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
-------
Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
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
-------
Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
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
-------
Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
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
-------
Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
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
-------
Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
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
-------
Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.