From merope@Radix.Net Mon May 24 11:19:51 1999
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 11:19:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: usgw_all@listbot.com
Subject: Daily Board Show
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.990524102715.25327A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O
X-Status:
All the news that's fit to wrap fish in...its Your Daily Board Show!
*warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk!
Saturday 22 May 1999:
Motion 99-12: Lots of discussion on this motion: Joe, Archives Project
rep, forwards a message to the Board from Linda Lewis [in which she
responds to yours truly <g>]. Linda assures the group that "no one will
be "fired" or replaced. As long as a volunteer represents the USGenWeb
Archives, and follows those guidelines, their help is welcomed." [which
could be interpreted to read "do as I say or get fired". The DBS reminds
Census II file managers of the Ken Thomas affair.]
Joe also posts a longish message saying that he was "in total ignorance
that there were two census projects until relatively recently." He goes
on to detail his experiences trying to volunteer to be a Census II file
manager and getting his submitted data properly linked in the project. He
notes that the two Census projects do not link to the same data and the
Census II is improperly using directories that were created for another
purpose. He urges the Board to "put the Project first."
A Board member requests to see a copy of the request from RW to "move or
remove" the Census II files. He also wants a copy of census
transcriptions within the county portions of the Archives FTP directories
and would like more interactive census pages (including such things as
links to other relevant information). He also notes that he had difficulty
volunteering to be a Census II file manager. He adds, "It would be a good
idea to look at and revise the structure of all Special Projects and their
relationship with the USGWP and the Board. Maybe even add one to recruit
and assist volunteers for all of the other Projects."
Another Board members requests to see the Rootsweb request to move the
Census II files.
A Board member expresses the opinion that the Board should not be
discussion a motion that would impact the project as a whole. Rather it
should go before the membership for a vote and the Board should concern
itself with "a motion that directs the actual orgainzation of materials
within our digital library as well as a motion that directs the
orgainzations special projects set up."
Another Board member says "That we even LET this happen and some of the
board even supported it, is ludicrous. I still have not heard a
satisfactory reason addressing why the files were separated. I would like
to hear from Kay on this. Rootsweb has asked her to remove the files, does
she plan on doing this?" She goes on to post a message from one of her
state lists that describes the current impasse and the confusion it
causes.
A Board member posts a message to clarify the issue [well, from her
perspective <g>]: "People are talking about "absorbing" the Census Project
into the Archives. That is NOT what this is about. The Census Project
was started as an Archives Project and was broken off without discussion,
Board approval or any sort of general vote of the USGW population." She
stresses that this is not an attempt by the Archives to gain "some sort of
power to which it is not entitled." It is her opinion that the project
cannot vote in a meaningful way if they do not understand the issues
fully.
A Board member proposes, "Why not let the Volunteers determine the outcome
of the Census Issue. There is an election coming up. Ask for a committee
of 5 CCs with no involvement in either Project. Let them revise Joe's
motion, or the previous motion passed by the Board on this issue or come
up with something new as a Bylaw amendment. Ask the SC list to
officially, by way of the correct number of states sponsoring, to put it
on the ballot." Another Board members asks that if this proposal is to be
a bylaws amendment then "wouldn't we want to have AB input as well as
SPs?" The original Board member replies "We have had input or at least
the opportunity. Everyone has heard from the Special Project's leaders.
Give someone else a chance and see what they come up with. If it fails to
get State support, it dies or must be changed. If it fails to get
volunteer support in the election, it fails." The second Board member
still "Would sure like to see us come together and then put it forth to
the whole project." The first Board member says "Well let's do it then...
Prepare something right here right now to be placed on the ballot to make
it an either or situation and settle this once and for all...Maybe someone
could propose that we create a transition team to help pull this back
together, or where ever we decide it should go. It would be the job of
this team to make as many volunteers as possible happy and productive.
Otherwise, give someone else a chance." [The fruit of this discussion ws
posted a short time ago on various project lists.]
The Board begins to discuss the issues concerning structure and location
of data. One posts "A more important issue is the TOC to show where those
file are and to access them. Files can be located in dozens of different
places [as are our entire project]; but the need to locate and access them
need to be in one location...Since there seems to be an impasse in the
Archives/Census problem, maybe it would be a better idea to look at and
revise the structure of all Special Projects and their relationship with
the USGWP and the Board of that entity." [we are now getting back into the
realm of a previous motion to force the Special Projects out from under
the Archives Project, by 'restructuring'.]
Two more Board members vote to table Motion 99-12. One notes, "Here we go
again. Time Bomb ticking away and we are waiting to even discuss this
"motion"." He notes that this seems to happen every time, and suggests
the Board ask itself two questions about the motion: "1) Does it solve any
problems? Or just create different problems? 2) Does it serve USGenWeb,
the Volunteers and the Researchers as much as the possible fallout can
harm the above?"
Tomorrow's News Today: David Young, SC for Maine has been invited by the
NC to join the Board as a replacement for Kim Harris Myers; apparently the
Board is not going to formally motion to appoint him to a Board seat, they
are just going to say whether or not they object to him having Board-L
read/write privileges; the Board discusses Motion 99-12 some more.
Recap Corner: Since its been a long and confusing DBS today, here's a
brief synopsis:
Motion 99-12 is presumably tabled [9 aye votes so far publicly]
David Young is presumbably the new NE/NC representative (no one has yet
objected to bringing him onto the Board-L list)
We still have two Census Projects for the foreseeable future.
"Bureaucracy is a giant mechanism operated by pygmies."
--Honore' de Balzac
This has been your Daily Board Show.
-Teresa Lindquist
merope@radix.net
-----------
Daily Board Show, (c) 1999 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
From merope@Radix.Net Tue May 25 07:36:40 1999
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 07:36:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: usgw_all@listbot.com
cc: usgw-cc-l@usgennet.org
Subject: News Flash!
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.990525073143.21702D-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO
X-Status:
With less than one week to go before the period to accept nominations
for the upcoming election, Kay Mason has resigned as Chair of the Election
Committee.
Also, I've received disturbing information that the new SC rep for the
NE/NC region, while being subbed to the Board-L list, may not be allowed
to vote [as he is not actually being appointed to the rep position]. This
seems hardly fair to David or to his constituents, so I hope the Board
decides otherwise before he is seated.
Gotta catch a plane...
-Teresa
merope@radix.net
From merope@Radix.Net Wed May 26 17:56:48 1999
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 17:56:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
Reply-To: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: usgw_all@listbot.com
Subject: Daily Board Show
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.990526062705.24402A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO
X-Status:
Working overtime...its your Daily Board Show!
*warning* editorial content dead ahead. Read at your risk!
Sunday 23 May 1999:
The NC asks for a motion to appoint David Young as Kim Harris Myers'
replacement as NE/NC SC rep, noting "This is to finish Kim Myers term that
ends 31 Aug 2000. David had the next highest number of votes in last
year's election." [I believe he is wrong here. The bylaws state that the
appointed replacement reps are to serve until the next scheduled election,
which would be this coming July; thus, Mr. Young would serve until Aug 31
1999.]
BS Bill notes that "A motion is not out of order, however, acting on such
a motion might be...may I suggest that Mr Young be granted Board-L and
Board-Exec-L read/write privileges to both bring him into the loop and
keep him in the loop of current business." He asks if there are any
objections to this from the other Board members. [No, I have absolutely no
idea why it would not be appropriate to act on a motion to appoint David
to the Board. This does not seem out of step with what they have done
previously.] Four Board members indicate they have no objection to having
David subbed to the Board-L list. [This is very curious. Are they really
considering letting a non-Board member join the lists? Or are they letting
David join the Board without a vote on his appointment? Or are they just
allowing him to sit in without affording him a vote of his own? If the
last, I don't see how the NE/NC region would be served by having a
vote-less representative for the next year and several months.]
A Board member forwards correspondence on Board-Exec between
the NC and David Young regarding Mr. Young's appointment to the Board as a
replacement for Kim Harris Myers. She asks if the Board ever voted on
Mr. Young's appointment and did she miss it? [the original message from
the NC to David is not included, so it is not clear if the NC actually
invited him to join the Board or asked him if he would be willing to serve
out Kim's term if the Board appointed him.]
A Board member publishes a suggestion by one of his CCs regarding the
impasse with the Census projects, which he would like the Board to
consider. The CC proposes that: "The concession by "us" (Census I) would
be that the File Managers would relinquish maintenance of the census
portion of each county's TOC to the Census II project....The concession by
"them" (Census II) would be that they agree to move the census files back
into the "Archives" directory structure so that files are included in the
Archives search engine, and so that researchers bypassing the TOCs
entirely will still be able to locate census files when using the ftp
directories to navigate the site. Also, to make use of the partial and
complete census files and indexes and various other census files that have
been donated thus far outside of the Census Project's guidelines." [she
provides a lengthy example of how this would work and how Census I and
Census II file managers might be accomodated.]
A Board member posts a long message regarding Motion 99-12, in which he
states that it is his opinion that the Board "does not have the authority
to direct any state or special project to anything as long as they are in
compliance with the bylaws. If they are not we do have the authority to
delink the entire state or special project but I do not believe the census
project is in non compliance." He notes that Motion 99-4 affirms the
structure established in the bylaws and also states that no mater where it
resides, any data submitted are part of the USGW Project Archives. He
states, "The only way to restructure the special projects is through an
amendment to the bylaws and if such an amendment is proposed it should
have considerable input from the volunteers of the special projects who
the restructuring will effect the most." In his opinion, there is only
one Census Project, that established by Kay Bradley [sic; should be
Mason?], and he notes that Census II has provided Census I with regular
updates so they can include census files in the archives file structure.
Finally, he states, "Instead of making directives which are possibly goin
to cause disruptions in my opinion we should be trying to find away for
the census project to move back into the main file structure that is
agreeable to all or we should be looking at possibly restructuring the
special projects through the amendment process. There are only 10 days
left in which to formulate a restructuring process, debate it and get 5
states to sponsor the amendment so perhaps the previous would be the best
avenue for us to take. If that cant be worked out and it is decided that
we just can't live with it the way it is now then we have an entire year
to work on a restructuring amendment."
A Board member posts a lengthy message regarding Motion 99-12. She notes
that the bylaws do not prescribe which directories data should be kept in,
but do specify that there are three separate Special Projects, which are
not necessarily part of the Archives Project. She says, "What I see that
was done wrong when the Census Project pulled their files from the
Archives Project, IMHO, was that the board was not notified prior to
this action nor the reasons why. However, no bylaws were broken that I
can see." She notes that the Board did vote on a previous motion
recognizing the Census Project [Census II] as part of the USGW Project.
She goes on to note that although the situation has existed for a long
time, the motion itself is new and it would be disastrous to rush into a
vote.
Bill Oliver posts his "Proposal to Begin a Dialogue" which was also posted
to numerous project lists, so will not be repeated here.
You Saw That Coming Corner: Kay Mason has resigned the Chairmanship of
the Election Committee, a mere week before the period for accepting
nominations opens. We are now 5 days and counting to June 1, and there is
no sign of an Election Committee on the horizon.
The Times They Are a Changing Corner: The Genealogy.com banners are gone
at Rootsweb,just in time for Rootsweb to launch its new "Surname Resource"
thingy, in direct competition [and so stated by RW staffers] with
Genealogy.com's GenForum. You can see what they've come up with at
http://resources.rootsweb.com/surnames/. Basically, when you select a
letter you get a list of names for which Rootsweb has created "clusters"
which contain all the various RW resources pertaining to that name:
Genconnect boards, mailing lists, home pages, etc. Select a name, and it
pulls up a list of all the places you can find that name on RW. It sounds
nifty, but there's been alot of despair over it. Rootsweb has created
clusters for existing boards and lists, some of which are owned by
different people, and there is some concern over who will get to
administer the clusters when RW offers them up for adoption. Also,
there's confusion over name variants. Some want variants to be included
with the main form to ease searching; and others, of course, want the
opposite: a cluster for each variant. Rootsweb has created over 3000
mailing lists and something like 30,000 GenConnect boards for these
clusters, very many of which do not have listowners, and in so doing they
have duplicated mailing lists on other servers. But, whatever, its nifty,
and it beats trying to find all the various resources on RW, which
sometimes tend to be not immediately apparent [for instance, try finding
the Obituary Daily Times on RW's front page...]
BTW, the ad banners have been replaced by ads for something called
GenealogyBookshop.com, RW's own begs, and a variety of banners for the
many interesting genealogy sites carried on RW [Notable Women, IBBSS, the
President's Genealogy pages, etc.]
RW has also added a nifty page for interested advertisers. You can put a
banner ad on a RW page for $25 CPM, or a button for $2 CPM. Or you can
tack a 6 line ad onto the RW Review for a mere $25 CPM [no, I don't know
what CPM stands for <g>].
"Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! It is a
dangerous servant and a terrible master."
---George Washington
This has been your Daily Board Show. A day late and a dollar short.
-Teresa Lindquist
merope@radix.net
------------
Daily Board Show, (c) 1999 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
From merope@Radix.Net Wed May 26 17:57:28 1999
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 17:57:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
Reply-To: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: usgw_all@listbot.com
Subject: Daily Board Show
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.990526152828.14728B-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO
X-Status:
Two for the price of one...its Your Daily Board Show!
*warning* contains editorial content. Really. Lots of it. Read at your
own risk!
Monday 24 May 1999:
The Board Secretary asks for any additional votes on the motion to tabe
Motion 99-12. One more board member votes to table Motion 99-12 [bringing
the total to 10; the motion to table is later declared passed.]
The NC asks why a motion to appoint David Young to replace Kim is out of
order, stating "Asking David Young to become Kim's replacement as the next
highest vote receiver has been the policy of the Board since replacements
began last fall."
A Board member posts to clarify that "it has not actually been the board's
policy to replace vacancies with the next highest vote getter." The Board
has done so in some cases in the past for expediency's sake, and other
times have asked for constituent input. He says, "The board should
not feel confined into always selecting the next highest vote getter just
because that is what has always has been done." He agrees with the NC that
the Board should just go ahead and appoint David.
There is much more discussion on [the now tabled] Motion 99-12. The NC
posts, "when one individual or group of individuals tries and
apparently succeeds to do whatever they want to do with files/directories
contrary to the Bylaws and gets away with it - it only encourages others
or sets precedent that others can follow. If that isn't life threatening
to the organization I don't know what is." He also notes, "this item has
been sitting here for at least 3 months if not longer - so voting now sure
doesn't seem to be a rush unless you are speaking in glacial terms."
A Board member requests that Motion 99-12 be withdrawn and the Board lend
its support and assistance to the two groups [Census I and Census II,
presumably] as they try to reach compromise. Joe indicates he will
withdraw the motion if a compromise can be worked out similar to the one
proposed previously by a file manager [covered in a previous DBS].
A Board member asks to be pointed to the section of the bylaws violated by
Census II.
Kay Mason formally resigns from the Election Committee. She states, "I
thought that I had formally resigned as the Chair of the Election
committee after the last election, but I have cannot find an email
doing so." [We cannot remember her formally resigning, although we do
have a copy of a post in which she swears the January election was her
last. We thought it was a joke, at the time.]
Tomorrow's News Today: One of the Board members suggests that they might
want to start thinking about the upcoming election; Motion 99-13 to
appoint David Young as the NE/NC SC representative is made and seconded
and voting begins; most incoming votes are positive, but there's concern
that Mr. Young might be affiliated with either Census I or Census II and
some Board members want a discussion period. Stay tuned!
[Goodness. Since when does membership in a Special Project qualify or
disqualify one for a SC rep postion? Are we now going to start applying
litmus tests to candidates for the Board? What a scary precendent that
would set.]
We Are the Champions Corner: We hear that the new, officially opened, LDS
Family Search site got 30,000,000 (yes, that's 30 million) hits on its
first day of operation. A big, big thanks and a hearty congrats to the
LDS for making this wonderful resource available to the genealogical
community. [If you aren't one of the lucky 30 mil, keep trying. Its
worth it.] http://www.familysearch.org
"A journalist is a grumbler, a censurer, a giver of advice, a regent of
sovereigns, a tutor of nations. Four hostile newspapers are more to be
feared than a thousand bayonets."
--Napoleon Bonaparte
This has been your Daily Board Show.
-Teresa Lindquist
merope@radix.net
----------
Daily Board Show, (c) 1999 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
From merope@Radix.Net Fri May 28 08:29:57 1999
Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 08:29:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
Reply-To: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: usgw_all@listbot.com
Subject: Daily Board Show
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.990528061314.5328A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO
X-Status:
Going nowhere fast...its Your Daily Board Show!
*warning* Contains editorial content. Read at your own risk!
Tuesday 25 May 1999:
BS Bill posts the 5/25/99 "Advisory Board Activity" summary [posted
elsewhere].
A Board member asks again to pointed to the section of the bylaws that
Census II has violated, and the NC informs her that her question was
answered elsewhere.
The NC posts his reply to a project member [originally posted on one of
the regional mailing lists]. The project member is apparently a Census II
volunteer and objects to the negative way that project's volunteers are
characterized by the Archives Project coordintator [to which the NC
replies "I believe your 'record' will speak for itself."] The Census II
file manager accuses Linda of wanting to control Census II and affirms
that the standards maintained by the project are of the highest order [to
which the NC replies "...why is it nearly impossible for folks to sign up
to transcribe, get their transcriptions linked, find the census records?
Why does it take a year or longer to get this done?"] The file manager
considers Linda's negative statements to be an insult and asks her to
visti the pages before she makes more negative comments. [to which the NC
replies with a question concerning people who can't get their files
linked and a complaint that when one "goes from the main page to Census -
folks get an advertising page about joining the transcription team and
other stuff - instead of leading them where they want to go, namely to the
census records."] The file manager agains raises the control issue and
says there should be diversity in the special projects [to which the NC
replies "I believe the Board is beginning to address this issue after some
suggestions received over the last few days in this regard."] The file
manager notes that the projects should be able to evolve over time and
that the Census II file managers are "We are a hard working dedicated
bunch of volunteers who would not follow Kay's leadership if we felt she
were harming the project." [to which the NC replies, "But can you grasp
the concept of how a library is set up? Do you know how data needs to be
housed so as to provide maximum search ability without a lot of hoop
jumping by the searcher?"] Finally the file manager says she believes
that Linda owes Census II and Kay Mason an apology. [to which the Nc
replies "And I ask how can you be a fair representative for the Census
Project - if as it appears you are not open to compromise?"]
The NC asks for a motion to "accept David Young as the new Rep for the
Northeast/North Central Region". A motion is made to appoint David Young,
SC of MEGenWeb, to fill the NE/NC SC rep postion left vacant by Kim Myers.
It is seconded, and the NC calls for a vote. The motion is given number
99-13. By the end of the day four Board members votes "aye".
The NC is reminded by a Board member that there has been no discussion
period on Motion 99-13. Another Board member asks what happened to the
discussion period and states, "I would like to know if David is involved
in either of the disputed special projects."
The NC replies that "This should be a rather easy up or down vote. Are
you now saying that if a Board member's politics aren't just right that
they can't be on the Board? If so, just what kind of power structure is
being advocated?"
After pointing out that time is running short, a Board member requests
that after voting on Motion 99-13 is finished, the Board "move and take
care of the Elections details that we are responsible for and then take up
Joe's Motion [Motion 99-12] once more."
Wednesday 26 May 1999:
The NC posts a long message responding to a Board member's long message
containing her concerns about Motion 99-12. [this has also been posted
elsewhere so will not be repeated here]
A message is forwarded to the Board from Linda Lewis in which she says she
has informed Kay that she is probably resigning soon [from the Archives?].
She has already adopted out her counties and is resigning her position as
SC for Virginia [according to other information I have received, she will
be ASC for that state.] She says "I'm tired of the back-stabbing, the
lies, the games, and the attacks. I have asked Kay to remove my name from
any portion of her census project, and since I was ignored two months ago,
have now requested Tim to bring it before the Board... to remove my name."
A Board notes that she sees nothing political in the reminder to the NC of
a discussion period on Motion 99-13.
Two more Board members vote "aye" on Motion 99-13 [bringing the total to
6.]
A Board member suggests Trey Holt replace Kay Mason as the Chair of the
Election Committee. He states "We have a duty to forget our differences
and get the election process moving." [which would be a good idea. there
are now 4 days and counting until the nomination period opens.]
Welcome Aboard Corner: According to information posted to various groups
by Board Secretary Bill Oliver, 7 Board members have voted to appoint
David Young to the vacant NE/NC rep position. 2 Board members abstained,
for a total of 9 votes cast. That's a quorum folks, and since more than
2/3 of those voting voted "aye", David Young is our newest member of the
Board. Welcome David!
Trouble a'Brewing Corner: We hear the upset at the new "Surname Resource"
clusters [or Clutters, as some folks call 'em] is runing so hot on some RW
lists that it is acutally being suggested that only financial contributors
to RW's kitty be allowed to post to those lists. Except for the
GenConnect staff, who are diligently correcting all the multiple and
variant boards they created, there doesn't seem to be much comment from Rw
staff addressing these concerns. One common one is that folks who have
very active surname lists on other servers are feeling considerable
pressure to move those lists to RW. Another one frequently expressed
is unhappiness with the creation of meaningless clusters for very
uncommon surnames and their variants without first checking with the
listowners/board managers of the more common variants of the surname. And
someone somewhere [reading my mind] asked the simple question: Why can't
Rootsweb just make a single search form that will return ALL resources for
a surname with one search? Seems a trivial thing and one that most other
online genealogy providers manage to do. These "clusters" of search
engines are, face it, lame.
FYI Corner: Turns out CPM stands for "cost per thousand" showings of the
ad. And you know, all this bouncing back and forth between separate
search engines required by the "clutter pages" does tend to ramp up the
number of times the ad loads. Coincidence?
Clarification Corner: The other day we reported 30 million hits on the
LDS' Family Search website on its first day of official operation. We
have been corrected. The site actually received 60 million hits that day,
and that was with a 6 hour shut-down to increase capacity. We hear that
the site's servers can be expanded to handle hundreds of millions of hits
a day if necessary. And guess what? You only have to enter your surname
once when you search. [http://www.familysearch.org]
Today's quote is from a reader:
"I'm getting flakier than some of Kellog's products"
---Brian Leverich, Jan 1997
This has been your Daily Board Show.
-Teresa Lindquist
merope@radix.net
------------
Daily Board Show, (c) 1999 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
From merope@Radix.Net Sat May 29 12:15:13 1999
Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 12:15:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
Reply-To: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: usgw_all@listbot.com
Subject: Daily Board Show
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.990529105033.5794B-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO
X-Status:
Deja vu all over again...its Your Daily Board Show!
*warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk!
Thursday 27 May 1999:
The Board Secretary posts the results of voting on Motion 99-13, and then
posts a corrected version after he is notified that he incorrectly listed
one member as not voting [both posted to various lists]
Two more Board members vote "aye" to Motion 99-13, and two abstain. The
NC declares the motion passed and says he'll sub David Young to the
appropriate lists, as the new NE/NC SC rep. Final count: 8 ayes, 2
abstains, 4 not voting.
The Nc posts a message from someone who asks whether the National Archives
[NARA] supports the USGW Archives Project. The NC replies that
unfortunately, no, we are not supported by the National Archives. [Poor
NARA can barely support itself these days :( ]
Ginger requests that the NC to see to it that she is subscribed to a
number of lists that the NC forwarded messages of hers to [with his
replies; these were sent to numerous project lists], and which she is not
a member of.
Tomorrow's News Today: Trey Holt turns down the offer to nominate him for
Election Committee Chair; Ginger Hayes is proposed as Election Committee
Chair [there's nothing in the bylaws that says the Chair has to be a Board
member.]
Hitting The Fan Corner: It is beginning to look like Rootsweb
miscalculated badly when they announced their new Surname Resource pages.
Except for a few people, nearly all responses are negative. Many diehard
supporters are protesting the dismissive way they've been treated, and the
dissatisfaction with the way the whole thing has been handled has reached
such a fever pitch [on numerous lists, including TEAM-ROOTSWEB,
LISTOWNERS, GENCONNECT-L, among others] that a new board has been created
for people to provide "constuctive suggestions" for fixing problem [and
constructive suggestions only, otherwise your opinions will be deleted
without notice. And no more discussing it on the lists will be
allowed either; they don't want to hear it anymore.]
Unfortunately, RW supporters are not happy with this approach either. Says
one, "So telling us to get off the list is telling us to shut up. Posting
to a board is not the same as posting to a list, especially when the
diversion simply makes it easier for you to ignore us." Some sponsors are
giving up their lists and GenConnect suites in protest. Rootsweb staff
are nearly invisible, except to tell people they shouldn't complain on the
lists, and that the "problems" are being worked on [at the same time they
are busy compounding the problems by creating 5,000 new "clutter" boards].
Another listowner notes, "we find ourselves in the throws of damage
control because a new product was prematurely introduced to the market
without sufficient planning or testing. Forget beta...this is alpha. Make
no mistake, this product is ONline....which means newbies are arriving
regularly while hosts and admins are still trying to understand the
product. Support (which is obviously understaffed for this demand) is
providing vague and inconsistent replies regarding "planned fixes" ... and
quoting timeframes in terms of *weeks* for certain fixes to be addressed.
And all the while we are online "live.""
Show Me the Money Corner: Many people are wondering how the smart folks
at RW made such a gross miscalculation [we've all heard about the multiple
advanced degrees from major universities, decades of experience with
computers and the internet, elbow-rubbings with Nobel laureates, etc.]
Well, turns out RW now has a CEO, one Bob Tillman, from the Stanford
Business School. According to the latest RW Review, he will "be working
on the strategic direction of RootsWeb and relations with folks who
might advertise, sell goods, or otherwise support the site." In other
words, he's there to make RW make money, which explains the sudden
emphasis on selling ad space on RW. [Karen and Brian are now "co-chairmen
and co-founders", incidentally.] The IRS takes a very dim view of people
who try to take badly failing for-profit companies and turn them into
tax-deduction-rich not-for-profits. Its just a guess on my part, but RW
probably needs to show the tax people that RW can at least make a stab at
supporting itself.
Do The Math Corner: And just how much are those new "clutter" boards
worth in terms of ad revenue for RW? Well, let's take a look. The banner
ads sell for $25 per thousand times the ad is pulled. In March, RW says
it had 109 million hits. If there was an ad pulled for each of those hits
[for the same company], RW would have made 2.72 million dollars in March.
Now think of the Surname Resource boards. They require you to go back and
forth between components of RW in order to access different boards,
archives, projects, home pages, etc., all of of which may have a banner ad
on them. You also have to access the various letters of the alphabet to
access the surnames, each of which may have a banner ad. The extra going
back and forth ought to rack up the bucks pretty quickly. Its no wonder
they were apparently willing to risk the fury of their loyal deep-pockets
supporters; they aren't going to need their money anymore.
Just how long do you think it will be before they are forcing similar
"County Resources" on the USGenWeb Project?
Today's quote is from a reader:
"Be forewarned that if you take on the lists and/or boards, RootsWeb will
expect you to work your butt off, keep your mouth shut, and do what you're
told -- and, of course, pay them for the privilege of doing so."
---a former RW listowner, board holder, and sponsor (who gave up their
lists in protest of RW's recent actions)
This has been Your Daily Board Show.
-Teresa Lindquist
merope@radix.net
--------------
Daily Board Show, (c) 1999 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
From merope@Radix.Net Sun May 30 10:16:03 1999
Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 10:16:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
Reply-To: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: usgw_all@listbot.com
Subject: Daily Board Show
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.990530090645.18305A-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO
X-Status:
Roll out the barrell!...its Your Daily Board Show!
*warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk!
Friday 28 May 1999:
Regarding Motion 99-1, the NC posts: "Now with Trey's vote making it 8
Ayes, 0 Nays, 2 Abstain and 5 not voting - a quorum of 9 being reached -
this Motion is declared passed. I'll add David to the appropriate lists."
The NC asks Trey if he is willing to serve as the Election Committee
Chair.
Citing a busy workload, Trey declines to be nominated for the Election
Committee Chair position. He further gives the Board notice that
effective Aug 31, 1999 he will resign as the CC rep for the SW/SC region,
stating, "I've served on the board now for about a year and a half, which
is much longer than I ever intended, and I feel that it is time to return
to Texas and devote my time there." He is giving his notice now so that
his position may be placed on the upcoming ballot. He further states
that, "If there is anything that I would like to leave this board it is
this. "If it ain't broke don't try to fix it". In hindsight I think that
the project as a whole is better off when this board just does the
housekeeping type of things such maintaining the website, the domains, and
overseeing the elections. Beyond that even the discussion of change seems
to do much more harm than any good the change could possibly do." It is
his opinion that discussion of major import to the project should occur at
the state level and that the board should avoid inititating change, unless
someting happens that cleraly threatens the existence of the USGW Project.
A Board member suggests that Ginger Hayes of Illinois would be a suitable
Election Committee Chairperson, stating "She has experience, having been
on previous election committees, and my personal belief is that
experience helps....." [the bylaws state only that Board members must
serve on the committee not that one of them must chair it.]
Recap Corner: With Trey's resignation the Project has now had a total of
10 resignations since September 1998 [including Pam and Beth's aborted
resignations, but only counting Beth once], for an average of slightly
more than one resignation a month. 7 of the 16 Board positions are held
by persons other than those elected in the July 1998 election. 12
positions are currently open for nominations in the upcoming July 1999
election. There are two days until the nominations period opens. And
there is apparently, as of yet, no Election Committee.
Disaster Central Corner: The furor over the new Surname Resources [or
Clutter Pages, as some call them] continues. Tim "I'm The Boss" Pierce
has declared that there will be a Cluster Page created for each surname
list hosted by Rootsweb [you have been warned]. Unhappy campers have been
warned that if the public unhappiness continues they will be summarily
unsubbed from their lists, and some folks have reported receiving their
"you have been unusbbed" notices already. More RW supporters have
publicly announced that they are looking for a new server for their
genealogical data. Although a "suggestions" board was set up at
GenConnect, Genconect promptly crashed, so the board was not available for
some time. Simultaneously with the GenConnect crash, the threaded
archives also went offline [both are reportedly back online now]. RW
staffers are being very quiet, except to help with folks with non-cluster
pages related problems and to remind the listowners that they are not
staff and have no place in the decision-making process. Although multiple
people have asked in multiple forums "why not one single search engine
that will search everything for a surname?", no one has answered that
question yet.
Since its back online, here is the "suggestions board" for the new cluster
pages: http://cgi.rootsweb.com/~genbbs/genbbs.cgi/AdminCenter/Clusters
Remember, no negativity! [it upsets Pam]
Old News Corner: I've been asked to provide the location of some
information published in the DBS in previous editions:
From 12 Feb 1999: Big Brother Corner: While researching one of the new
Tales of Rootsweb mentioned above, I found that at least one unhappy
Rootsweb camper has filed a formal complaint with the Federal Trade
Commission. You can too! http://www.ftc.gov. Complaint file number is
444020, should you want to mention it. [The Tales of Rootsweb site is at
http://www.radix.net~merope/rfiles.htm; the specific Tale is The Sponsor's
Tale]
From 19 Feb 1999: Interesting Tidbits Corner: This author spoke yesterday
to a very nice lady in the California Secretary of State's Office of
Business. Turns out there is NO "mom and pop" company or any other kind
of company registered in California under the name Rootsweb. Or the name
Rootsweb Genealogical Data Cooperative. Or Karen Isaacson's name. Or
Brian Leverich's name." [I've since received written confirmation of
this, with a shiny gold seal on it.]
From 23 March 1999: The Thickening Plot Corner: As some of you may know,
back about a month ago I submitted a FOIA request to the Federal Trade
Commission for information in their files that pertain to our favorite
repressive server, Rootsweb. Today I got notice that my request was
denied. Two reasons are given: one is to protect the privacy of the
submitter(s), and the second is as follows:
"Records that would reveal the existence and focus of nonpublic law
enforcement proceedings being conducted by the Commission are being
withheld where release could reasonably be expected to interfere with
those proceedings." [then specific passages of the FOIA law are cited in
support of the denial.]
[my appeal of this denial is still pending]
For further information, and more stuff: http://www.radix.net/~merope
"Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged
as those who are."
This has been your Daily Board Show.
-Teresa Lindquist
merope@radix.net
----------------
Daily Board Show, (c) 1999 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.
From merope@Radix.Net Mon May 31 08:16:11 1999
Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 08:16:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: merope <merope@Radix.Net>
To: usgw_all@listbot.com
Subject: Daily Board Show
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.96.990531073848.2432C-100000@saltmine.radix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO
X-Status:
The eye of the storm...its Your Daily Board Show!
*warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk!
Saturday 29 May 1999:
There is no Board-L traffic on this date [guess they took the weekend
off? Or perhaps they've decided the Project should not be privy to their
current discussions?]
Election Update: There isn't one. The period for nominations opens
tomorrow. I guess in lieu of an announcement to the contrary, send your
nominations to the NC. Positions open this election are as follows:
NC [elected to one year term]
At-large rep: [new this year]
Archives rep: [interim position, Joe Zsedeny]
NE/NC SC rep: [Kim Harris Myers' position, will presumably be held by an
interim appointee to serve until Aug 31]
NE/NC CC rep [interim position; Bonnie McVicar-Briggs]
NE/NC CC rep [original member, but one year term, Beth Mills]
NW/P SC rep [interim position, Bill Oliver]
NW/P CC rep [interim position, Lynn Waterman]
SE/MA CC rep [interim position, Jim Powell]
SE/MA CC rep [original member, one year term, Yvonne James-Henderson]
SW/SC CC rep [interim position, Megan Zurawicz]
SW/SC CC rep [Trey Holt's position, resigned effective Aug 31 1999]
Today's quote is a blast from the past. If we knew then what we know
now...
"There's a reason why I always feel injured when someone dumps on
RootsWeb; to my knowledge, we interfere less in the affairs of the
Webmasters and listowners we host than *any* other server on the Internet.
---Brian Leverich, (USGENWEB-ALL, 11 Sep 1998)
This has been your Daily Board Show.
-Teresa Lindquist
merope@radix.net
-------------------
Daily Board Show, (c) 1999 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.