May 24-31 1999

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

-----------

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

------------

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

----------

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

------------

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

--------------

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

----------------

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

-------------------