Apr 1-9 2000
From merope@Radix.Net Sat Apr 1 07:47:51 2000
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 07:47:50 -0500 (EST)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
Reply-To: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: Daily Board Show <usgw_all@listbot.com>
Subject: Daily Board Show
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.1000401073644.14026A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O
X-Status:
Live from Georgia...its Your Daily Board Show!
*warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk!
Friday 31 March 2000:
Board Secretary Ken Short declares Pam Reid's motion to send Motion 00-6
to a Special Committee out of order, noting "No action can be taken on
Motion 00-6 unless motion 00-6b passes." He also reminds the Board that if
Tim votes "in favor of 00-6b then Motion 00-6 will be brought to the floor
for discussion and Pam may make her motion at that time."
Pam Reid says that her motion "was NOT out of order when it was made. At
that point in time, it was assumed the 00-6b was a done deal." She didn't
want anyone to think she was a "twit". She says her motion "was well
within the guidelines set out by Roberts," says she was really careful
about it, and notes "I consider 00-6 and its careful consideration to be
of utmost importance. The need for complete fairness to all of the
volunteers involved is my primary motivation."
Pam calls for point of order: "Will the Chair please present supporting
text of RRoO which authorizes a member to withdraw a vote after the
announcement regarding a motion has been made?" She notes that Tim
"correctly ruled Jims' motion to reconsider as being out of order, BUT
improperly allowed his vote to be withdrawn, thus negating the vote
of the prevailing side." She also asks if the BS will be providing
supporting text from RroO which authorizes the BS to make such a ruling.
She considers it to be "usurping the authority of the chair."
Tim tells Pam he can't give her any text from RroO supporting his ruling,
because he "used something rarely seen - common courtesy in removing Jim's
vote when he asked me to." He also notes that he asked the BS to send the
ruling to the list.
Tim posts the revised vote count for Motion 00-6b, noting once again that
he removed Jim's vote "under the privilege of common courtesy." He notes
"This left the vote at a tie, which as NC I have to break."
Tim votes "yes" on Motion 00-6b, and posts the new "final" totals: "Yes -
8; No - 7; Abstain - 0; Not Voting - 1". He announces that "The
postponement of Motion 00-6 and subsequent admendments are put on hold
until the empty Board seat is filled," and asks the BS to forward the
results to the appropriate lists.
Tim posts a lengthy treatise on the Census Project issue, which he has
apparently been thinking about extensively [uh oh]. Here are some
excerpts:
"From the time a person volunteers to transcribe a census for a
county/parish/borough until it goes on-line for all to view several items
must be addressed by coordinators along that path. Perhaps a solution can
be found by a division of tasks rather than a merger of projects...the
tasks involved include: recruiting volunteers, acknowledging their
requests to volunteer on a timely basis, assignment of the transcription,
maintaining web sites of what's available for transcription and/or status,
assisting the volunteer in getting the materials to transcribe and
software if need be, answering questions concerning transcriptions,
keeping in contact with the volunteers to make sure that the transcription
is proceeding without problems, assisting the volunteers in getting the
completed transcription uploaded or turned in to the Project, formatting
the files for viewing by the public, storing the files, updating web sites
to current status of completed transcriptions.... please consider breaking
down the tasks as follows:
USGW Census Project (CP) retains their name, logo and project coordinator:
recruits volunteers, acknowledges their requests to volunteer on a timely
basis, assigns transcription, maintains their pages to show assigned
census, assists volunteers in getting materials, software, answering
questions, keeps in contact with volunteers, assists transcribers in
getting the materials uploaded, modifies their recruiting web sites that
transcription is complete.
USGW Archives Census Project (ACP) retains their name, logo and project
coordinator: receives completed transcriptions from CP, formats files for
viewing, stores files, modifies census on-line web sites to current URL
for stored files, contacts appropriate CP file manager with any questions
regarding the files.
...someone needs to coordinate the process. It doesn't have to be someone
with an iron hand but it does need to be someone who thoroughly
understands every aspect of the process. It should not be a popularity
contest. This person either needs to be appointed or chosen from
qualified candidates."
[Tim has posted this wherever he has posting privileges and has told the
SC's to send it to their CC lists as well.]
===
"IMO, this entire situation has become a comedy of errors."
---Roger Swafford, USGW-CC-L, 30 March 2000
This has been your Daily Board Show.
-Teresa Lindquist
merope@radix,net
-------
Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
From merope@Radix.Net Tue Apr 4 11:52:18 2000
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 11:52:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
Reply-To: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: Daily Board Show <usgw_all@listbot.com>
Subject: Daily Board Show
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.1000404055751.18583B-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O
X-Status:
Tanned, rested and ready...its Your Daily Board Show!
*warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk!
[I apologize for the scarcity of DBSs in the last few days; I was busy
having "too much fun" and failed to read my mail. But we didn't miss
much, as it turned out.]
Monday 3 Apr 2000-Tuesday 4 April 2000:
Gloria Mayfield sends a "test" message to Board-L, asking if everyone is
still there, since she has received nothing from the list.
Pam Reid says she's still on the list; she thinks "everyone is just being
really quiet right now."
Gloria responds that she doesn't blame them.
Tim Stowell states that the next order of business for the Board is to
fill the vacant Census Project seat. He says "Interested parties are
asked to send their application to the National Coordinator for submission
to the Board. With the permission of a person so named you may submit
names other than your own." He will accept applications until 9 pm EST on
Thursday 6 April.
Ginger Cisewski asks Tim when the Board decided that they would take
applications, as she does not recall "voting on such a plan of action."
She asks "Where is your precedent for issuing such a dictate?"
Holly Fee Timm also notes that Tim's action is "a bit precipitate with no
discussion as to nomination procedure"; she also feels that the time frame
for nominations is too short.
===
Not Interested Corner: NC Tim Stowell's so-called "alternative" solution
to the census projects issue has met with something less than enthusiasm
from most quarters. One project member called it "a stupid (to use a kind
word) "solution" to a situation that just gets stupider and stupider and
just points out the inneffectiveness [sic] of the umbrella "organization"
that calls itself the USGenWeb project." Ron Eason, coordinator of the
Census Project, in a letter to the Census Project mailing list, notes that
Tim and the Board apparently have no clue as to what the real sources of
concern are for the CP. According to Ron, Tim's proposal has nothing in
it for the Census Project, and Motion 00-6 will result in nothing less
than the end of the CP, which will become another Archives subproject
whose coordinator is appointed by and answerable to Linda Lewis. Ron
notes that the CP's own suggestions for merging the projects were rejected
out of hand by the Board; his own candidacy for the vacant seat [for which
he is the CP's elected choice] will apparently never be allowed to come to
a vote. Ron, however, seems willing to consider other options; his
message includes mention of both incorporation and moving [bold
strategies, yes, but allowable under the bylaws and acceptable based on
precedent.]
BTW, a reader has pointed out one very good reason why the USGW Census
Project should keep its name. That is what is is called --repeatedly-- in
the bylaws.
Get A Job Corner: The Archives is soliciting for persons to index the
scanned census images. If interested, contact Linda Lewis at:
cen_img@yahoo.com.
More Is Always Better Corner: Root$web minion Tim Pierce has announced a
Marvelous New Feature for Root$web customers: now all GenConnect Board
postings can be gatewayed to a mailing list. According to Tim, "When a
board is gatewayed to a mailing list, every message posted to the
GenConnect board will be forwarded to the corresponding mailing list. The
message sent to the list will contain the URL of the specific post to
allow the list subscribers to respond directly to the message."
Apparently, one can gateway the posts to _any_ mailing list, providing the
mail list manager agrees [both parties must make administrative changes
for it to work]. [Those poor PML subscribers...]
Fresh New Look Corner: A week or so before it announces its "Get a New
Homepage Designed for Free" contest winner, RW modified its homepage
slightly. Major change of note: the surname/county "cluster" pages,
formerly called "resources", are now called "Research Templates".
===
"Every government is run by liars and nothing they say should be
believed."
---I.F. Stone
This has been your Daily Board Show.
-Teresa Lindquist
merope@radix.net
-------
Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
From merope@Radix.Net Wed Apr 5 16:21:45 2000
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 16:21:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
Reply-To: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: Daily Board Show <usgw_all@listbot.com>
Subject: Daily Board Show
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.1000405061013.28744A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O
X-Status:
Whoa Nelly...its Your Daily Board Show!
*warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk!
Tuesday 4 April 2000-Wednesday 5 April 2000:
Ginger Cisewski says "Unless one of you can think of some reason why the
USGenWeb Census Project should be treated in a manner differently than the
Archives Project, Tombstone Project or the Regions, I suggest that the
appointment of Census Rep be carried out exactly as we have done in each
of these other areas." She notes that since the bylaws were passed the
Board has seated replacements of each group's choosing regardless of
personal prejudices and has felt "honor-bound" to do so. Since "The clear
choice of the Census Project is Ron Eason," she moves to appoint Ron Eason
as Census Project representative.
Jim Powell seconds the motion.
Tim Stowell tells the Board that GingerC's motion is out of order, "as
nominations are not made for appointed positions." He tells her she can
submit Ron's name through the application process and notes that when the
Board closes the applications process they can then consider how to choose
among applicants. He says, "Options at that point would include
appointment of a committee to study the names sumbitted [sic] and offer
one or two to the Board for a vote. Or the Board can decide to select one
or none of those on the list of applicants as a committee of the whole."
In response to Holly's question of earlier [see yesterday's DBS] Tim notes
that the time limit on the applications was put in place to speed things
up but notes "if the Board wishes to drag the process out for several
days/weeks that's ok."
In response to GingerC's question [see yesterday's DBS] Tim says that the
Board decided the vacant seat would be filled when it voted to postpone
action on Motion 00-6. He says "Every single item that the Board
addresses doesn't have to be motioned, then discussed ad nauseam, be held
up to the 'light' of RRO to be handled...It's time for some common sense
to return to the proceedings here. The members of the Project are tired
of seeing nearly everything being completely dissected until nothing
remains of the original question." He notes that some things should still
be discussed but "they don't have to be belittled into meaninglessness."
[Man, but Tim is full of piss and vinegar these days.] He notes that
precedence for his action exists in the Board's selection of the NE/NC rep
[In the post in which he tells GingerC her motion is out of order, Tim
also says "The Board selected the Northeast Rep by inquiry of potential
applicants and then voted upon those applicants." He fails to mention
that the Board solicited applicants from the NE region only and then
polled the NE members as to which of those applicants they preferred.
Tim's process does not limit the pool of potential applicants at all; I
could apply even though I have no ties to either census project. Nor
is there any specific mention of polling the CP volunteers as to the
acceptability of the applicants. But of course, the CP has _already_
elected the person they want to represent them. The Board instituted the
applicant procedure for the NE rep position because the next highest vote
getter in the previous election was someone they did not want to seat.
Some members of the Board strenuously urged that the NE/NC members _not_
be allowed to elect their choice of replacement representative. So now
its "precedent."]
Pam Reid says she's glad this subject has come up since she feels the
Board is letting too much time pass before the position is filled. She
does not object to doing it through an applications process and notes "The
bylaws don't spell out how the Board fills vacant seats - just that the
Board do so. The applications process might bring forward someone with a
great deal of interest whom nobody had thought of before."
Tim says he's received an "application" for Ron Eason.
GingerC challenges Tim's ruling and asks Tim to cite his sources. She
notes that she made no references to "nominations" but moved to appoint
Ron Eason to fill the vacancy. She then cites several instances in which
Tim previously allowed similarly worded motions to be acted upon by the
Board. One of these is Joy Fisher's recent motion to appoint Ron Eason to
fill the position and GingerC also notes "that Motion 99-25B was a Motion
to Appoint Ed Book as Board Secretary and Motion 99-26 which was a Motion
to Appoint Richard Howland. None of the above Motions were ruled out of
order and all of them were allowed."
Gloria Mayfield also notes that the CP rep position should be "filled as
soon as possible" and she sees "nothing wrong with it being done by
applications."
===
Minor Irregularities Corner: This whole issue of choosing a CP
representative has scared some interesting bugs out of the woodwork. As
some of you may recall the USGenWeb Project had an election last July, as
provided for in our bylaws. One of the positions on the ballot was that
of Archives representative. Joe Zsedeny was the only candidate for this
position and his name was forwarded as the "choice" of the Archives for
its seat. On August 4, 1999 [four days after the election had ended]
Linda "Dirty Tricks" Lewis posted a request to her file managers:
"I've been contacted by the election committee and asked to provide
something official about Joe being chosen as our board rep. Would each of
you vote either aye or nay, yes or no, for Joe?" [ARCHIVES-L]
Linda herself voted "aye" and presumably some majority of the Archives
file managers did as well. Interestingly enough, though, the _only_
people who got to vote for Joe were the Archives file managers
[According to Linda, 51 votes are possible, one for each state and D.C.
Apparently, file managers get to vote as many times as they have states.]
Members of the Archives subprojects, including the Archives Census
Project, the Maps Project, and the Pension Project, were not allowed to
vote, unless they were also file managers. Thus, Joe was elected solely
by the rather small group of file managers, although at least
theoretically he represents _all_ members of the Archives, including its
subprojects. Linda now claims there "was no controversy" over who was
allowed to vote, but at least one of her staff members disputes this.
Another interesting irregularity in the last election is the way the
Archives' "single candidate election" was handled. During that race,
there were two other single candidate elections, and after much discussion
on how to handle this circumstance, the Board Secretary cast the single
vote necessary to elect each of these representatives to the Board. Why
was the Archives election not handled in the same way? Why were they
privately asked to provide "something official" after the election was
over and why were they allowed to conduct a regular election outside the
timeframe set by the bylaws?
If Wishes Were Horses Corner: Neilsen, Inc. who does the TV ratings that
allow junk like "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire" to infest the airwaves,
also does website traffic ratings, and they've just released some stats on
genealogy websites. According to them the most active genealogy site in
February was MyFamily.com [1.5 million unique visitors]; second was
Ancestry.com [1.4 million unique visitors]; third was RootsWeb.com, Inc.
[981,000 unique visitors]; and fourth was FamilyTreeMaker.com [640,000
unique visitors]. On top of this, MyFamily.com just got another 30
million dollars of investment capital. You go!
Gag Me With A Spoon Corner: For some reason not immediately apparent to
me, Linda Lewis has invited me to lunch with her.
===
"Why is there an applicaiton [sic] process. Every other project has
submitted the name of the supposedly elected choice and the board has
accepted that choice. We had a real election with more than one
candidate. Why are you not seating our choice?"
---Veda Mendoza, CP member, to the Board, 4 April 2000
This has been your Daily Board Show.
-Teresa Lindquist
merope@radix.net
-------
Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
From merope@Radix.Net Wed Apr 5 21:53:33 2000
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 21:53:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
Reply-To: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: Daily Board Show <usgw_all@listbot.com>
Subject: DBS Special Late Edition
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.1000405211256.21770A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O
X-Status:
This is too Good To Pass Up, so here's a DBS Special Late Edition!
Trouble in Paradise Corner: The Board has once again degenerated into
nasty infighting, and it ought to get even better before the morning.
Tim Stowell apparently decided to respond to Ginger Cisewski's comments in
a less than professional manner. He basically told her he was allowed to
change his mind "on stuff" and that the bylaws don't say he has to use
RRoO exclusively and they infer that "folks will use their common sense,
if they have any." [and nyah, nyah, nyah...] In the course of responding
to this, Ginger quoted the bylaws at him and said "Changing policy from
one week to the next to suit your personal agenda under the vague umbrella
of 'common sense' is the poorest of excuses." Only it turns out that Tim
made his remarks to her on BOARD-EXEC, and she responded to him, quoting
his post in full, on BOARD-L. And guess what? In a powerful
demonstration of leadership and maturity, Tim not only summarily unsubbed
her from Board-Exec, he also managed to imply that she is responsible for
the myriad leaks of material from the secret list.
But it gets better. GingerC next asks why he unsubbed her and he quotes
RRoO at her! Guess his "common sense" failed him on this one. [Actually
he gave her a page number out of "RRoONR"; she apparently has no idea
what this section says.] For her part, GingerC blames the "mistake" on her
preoccupation with her week old grandchild and has apologized. No word
from Tim yet as to whether or not he'll be big enough to accept it. [Darn,
_where_ is a kindergarten teacher when you need one? I know some people
who need to go for a time out.]
In Other News: We hear that the nominations for Ron Eason are coming in
one right after the other. Along with the questions as to why the Board
just can't accept him as the elected choice of the CP and quit wasting
time that could be better spent in other ways [like maybe learning how to
play nice with others.]
There you have it...a DBS Special Late Edition!
-Teresa
merope@radix.net
From merope@Radix.Net Thu Apr 6 09:08:15 2000
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:08:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
Reply-To: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: Daily Board Show <usgw_all@listbot.com>
Subject: Daily Board Show
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.1000406061909.1031D-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O
X-Status:
We live in interesting times...its Your Daily Board Show!
*warning* its a doozy today! contains editorial content. Read at your own
risk!
Tuesday 5 April 2000:
As support for his declaring GingerC's motion out of order, Tim Stowell
cites "common sense" and asks her if she would "deny others the right to
offer names?" He also reminds her that the appointment time is ongoing and
"Since all potential candidates have not been presented nor is the time
called for," her motion is premature. [This is the "nice" version of the
message he sent to Board-Exec.]
Tim tells the Board that he's received Sundee Maynez's name for the CP
seat. Joy Fisher forwards a message from Veda Mendoza saying that if the
Board can't bring itself to seat Ron, she will accept the seat.
Ginger replies to Tim's Board-Exec message on Board-L [reported last
evening] and Tim responds by unsubbing her from Board-Exec. GingerC asks
why, he tells her "for cause" and at her request provides the RRoO
reference, which essentially says that anyone that violates the confidence
of "executive session" can be removed from the meeting. GingerC
apologizes, but Tim tells her, essentially, that he doesn't believe a word
of it. [It takes a big man to accept an apology.]
Jim Powell tells GingerC not to worry, "The atmosphere out here is much
better." And GingerC agrees with him.
Tim publishes Executive Order 2000E-1 in which he notifies Ron Eason that
the Census Project has been delinked for being "not in good standing" and
claims that he can do this within his "rights as National Coordinator" and
under his "day to day administration duties." [This is a stretch Tim.
Delinking a project or page is so important a responsibility that the
bylaws devote an entire section to it. And guess what? Its not up to you,
its up to the Advisory Board to determine who is not in good standing and
who is to be delinked. Read a litle further down next time.] Tim offers
to provide evidence of the CP's sins to the Board upon request. [According
to other sources, the CP has been removed from all national pages, and all
urls that formerly went to its pages have been replaced with redirects to
the Archives Census Project.]
Noting the extreme importance of the "executive order", Richard Howland
believes that it is also necessary that the Board confirm it. Therefore,
he moves "to over ride the National Coordinator's delink of the USGenWeb
Census Project." Jim Powell, while hoping that "that Robert's Rules
doesn't have another meaning of over ride" and assuming that "it means
repeal, do away with, make null and void, etc." seconds Rich's motion,
although he notes "although we will probably be ruled out of order."
[Good job, guys! At least someone recognizes that Tim has just usurped
for himself the only real authority the Board has.]
Ginger Hayes tells Tim that he is "gravely overstepping" his bounds as NC
and provides him with the bylaws to support her statement. She notes that
article VI, section 5 was "specifically instituded to prevent one person
from having the power to remove state or special projects at will." She
believes Tim owes the Board and the CP an apology and says that she finds
his actions "reprehensible." She says "Since this action was taken
without due process by the Advisory Board, I suggest that the link to the
USGenWeb Census Project be restored IMMEDIATELY." [Unfortunately, it
takes an even bigger man to admit he made a mistake.]
GingerC agrees with GingerH's sentiments.
===
The Man Who Would Be King Corner: Over the last year, I've heard from
various people who were on the original bylaws committee, and all have
assured me that the bylaws were written in such a way so as to prevent a
single individual from "being a dictator." The NC has no meaningful vote
and is limited to chairing the meeting, managing a handful of mailing
lists, and performing "day to day" administrative duties [undefined, but
which definitely don't include unilaterally deciding who gets to be in
the project and who doesn't]. As a measure of the relative importance
of the NC to the Advisory Board as a whole, Article VI [which sets out
their duties] devotes one smallish section to the NC and _seven__ to the
Advisory Board [the remaining section gives qualifications]. Section 5 of
this Article specifically gives the power to delink projects to the
Advisory Board and sets out specific procedures which must be followed.
The ability, after due consideration, to delink projects is the _only_
real power the Board has, and Tim has just attempted to execute a coup of
stunning proportions. If he can do this to the Census Project, he can do
it to any one of us [and it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if he
has a list].
Tim managed to look the other way for over a year while the Archives
Census Project ignored a motion duly passed by the Board. The Archives
Census Project is currently in violation of the bylaws [no USGW logo on
its pages]. Yet is apparently in "good standing". Whether or not one
believes that the Census Project negotiated in "good faith", that is
simply not a criterion for being in "good standing". Nor is it an excuse
for usurping the Board's authority in this matter. The Census Project is
recognized by name in the bylaws and has the same standing as any state or
other special project. While we can all understand the frustration of not
being able to get our way as quickly as we'd like, the Board is slowly in
its own blundering way moving toward a resolution of this non-crisis.
Under most circumstances it is better to let the wheels of deliberative
assembly work at their own speed, so perhaps our Tim has suddenly realized
that he may not have the 2/3 of votes necessary to pass Motion 00-6 [or
indeed any motion concerning this issue] and is now unwilling to risk a
vote?
Of course, if Tim has some new evidence of perfidy on the part of the
Census Project, we urge him to share it with the project, allow the Board
to assess it and determine whether or not it warrants delinking. After
all, if it is good enough evidence for Tim to invoke executive privilege
and violate the bylaws, it ought to be good enough to convince the Board
that the CP is "not in good standing".
Mea Culpa Corner: We reported yesterday that, based on communication with
Linda Lewis, it appeared that voting in the Archives' elections was done
by state rather than on a "one person, one vote" basis. We have been
corrected in our misunderstanding; Linda tells us that each Archives file
manager gets only one vote, regardless of how many states they manage. We
apologize for the misunderstanding and any confusion it has caused.
===
"Power does not corrupt men. Fools, however, if they get into a position
of power, corrupt power."
---George Bernard Shaw
This has been your Daily Board Show.
-Teresa Lindquist
merope@radix.net
------
Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
From merope@Radix.Net Fri Apr 7 08:24:38 2000
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 08:24:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
Reply-To: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: Daily Board Show <usgw_all@listbot.com>
Subject: Daily Board Show
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.1000406211226.26262A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O
X-Status:
In a world without heroes...its Your Daily Board Show!
*warning* we're knee deep in editorial content here. Read at your own
risk!
Thursday 6 April 2000:
His Serene Highness Tim Stowell gives Rich's motion to over ride the
delinking of the Census Project number 00-8 and opens the floor for
discussion.
Gloria Mayfield tells Tim that "this is POOR Timing and NOT necessarily in
the best interest of the volunteers of the USGenWeb Project." She notes
that the project comes first, not the Archives or the CP and points that
the CP was in the process of appointing a representative when Tim delinked
them [actually the Board was doing this, but we get the point.] Gloria
has transcribed for both the Archives and the CP and also works for the
Tombstone project and has had no problems with any of them. She says
""Talk about the frying pan into the Fire." This action needs to be
reversed NOW. I support Richard's motion to OVERRIDE Tim's Delinking of
the Census Project."
Pam Reid says that "Tim is correct in his assessment that the Census
Project is NOT operating within the guidelines and can, therefore, be
delinked." She feels that the Board needs "to do something about the files
that are already there. The most sensible action is to combine the two
projects, and put the Census files back where they belong, in the USGenWeb
Archives." In her opinion, the Archives are "our" digital library and
"the proper place of storage for ALL records." She says "The Projects
themselves are irrelevant to this opinion," and the Board needs to act
quickly to resolve this issue. [I have to confess that I have read this
post numerous times, and it makes absolutely no sense to me.]
Pam asks what happened to Motion 00-7. Tim tells her that it was Holly's
abortive motion to reconsider the motion to postion Motion 00-6; the one
he declared dead.
Friday 7 April 2000:
Tim posts a message from fellow Board member Maggie Stewart Zimmerman in
which she invites census project volunteers "to continue the hard work and
efforts of providing census material on-line for the visitors of the
USGenWeb Project and the USGenWeb Archives Census Project."
Tim posts a message saying he will post a series of message "that will
show where the census talks started and where they ended," and invites
"project members" to forward them elsewhere. He then posts two messages
from September 1999, one from himself and one from Maggie. Tim's message
sets out some areas of discussion for a merger of the two census projects,
and Maggie's is a response to those discussion topics. Others cc'd
on the message include Ron Eason, Connie Burkett, and John Jacoby. [This
sequence of events preceded the merger talks described in detail at:
http://www.radix.net/~merope/history/chaptr5a.htm. According to several
sources, the "september talks" were secret and more or less petered out
with little being accomplished. The talks did not included Linda Lewis or
Kay Mason and Maggie makes repeated reference to those two needing to
"work things out" before any issues could be resolved. Thus far none of
the replies from Ron, Connie, or John have been forwarded, and Tim has yet
to provide any evidence that the Census Project is not in "good standing".
===
Fixing A Hole Corner: The space formerly occupied by the Census Project
on the first page of the nation website now has a link to something called
"Census Lookups". This site is not a part of the USGenWeb Project, but is
some private project to coordinate Census lookups. When did we start
linking to non-USGW sites off our main page? Something like this is
certainly valuable, but belongs with the "resources for researchers", not
prominently featured on the front page. Methinks that Tim needed
something to fill the hole where he carved out the Census Project and he
isn't enough of a coder to figure out how to move things around so there
isn't a big obvious empty space.
Peanut Gallery Corner: Some comments have been forwarded my way
concerning this mess. Some have gone to the Board, and some have not.
"I would like to know the means by which to file a grievance against Tim
Stowell as well as the method for removing him from office due to his
obvious inability to deal serve all members of the USGenWeb."
---Veda Mendoza
"Can I just tell you all that I think it stinks that a few people out of
hundreds seem to be on the road to either causing a political division or
completely ruining such a fabulous project that is a model to other
volunteer organizations. Can we even begin to count the multitudes of
people that contribute to GenWeb on a daily basis? How about the folks
that use GenWeb and its resources? Can you imagine what would happen if
this bureaucratic subterfuge is allowed to continue, and the folks that
count on us for assistance and information in one place had to
continuously go back and forth trying to find something?...I hope that a
reply is made, not only to myself, but to all the members, of USGenWeb,
that explains exactly what is going on, why its going on, and who is
responsible. I think its fair to say that even in a volunteer
organization, there has to be accountability, and if it hasn't gone on in
the past, maybe it needs to start now."
---Susan Anderson
"This is absolutely ridiculous!!! What reason have they given for
delinking the census site and what do they consider in good standing.
This make me just sick... This not only effects us but everyone in the
genealogical community. When all the trouble in the past happened I
immediately stopped giving any of my files to them. Who do they think they
are....grrrr!"
---Anonymous DBS reader
"Tim's "Executive Order" is a very sad omen of the USGenWeb Project's
state of affairs. Even the fact that he felt he had the right to take this
action is indicative of the undemocratic organization our project has
become. Just when did the true goals of our project turn from the
volunteers, the transcribers, and researchers? When did these few people
become the ruling tyrants of the project? When did these few people gain
the right to ignore or interpret the bylaws at whim? Tim's action has
seriously hurt the trust of many people and will be very hard to amend....
Tim, the last two messages you have sent to the USGenWeb have proved to
me that you don't understand anything about these issues. Your message
about the division of duties between the two projects was absurd and your
"Executive Order" should lead to your immediate removal from office. If I
were you, I would resign and slink away to never be heard from again."
---Sue Soden
"I am saddened by the thought that a project that started out with such a
wonderful goal in mind is being damaged by folks who cannot overcome their
own attitudes and work together. But more important I am saddened by what
this means for those hundreds of volunteers who have worked so hard, given
their time, effort, and even financial resources to support this project
(yes, I purchased a copy of the census I am transcribing as did many
others) all with the idea of making that data available to others. All
of them felt that in doing so they would be part of a wonderful national
project. And now it appears that their efforts will not be part of that
project. Now why don't all you folks get your act together and start
putting the concerns of the project and that project's ultimate goal as
top priority (instead of individual feelings) and see if you can't get
this project back on track again."
---"Emma"
"Mr. Stowell, Not being a board member or in any capacity other than
transcriber and proofer, I formally request the return of my property:
[census, will, cemetery, marriage file names deleted]. I withdraw my
permission to post the above listed transcriptions for USGenWeb."
--Anonymous, quoted by "Emma"
"I will not stop transcribing census data but I will no longer submit it
to USGenWeb until such time as the Census Project is restored to autonomy.
I have my own web site where I can make the census data available and
there are at least two census indices online that provide state and
county indexing of census files."
---Anonymous, quoted by "Emma"
"I have sat here day after day reading all this, now I have had it. I am
no longer, like many others, interested in this nonsense and am
unsubscribing. I will also no longer be doing any more census
transcriptions. I can offer my volunteer efforts to other forums."
---Anonymous, quoted by "Emma"
"Can someone tell me how to remove my transcription from on-line until
this mess is settled? To hell with both sides of the issue."
---Anonymous, quoted by "Emma"
"I have also forwarded some letters to Linda from volunteers demanding
that their files be taken out of the archives. All that has happened in
the past 24 hours has not advanced the ACP position but hurt it as
we are losing files because of it....We must work within the by laws
without disregarding them or this is not a true organization but a chaotic
machine ready to fall apart....As was pointed out earlier today, Tim's
action was totally out of scope of his authority. Delinking can only come
from the AB. The links need to be re-established and merger talks resumed
in the normal manner. I am truly disheartened by all of this. If this
isn't dealt with the board immediately, there will be nothing to deal with
down the road as volunteers will be lining up to remove their files."
---Stacey Orchard
"Like I said, unfortunately, no one cares about the volunteers. These
latest events including Tim's has caused such a rift that I doubt the USGW
can withstand it. Too many people will be resigning. Tell me why the
Archives feel that they have to have complete control over the census
project?... The USGW has control over its projects NOT the archives. I
want a solution to this problem as it is causing havoc all the way down
to the county level! You will be getting an onslaught of letters
requesting the removal of their files and if the archives do not comply, I
believe some will actually take it to court as the files specifically
state that the copyright belongs to the submitter. The project cannot
withstand that sort of injury."
---Stacey Orchard, letter to Linda Lewis
"...one of the biggest problems here is that the USGW Project is becoming
defunct while being taken over by the USGW Archives. Many volunteers
believe they are one and the same since the Archives have so much power
over all the other projects. This needs to be corrected and the Archives
need to go back to being only a special project whose duties revolve
around the storing of data brought in by the other special projects."
---Stacey Orchard, letter to the Board [in which she requests a formal
name change for the Archives Census Project to the Census Project]
"Maggie? Tina? These are the ladies that NEVER had the guts to reply to
my requests for volunteering to the point of exasperation. Is it any
wonder the other Census Project is by far more active in transcribing and
putting online?!...How can you (Maggie) expect us to follow you when YOU
and your folks continue to IGNORE us, the transcribers/volunteers?"
---W. David Samuelsen, message to -ALL
"Too many people are stepping over the boundaries of the by laws and as
we saw today, have taken upon them the role of dictator. The AB is the one
that decides who is delinked, not the NC and yet, that is what
happened today... Not only do we have the Archives wanting to keep their
fingers in the census pot, the NC has decided to do things his way. This
is not what the by laws state nor is this the way the USGenWeb project is
suppose to run....we are losing volunteers fast and the demands for file
removal are coming in daily... This cannot be the intention of the ACP or
the Archives. If it is, then we are in dire straits. This contraversy is
not helping the cause, only hurting it. Before long, there will alot less
files in the archives and we all have to start all over. "
---Stacey Orchard, message to the Tombstone Project
===
"If we're going to be damned, let's be damned for who we really are."
---Captain Jean-Luc Picard, Star Trek
This has been your Daily Board Show.
-Teresa Lindquist
merope@radix.net
-------
Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved
From merope@Radix.Net Sat Apr 8 08:58:20 2000
Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2000 08:58:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
Reply-To: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: Daily Board Show <usgw_all@listbot.com>
Subject: Daily Board Show
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.1000408071010.15090A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O
X-Status:
Sic semper tyrannis...its Your Daily Board Show!
*warning* editorial content? You're soaking in it! Read at your risk!
Friday 7 April 2000:
Ginger Hayes posts a message entitled "'Tis a sad day for The USGenWeb
Project". She is appalled with current events and at Tim's actions and
notes she has "no doubt that some of you were aware of what was coming."
She reminds the Board that "when a previous NC made a similar statement
about their executive privilege some of you, that are still here, went up
in arms, with the result of the resignation of that NC....Now, when
another NC has taken such power upon himself, you appear to support his
position by your very silence. Where is your outrage now? She points out
that those Board members who had foreknowledge of it and endorsed it
should have "had the fortitude to do it publicly, instead of behind closed
doors," and brought it to a vote before the Board. To the rest of the
volunteers in the project she says she is "deeply ashamed" of these
receent events and finds it "incomprehensible" that adults would act in
such a way as to destroy the project. She also notes "that "people who
live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones". Neither side has a spotless
record," and that no one is indispensable.
His Serene Highness Tim Stowell notes that John Jacoby has declined
permission to forward his correspondence so " any input he may have made
will not be included." [This is apparently in reference to HSH Tim's plan
to post the messages from the September merger talks; John was a member of
the discussion team.]
Joe Zsedeny tells his fellow Board members not to ascribe motives to him
"that only seem to reflect what you would do in like circumstances because
in all likelihood you will be wrong." As a Board member, he will continue
to vote his conscience. He also wishes "everyone would cool it and let
Richards' motion work it's way through the discussion and voting process.
Then you can pick your targets for whatever invective seems appropriate.
If his motion passes the Board says no and the link returns." Joe notes
that he and HSH Tim are friends and often discuss issues privately, and
Joe understands Tim's frustration with the Census project, but "only the
Board can vote to delink. We must respect the ByLaws or else we make it up
as we go along and the Boards behind us do the same and chaos reigns."
Shari Handley asks GingerH not to assume that silence implies support [of
HSH Tim's actions] and notes "We have a motion before the board, #00-8,
Richard's motion to override Tim's executive order.... It is clear to me
that de-linking is something that can only come from the AB. This is
spelled out quite clearly in the bylaws. Allowing any NC to make a
unilateral decision and pronouncement such as that sets a perilous
precedent. If delinking needs to happen, then it needs to follow the
standard "motion-second-discussion-vote" path." [This precedent was
already set, when HSH Tim "declared" Kay Mason's seat vacant.] Shari also
suggests that if the royal decree is overturned the Board needs to quickly
appoint someone to the CP seat and begin to deal with Motion 00-6.
GingerH asks "would someone please explain to me how we can have a motion
to overrule an action that the NC had no right to take in the first
place." She feels he should have been declared out of order and
instructed to refrain from further similar actions. She notes "Moving to,
what basically amounts to a, veto of his actions implies that he had the
right to take those actions in the first place. Which he clearly did not!"
Ginger Cisewski says its a rare day when she agrees with GingerH, but in
this case she does. She thinks "a Motion for Sanctions or something
similar would be a better way to handle it and avoid setting dangerous
precedents by implication or inference as Ginger has pointed out."
Teri Pettit does not agree with their position, however. She thinks Motion
00-8 is a declaration by the Board that HSH Tim's action was out of
bounds. She agrees that the Executive Order "was flagrantly outside the
ByLaws," and says that the Board needs "to vote to make it official that
the NC does not have that authority. And official actions are introduced
via motions." She is concerned with the clause requiring a 2/3 majority
to pass motions, noting "If a motion to declare an NC's action to be
illegal requires 2/3 approval to pass, then any NC with a 1/3 support on
the Board can do anything illegal they want, by issuing one Executive
Order after another, and those opposed needing 2/3 approval to override
it!" She points out that "Traditionally, clauses that certain votes
require more than a plurality to pass are reserved for a few specified
actions, such as requiring 2/3 majority to pass a new tax or to forcibly
unseat an officeholder - or to delink a project! Requiring a 2/3 majority
to pass any motion makes the likelihood of change oversensitive as to
whether the motion is worded so that change will occur when it passes
versus when it fails. Some very good ideas get voted down because 35% of
the Board opposes them, even though 65% think we should do it, and some
dubious actions get allowed because somebody with web page control or
directory access does them, and the Board needs 2/3 agreement to force
them to undo whatever they did." She hopes that Motion 00-8 will pass, a
CP rep can be seated, the Board can then deal with Motion 00-6, and then
perhaps turn its attention to amending some of the bylaws. She had hoped
that working on the bylaws would be the major focus of attention this year
and thinks the CP issue has been a real distraction. She says "I don't
think there is that much of a problem with the two Census Projects the way
they are. A bit confusing, yes, but not nearly as much of a headache as
trying to force volunteers to merge when they don't want to, and getting
everybody up-in-arms at being coerced." She notes that she prefers the
suggestion of a joint committee or a fact-finding liason "to ANY solution
worked out by the Board and handed down from on high, no matter how sound
or fair or even positively inspired the Board's plan is." She notes
that people will be happier with a plan they come up with themselves than
one forced on them, "even if it turns out to be the same plan in the end."
In a separate message, Teri tells the two Gingers that if a motion is
couched as a censure or sanction, then "people who would vote for a simple
motion to declare EO-2000 void and without authority might not vote for a
motion to censure." She thinks some people on the Board might think the
executive order represents an "innocent misinterpretation of the
ByLaws"; they would vote to overturn it but might not vote to sanction HSH
Tim. She notes that Joy Fisher has expressed similar sentiments. Tere
points out that "Since any motion needs 2/3 majority to pass, I would be
*very* cautious about amending Motion 00-8 to be any harsher than it is.
It doesn't do much good to put your righteous outrage into a Motion if it
results in the Executive Order standing."
===
$64,000 Question Corner: So, many are wondering, what prompted this
sudden action by His Serene Highness? We have to admit we have no idea.
shortly before the Royal Decree was issued, Tim had opened the floor for
the submission of potential appointees to the CP seat, and that seemed to
be going well, except that the vast majority were suggesting that the
Board honor the CP's recent election and seat Ron Eason. Maybe that's why
Tim suddenly decided to pull the plug. Maybe its because the diversion of
all the motions and counter motions gave the ACP the time it needed to get
its own house in order [new software, etc.] and they were just "ready" to
take the place of the CP? Tim's reasons for suddenly delinking the CP
certainly don't hold much water. A quick view of the Census Project main
page [http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgwcens/] shows them to be in order and
per the bylaws. There are no obvious errors to correct. The accusation
that Ron Eason was failing to respond to email is also not borne out.
Less than a month ago [March 12] Tim contacted Ron about re-opening
merger negotiations; Tim noted "If you delay or decline, it is fairly
obvious that the Advisory Board intends in some fashion to force a merger
and/or resolution which may make folks more dissatisfied than satisfied
with the results." Ron responded to this correspondence on the same day,
indicating a willingness to continue merger talks. So the "unwillingness
to negotiate in good faith" reason is also so much hooey. Ron and the CP
have participated in the September talks, they participated in the
abortive November-December talks [which Ron backed out of when he felt
the agreement was not being honored by the ACP], and they are willing to
start new talks. HSH Tim so far has not provided any further elucidation
of his evidence against the CP and we really don't expect him to.
More From The Cheap Seats Corner: More comments from various places
regarding the delinking of the Census Project:
"It appears to me, per the bylaws, that Tim didn't have the authority to
delink the UsGenWeb Census Project. The Advisory Board could though, but
they *didn't* authorize this action."
---Debi, USGENWEB-ALL
"I agree that both sides are not spotless but we have to do what is best for
the project. I agree too that the NC overstepped his authority by
delinking the CP. I have read the preceedings and it specifically says
that if goodwill is not shown by one side or the other, the AB has the
right to delink. It does not say that the NC has that right...Can anyone
suggest something that we other "peons" can do to resolve this NC matter
and the census matter?"
---Stacey Orchard, USGENWEB-ALL
"Well I see that some on the Board seems to be following the tradition of
"I don't like you so I'm going to find something wrong with your project"
tradition. For a volunteer project of this type, with so many dedicated
county coordinators who don't like to get involved with the politics of
this project, these type of actions are pitiful, and the county
coordinators deserve something better....Now we have these "Executive
Orders" to get rid of projects. Is such a power given to the Director in
the bylaws or are some people making up the rules as they go? Just what
terrible crime did the leader of the Census Project commit that deserves
being delinked from the USGenWeb project?"
---Gary Martens [former Board member], USGENWEB-NW
"Were there votes by the Advisory Board to first delink the Census
Project, and then to make the Archives Census Project the only census
project? This message seems to me to be premature unless there has been a
vote by the Board....Let's get this mess straightened out, but not by
using strong-arm tactics that will turn everyone 'off' from working with
any USGenWeb project, whether it's a special project or a state/county
project. This latest move makes me wonder just how we managed to place so
much power in the NC and AB in the first place."
---Connie Snyder, STATE-COORD-L
"I would like to ask one question - where in the bylaws is it written that
a project can be delinked without a vote of the Advisory Board? I have
been following the various and asundry arguments etc and had finally seen
some progress in seating a member of the Census Project. And now this????
No one person should have the power to delink a project. I believe that
is why there are bylaws."
---Mary Saban, STATE-COORD-L
"I would also ask each Board Member to consider that just because the
Bylaws give the AB the power to DE-link a project, it also does not
specifically prohibit the NC from doing so. Since the AB chose to follow
the parliamentary procedures of RRoO, then Tim was well within his rights.
I would also ask each Board Member to consider that accusations towards
Tim are changing the focus from the problem at hand: namely, resolving
the original problems in the Census Mess. And, finally, I would ask that
each Board Member continue to work to resolve the census mess, but to
refrain from taking it to the CC's until the Board has, at the very
least, resolved item 00-08."
---Carol Askey, STATE-COORD-L
"The NC does not have the authority to delink a project. The AB has that
authority but there has been no vote by them. This was an arbitrary action
taken by the NC without regard to the by laws. I guess no one cares about
the by laws anymore except when if furthers their cause in some way and
then they will quote a portion of it....Something need to be done about
the NC overstepping the boundaries and the AB's inablity to control it.
Not only is the project delinked but if you try to access the URL from
your own links, it is rerouted to the ACP pages....The most that should
have happened in this case was delinking from the USGW site but not
interrupting others use to access that url from any other site. THAT is
very wrong."
---Stacey Orchard, STATE-COORD-L
"On the other hand, everyone clearly and explicitly gave permission for
their transcriptions to be posted by the CP. But then someone, without
consideration for most of the genealogical world, decided to wipe the CP
out of existence.... I think that Tim what's-his-name should either (1)
make a major apology and restore everything to its original state until
things are worked out, or (2) he should resign his position immediately,
or (3) he should be ousted now by a special election if necessary. We
cannot tolerate his kind of tyranny."
---Dennis Miller, CENSUS-L
"As a county host in several counties and a transcriber of one county
sensus, I am saddened upset and my true words cannot be put into print, by
the goings on of the board of the USGenWeb Project. First I would like to
address your leader. It appears he or she has never had any leadership
training. To create the confusion or whatever you would like to call it
is definitely not leadership."
---Fred Dethlefson, to the Board
And finally...
"If you have in fact delinked the census project from the archives I
DEMAND that you remove my transcriptions. If they are not removed I will
seek LEGAL remedy against the archive group for copyright infringement."
"If you are delinking the census project from the archives, I want you to
remove MY transcriptions NOW. "
"I did NOT, repeat NOT, sign up for your ARCHIVE, REMOVE me from your site
at once!!! I will continue to transcribe but YOUR ARCHIVES will not get
it; I expect to be removed from your site by the end of the day."
---various Census transcribers
===
"It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. We
hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of citizens, and one of
the noblest characteristics of the late Revolution. The freeman of America
did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and
entangled the question in precedents. They saw all the consequences in the
principle, and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle."
---James Madison
This has been your Daily Board Show.
-Teresa Lindquist
merope@radix.net
-------
Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
From merope@Radix.Net Sun Apr 9 09:33:49 2000
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2000 09:33:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
Reply-To: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: Daily Board Show <usgw_all@listbot.com>
Subject: Daily Board Show
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.1000409071908.24326A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O
X-Status:
They have the guns, but we have the numbers...its Your Daily Board Show!
*warning* Lions and tigers and editorial content, oh my. Read at your own
risk!
Saturday 8 April 2000:
His Serene Highness continues to post the correspondence between himself,
Maggie Stewart-Zimmerman, Connie Burkett, and Ron Eason from the september
merger talks. [This correspondence is too extensive to summarize here.
He's apparently published them in order, so I'll work up a timeline and
post it.]
HSH Tim Stowell posts a message from Census Project staffer Connie
Burkett. His Nibs had asked her for permission to forward her merger
correspondence, telling her "If you want a fair hearing on Board-l - I'm
asking your permission to release the mail from Census-Discuss" [this was
a mail list they set up to talk about merging]. Connie gives the
permission and reminds him:
"As I recall...there were still four of us sitting at the merger committee
table waiting for you to recap. By mid-September the discussions had
reached the point of your recap. And since we never heard from you by
mid-October Ron emailed you and cc'd me asking where the discussions over
and where you going to recap. Here is a snip of your reply dated the 17th
of October. <snip> As far as I'm concerned, no. I'll see if I can't
resume them later today. <end snip> And that was the last we heard from
you on the First Merger. Are the First Merger discussions resuming now?.
Are you going to do your recap now 6 months later? If not, what's the
point of rehashing the discussions?"
[Oh, very interesting. Tim, who is well-known for and who publicly admits
to not bothering to read all his email, apparently is the end reason why
the Semptember talks failed.]
[We share Connie's confusion as to why the september merger talks are
of any relevance at this point. They failed, for whatever reason, and new
talks were instituted in November. Those failed, for whatever reason, and
Tim approached Ron again in March, although he apparently never responded
to Ron's affirmative reply. Now, according to Ron Eason, Tim has _again_
approached him with a proposal to initiate merger talks. What happened
way back in September is old news, interesting from a historical
perspective, but hardly relevant to the current situation, which as we
recall, involves not the only the delinking of a Special Project without
due process and in violation of the bylaws, but the rerouting of it URLS,
which makes it very difficult to find, get information on, or volunteer
for, the Census Project.]
Sunday 9 April 2000:
Ginger Hayes asks HSH Tim why he has failed to call for a vote on Motion
00-8, as the customer 48 hour discussion period ended "some time ago."
===
More From the Little People Corner: Following are some more excerpted
comments regarding the recent de-linking of the Census Project. As is the
usual occurrence in the USGW the discussion has begun to stray a bit from
the topic at hand [the illegal --per the bylaws-- rerouting of a Special
Project] to other topics [Root$web, the Archives' power grab, Linda Lewis'
character, etc.] which are not germane to the current issue. The comments
below do not reflect the range of this discussion, but focus [or try to]
on the issue of His Serene Highness' violation of the process clearly
spelled out in the Bylaws for the "delinking" of a project from the USGW.
There are not as many comments supporting Tim's action as opposing; this
reflects what I have seen, not any deliberate attempt to minimize any
support he may have.
"So what personal issue stands between Tom and Ron? This looks like a
hatchet job."
---Donald O'Collaugh Kelly, USGW-CC-L
"Mr. NC, you blew it. You didn't have the right to do what you did...
delink an acknowledge project. (pretty bad when a CC figures out you
goofed) Linda. you are terrific but why do you have to have to have
control of the Census when there is so much more you and your crew could
work at? To the members of the board. This isn't right and you know it.
It's been wrong for a long time and you let it continue.... To the Eason's
and the Census Project... What can I do besides saying that your group
has my support?"
---"Darilee", USGENWEB-ALL
"Removing links from the main page so there are no active links from the
USGW page to the CP is fine. But when they start rerouting the consumer,
that is wrong. If the consumer wants to view those pages, they should be
able to. No one should be able to control another project like that. I am
concerned that people are abusing their authority. Where does that leave
the rest of us?"
---Stacey Orchard, STATE-COORD-L
"The problem I'm having with all the discussions popping up all over the
USGW, either CC or SC, is that we don't seem to know what part of the
negotiations finally broke down to the point that Tim took his action to
DE-link. Enough of the discussion goes on in Board-Exec that we just
don't have all the facts, and maybe we never will...This wasn't a
precipitous decision to DE-link. It came after a long, hard, painful year
during which every attempt to resolve the census mess has failed...Whether
or not Tim redirected, changed files, got completely fed-up, or had every
right to do so under the "rules" of either the Bylaws or Roberts Rules,
seems a lesser issue than resolving the census mess....This has been a
circumstance that has boiled so long that it's time to clean the pan, and
get something done!"
"Carol", STATE-COORD-L
"Tim took his action in total disregard of the Bylaws. I believe there
were several board members aware of this plan of action but there was
never a vote to delink the CP, unless it was without the full board and
behind closed doors. His action is in flagrant violation of the Bylaws and
a slap in the face to every member of the USGW Project.... I do not
support in any way the NC's actions and I'm learning more and more that I
seem to be living in a world peopled by control freaks who have forgotten
that everything they needed to know they learned in kindergarten. This
constant squabbling does great harm to the Project and absolutely nothing
to further the free access to genealogical information on the internet,
which is supposedly our goal, it in fact hinders it greatly."
---Ginger Hayes, STATE-COORD-L
"The Board does know that it isn't right and that Tim overstepped his
authority. There is a motion on the floor to overide Tim's delink of the
Census Project. (Motion 00-8) The only problem with this motion is that
there shouldn't be a motion. Tim had no right to do delink in the first
place. The links should be restored immediately without him having a
say-so. If this motion doesn't pass, where does that leave the bylaws?
The USGenWeb? Will this leave one person with the right to say what a
Special Project can be delinked?"
---Debi Kendrick, USGENWEB-ALL
"Mr. Eason when people are in receipt of stolen goods it is not often that
they are ask them to be returned. However you were. Time and time again.
Is it any wonder, that finally the stolen accounts were frozen until such
time as a final disposition can be worked out?...you are correct the
accounts were stolen. You were given stolen property and you continued to
use that stolen property. You continue to lead your hard working
Transcribers into thinking that their info is going into a USGWP and being
stored in an appropriate USGWP accounts. Maybe this delink should have
been called a relinking....here is only one reason this delink hadn't
taken place before.... The innocent people that joined thinking they were
joining and giving their time to a safe respectable project flying the
USGWP logo. Those people the Advisory Board is here to help protect and
serve. Time and time again though these "bullies" have sought you out to
attempt a quiet simple solution. Time and time again you have declared
foul and dived back behind those trusting people...Now you want them to
follow you out to the unknown world. If this board is so power hungry, Mr.
Eason. why is it that we have waited this long. Why is it nearly split
down the middle on every subject. Why is it that nearly every member is
split on this matter. The only thing we do agree about is that we want
the best for USGWP as a whole. And not a bunch of little kings dictating
in anyway that suits them this month."
---Rich Howland, USGW-CC-L [and other places, reply to Ron Eason]
===
"Where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification
of the act is the rightful remedy."
---Thomas Jefferson, Kentucky Resolutions, 1798.
This has been your Daily Board Show.
-Teresa Lindquist
merope@radix.net
-------
Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
From merope@Radix.Net Mon Apr 10 00:07:57 2000
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 00:07:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
Reply-To: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: Daily Board Show <usgw_all@listbot.com>
Subject: Late Breaking News
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.1000409230858.26498A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O
X-Status:
DBS Late Breaking News...Get it while its hot!
Mergers and Acquisitions Corner: John Schunk, of SK Publications [upon
whose generosity both the Census Project and the Archives Census Project
depend heavily] has recently proposed a "solution" to the census issue.
It appears to be in good faith and is quite simple, having only two
points:
"1) The USGW Census Project remains the Census Project and functions as
outlined in the Bylaws. Its purpose is get census transcriptions in the
USGW Archives, but it is an autonomous project...The USGW Archives Census
Project ceases to exist as such.
2) Maggie Stewart-Zimmerman becomes Coordinator of the USGW Census
Project...CP (Census Project) personnel are retained, but ACP (Archives
Census Project) File Managers are also welcomed to be integrated into the
Census Project structure. Ron is allowed to select what leadership role
he would like to perform in the Census Project."
According to Joy Fisher, one of the Board members privy to this proposal,
"Many of us accepted his proposal with certain modifications or
stipulations. Ron rejected it. He has not budged one bit from his "my way
or no way"." [These "certain modifications or stipulations" remain
unknown to me at this time, but I will bet a census transcription that
one of them includes retaining the name "the Archives Census Project".]
According to Ron, he rejected the proposal because it violates the wishes
of the Census Project volunteers, who recently elected him as their
coordinator and as their choice for their Board representative. Ron says,
"I offered to my constituents that I would step down and move out of the
way if they wanted to just turn everything over to the Archives. They
resoundingly rejected that idea and so I will honor their wishes." Ron
also noted that although this proposal has been under discussion for some
time, he had seen no response from Tim Stowell, Maggie, or Linda, and had
no idea what their position on the proposal might be. However, he says,
Tim _did_ contact him privately after John made his proposal and "told him
the score" and that "He and Linda and Maggie have already made an
agreement but it had to be on the grounds that I [Ron] accept."
According to Ron, "They have made a pact that if I will go away peaceably
and turn the Project over to Maggie that Tim will do everything he can to
expedite me being assigned to the Board." He says he's willing to talk but
"this deal was already done before we started talking." In his opinion, a
Board seat is not worth the price of selling out his volunteers.
Joy Fisher and Linda Lewis deny any knowledge of any such "pact", although
Linda Lewis has noted that that, while she has recommended to her
representative that Ron should be seated as the CP rep, "Board rep and
project coordinator are two different things." John Schunk _specifically_
recommends the CP representative seat as Ron's "leadership role" in the
Census Project. Other Board members involved in this proposal, including
Tim Stowell and Maggie Stewart-Zimmerman, have so far declined to comment.
More news as it develops; it's sure to get more interesting.
-Teresa
merope@radix.net