May 15-21 2000

From merope@Radix.Net Mon May 15 10:12:24 2000

Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 10:12:23 -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.SV4.3.96.1000515091631.11122A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>

MIME-Version: 1.0

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

Status: O

X-Status:

The pot calling the kettle black...its Your Daily Board Show!

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

Sunday 14 May 2000-Monday 15 May 2000:

Tim announces the final vote on Motion 00-11: 3 "yes" votes, 2 "no" votes,

and one abstention. A quorum was not met and the motion is declared "not

passed."

While casting her vote, Pam Reid notes "I am not real sure that a "fair

forum" is possible in this situation. Where are these people coming from?

What will we do with the results they come up with? How will they be

implemented?" She believes that, with elections coming on so close, "If

the Projects members, the thousands of them that are out there, are SO

concerned, that is their forum. The can nominate and elect people that

they believe in."

Ginger Cisewski tells Pam that she believes that for many people they will

have to wait a full year before they can elect people "they believe in,"

and asks "Should these grievances be ignored for another full year?"

Tina Vickery forwards a message from project member Roger Swafford that

originally appeared on USGENWEB-ALL. Roger notes that "Events of the past

few days have reached the point of causing irreversible damage to the

public image of USGW"; he points out that two other Board members have

links to the Civil Disobedience site. In his opinion "there is no excuse

for the above links of protest, and those of other CC's with similarly

held positions." He suggests that Jim Powell, author of Motion 00-11, and

GingerC, its second, of failing to meet the duties of their office because

they forwarded a poorly written motion. He requests publicly "that both

the above members remove the inappropriate content/links from their county

sites and also exert any influence they may have upon others involved to

do so as well...Ifthey hold steadfast to displaying such content/links

then IMO ... they should resign." [All due respect, Roger, but with one

Board member consigning project members to the DBS for a "fair hearing",

another telling them to wait until after the election, and most of the

rest apparently willing to ignore the issue entirely, the court of public

opinion is the only court we have. If anything we should go more public.

Newsgroups, anyone?]

GingerC notes that "Since the unlawful delinking of the USGenWeb Census

Project, the national website has been out of compliance with the Bylaws

of the USGenWeb Project." [Article VI, Section 4] She moves "that the

Webmaster of the USGenWeb Project's national website be required to

immediately place a link on the main page of the national website to the

USGenWeb Census Project, which is now located at:

http://www.us-census.org/ to bring the national website into compliance

with the Bylaws."

===

Vote of Confidence Corner: We hear that at least two states are currently

running internal votes on whether to formally support the actions of the

NC and the Advisory Board or to publicly censure them. One state,

Nebraska, has already published a statement of non-support which reads in

part,

"Since the National Coordinator has seen fit to delink a national special

project, and then did not relink that project when the Advisory Board

failed to ratify that delinking, and since the National Coordinator has

now decided to read something into a motion that wasn't there by declaring

that the motion to sever its relationship with the USGenWeb Census

Project, Inc. also meant (by reading between the lines) that the

relationship with the domain name was severed, we will no longer actively

support any National USGenWeb Special Project in our position as the

NEGenWeb Project State Coordinator and NEGenWeb Project Advisory

Committee. Our State website will follow the By-laws and we will provide

the required links on our website, not necessarily on our main page. We

will not encourage any of our volunteers to submit files to any national

project. Our State Project will continue to serve the researchers who

visit us at the State level."

Public Disclosure Corner: Thanks to the beneficence of the IRS and the

Freedom of Information Act, I have received the entire application for

tax-exempt status for GenSoc.org, Inc., Root$web's mysterious non-profit.

As you will recall, GenSoc was granted tax-exempt status in Jaunary 2000,

but nary a word of this has escaped RW's lips in the last five months,

except for a celebration party a few months ago to which most of RW's

big donors were invited. As soon as I have a chance to sit at a

scanner, you can see the application too.

===

"Thieves respect property. They merely wish the property to become their

property that they may more perfectly respect it."

---G.K. Chesterton

This has been your Daily Board Show.

-Teresa Lindquist

merope@radix.net

-------

From merope@Radix.Net Tue May 16 10:29:41 2000

Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 10:29:40 -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.SV4.3.96.1000516095302.9650A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>

MIME-Version: 1.0

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

Status: O

X-Status:

Better than sliced bread...its Your Daily Board S how!

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

Monday 15 May 2000-Tuesday 16 May 2000:

Ginger Cisewski withdraws her motion requiring the webmaster place a link

to the USGenWeb Census Project on the USGW home page.

Jim Powell responds to Roger Swafford's concerns about the blackened logo

and links to the Civil Disobedience page and an on the issue of poorly

worded motions he says, "I have made motions that may not have been in

the best "form". It is strange to me that the motions that some of us

make are scrutinized more harshly than others, but I can live with that.

I had good intentions with the last one that I made. The previous, better

thought out motion was declared not in compliance with the Bylaws when it

was removed for lack of a second." Jim also notes that "I have removed

the links from my darkened logos in the spirit of compromise, but I will

keep my darkened logos. I am not saying that it is "right" or okay. I am

saying that I feel strongly that there was a serious violation of our

Bylaws by our NC and in protest, I will leave my logos up. If there is a

fair forum and the grievances are addressed, I will remove them, no matter

what the outcome is." Jim notes that that he will read each and every

piece of mail delivered to him on this issue, even the flames.

Jim proposes a new motion, which Roger Swafford helped him to write [see

below]. He says he will submit it later today and include any comments

that the Board members may wish to make.

===

A Skunk By Any Other Name Corner: Back in the day when the Archives was

at least pretending to be interested in amicably merging the two census

projects, a major sticking point in the negotiations was the name of the

project. Linda "Ethics" Lewis maintained that the name of the project

_must_ remain the "Archives Census Project" in order to reflect not only

its original name but also that it was part and parcel of the Archives.

It was, more or less, one of the "non-negotiable" terms discussed in the

several talks. Yet now the ACP is calling itself the "USGenWeb Census

Project" on its home pages and in its correspondence to staff and

transcribers. [cf. http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/census/]. Why might

this be?

One hypothesis making the rounds is that the ACP has conveniently dropped

the word "Archives" from its name in order to continue using the CART

program. Phil Beshear, CART programmer, has forbidden its use by the ACP,

but phrased his notice of same to state that the program was solely for

the use of the "USGenWeb Census Project". Voila! By dropping a single

word from its name, the ACP can now continue to use a program that has

been explicitly withdrawn from them and can continue to claim that the

program was designed for them. At least one ACP staff member has been

using official ACP project lists to encourage fellow ACP members to use

CART:

"We currently have three different custom transcription programs

available, CTA, CART, and CENTRANS. Please choose the one that best meets

your needs, all three were specifically developed for this project, and

are perfectly acceptable for your use. While CART is in several ways the

least preferable of the three available programs, you certainly may use

all past and current versions of it in your work." [Kevin Fraley,

USGW-CENSUS-STATE-COORDINATORS-L@rootsweb.com]

[This message was originally sent on May 4, the same day that Phil Beshear

published his notice that the ACP could not use CART. Yet another

impressive display of "ethics", Archives-style!]

Another hypothesis is that the "Archives" was dropped from the name of the

project in order to bring the project into compliance with the bylaws and

to claim the empty Census Project representative seat on the Board.

Please note that that these hypotheses are not mutually exclusive. Given

that elections are so close, I imagine that they will probably wait to

fill the seat then, but I will bet a box of rocks that the election

committee will be instructed to accept only nominees from the ACP.

===

"I guess I shouldn't be surprised that some members of the AB cannot even

vote to take action on an issue that is clearly relegated to the AB. Why

on earth can they not fulfill their responsibilities?"

---Nathan Zipfel, 15 May 2000, USGENWEB-ALL

This has been your Daily Board Show.

-Teresa Lindquist

merope@radix.net

-------

===

Full text of Jim Powell's proposed motion:

"I move to commit the consideration of the grievance submitted regarding

SC/PAGenWeb -vs NC et al to a special committee as follows; 1) The

committee shall consist of twelve USGW members selected by ballot from

open nominations of candidates by each Advisory Board member in turn until

sufficient candidates have been elected. A plurality shall elect Nominees

shall consist of 7 CC's and 5 SC's no two committee members may be from

the same state.

2) The Advisory Board shall elect a Committee Chairperson by ballot

from the Committee membership. A plurality shall elect.

3) The committee is authorized to obtain any information deemed

necessary for investigation of grievances, including but not limited to

public and private e-mails, obtaining statements from the parties

involved, and other USGW members as related to the investigation.

4) The committee shall meet on a closed archived e-list under the same

restrictions of secrecy regarding deliberations as for executive

session of the Advisory Board.

5) The committee deliberations shall adhere to accepted parliamentary

procedures for committees and USGW bylaws. Nine members shall

constitute a quorum for the conduct of committee business. A 2/3

majority of members voting on main motions is required for approval.

5) The committee Chair shall submit reports directly to the NC. The NC

shall present the report to the AB only while in Executive Session.

Recommendations of the committee are not binding upon the AB for

administrative or disciplinary action toward the person(s) involved.

Acceptance of the report does not constitute adoption.

6) Supplemental instructions may be given to the committee in

accordance accepted parliamentary procedures."

From merope@Radix.Net Wed May 17 12:03:14 2000

Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 12:03:13 -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.SV4.3.96.1000517102450.12906A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>

MIME-Version: 1.0

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

Status: O

X-Status:

Making hay while the sun shines...its Your Daily Board Show!

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

Tuesday 16 May 2000-Wednesday 17 May 2000:

Concerning Jim's proposed motion to form a committee to address grievances

against the NC and Board members, Richard Howland responds "You think that

we should set a precedent of each time that the NC or AB makes a decision

that contrary to the feeling of some. We should have a committee to

review the actions taken be the NC or AB. So when this committee makes a

decision contrary to what some think we set up a committee to look in on

the committee?" He then proposes a hypothetical scenario of numerous

committees all reviewing each other's decisions and notes "If this seems

redundant and boring it is. The NC made a decision. Then a majority of

the board failed to over turn this decision." He asks "How would a

committee who's recommendations that are not binding upon the AB for

administrative or disciplinary action toward the person(s) involved help?"

Rich considers that the "sky is not falling," and there are not plans for

a coup by the NC. Instead there is "Just an attempt to stop one small

group from smearing a good and proud organization. One who's day-to-day

administration of was forced to be put on hold by continual deceptions."

Rich recommends "Maybe it is time for you and others to support the USGWP,

and not the people that wish to Inc. it for their own reasons."

Richard moves "to declare the members displaying the assorted logos

(know as protest logo's) to be found to be displaying inappropriate

content, and in non-compliance with guidelines for web pages. I also move

that they be found in "NOT" good standing with USGWP." [Which would have

the added benefit of making everyone who protests the illegal actions of

the NC and the Board ineligible to run in the upcoming elections. Nifty.]

The motion is seconded by Maggie Stewart Zimmerman, who notes "The pages

of the USGWP are not the place for our visitors to be seeing these

protests. Complain in private if you must but keep a smile on the face of

the USGWP's image to the public." Tim Stowell gives the motion number

00-12 and opens the floor for discussion.

Ginger Hayes, noting "it would behoove us all to think about those

comments and whether we really want to wander down the path suggested by

Rich's motion," posts comments by Ellen Pack that originally appeared on

USGENWEB-ALL. Ellen notes that she would "consider it a badge of honor

were I to be delinked for displaying a blackened piece of clipart, on my

counties, placed there as a quiet and dignified protest of what I consider

to be illegal and unethical moves by the NC and AB." She reminds the

Board that words such as "inappropriate content" and "bad image" are

highly subjective and says "I am horrified that one person, or small group

of persons, would attempt to exercise such extraordinary power and control

over those who disagree with them." She suggests that it is not the

protesters who are giving USGW the bad reputation and urges her

representatives to vote no, should the motion come to a vote.

Joy Fisher says she likes the blackened logos and moves to make them

official USGW logos. This motion is seconded by GingerH.

Jim Powell tells the Board that he has requested that USGW members using

the black logos, which he designed, stop using them because "there is no

sense in loosing any good volunteers over something that I feel I

started." He says that some members have replaces the logos with a small

black ribbon graphic with no link and says "Only those in the know, will

know. It could mean anything in the world. If you disagree with that,

you may want to add it to the motion." [Actually, Motion 00-12 is already

written in such a way that it can inlcude _any_ graphic that the Board

wishes to consider inappropriate. The specific blackened USGW logo is not

mentioned.]

Pam Reid thanks Richard for his motion and says "even though I respect

these people and their work they are exhibiting blatant disregard for the

standards set for State and County pages LONG before there were any

bylaws. I completely understand that the people who are doing this are

doing it in protest of what they believe to be a severe violation of the

bylaws by the NC and the Board...However, there is no reason to add insult

to injury by using these blackened logos. What is needed (and highly

unlikely to happen) is a some kind of healing process." [Pam fails to

explain how declaring project members not in good standing will facilitate

any sort of healing process.]

Pam says she feels like she's in a Civil War and says she didn't join the

project for that sort of thing. She notes "we have abandoned our ideal of

sharing and giving somewhere along the way and replaced those principals

with an attitude of "who is right" and "who is wrong" and "do it my way

or I will take my ball and go home". If USGW is to survive, we MUST find

a way to settle our differences and continue our original goals of placing

data online for the sake of researchers and for the sake of posterity. I

am SO disappointed in all of us right now." Betsy Mills seconds this

sentiment.

Tim Stowell tells the Board he has appointed Kevin Fraley to serve as an

"ombudsman". He describes the duties of this person as follows: "This

person will be given the resposibility to look into, consider filed

'grievances' of one sort or another, to judge the merits of a case, as an

impartial outside opinion. This person would make recommendations to the

NC regarding their findings unless the grievance in question concerned the

NC. In that case, recommendations would be made to the Advisory Board."

[Kevin Fraley would hardly provide an "impartial outside opinion" in the

grievances currently before the Board. He is a staff member of the ACP,

has recently told people in that project they may use CART over the

expressly stated wishes of its programmer, and has repeatedly written

negative posts regarding the Census Project in which he called its members

liars and thieves and supported the illegal delinking of the Census

Project.]

Pam asks Tim if this ombudsman thing is a "done deal" or does the Board

have any say in it.

Barbara Dore posts an excerpt from Roberts Rules of Order [1990 edition]

in which provision is made for disciplining and/or expelling members of an

organization who act to harm the organization. The topic covered is

"Disciplinary Procedures; Offenses Elsewhere than in a Meeting; Trials"

and reads in part:

"If there is an article on discipline in the bylaws...it may specify a

number of offenses outside meetings for which penalties listed at the top

of page 639 can be imposed in a member of the organization. Frequently

such an article provides for their imposition on any member found guilty

of conduct described, for example, as "tending to injure the good name of

the organization, disturb its well being, or hamper it in its work." In

any society, behavior of this nature is a serious offense properly subject

to disciplinary action, whether the bylaws make mention of it or not. If

improper conduct by a member of a society occurs elsewhere than at a

meeting, the members generally have no first-hand knowledge of the case.

Therefore, if disciplinary action is to be taken, charges must first be

preferred and a formal trial held before the assembly of the society, or

before a committee---standing or special--- which should be required to

report its findings and recommendations to the assembly for action."

[Babs does not give the "penalties" from page 639. Yes, folks, you have

just seen a USGW Board member propose witch trials against selected

members.]

Ginger Cisewski posts a snippet of a call for volunteers for an election

committee and asks "when, where and how was this decided upon??"

Richard posts a clarification of Motion 00-12, that "it is not a motion to

delink. It is a motion to find these logos (know as protest logo's) as

inappropriate and in non-compliance, and those displaying them to be "NOT"

in good standing with USGWP." He then amends his motion to read "I move

to find the logos (know as protest logo's) as inappropriate and in

non-compliance, and those displaying them after 23:59 on 21 May, 2000

"NOT" to be in good standing with USGWP."

===

Taking My Toys and Going Home Corner: John Rigdon, Census Transcription

Assistant [CTA] programmer, has rescinded permission for anyone to use the

program if their transcriptions will be stored on Root$web. In a message

sent to several project lists earlier today, John says:

"As the author and copyright holder of the Census Transcription Assistant

(CTA) I hereby rescind my permission to use the program today (May 17,

2000) for further transcriptions for use on any Rootsweb servers. Any

pages posted on these servers in the future will be deemed to be in

violation of my copyright unless my royalty fee of $25 per page has been

paid to me...If Rootsweb is going to continue to benefit from my efforts,

I intend to be compensated...Any and all monies I receive from royalties

on this program will be used 100% for the original purpose of my writing

the program - to provide FREE non-commercial access to census records."

John expressly gives permission for the USGenWeb Census Project [headed by

Ron Eason] permission to continue to use the CTA.

Open Book Corner: John Jacoby, who briefly participated in merger talks

between the two census projects back in the fall, has written to the head

of the USGenWeb Census Project [Ron Eason's] and suggested that they open

their mailing lists to members of the Archives Census Project. In return,

the ACP would open its mailing lists to the CP members. He notes "Maybe,

it will help solve some of the problems that plague our projects. At the

very least, it would be interesting to get another point of view. I have

to be honest. Their list [ACP's] isn't as active as yours." [What? Can't

Linda "Moral" Lewis find anyone on the list to forward the CP's business

to her?]

Committee Business Corner: The Board is now soliciting volunteers for the

Nominations Committee for the upcoming elections. If you are interested

in volunteering, send an email to nominate_2000@yahoo.com by May 21.

There is an elections page set up at:

http://www.usgenweb.com/elections/election-central.html if you are

interested in open positions.

===

"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

-------

From merope@Radix.Net Thu May 18 14:47:06 2000

Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 14:47:05 -0400 (EDT)

From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>

Reply-To: merope <merope@Radix.Net>

To: Daily Board Show <usgw_all@listbot.com>

cc: USGW-CC-L@usgennet.org

Subject: Another proposed amendment to the USGW bylaws

Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.1000518142904.7877B-100000@saltmine.radix.net>

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: MULTIPART/ALTERNATIVE;

BOUNDARY=MS_Mac_OE_3041500214_161058_MIME_Part

Content-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.1000518142904.7877C@saltmine.radix.net>

Status: RO

X-Status:

--MS_Mac_OE_3041500214_161058_MIME_Part

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

Content-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.1000518142904.7877D@saltmine.radix.net>

Another proposed amendment to the USGW bylaws. Read it all the way

through. It really changes some things. We hear that Tim Stowell Himself

is flogging this in various places.

-Teresa

===

Current Version:

ARTICLE XIII. SPECIAL PROJECTS

Section 1. Special projects shall be established by The USGenWeb Project to

promote the gathering of information in specialized areas. A coordinator

shall be appointed by the Advisory Board to organize the project and enlist

volunteers. In addition, each special project shall have an Assistant

Project Coordinator or other support team in place that can take charge in

case the Project Coordinator becomes unavailable for a period of 30 days,

unless there are extenuating circumstances. Special projects shall be

repositories for public domain or research documents and shall provide an

easily accessible website for online research by the genealogical

community. A collection of links does not constitute a special project,

although links to appropriate websites maintained by other individuals or

organizations are encouraged.

Section 2. The name of the special project shall be The USGenWeb ______

Project

Section 3. The staff members of The USGenWeb Archives Project, The USGenWeb

Project, and The USGenWeb Tombstone Project shall each elect one

Special Project Representative to serve as a voting member of The USGenWeb

Project Advisory Board.

Section 4. Project Coordinators shall be elected to those positions by the

project staff.

Section 5. Project Coordinators are subject to possible removal by a 2/3

vote of the Advisory Board and a 2/3 vote of the project staff. A quorum of

75% of the project staff shall participate in order for the vote to be

binding.

Section 6. If a Project Coordinator is unable to perform his/her duties,

the Assistant Project Coordinator, or other support team, shall serve until

an election can take place among the project staff. In the case of special

projects with more than one Assistant Project Coordinator, they shall

choose one among themselves to serve in the interim.

Proposed Version:

Article XIII. THE ARCHIVES PROJECT

Section 1. The USGenWeb Archives Project shall have a Coordinator and an

Assistant Coordinator or other support team in place that can take charge

in case the Coordinator becomes unavailable for a period of 30 days, unless

there are extenuating circumstances. The USGenWeb Archives(Digital

Library) shall be a repository for public domain or research documents and

shall provide an easily accessible website for online research by the

genealogical community.

Section 2. The name of the project shall be The USGenWeb Archives Project.

Section 3. The staff members of The USGenWeb Archives Project shall elect

one Representative to serve as a voting member of The USGenWeb Project

Advisory Board.

Section 4. The Archives Project Coordinator shall be elected by the project

staff. The Coordinator in place at the time this section of the Bylaws is

amended shall be exempt from election procedures, unless he/she is removed,

resigns or is unable to perform his/her duties.

Section 5. The Archives Project Coordinator is subject to possible removal

by a 2/3 vote of the Advisory Board and a 2/3 vote of the project staff. A

quorum of 75% of the project staff shall participate in order for the vote

to be binding.

Section 6. If the Archives Project Coordinator is unable to perform his/her

duties, the Assistant Coordinator, or other support team, shall serve until

an election can take place among the project staff. In the case of more

than one Assistant Coordinator, they shall choose among themselves to serve

in the interim.

Other Proposed Changes:

Article II.

Section 2. Change "The USGenWeb Project Archives" to "The USGenWeb

Archives Project"

Article V.

Change "one(1) representative each from The USGenWeb Archives Project, The

USGenWeb Census Project, and the USGenWeb Tombstone Project," to "one(1)

representative from The USGenWeb Archives Project,"

Article VI.

Section 9.

Change "and Special Project Representative" to "and Archives Project

Representative"

Change "with the Special Projects" to "with the Archives Project"

Article VIII.

Section 1.

Change "Eight(8) voting members of the Advisory Board shall constitute a

quorum." to "Seven(7) voting members of the Advisory Board shall constitute

a quorum."

Article XII.

Section 2.

Change "The USGenWeb Project Archives" to "The USGenWeb Archives Project"

===

--MS_Mac_OE_3041500214_161058_MIME_Part--

From merope@Radix.Net Thu May 18 15:53:31 2000

Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 15:53:30 -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 [USGENWEB]

Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.1000518060450.22253A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>

MIME-Version: 1.0

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

Status: RO

X-Status:

Taking it to the limit...its Your Daily Board Show!

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

Wednesday 17 May 2000:

Ginger Cisewski forwards to the Board the letter from John Rigdon in which

he rescinds permission for the use of the CTA program "for further

transcriptions for use on any Rootsweb servers" but continues to allow the

USGenWeb Census Project to use it [as they are no longer on RW].

Maggie Stewart Zimmerman does not object to Rich's amendment to Motion

00-12.

[Tim has not yet numbered the motion to make the blackened "mourning"

logos official.]

===

Giving Away the Store Corner: There's a new proposed amendment to the

bylaws making the rounds that was supposedly composed by a small group of

Board members and supporters. The amendment proposes to eliminate all

"Special Projects" in favor of the "USGenWeb Archives Project". It

proposes to replace all mention of "Special Projects" and "USGenWeb

Project Archives" with "USGenWeb Archives Project." It would also

eliminate two Board seats, those of the Tombstone and Census Project

representatives. This proposed amendment places _all_ control of _all_

data transcribed for the USGenWeb Project under the control of one person

[Linda Lewis], and will likewise insure that the data continue to make

money for the for-profit RootsWeb.com, Inc.

[This amendment was sent under separate cover.]

Ask Me No Questions, I'll Tell You No Lies Corner: Our Esteemed NC Tim

Stowell has been claiming on at least one project mailing list that the

"USGenWeb Census Project has unsubbed and kicked out anyone who dared to

raise their hand in protest to his [Ron Eason] and his admins moves.

Furthermore, prospective volunteers were asked questions of a personal

nature before being 'allowed' to join his 'group'." Despite requests for

documentation of this claim Tim has failed to provide any evidence to

support it.

Tim has also been asked why some people are not allowed to subscribe to

Board-L even though it is now an open "read-only" project mailing list. A

county coordinator states "When I subscribed to Board-L in order to watch

the motions votes etc. I was immediately unsubscribed , without reason or

explanation. When I tried once more to subscribe I received an email from

you Tim stating that I had been rejected from the list. I emailed you

asking Why and received no response. Is this how the USGW is being run?

If you do not agree you get rejected?" There is no answer from Tim on

this one either, but this is the third person from whom I have heard a

similar story.

Linda "Ethics Is My Middle Name" Lewis has been publicly challenged to

explain why the sudden the name change for the Archives Census Project [it

has suddenly dropped the "Archives" from its name]. She has also not

bothered to answer the question, but instead has retreated to her favorite

refuge, the Root$web mailing list archives, which she has mined for old

emails from people that used to support her but who no longer do.

Fair and Impartial Hearing Corner: We've received a snippet of

correspondence from one Kevin Fraley, who among his other duties for

USGenWeb is the state coordinator for the Oregon portion of the ACP.

Kevin has recently been unilaterally appointed to the post of "ombudsman"

for the project by Tim Stowell. In response to a Census Project

volunteer who was upset that Kevin was misrepresenting himself as a

Census Project member, Kevin has this to say:

"I am exactly whom I say I am, and my project is the USGenweb Census

Project. It is also the only such project, despite the outrageous claims

of the imposter group. You have clearly swallowed some enormous lies, I'm

sorry for you. Nobody is making you do anything, we can easily use

another proofreader. Incidentally, [name deleted] signed up originally

for the former Archives Census Project, which no longer exists, now that

all USGenweb sponsored census transcription projects have merged. She

never at any time volunteered for Ron Eason's renegade project, either

before or after Eason's termination from USGenweb. I will inform [name

deleted] once again that you have changed your mind about proofreading

[county] , and we will go forward from there. Another incidental is that

[name deleted] is another of our Oregon transcribers and has publically

condemned Ron Eason and Stacey Ochard and their illegal and outrageous

behavior. Like it or not, USGenweb has only one census transcription

project again, and thank God. Good luck in your future with that gang of

unprincipled cutthroats, you will need it."

[According to the OED, an ombudsman is "an official appointed to

investigate complaints by individuals against maladministration by public

authorities".] All the known grievances [and there are several] before

the Board 1) are against the NC and some Board members; and 2) are

concerned with the delinking and other actions against the Census Project.

In addition to his sterling treatment of a project volunteer given above,

Kevin has also been a vocal partisan supporter of and volunteer for the

Archives, and fully supports the Board's actions in regard to the Census

Project. Just how fair a hearing into the alleged "maladministration" do

you think the submitters of the current crop of grievances are going to

get from him?

===

"If you think of yourselves as helpless and ineffectual, it is certain

that you will create a despotic government to be your master. The wise

despot, therefore, maintains among his subjects a popular sense that they

are helpless and ineffectual."

---Frank Herbert

This has been your Daily Board Show.

-Teresa Lindquist

merope@radix.net

-------

From merope@Radix.Net Fri May 19 20:48:37 2000

Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 20:48:33 -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.SV4.3.96.1000519151827.9677C-100000@saltmine.radix.net>

MIME-Version: 1.0

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

Status: RO

X-Status:

Sent to bed without supper...its Your Daily Board Show!

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

Friday 19 May 2000:

Gloria Mayfield says she agrees with Pam's sentiments [from May 16]

"100%".

[The motion to make the mourning logos official is still not numbered; Tim

must be too busy to take care of that little "day to day" business.]

===

Takin' It to The Streets Corner: Maybe one reason why the Board is so

quiet today is that many of them spent several hours online last night

chatting up the good folks at MSGenWeb. MSGW is currently considering

holding a vote on whether or not to issue a statement of "no confidence"

in the Board and the NC, and their State Coordinator invited the Board

members to attend a chat. Tim Stowell, Tina Vickery, Betsy Mills, Joy

Fisher, Maggie Stewart Zimmerman, Barbara Dore, Holly Fee Timm,

Rich Howland, Ginger Hayes, and Shari Handley showed up and answered

questions about themselves and recent Board actions. As may be expected,

they tried diligently to put a positive spin on the illegal delinking of

the Census Project and the current motion to declare members of the

project "not in good standing" for publicly protesting that illegal

action. Particularly interesting is that the at least one board member

who does not support the recent pogrom against the CP was not invited to

participate in the chat. Turns out the invite was sent to Tim Stowell,

who was supposed to forward it to all the Board members; guess he "forgot"

some.

Hot topics were the bylaws, the Census Project, the Archives, Linda

"Shoot From the Hip" Lewis, and project malcontents and what to do about

them. There were several interesting comments made during the chat:

"<Foggy> and that's the way the bylaws are - open to interpretation"

[Foggy is Tim Stowell]

"<MaggieNW-Plains> The only way to properly express your opinion is at the

ballot box."

[Maggie Stewart Zimmerman]

"<RootsLady-SWrep>...FWIW: I don't have a single file in the CP, ACP or

ARCHIVES. I am NOT employed by RW."

[Barbara Dore]

"<Haze> Sorry y'all, this is all fine and good, but I still find it ironic

that an NC was drummed out of office for attempting the same

intrepretation of "day to day operations" as is being touted now"

[Ginger Hayes]

"<RootsLady-SWrep> If anyone really cares to notice... it's NOt those who

have a unquestioned loyality to the USGWP who are doing the screaming! Ask

yourself WHY??"

[Barbara Dore; who fails to realize that unquestioned "loyality" is

not the same as blind obedience or blissful ignorance]

"<Shari_SE-MA-SC> Jackie - that is a common misunderstanding, I think,

that all those census files from Ron's project were lost. That is not the

case. Isn't that correct, Maggie?

[19:11] <MaggieNW-Plains> Correct Shari.

[Shari Handley, and Maggie Stewart Zimmerman, who seems to be admitting

that the ACP will be keeping the CP's files]

"<Shari_SE-MA-SC> Amen, RootsLady. I haven't read such a *sensical* post

as Corky's in a very long time. And Fred Smoot sent a nasty-gram in

response. That's just plain mean-spirited, and that is the kind of junk

I'm sick of seeing."

[Shari Handley, referring to a post originally made on STATE-COORD-L]

<boo> why wasn't the board consulted prior?

<boo> why wasn't the board consulted prior???

<boo> why wasn't the board consulted prior to delinking?

<boo> then (one more time) why wasn't the board consulted prior to

delinking?

<boo> let's see...."why wasn't the board consulted prior to delinking?

<boo> Tim, please answer...why wasn't the board consulted prior to

delinking?

<Richard> The board was consulted

<boo> With this type of confusion over bylaws, I again ask...why wasn't

the board consulted prior to delinking? Anyone care to answer that?

<boo> answer this...why wasn't the board consulted prior to delinking?

<Foggy> Boo - I didn't say that the Board was consulted or not consulted

<Foggy> I've answered Mr/Mrs/Ms boo's question

[Don't know who "boo" is, Richard is Rich Howland, and Foggy is Tim

Stowell. "Boo" first asked her question at 21:07 and Tim claimed to

answer it at 21:36. Many non-related comments were deleted, but the

comments above appear in order. Apparently, Richard Howland was consulted

on the delinking prior to it happening; was the rest of the Board? A

quick perusal of Board-L in the days following the delinking would not

lead one to believe that it was.]

Partial chat is posted at

http://www2.netdoor.com/~isumpin/msgw/MSGWchat.txt [it apparently covers

the time that all the Board members were present; some of the above quotes

occurred after the posted log was closed out]

===

"There is one safeguard known generally to the wise, which is an advantage

and security to all, but especially to democracies as against despots.

What is it? Distrust."

---Demosthenes

This has been your Daily Board Show.

-Teresa Lindquist

merope@radix.net

-------

From merope@Radix.Net Sat May 20 16:41:35 2000

Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 16:41:34 -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.SV4.3.96.1000520100337.27336A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>

MIME-Version: 1.0

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

Status: RO

X-Status:

Nothing better to do on a rainy Saturday...its Your Daily Board Show!

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

Saturday 20 May 2000:

Nate Zipfel withdraws his grievance against the Board and the National

Coordinator, noting "I have come to the conclusion that the by-laws do not

adequately address a procedure for the AB to follow in hearing a

grievance. The recent announcement of the appointment of an Ombudsman (my

esteemed colleague, the SC of Hawaii) would not based upon e-mail history

that I've reviewed provide a fair and unbiased hearing of the grievance."

Tim Stowell declares the motion to make the "mourning logos" a "frivolous

motion" and says "it is now dead." [O, what raw power!]

Tim opens the vote on Motion 00-12 "to find the logos (know as protest

logo's) as inappropriate and in non-compliance, and those displaying them

after 23:59 on 21 May, 2000 "NOT" to be in good standing with USGWP." No

one has voted thus far.

Teri Pettit responds to Ginger Cisewski's message from a couple of days

ago noting that the decision to seek volunteers for the Election Committee

was not made through any forum she was aware of. She does agree that

proceeding with the Election Committee is timely, but doubts the

advisability of: "(1) Deciding upon any election-committee-filling

procedure without discussion. (2) Asking that volunteers send their

notices of willingness to serve to a non-public email address...(3)

Closing the request for volunteers only 4 1/2 days after opening it."

She notes that the use of a private mailbox makes it easy for whoever is

it managing it [and she doesn't know either] to "filter out volunteers"

and would prefer that the Board "use the public BOARD-L to decide upon

some procedure for filling the committee, and that whatever procedure it

was, would be likewise conducted publicly, and that the committee would

not be closed for at least 10 days." She also believes there should be

"some rule to guarantee that the current Board...cannot filter out

volunteers that they may disagree with. Something like saying that anybody

who volunteers by a certain date is guaranteed a spot on the committee, or

something else that gives us none of us any veto power over any

volunteer."

===

Open Invitation Corner: Turns out that three of the five Board members

who did not attend the MSGenWeb chat the other evening were not invited.

Jim Powell was not invited by Tim, but did know of the chat through other

means. He asked to have any questions sent to him by email during the

chat, but none were. Teri Pettit says the Board members know she does not

have access to IRC and would not invite her for that reason, but she did

not see the invitation come over any Board forum to which she is

subscribed [nor were the logs sent to her, as she requested] . Ginger

Cisewski was not invited by Tim or any other Board member and did not know

of the chat until after it occurred. Pam Reid and Joe Zsedeny have not

responded to inquiries as to whether or not they were invited.

===

"Imagine hav[ing] the gall to have an opinion."

---Richard Howland, STATE-COORD-L, 20 May 2000

This has been your Daily Board Show.

-Teresa Lindquist

merope@radix.net

-------

From merope@Radix.Net Sun May 21 14:53:34 2000

Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 14:53:33 -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.SV4.3.96.1000521143103.8279A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>

MIME-Version: 1.0

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

Status: RO

X-Status:

Fighting like cats and dogs...its Your Daily Board Show!

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

Saturday 20 May 2000--Sunday 21 May 2000:

In response to a question from a constituent regarding the determination

of the regions for this year's election, Teri Pettit writes "Since terms

are staggered, it would be rather awkward to rearrange the regions...It

would require a pretty compelling reason to justify making such a change.

Should one of us formally move that we keep the same regional divisions as

the last election?"

Voting continues on Motion 00-12; thus far eight Board members have voted

"yes" and two have voted "no". [Folks, this travesty is going to pass;

those of you are intending to run for office or vote in the upcoming

election had better get those logos --indeed, ANY logo the Board might

take offense to-- off your web pages, pronto.]

While placing his vote on Motion 00-12, Joe Zsedeny notes "Consistency and

conviction compels me to support this motion because the actions against

which it was put forth also violates the ByLaws. We can't have it both

ways, support what you like and ignore when it's convenient."

Teri Pettit responds that she doesn't think its fair for Joe to

characterize "no" votes on Motion 00-12 as "ignoring the bylaws when its

convenient." She notes "Motion 00-12 is precisely to answer that

question, "are the protest logos in violation of the Bylaws, or are they

allowed under the Bylaws?" People can have different opinions on that

question without 'ignoring' any of the Bylaws...I cannot find anything in

the Bylaws that would disallow a protest display so long as it did not

modify a copyrighted graphic...There is a Section (IX.1) that requires

"prominent display of The USGenWeb Project logo on the home page", but

Motion 00-12 is not to find failure to display The USGenWeb Project logo

non-compliant..It is instead to find display of the "logos known as

protest logos" non-compliant...If you and others see something in the

Bylaws that prohibits protest logos that don't modify a copyrighted

graphic being displayed...then you certainly have the right to your

interpretation. But it is not fair to suggest that those who don't find

anything in the Bylaws that prohibits protest graphics are somehow

supporting what they like and ignoring the Bylaws when its convenient for

them."

Tim Stowell responds that he doesn't think Joe was referencing how AB

members voted on the motion, but was instead "refering to the actions of

those who caused the motion to be written in the first place."

While making her vote on Motion 00-12, GingerC notes "This Motion is far

to vague to be supportable and opens the door to a vatiety of abuses.

Which logos qualify as "protest logos"? Who is going to police the pages

to ferret out those logos deemed "protest logos"??" She wonders if a

"Policing Committee" will be necessary to make sure no one is displaying

any logos the Board deems to be "protest logos".

In response to the questions asked by Teri Pettit regarding the election

committee, Tim Stowell says "If you don't read your mail - for the

invitation to the MS chat or the note about Elections - you of course

won't know what's happening."

Ginger Cisewski notes that she also "received nothing regarding

the formation of an election committee or any invitation to the MS chat."

===

One Big Happy Family Corner: Our Esteemed National Coordinator Tim Stowell

informs me that it is his understanding that my offer to volunteer for the

Elections Committee has been received. No word yet on the status of my

grievance against him and other Board members though.

===

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless

minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."

---Samuel Adams

-Teresa Lindquist

merope@radix.net

-------