I won't. I've compiled 25k names in Ancestry and am fairly fastidious in my family building. The dopamine comes from finding people/relationships that everyone else missed.
But I won't submit DNA to hurry that along and I try to talk anyone out of it I can.
The interval between introduction of cheap DNA and misuse by LEO was about 5 minutes. We now have a situation where one person creates risk for many family members. There are some incomplete safeguards in place but they will erode eventually.
That was enough to put me off at first but then came reports of comparing results between the big 3 or 4 DNA analyzers, with little-to-no agreement on origin.
I will grudgingly admit there's value in helping people who don't know their blood relatives - especially groups with few/no ancestral records (eg:African-Americans).
I even gained a nephew who was put up for adoption. But I don't think that pays for the eventual moment when bad actors (LEO, corps, etc) are routinely able to leverage our DNA against us.
At this point, I have five grandfathers. I also suspect that my birth mother has a recent NPE in her tree as well.
I've been working with a cousin who's a "DNA Angel" and she has some extremely strong views on who is a relative and who isn't. Her comments border on the offensive to me, someone who was adopted and loved by a family who aren't technically related to me, while my birth family has no legal claim or relation to me other than just being FB friends.
The melding of DNA and documentary evidence can be an extraordinary thing, and unlock all sorts of mysteries of the past for your family. It's interesting for me, when my ethnicity report is so cleanly delineated, that I can figure out which relatives I can't possibly be blood-related to, because of their country of origin, back to several centuries ago.
Neither can I. But sooner or later a relative is going to do one for fun, and then a massive chunk of the family tree's DNA is rooted.