Aug 1-6 2000

From merope@Radix.Net Tue Aug 1 14:04:16 2000

Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 14:04:14 -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.SV4.3.96.1000801061002.1215A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Status: RO

X-Status:

Waiting on pins and needles...its Your Daily Board Show!

*warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk!

Monday 31 July 2000-Tuesday 1 August 2000:

Teri Pettit lets the group know she is back and available for Board

business. The first message she posts refers to Barbara Dore's reference

to a "look-alike" site at http://www.usaroots.com/. Teri points out that

not only does this site not look like USGW, it is little more than a page

of links put together to generate ad revenue. She suggests asking the

site to fix the spelling on their links and to use our proper project

name.

Barbara Dore posts an excerpt from the "US Patent & Trademark Manual of

Examining Procedure", section 202.04(d) Distinctiveness under 2(f):

"Section 2(f) of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1052(f), allows the

registration of matter which, while not inherently distinctive, has

acquired distinctiveness as to the applicant's goods or services in

commerce. Thus, an application which includes a claim of distinctiveness

is one in which, while the mark, or a portion of the mark, is not

originally entitled to registration on the Principal Register, the

applicant contends that it has become distinctive of, or has acquired a

secondary meaning for, the goods or services specified and is registrable

on that basis." She notes that the servicemark for "USGenWeb Archives"

seems to qualify under this section.

Tim gives the amended motion to declare Linda Lewis not in good standing

number 00-24a and opens the floor for discussion.

Pam Reid disagrees with Motion 00-24a and feels that it will cause more

harm than good. She notes "Linda Lewis has been a very loyal supporter of

USGW from the beginning. I truly believe her actions were taken to

protect the Archives from any possible take-over attempts....Perhaps she

went about it in a way that seems out of line to many and I am not up on

trademark law, so I really can't comment on that. I just know that Linda

loves the Archives and that she loves USGW. I can empathize with her

fears since I probably feel the same way about The Tombstone Project as

she does about the Archives." Pam reminds the group that Linda has

notified the Board that she will transfer the servicemark to the USGW

Project and suggests a substitute motion: ""I move that we substitute the

motion of declaring Lewis Lewis not in good standing with this motion of

working with Linda Lewis to transfer the Archives trademark to the Project

within a six month length of time." Pam suggests 6 months because,

"being ignorant of trademark law and the process involved," she doesn't

know how long the paperwork will take. [Talk about buying time!]

Ginger Hayes responds that "Condoning the actions of one, while condeming

the same action in another is what causes harm. Her [Linda's] actions do

not reflect loyalty to The USGenWeb Project." Ginger also notes that Pam

is welcome to introduce her suggested motion as a separate motion but that

she [Ginger] will not be withdrawing Motion 00-24a. She states "When we

condone the actions of one because we like them, and condem that action in

another because we don't like them, then we have chaos. We are all

accountable for our actions and Ms. Lewis should not be an exception."

Ginger Cisewski asks Tim to forward his response "regarding the USGenWeb

Census Project's duly elected Board Representative" [see below] to the

Board. She notes "It is official Project business and should be included

here for the record." [I gather that Tim's response was somewhat

unprofessional.]

Pam notes that since GingerH will not withdraw her motion, Pam's proposed

motion will not serve its intended purpose; she therefore withdraws it.

She says she still does not agree with Motion 00-24a and thinks there must

be a better way to resolve the issue. She notes "If we find Linda not in

good standing and ask for her resignation, she still has the trademark for

the Archives." [interesting observation; Linda does not have the

servicemark yet]. Pam says "I still do not believe that we were

completely fair in the whole Census Project incident. I wish there was

some way to amicably resolve the differences that exist, but there does

not appear to be any inclination from that Project towards making any

compromises. In that case, the damage is done and does not appear to be

reparable." She also says she is sickened by all the politics in the USGW

and "I have frankly been really taken aback by the politics that has

surfaced and hurt our reputation to the point that I no longer hold my

head up quite as high as I once did when I say I work with USGW."

===

Election News: The polls have closed. There is no estimate at this time

when the winners will be announced. The EC has announced "Results of the

voting will be announced as soon as votes are tabulated and cross

checked," but has not given any idea of how long that process will take.

We hear the Chairman of the EC, Roger Swafford, was unwinding last night

over in "Joe's place" [a chat room on irc.rootsweb.com], fraternizing

with a few of the candidates, including Tim Stowell, Joe Zsedeny, and

Richard Howland.

A Seat At the Table Corner: Ron Eason has forwarded the following

announcement to the Election Committee: "It is required that we contact

you no later than the last day of voting before the polls close to inform

you of our decision on a Board Representative for The USGenWeb Census

Project. Out of 19 eligible voters 18 votes were cast 1 voter was

unavailable. All 18 votes were confirmed, and unanimous. Having excluded

myself from the running our choice for The USGenWeb Census Project, Board

Representative is: Sue Soden. It is therefore requested that her name be

entered for approval, for seating, as our duly elected Representative."

Congrats to Sue! [of course, the probably she will be seated is nil.]

===

"There's no idea that's so good that you can't ruin it with a few

well-placed idiots."

---Scott Adams

This has been your Daily Board Show.

-Teresa Lindquist

merope@radix.net

-------

From merope@Radix.Net Wed Aug 2 13:39:35 2000

Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:39:34 -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.SV4.3.96.1000802075306.13124A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Status: RO

X-Status:

An ace up your sleeve...its Your Daily Board Show!

*warning* contains editorial content and subversive thinking. Read at

your own risk!

Tuesday 1 August 2000-Wednesday 2 August 2000:

Tim Stowell tells Pam Reid since Motion 00-24 had already been amended, no

further amendments could be made to it. He notes that her proposed

amendment would have been a new motion since they have different subject

matters.

Tim posts his reply to Ron Eason regarding the vacant Census Project board

seat: "Mr. Eason, This request cannot be honored, as your group is no

longer associated (with) the USGenWeb Project. Please see Advisory Board

Motion 00-10 which reads in part - "I move that the USGenWeb Project sever

its relationship with the USGenWeb Census Project, Inc. headed by Ron

Eason."" [We are dying to know who the Archives project has "elected" for

that seat.]

Pam says that Tim misread her intent. She was hoping that Ginger Hays

would withdraw Motion 00-24 so that the Board could then "move forward

toward a more constructive resolution of the situation."

GingerH tells Pam that she is always willing to listen to constructive

solutions, but notes that she cannot "sit here and watch actions get swept

under the rug, so to speak, when a whole project, not just an individual,

got kicked out of the project on the same grounds. That's about as unfair

as it gets. No one individual can, or should, be above the standards the

rest of the project has to live by."

Joe Zsedeny notes that the Board has some tough decisions to make. He

says "We can rationalized and moralized but in the end we are going to

have to realize that there is not a flip of difference between what Ron

did and what Linda did in using "USGenWeb" in filings for incorporation

and trade marking, respectively. If I look at it objectively I see no harm

done to the Project in either case...I must confess that my conscience

cries out for consistency." Joe believes that Motion 00-24a should be

withdrawn and Motion 00-10 rescinded and says "If we can't do that then I

must vote yes on this motion and chance ruining something I love very

much, the Archives and lose many valued friendships which I suppose I will

lose in either case. But...we can not have two standards. One for our

friends and one for those whom we disagree." He proposes that the Board

handle the situation as follows: "Ginger be requested to remove her motion

and a motion be made to rescind Motion 00-10. Then this process can be

finalized contingent on the fate of the Archives Amendment. If the

Archives Amendment fails then the CP Representative should be seated, the

CP be relinked and instructed to furnish one copy of their transcriptions

to the Digital Library (Archives). Their server location is their choice

and all others stay out of their business. If the Archives Amendment

passes the CP be relinked without Board representation but instructed to

furnish one copy of all transcriptions to the Digital Library and again,

server location is their choice, all others stay out of their business.

Census wise, live and let live."

Joy Fisher suggests that the ball is in GingerH's court and asks "Do you

withdraw your motion?" [Perhaps GingerH might consider _tabling_ her

motion until a vote is taken on rescinding Motion 00-10.]

Jim Powell says he also supports Joe's ideas and will back him on them.

===

Worth A Thousand Words Corner: Scans of Linda Lewis' servicemark

application are now available at:

http://www.radix.net/~merope/gifs/uspto1.jpg [1st page]

http://www.radix.net/~merope/gifs/uspto2.jpg [2nd page]

===

"I fear the Greeks, even when they are bearing gifts."

---Virgil

This has been your Daily Board Show.

-Teresa Lindquist

merope@radix.net

-------

From merope@Radix.Net Thu Aug 3 09:04:19 2000

Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 09:04:18 -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.SV4.3.96.1000803082930.22882A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Status: RO

X-Status:

Nothing to sneeze at...its Your Daily Board Show!

*warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk!

Wednesday 2 August 2000-Thursday 3 August 2000:

Richard Howland agrees with Joe that the Board has "tough decisions" to

make. He notes the similarities between Linda Lewis' actions and Ron

Eason's actions and says "You say that you see no harm that has been done.

I hear daily of someone else that is discussed and is quitting USGenWeb. I

hear daily that someone does not trust USGenWeb to protect their interest

or research. To me this is HARM. I see what was a friendly group of

researchers split and screaming ugly

names and words at one another....To me this is HARM." He thinks that

"USGenWeb and the people that make it up own the Archives. They own all

the projects that have collected data using the USGenWeb name. The

National Coordinator and the Advisory Board are these people designated

representatives." Richard believes that both Linda and Ron should

apologize for their actions, agree that the Census Project and the

Archives belong to USGenWeb, and pledge to follow the rules in the future.

Richard says "I would hate to lose either or both. But I would rather lose

both and save USGenWeb from being gobbled up a piece at a time." He

thinks that Ron and Linda are both "fighting to save their projects," and

he says "I just wish that they could see that their projects are a part of

something bigger. That they are not fighting the enemy, but

are fighting themselves."

Tim Stowell forwards a message from Linda Lewis to the Board in which she

says "I consider the current motion #00-24A as a formal charge to declare

me not in good standing and officially request a trial as is my right

under the parliamentary authority."

Joy Fisher asks Tim to explain how a trial would work. Tim replies

guesses that it would involved " jury of peers would be selected, evidence

presented, judgment rendered and confirmation by the Board."

Jim Powell notes that in the case of the Census Project, Tim "was Judge

and Jury. The Board allowed his decision to stand." He asks Tim what his

determination is on the present issue.

Shari Handley moves "to table Motion 00-24A until the disposition of the

application for the Service Mark (SM) or Trademark (TM) is final. If the

SM or TM is granted, motion 00-24A will be un-tabled unless Linda Lewis,

as holder of the service mark or trademark, signs over all rights to the

SM or TM to the USGenWeb National Coordinator, Archives Project

Representative and At-Large Representative (no names to be listed).

Further, if at any time The USGenWeb Project is disbanded, all rights to

the USGenWeb Archives SM or TM will revert to Linda Lewis. [Wow, she

packed a lot of business into this "motion to table"] Richard seconds the

motion. Tim gives the motion to table number 00-25 and opens the floor

for discussion.

Jim Powell notes that "the problem is the application. To wait on final

disposition would be a travesty." He moves "to suspend Linda Lewis as

Coordinator of the USGenWeb Archives until a final disposition on this

issue." Ginger Cisewski seconds this motion.

Ginger Hayes notes "Whether or not the servicemark/trademark is granted is

irrelevant. Tabling this motion under the conditions set forth below

appears to be just another way of sweeping the whole affair under the

rug....The action of Linda Lewis attempting to acquire the

servicemark/trademark is what is wrong. It does not hinge on whether it is

granted or not."

===

Election News: There is none.

Long Haul Corner: This latest delaying tactic is interesting. The

service mark application will not be disposed of for at least three months

and possibly far longer than that. It is now under dispute and that will

probably lengthen the process. By the time Linda either gets her service

mark or doesn't, this incident will be long forgotten [probably buried

under whatever current crisis the Project is embroiled in]. Furthermore,

it kicks the issue into the court of the next Board session, in which

there may be an even larger majority of "Archives friendly" members than

there is now. It also implies that Linda's actions are only wrong if she

is actually succesful in acquiring a service mark using the reserved term

"USGenWeb", but not if the clandestine attempt proves to be unsuccesful.

Do not forget what has transpired here. Linda Lewis, acting on her own

and without knowledge of the Advisory Board, Our Esteemed National

Coordinator or the project at large applied for a service mark on the term

"USGenWeb Archives". If granted, it would be her personal property. She

could sell it, give it away, use it in her personal business, etc. In the

process of applying for it, she "forged" the electronic signatures of

three Board members, two of whom have stated publicly that although they

knew she was planning on applying for the service mark they did NOT know

that they were signatories on the application [I have learned that in

private discussion Maggie Stewart has also stated she did not know her

name was on the application until after the fact]. This may expose these

three Board members to legal consequences arising from any false or

misleading statements made on the application. Furthermore, the

application was filed AT THE SAME TIME as the Board was voting to sever

ties with the USGenWeb Census Project, based in part on its incorporating

using the reserved term "USGenWeb" without the Board's approval. The

motion to sever the Census Project was made by Joy Fisher, signatory to

the application to service mark "USGenWeb Archives", who was apparently in

full knowledge that Linda Lewis was doing the exact same thing the Census

Project was being booted for.

So, now what? Shari and Richard propose kicking this issue into the

distant future [as measured in USGW-time] while the project continues to

lurch from crisis to crisis. Meanwhile, the proposed motion to rescind

Motion 00-10 [which cut the Census Project loose] has not surfaced and has

not been mentioned again. Jim and GingerC propose to suspend Linda until

the issued is disposed of, which if passed would leave the Archives

leaderless for the forseeable future. This is an interesting proposal,

since it would not require a 2/3 vote of the Archives members as outright

removal would. However, it is probably unworkable. Linda has a history

of ignoring Board motions she does not like, and in any case, the Board

has no control over the internal workings of the Archives or any other

state, local or special project. They can pass all the motions they want

censuring, suspending, or removing Linda, but if they are ignored their

only real recourse would be to sever all ties with the Archives until such

time as its Coordinator decides to be a team player. Finally, Linda has

asked for a "trial". That we would dearly love to see.

===

"O praeclarum custodem ovium lupum!" [An excellent protector of sheep,

the wolf!]

----Cicero

This has been your Daily Board Show.

-Teresa Lindquist

merope@radix.net

-------

From merope@Radix.Net Fri Aug 4 07:50:26 2000

Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 07:50:25 -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.SV4.3.96.1000804062937.17841A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Status: RO

X-Status:

Holy smoke!...its Your Daily Board Show!

*warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk!

Thursday 3 August 2000-Friday 4 August 2000:

Joe Zsedeny suggests the following conditions for relinking the Census

Project: "1. Ron dissolves the corporation. 2. Ron agrees to the terms you

set for the delinked CP (see RE: Motion 00-24A - Not in Good Standing

[Consistency]) 3. AB negotiates agreement in writing with Linda to

transfer the Archives trademark to the Project. 4. The delinked CP

Representative and the Archives Representative must both be chosen with

oversight by the Advisory Board. " He asks for a timely reply from Ron

Eason.

Joe asks Shari to amend her Motion 00-25 to read simply "I move to table

Motion 00-24a." He believes her other points should be be discussed and

negotiated. He also asks Jim to withdraw his motion to suspend Linda

Lewis and notes "These motions are complicating things and will achieve

nothing of substance as written as they will be ignored as all other

motions are ignored." Joe says "Having been on the Board for over a year

now I have come to realize that agreement between the parties is the only

way to get anything done. Motions to force something on a group of

volunteers is futile."

Joy Fisher remarks that if she remembers correctly [she doesn't], "When

Jerry Dill INC'd USGenWeb, the Board and NC gave Mr. Dill the option to

sign the INC over to the organization. He refused and even claimed to

"own" USGenWeb. At that point, he was cut loose from the organization."

[Actually the Board turned down Jerry's offer to turn the corporation over

to them. They wanted nothing to do with it.] Joy notes that Ron has not

been given the opportunity to turn the CP over to USGenWeb.

Ginger Cisewski tells Joe that what he asks Ron to do is impossible: "1.

The USGenWeb Census Project is not "Ron's Project." Ron cannot dissolve

the nonprofit corporation. In fact, Ron cannot, BY LAW, agree to anything

without the approval of the Board of Directors....2. If the nonprofit

corporation were to be dissolved, the assets of said corporation must, BY

LAW, be transferred *only* to an IRS-approved (501(3)(c)) nonprofit public

benefit corporation (Article XII), including its domains, us-census.org &

.net, and its "transcription collection." 3. The Board of Directors

cannot, BY LAW, agree to deposit copies of ALL transcriptions in the

digital library, but only those where permission has been given by the

transcriber." She notes that agreements with the CP will need to be

reached by contacting its Board, not Ron Eason.

Joe notes that although Ron as acted as spokesperson for the Census

Proeject, "CP he only speaks for himself and has no influence on his

Board." Thus, Joe's proposal for relinking are moot.

Project member Carole Hammett offers to pay in full for the cost of

registering the service mark "USGenWeb" in the name of the USGenWeb

Project. She asks only that all 15 current members of the Advisory Board

agree by email to act as signatories on the the application. She says she

claims "no personal interest in this registration other than as one of

thousands of members of The USGenWeb Project." [Her message is forwarded

to the Board by GingerC.]

GingerC agrees to Carole's proposal and urges her colleagues to do the

same. She notes "This is the best protection the Project can have, as it

would protect our very identity!"

GingerC notes that if the USGW were ever to incorporate "all proposals

would have to be decided upon by it's elected Board and/or the membership

as a whole, dependent on the structuring set forth in the Articles of

Incorporation." She also notes that the Census Project is currently the

only special project whose "structure is democratic in nature and no one

individual makes all the decisions." She finds it interesting that Joe

apparently finds "a democratic structure distasteful or undesirable."

Barbara Dore posts a timeline for the incorporation of the USGenWeb Census

Project. [On other lists, she posts an updated version that includes links

to the scans of Linda's service mark application.]

GingerC notes that regardless of what the Board does, the USPTO will still

investigate the application and "If that agency determines there was

wrongdoing, there is nothing this Board can do to protect Linda Lewis from

prosecution."

Shari Handley amends her motion to read "I move to table Motion 00-24A."

She also reminds Tim Stowell that according to RRoO, motions to table are

undebatable, so once it is seconded the vote should be called immediately.

Joe seconds her amended Motion 00-25.

GingerC fowards a message from Wayne Duncan in which he notes that he is

the sole incorporator of the USGenWeb Census Project, Inc., and that "For

once in the life of this project, its intents and mission are safe from

any potential abuse. WE (the initial Board of Directors of THE USGENWEB

CENSUS PROJECT) finally have assurances that the project name and

intentions of those who had the original dream are protected...It was our

intent to ensure that no one single individual may ever control THE

USGENWEB CENSUS PROJECT. Our decision making process is structured such

that no one "voice" can control it, nor can any group hamper progress

through refusal to participate." He stresses the teamwork both on the

CP's Board and within its membership and compares it to the example of the

USGW Advisory Board which "struggles with parlimentary procedure and tries

to please everyone, then cries "foul" when someone takes an action." He

asks "Why the great rush to for THE USGENWEB CENSUS PROJECT to return

under the auspices of the USGENWEB PROJECT?," and notes "No one has

offered any sort of reconciliation after Motion 00-10. In fact, we have

been treated as some sort of social outcast. Seems most folks were

content to just allow us to die off."

Joe Zsedeny points out that despite Mr. Duncan's implication that the CP

is in no rush to be relinked, Ron Eason has forwarded the name of their

elected representative for the CP's Board seat. He suggests that the CP

needs to get its act together and asks "Just who does speak for the CP? Is

the CP interested in a link to The USGenWeb Project?"

Pam Reid is confused by the proliferating motions and motion numbers. She

asks "Aren't all of these amendments and motions dealing with Motion 00-24

and aren't all of the motions for amendments pointing to this Motion and

it seems that all are germane to the original." She also notes "We seem

to jump to the voting process before we have sufficiently discussed an

issue and many of the amendments are cloudy and some of them server to

clarify."

Noting that "Motions to Table do not allow for discussion", Tim Stowell

calls for a vote on the _unamended_ version of Motion 00-25.

===

Smear Tactics Corner: Someone calling themselves "KayMasonCP" has been

sending out the following letter to the Census Project transcribers:

"Dear Census Project Volunteers, I am writing to warn and advise you that

the Census Project you are transcribing for that is located at

http://www.us-census.org/ is an INCORPORATED project owned by Ronald Eason

and it has been severed and removed from the one and only actual USGENWEB

located at http://www.usgenweb.org/ . Mr. Ronald Eason has been repeatedly

warned of his misuse of the USGENWEB logo and name but continues to

decieve transcribers by acting as if he and his incorporation are a part

of USGENWEB. Your transcriptions are not going to USGENWEB, they are

becomeing a part of his ever growing buisness. If you continue to

transcribe for this project you will not be protected in the event he

files again as a "FOR PROFIT" Organization. He originally filed as a "FOR

PROFIT" Organization until he was caught by the members of the USGENWEB

and ultimatly severed completely from the USGENWEB for COPYRIGHT

VIOLATIONS, INCORPORATING THE USGENWEB as well as MISUSE OF THE NAME AND

LOGO. He later changed his filing status to "NON PROFIT" in hopes of

winning back some lost transcribers. I personally cannot trust a person

who files "FOR PROFIT" and then changes to "NON PROFIT" when he is caught

red handed. His actions of filing "FOR PROFIT" tell us his goals and had

he not been caught he would have gotten away with this.... If you are

still in doubt of these statements I recommend that you visit the USGENWEB

home page and look for yourself to see what Census Project is truely

affiliated with them. I would also encourage you to take a moment and

email Mr. Eason to demand that your transcription and name be removed from

his pages....PLEASE FORWARD THIS IN ITS ENTIRETY TO ANYONE CONCERNED"

Not only is it woefully unlettered, it is full of misconceptions about

the nature of nonprofits, _and_ it is going out in batch mails by

letter of the alphabet to all of the CP transcribers. It is also

unsigned. Methinks someone needs to contact "KayMasonCP"'s ISP and let

them know.

===

"I have not agreed with everything Carole or Ginger have but this is an

exceptional offer and if the Board doesn't except they are more foolish

than I give them credit for being."

---Kathy Heidel, USGW-CC-L, 3 Aug 2000

This has been your Daily Board Show.

-Teresa Lindquist

merope@radix.net

-------

From merope@Radix.Net Sat Aug 5 17:19:38 2000

Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 17:19:38 -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.SV4.3.96.1000805162406.7892A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Status: O

X-Status:

Where's Waldo?...its Your Daily Board Show!

*warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk!

Friday 4 August 2000-Saturday 5 August 2000:

Ginger Hayes points out that a motion to table cannot contain any

subsidiary motions. She notes that "The final disposition of the

trademark/ servicemark ownership contained in the this motion to table

would be considered a subsidiary motion, since nothing in the motion being

tabled contains any reference to the the final disposition of the TM/SM."

Joe Zsedeny points out that the "new" motion to table Motion 00-24a [which

reads simply "I move to table Motion 00-24a"] was not acknowledged by the

Chair [Tim Stowell].

Shari Handley withdraws her _other_ motion to table Motion 00-24a [the one

with all the other business attached].

Shari moves "to table Motion 00-24a".

Tim acknowledges the motion to table Motion 00-24a [new version] and calls

for the vote. Thus far, 10 Board members have voted to table Motion

00-24a [and Linda's buddies have got her out of yet another scrape].

Tim passes the gavel to Shari Handley while he is out of town for the

weekend.

Richard Howland points out that no one ever seconded Shari's new motion to

table Motion 00-24a. Joe replies that he sent his second directly to

Shari rather than the list. Shari apologizes for the confusion. [ever

get the feeling you're watching one of those '40s screwball comedies? Or

maybe the Three Stooges?]

===

Election News: Joy Fisher reports that as of Thursday, 20% of the votes

were "counted" [although she probably means verified]. At this rate it

will be another week and a half before election results are announced.

Takin' It To the Streets Corner: Both Betsy Mills and Shari Handley have

asked the State Coordinators to send them their comments and opinions on

the matter of Linda Lewis' application for servicemark status for

"USGenWeb Archives." Apparently this was before they decided to vote to

table the motion to declare Linda not in good standing for her actions.

===

"I feel that members of my family should never be suspected of breaking

the law."

---Julius Caesar

This has been your Daily Board Show.

-Teresa Lindquist

merope@radix.net

-------

From merope@Radix.Net Sun Aug 6 08:20:09 2000

Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 08:20:09 -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.SV4.3.96.1000806073817.141A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Status: O

X-Status:

A little bird told me...its Your Daily Board Show!

*warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk!

Saturday 5 August 2000-Sunday 7 August 2000:

Voting continues on the motion to table Motion 00-24a. Thus far 10 Board

members have voted "yes" and one has voted no.

===

Election News: The Election Committee has released "preliminary results"

of the recent election. They are as follows:

NC Total 689 , 345 required for election. Powell 291 (run-off) Stowell

231 (run-off) Zsedeny 167

Recall Amendment Total votes 608 , 2/3 majority = 405.33 rounded down to

405 to pass. (Failed) Yes 336 No 272

Archives Amendment, Total votes 596, 2/3 majority = 397.33 rounded down

to 397 to pass. (Failed) Yes 335 No 261

NE/NC Total =167 Howland 86 (Winner) Oliver 81

SE/MA Total 217 Pack 121 (Winner) Morgan 96

SW/SC Total 130 Short 85 (Winner) Lindquist 45

NWP Total = 140 Harrison 73 (Winner) Cisewski 67

Although these results are "preliminary", Roger Swafford assures us

that final results will not change the outcome. There will be a runoff

election for the NC position between Jim Powell and Tim Stowell;

instructions for voting in the runoff will be forthcoming.

The DBS congratulates all the winners and consoles all the losers.

The Little Bird Sings Corner: For those of you interested in the

Immigrant Ships Transcribers Guild, the following URL may be of interest

to you. It seems they have a little cash flow problem over there and

their way of doing things is about to change big:

http://istg.rootsweb.com/status/stateofguild.html [be sure and

read this all the way through, it gets quite interesting at the

end.] According to the little bird "no accounting is available, and

anyone who doubts, or complains about the change-of-copyright, is

immediately unsubbed from the ISTG list, and banished from "membership" in

the guild. And, of course, no one is responsible: policy regarding

copyright is under the control of ISTG, RW, Myfamily, etc. anyone other

than the person written to." Apparently, someone over at ISTG is taking

lessons from the master.

Over in the technical/computing corner of the genealogy world, we have

GenTech [http://www.gentech.org]. Someone has sent me some interesting

information on them; apparently they are in dutch with the IRS over

alleged financial improprieties and failing to provide a 1023 to someone

on request [which they are required to do as a 501c3 tax-exempt

organization; see http://dfc.cc/cummings.jpg]. The interesting thing is

that GenTech has made it very difficult to contact them about this; as of

February 2000 all the email addresses for all GenTech personnel have been

removed from the webpage. The only remaining email addresses are a

"general info" address and the webmaster's address. Thus far, emails to

the "general info" address go unanswered.

===

"YAHOOOOO ! We didn't win 'em all but BOY we did GOOOOD"

---kellygirl3398, USGENWEB-ALL, 5 Aug 2000, on the election results

This has been your Daily Board Show.

-Teresa Lindquist

merope@radix.net

-------