markers or 67 marker STR haplotype at Family Tree DNA. 67 markers is most useful down the road, but sometimes 37 markers yields enough information, especially in the unusual event one has no matches at all at that level. Sometimes people want to know if they belong to a surname group but not where in the surname group they belong. One can do a 111 marker upgrade to see if a common ancestor lived very recently. Unlike the autosomal DNA test it can't specifically identify your father.
SNPs come in handy if you aren't satisfied with your ancestral information at that point, or
3. I like the concept of affinity factors. LOL. The surprise that I found when I looked at my AS121210 cluster in more detail, is that London merchants were evidently trading Y DNA along with the furs and wool, and even a financier in the system picked it up. It also wouldn't surprise me if the Y DNA focused on groups who were particularly interested in the settlement of the colonies.
I'll drop dead from astonishment if I ever identify a surname behind the cluster, or even a family.
4. I can clearly see that I'm not going to establish the age of this cluster more closely than within one to two hundred years either way.
5. Digging up the ancestor is all of our dream. But if I already know who he is and where he's buried I'm not likely to bother, LOL!