Editor's note: The following synopsis of the trial of Tim Stowell was taken from materials available at the onebatcave blog (which on a fast connection takes about 20 minutes to load). Please note that the synopsis follows the order the documents were in the original materials and since some messages are not dated this presentation may not follow the correct sequence of events. Other materials are from the USGenWeb Advisory Board's public list (BOARD-L), its secret list (BOARD-EXEC), the trial list (USGW-CONF2), other publicly available sources, and from interviews with participants. As the Board is extremely secretive about its actions there will be gaps in the record; thus any corrections and supplemental materials are welcome and the identity of correspondents will be kept confidential.
As always, editorial comments are mine. Read at your own risk!
Sentence first---Verdict Afterward: The Trial of Tim Stowell
Day 32--circa 22 September 2004
Linda Blum-Barton posts another series of emails from GAGEN-L purporting to show "how some CC's felt about how the guidelines were administered." These messages all occurred in 2003, after the petition to oust Tim was sent around. [I'm not sure what she intends to get at here, other than that a couple of GAGW CCs felt that the guidelines were not being fairly applied.--Ed.] 25 March 2003: Jan Cortez and Gloria Holback exchange emails in which Jan suggests that the GAGW implement some sort of site compliance review team and a "county of the month" award, and Gloria notes that's a good idea.
22 March 2003: Brenda Pierce notes that the Council is about to begin doing site review of GAGW sites. [Jan and Gloria's exchange above was in response to this.--Ed.]
25 March 2003: Debra Crosby says "we now have these "guidelines" they are being used to target people personally and not used equally. CC's are being dismissed who barely are out of the guidelines, if at all, while other CC's blatantly ignore the guidelines and are never even questioned. "
26 March 2003: A list member [not clear who] states "most of us have always called upon one another to check our pages...We need to all get back to our pages...we did not have this type of problems before. There was nothing that we could not solve and then get back to work...But there seems to be the same ones who pick, pick and pick...We are just family historians and do not need nor want this constant battering of the other CCs...I for one don't think the bickering will stop even if you voted Tim out of office. This project is near and dear to some of our hearts...and...there are some of us who will speak out when we feel the project is being threatened and harm is being done to some of those who have helped build this project up. Tim and Margie both have been here a long time, since the beginning of the GAGenWeb Project and each of them have helped it to grow...We worked together to help one another there was very little problems such as there is now."
Jan Cortez, 25 March 2003: "...all rules should be applied equally or not at all. We all work within those rules to the best of our abilities...I guess what distresses me most here is that we are not perfect...we need to work together for this project and also realize those imperfections, working together rather than arguing amongst ourselves....Let's foster teamwork here and make the GAGenWeb all that it can be."
Donna Parrish, March 25, 2003: "If you are going to have rules, EVERYONE should abide by them. They should be applied equally or not at all. All I ask is that all people in the same project operate by the same rules." Linda sends more evidence from the Wayback Machine regarding the dismissals of Carolyn Golowka, Debra Crosby, Sylvia Rankin, and Linda Geiger. She claims to "have been sent information that these folks and others felt they were targeted by Mr. Stowell & his council for dismissal either because of their affiliation with the USGenWeb Archives Project or because they had spoken out against something being done in the name of GAGenWeb that they did not agree with." [Well, that's their opinion...--Ed.] She says "The point in presenting this evidence is...to point out that there were numerous cases of non-compliance that apparently were never addressed by the SC, the ASC's or their RC's trying to get them into compliance while *others* were targeted over minor violations or violations that did not exist until they were made up. There are cases of CC's who were hassled about these same issues to the point where they either quit or were brought to the point of losing their temper and saying things they shouldn't have...it was ultimately caused by the tactics used by the SC and his appointed Council. This...caused the atmosphere of distrust and fear and caused the CC's in GAGenWeb to feel unappreciated for their efforts...The counties listed below are sites that were never brought into compliance with the GAGenWeb Guidelines passed in April/May 2002." [I've left her links in, but none of them work.--Ed.]
Atkinson & Coffee Counties; CC'd by Melody McCook who was a Regional Coordinator while Mr. Stowell was the SC. http://web.archive.org/web/20020806231618/www.geocities.com/Heartland/La ne/3390/ http://web.archive.org/web/20030402165849/www.geocities.com/Heartland/Pr airie/5941/ Violations found on Atkinson County - In March, 2004 - the email address for the assistant cc Karen Batten bounced repeatedly; The link to queries on Atkinson county was broken; GAGENWEB GUIDELINES - SECTION 13B - NOT UPDATED W/DATA IN 9 MOS The index.html of Atkinson - last update 2/08/2003; of Coffee County - 1/01/04 but the pages marked as new on the index were dated 2002; GAGenWeb Guidelines - 16A - Atkinson violated; 16B - Both counties; 16G - Coffee; 16H - both; 16I - Atkinson; 166K - Atkinson.Section 21 - 45 days to comply.Next includes a letter she wrote to Tim in March, 2003 after she "started realizing what was going on in GAGenWeb;" she claims she was "trying to express my concerns over the project." She notes, "At that time...anyone who said anything on list was met with smart aleck remarks or were labeled "the troublemakers". I did not see most of these people as troublemakers...I saw what was obviously direct targeting of anyone who spoke out about the quality of GAGenWeb or about how some of the Regional Coordinators were allowed to treat others, speak on the list, violate copyrights, etc. without ever being held accountable...A lot of the time...it was written off as "those archives folks". I did not see where the majority of the issues raised in GAGenWeb had a thing to do with the USGenWeb Archives - but that project seemed to be a good *whipping post* to hang everything on." [Well, that might be because everyone causing trouble in GAGW was involved with the Archives, but that's just an opinion. And we find it very amusing that someone from the Archives would be concerned about "violating copyright."--Ed.]
Appling, Jeff Davis, Montgomery, Telfair, Toombs; CC'd by John B. Ellis; http://web.archive.org/web/20040202103010/plant.sgc.peachnet.edu/~jbelli s/genweb/appling/appling.html http://web.archive.org/web/20040202104344/plant.sgc.peachnet.edu/~jbelli s/genweb/jeffdavis/jd.html http://web.archive.org/web/20040202104932/plant.sgc.peachnet.edu/~jbelli s/genweb/montgomery/montgomery.html http://web.archive.org/web/20040202105902/plant.sgc.peachnet.edu/~jbelli s/genweb/telfair/telfair.html http://web.archive.org/web/20040202110421/plant.sgc.peachnet.edu/~jbelli s/genweb/toombs/toombs.html In March, 2004 - On all - copyright - 1998-2002 ON all - GAGenWeb Guidelines - 16B All but Appling - GA 16K All - Section 21 - 45 days to comply;
Ben Hill, Irwin, Pulaski - CC'd by Gloria & John Holback; http://web.archive.org/web/20040216001640/home.comcast.net/~gholback/ben hill.htm http://web.archive.org/web/20040216002158/home.comcast.net/~gholback/irw in.htm http://web.archive.org/web/20040216003413/home.comcast.net/~gholback/pul aski.htm In March - May 2004 On all - GAGenWeb Guidelines - 16A, 16K, 21
Berrien, Cook - CC'd by Vickie Lynn Ashley; http://web.archive.org/web/20031230164847/www.rootsweb.com/~gaberrie/ http://web.archive.org/web/20040226053607/www.rootsweb.com/~gacook/ In March - May 2004 and back to 2003 - USGenWeb Bylaws - Resources; Link to State TOC; - No on both; GAGenWeb Guidelines - Both Counties - 16A, 16C, 16F,16K, 21 GAGenWeb Guidelines - Berrien Co. - 16E, GAGenWeb Guidelines - Cook Co. - 16H - All pages are dated; most not updated since 1999;
Bleckley, Laurens - CC'd by Scott Warren; http://web.archive.org/web/20040225190727/www.rootsweb.com/~gableckl/ http://web.archive.org/web/20040216222719/www.rootsweb.com/~galauren/hom e.htm IN March - May 2004 and back to 2003 - USGenWeb Bylaws - Link to State TOC - Both in violation; GAGenWeb Guidelines - Both - 16C,16E, 16H Laurens Co - 15 - Link from front page to historical society with books for sale - I would not consider this a violation but when I tried to adopt a county this is the only reason I was ever given - because I had a link on my front page to a historical society that had books for sale on their site;16A,16J,16K.
Brantley - CC'd by Thomas Earl Cleland; http://web.archive.org/web/20040129055830/www.rootsweb.com/~gabrantl/ USGenWeb Bylaws - Query - No; Resources - No; Copyright - No; GAGenWeb Guidelines - 16A, 16C, 16E, 16F, 16G, 16H, 16I, 16J, 16K, 16L, 21;
[Linda adds a note here about Mr. Cleland: "This man is a very nice gentleman who I am sure would have complied with the guidelines if someone would have worked with him...After Motion 04-14 passed and...Mr. Pettys and others were writing CC's asking them to join their new project...Mr. Cleland forwarded a letter to me...that he received from Mr. Pettys and his question to me was 'Who is this guy?'"]
Bacon - CC'd by Robert Morrison; http://web.archive.org/web/20040216202323/www.rootsweb.com/~gabacon/bcho m.htm USGenWeb Bylaws - Resources - No; GAGenWeb Guidelines - 16B; 16E - there were links to surrounding counties but not the current ones; 16F, 16G; 16H; 16K; Section 21;
[Here Linda notes: "Robert Morrison's email addresses had been bouncing for quite awhile...a complaint was made by someone who had been trying to reach him concerning posting data; after...Richard Pettys became aware of this complaint, the page was changed to show that it was Up for Adoption with links back to Robert Morrison's page and with his name still on the County Selection list."]
Apparently Bacon County has not had an active CC for quite awhile. http://web.archive.org/web/20040216202323/www.rootsweb.com/~gabacon/bcho m.htm By looking back at older versions of this website, it is the same as it had been for years. At one point in time, it was shown as being CC'd by Robert Morrison and Linda Angell but I don't find Linda Angell's name on the actual website for that time. On a cemetery page, she is listed as the CC for Ware County.The content on this site doesn't appear to have changed since 1998 except for the update *date*. This was the only reference to Robert Morrison found in GAGEN-L archives. http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/ifetch2?/u1/textindices/G/GAGEN+20 02+4411117311+F
Bryan & Effingham Counties http://web.archive.org/web/20040126112233/www.rootsweb.com/~gabryan/ http://web.archive.org/web/20040128123748/www.rootsweb.com/~gaeffing/ CC'd by Carolyn Barber Jarrard USGenWeb Bylaws - Resources, Lookups - No; Copyright date in March - May 2004 was 1996-2003; GAGenWeb Guidelines - 16E - No on one; 16F - No on both; 16K - No on one; 21 - No on both counties;
Bulloch & Camden Counties http://web.archive.org/web/20040206164307/www.rootsweb.com/~gabulloc/ http://web.archive.org/web/20040124031013/www.rootsweb.com/~gacamden/ CC'd by Nancy Gay Crawford USGenWeb Bylaws - Lookups - No on one county; Link to State TOC - No on one county; Copyright dates - 2001 on one county; 1998 on one county; GAGenWeb Guidelines - One dated Feb 2003 in Mar - May 2004; One dated Jan 11, 2004; 16C - No on one; 16E - No on one; 16H - No on one; 16L - No on one; 21 - No; Regional Coordinator listed wrong on one county - RC had been gone over a year;
Burke & Screven County - http://web.archive.org/web/20040226090114/www.rootsweb.com/~gaburke/ http://web.archive.org/web/20031230002908/www.rootsweb.com/~gascreve/ CC'd by Deborah Byrd USGenWeb Bylaws - Resources - no; Copyright Date - None on Burke; 2002 on Screven; GAGenWeb Guidelines - 16A - NO; Front page Burke dated Sept 2003; 16F - NO; 16G - RC is listed incorrectly - should have been Chuck Pierce but was Brenda Pierce; 16H - No; 16J - NO; 16K -NO; 16L - No;
Butts & Johnson County - http://web.archive.org/web/20040209123614/www.rootsweb.com/~gabutts/ http://web.archive.org/web/20030806233035/www.rootsweb.com/~gabutts/ http://web.archive.org/web/20030625043245/www.rootsweb.com/~gajohnso/ http://www.usgennet.org/usa/ga/county/butts/ http://www.gagenweb.org/ CC'd by Myra Watkins USGenWeb Bylaws - CC Listed at Website - Butts County - NONE - BRENDA PIERCE LISTED AS RC & CONTACT; PREVIOUSLY MYRA WATKINS HAS BEEN LISTED AS CC BUT BRENDA PIERCE AS WEBMASTER; Resources - Butts County - LINK TO JACKSON GA'S WEBSITE - THERE IS A RESOURCES "BUTTON" BUT IT IS DEAD; Lookups - Butts County - THERE IS A LINK TO "'BOOKS WE OWN" WEBSITE, BUT NONE OFFERED ON WEBSITE; Link to State TOC - Butts - Not on Front page; Johnson County - had been listed as up for adoption since a letter I sent concerning these two websites (see below) CC Listed on Site - LINK THAT SHOULD BE EMAIL ADDRESS FOR MYRA WATKINS ACTUALLY GOES BACK TO HER PREVIOUS JOHNSON COUNTY SITE - SEE FURTHER INFORMATION ON THIS COUNTY/CC; Lookups - Johnson County - LINK TO NACO SITE; Link to State TOC - LISTED AS A LINK TO NEIGHBORING COUNTIES; GAGenWeb Guidelines - 13A - Johnson County - ??- APPEARS ABANDONED TO ME - IS SHOWN AS UP FOR ADOPTION - WHICH DOESN'T CLARIFY WHY IT WOULD STILL HAVE A CC'S NAME ON THE TOC OR THE SITE; NOT UPDATED WITH DATA - APPEARS TO HAVE HAD SOME LINKS ADDED WHEN THIS "OLD" PAGE WAS PULLED OUT OF THE FILES AND PUT BACK UP; 16A - Butts - NOT THE ONLY OFFICIAL PRESENTATION OF GAGENWEB LOGO REQUIRED AS STATED BY SC, TIM STOWELL; Johnson - LOGO IS THERE BUT NOT LINKED TO STATE PAGE - INSTEAD LINKS BACK TO JOHNSON COUNTY HOME PAGE; 16B - Butts - NO 16C - Butts - NO 16E - Butts - NO - THERE IS A "NEIGHBORS" LINK BUT IT IS BROKEN; THERE IS A COUNTY WEBSITES LINK BACK TO THE STATE TOC BUT NOT NEIGHBORS 16E - Johnson - NO - THEY ARE LISTED AND A LINK GOES TO STATE TOC; 16G - FRONT PAGE CC & RC EMAIL & NAME - BUTTS - RC & SC LISTED ON 5/28/2004; STATE TOC STILL SHOWS MYRA WATKINS AS CC BUT HER NAME IS NOT ON FRONT PAGE OF WEBSITE ANY LONGER; 16H - No - Butts; 16N - UPLOAD DATA SUBMITTED WITTHIN REASONABLE TIME - Johnson - There is no data there;
The letter: "I am sure if Carla recommended him that Bill Clody will be a great regional coordinator but herein lies alot of the problem with GA GenWeb. You are appointing someone to a regional coordinator position whose website...was not in compliance with GAGenWeb Guidelines passed in 2002...His site is one of 58 counties out of 160+/- in Georgia GenWeb that is not in compliance with either one or two points of the Georgia Guidelines that I looked for when going through those counties that week...36+% is high for non compliance. Apparently GAGenWeb does not have a committe to check for compliance as is required by USGenWeb guidelines...I assume this requirement of USGenWeb is supposed to be covered by Georgia's system of Regional Coordinators. The fact that the regional coordinators are not doing this is part of our problem...According to my records, the North West Region has 20 counties and 11 of those are not in compliance with the Guidelines of GAGenWeb. That is higher than the state average at 55 %...Maybe one of the things that is forgotten is that I...consider my free time to be as valuable as you consider yours and as valuable as any of the regional coordinators, special project coordinators or other county coordinators...dissention in the ranks of GAGenWeb is...caused because people who...have taken time away from their love of genealogy to bring their websites up to a level of compliance...look around them...and realize that there are many sites that are not in compliance...do you expect us all to just sit back and ignore this? Or maybe they labor for hours over transcriptions, careful not to violate copyright and then look around and see others violating copyrights left and right and nothing being done about it...I spent hours poring over the websites and putting together the information I reference above...The opinions I have formed about what is going on are just that, my opinions...not ones I picked up from others following along like a sheep but from going and researching for myself...I believe the USGenWeb is a wonderful theory and that GAGenWeb has the opportunity to be a great part of it but what has been going on since I have been affiliated with this project has to change. It appears that there are certain personalities that it is easy to blame everything that comes up on. But from what I have witnessed, those personalities are not the problem...I can understand the frustrations that are rampant at this time...when I ask a question...I expect an answer to that question, not sidestepping to avoid answering it nor do I appreciate being ignored. Those tactics make me suspicious as obviously, it does others. I hope you will consider this as constructive."
[Ed. Note. Although I stripped much of it out because it was tedious, Linda wastes a lot of bandwidth in this message telling Tim how very, very busy she is with all sorts of things and how much time she had to spend going to all 159 counties in Georgia to see how many people were complying with the guidelines. If nothing else, this little exercise demonstrates the extensive and ongoing nature of Linda's efforts to discredit Tim and eventually get rid of him. Clearly its something she cared enough about to sacrifice her very valuable time for. And yet---she did not recuse herself from voting on the charges. For what its worth, Linda is wrong about the USGenWeb requiring a committee to check for website compliance. The guidelines suggest such a committee but do not require it. Most things in the USGW guidelines are like that; they suggest many things but only one or two things are required, so it actually turns out to be very difficult to be not in compliance with the guidelines as long as you slap the logo on your page and have a query site of some sort.]
Linda next includes a message from herself to the GAGEN list, dated 30 January 2003, regarding the "State Evaluation Committee": "I...am wondering who is on the GA GenWeb State Evaluation Committee for our county pages. The requirement for this committee is stated in the US GenWeb information and it speaks of new pages being checked by this committee. When GAGenWeb changed it's guidelines last year, did this committee review all county pages for compliance with new guidelines?...Just one of many questions this new "controversy" is creating for me."
[Ed. Note. Again, no such committee is required. Given Linda's demonstrated and possibly willful misinterpretation of the USGenWeb and GAGenWeb bylaws and guidelines, I wonder just how accurate her list of noncompliant sites is. I didn't bother to go check all the particulars since I can't get her Wayback Machine links to work, but I also wonder how many of the Board members went to check them. After all, the links probably didn't work any better for them. Do you suppose they Just Took Her Word for it? Does quantity of "evidence" count more than quality? Or was it a matter of Linda's word against Tim's and well, they like Linda more than they like Tim?]
Over on BOARD-EXEC, a brief skirmish erupts when David Morgan asks "Would somebody explain to me why Tim Stowell was removed as the State Coordinator of North Dakota? What are the charges?" Angie responds that "what is being determined, is whether Tim should be removed as a member of the USGenWeb Project. He was suspended from all positions within the project pending the outcome of the hearing."
Day 33--circa 23 September 2004
Continuing the conversation begun the day before on BOARD-EXEC, David notes that Angie is incorrect and that Tim was still a CC in New York, Minnesota, and Tennessee. David notes, "I have voted to hold Tim responsible for his actions in GAGenWeb, and I will vote the same way on #3...I have not voted to remove Tim from the USGenWeb Project, and I will not do so. It seems mighty strange to me that all the problems were in Georgia, and not one complaint came from North Dakota. I blame Margie Daniels, Brenda Pierce and Keith Giddeon for the problems in Georgia as much as I blame Tim...he was the chief officer in charge, and should be held responsible." Angie responds: "I'm a little uncomfortable by anyone saying that they've already made a decision how to vote on any aspect of the situation...If anyone announced at this point that they've already decided that Tim should be expelled, and that they're going to vote that way no matter what happens through the rest of the hearing, there were be screams of protest and demands that the person making such an announcement recuse himself/herself from the remainder of the hearing. And those protesters would be right. It's hard to imagine that someone who has already made up their mind about punishment is going to be open-minded about the process...." [Evidence from both sides?--Ed.] David notes that he thinks that the evidence is already in, and "I have already said I am going to vote him responsible on #3...I will not recuse myself." Shari Handley steps in at this point, tells David that they aren't ready to discuss these issues yet and tells him to wait until they are. Angie says, "All of the evidence has not been presented on charge #3, and Tim has not presented his defense yet. Since you've already made up your mind to vote him guilty, then you are morally obligated to recuse yourself from the vote on that charge. If you cannot be objective in regards to the charges -- AND the potential consequences -- you should not be taking part in the hearing." Don Kelly gets his two cents' worth in with: "The leader is always responsible. There is of course a practical limit to censure."
Meanwhile, on the trial list, David contributes some evidence on Charge #3. This consists of a May 20, 2004 message from himself to Carolyn Golowka asking what she did to get tossed out of GAGenWeb, and Carolyn's reply:
"Brenda Pierce set a trap. She email a submitter in the Archives asking if it would be OK to upload a Bible file to the Newton County website. The submitter was confused...But, if it made it easier for us, it was OK by her...Brenda sent me the file, not telling me any of this. I contacted the submitter asking if it was all right to leave the links as they are and not upload the file to the County site's server space. She said no problem...I told Brenda that it was already linked and the submitter was fine with the way thing worked. Made the mistake of sending the submitter's response which was very complementary. The next email from Brenda said that I refused to upload a transcribed file and my site was 'abandoned.' Where does it state that information must reside on my County's server?"Day 34--Circa 24 September 2004
On BOARD-EXEC the Board members continue to fight amongst themselves [some things in USGW are just a given.--Ed.] David notes that Angie's suggestion that he should recuse himself is just her opinion and that Tim did make a defense on all the charges before the Board. He tells Don that "Honesty is frowned upon on this list. You might have to recuse yourself." Don says that he has felt for some time that "the buck always stops somewhere," and it is the Board's job to "determine where." He says he's still "sifting through evidence" and is not even thinking of removing anyone. He notes "I'll cross that bridge later and for now I'll try to maintain an open and objective mind. I owe that much, and a lot more, to the SCs I represent within this body." Shari Handley again steps in, tells David his comments are not necessary, and says "We're all in this together, we're all looking out for the best interests of the project, and we're all expected to treat each other with courtesy. There is no room on this list, or on this AB, for sarcasm or biting humor. Be nice." David says "Maybe I can ask this without sarcasm and without biting humor. What did you folks do in June and July? I have CCs asking me when there is going to be some kind of resolution."
Over on the trial list, Linda is busy with more evidence. This set involves a series of letters she exchanged with various people regarding Butts and Johnson counties.
Linda to Brenda Pierce, 8 February 2003: I was a little confused by the Butts County page as to whether you or Myra are the CC for it so am sending this info to both of you. From the Metro Region Page, there are two links to two different websites for Butts County...the "old" page has a link from the map for Henry County that is at least 8 months out of date...In this same map with links to surrounding counties found on the old Butts Page, the Newton County link is still going to the old site."[Ed. Note. Geez...you wonder why at some point they didn't just tell her to 'butt' out (pun intended) and mind her own damn business.]
Linda to Myra Watkins, 8 Feb 2003: I am a little confused about whether you are the CC for Butts County or if Brenda Pierce is but I found the following when going through the Georgia GenWeb pages that you might want to check on if Butts is your county...there are two links to two different websites for Butts County...the "old" page has a link from the map for Henry County that is at least 8 months out of date. In this same map with links to surrounding counties found on the old Butts Page, the Newton County link is still going to the old site."
Brenda Pierce to Linda Blum-Barton, 8 Feb 2004: "I don't know who else this was sent to as it only shows my name and you ref Myra below, so if there are others, pls let me know so that I can copy them as well. I don't want to confuse people with messages that they didn't receive previously. 1 - I will take lofthouse off the Butts site on my Metro page 2 - The Butts county site has Myra clearly spelled out as the coordinator for that site. Myra also has another county in another region I think Johnston"
Linda to Brenda: 8 February 2003: I was a little confused by the Butts County page as to whether you or Myra are the CC for it so am sending this info to both of you."
Linda to Myra, 26 February 2003: I just thought I would let you know that I just tried to use the Search engine on the Butts County site which states it is for that site specifically and it is searching all of GAGenWeb apparently." [This is a bad thing?--Ed.]
Brenda to Linda, 26 February 2003: "In your email to Myra you are telling her she is connecting to all of GaGenWeb? What does that mean? What URL are you looking at, where did that URL generate from? Is it her Butts site or the Johnson site? Please advise so that I may assist her."
Linda to Tom Stowell, 13 December 2003: "It is obvious to me and anyone else who looks at these two websites that Myra Watkins is not a webpage "coordinator" nor is she interested in being one...I am the Archives File Manager for Butts County, am subscribed to the Butts County Mailing List and have research in the County; therefore I have received various correspondences over the last year concerning Butts County & the GAGENWEB county site in particular. Obviously, that is not a concern to either of you but it is to me...I would much prefer that the site worked and no one ever contacted me about it. It is obvious that Brenda does the "web site design" for this site "for" Myra. This is my offer and I would appreciate a response from the three of you within 24-48 hours concerning this offer...I am offering to download the pages to my computer, organize them and fix all of the broken links so that it is a viable web site for Butts County researchers. I am not interested in being a CC for Butts County nor am I trying to "start" anything...In addition, I have the contributors of the wonderful "mountain" of data that has been contributed there...I won't go into all of the problems that exist there as all I want to see is the site "working" - I am not interested in being "accused" of anything over this email either...I don't want my name on it nor do I care about anyone knowing I did this. I just want the website to be functional for the contributors & researchers."
Brenda to Linda, 14 December 2003: "...I am not going to respond to much of the items below except to...tell everyone to make sure they use the correct link...There are three items that need fixing - history link, archives link and the date upload needs fixing. I put the items in the top online from submitted items, the other documents as denoted are from the old Butts county site...2) My name is under the PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE... and Webmaster Link 3) I suppose putting close to 60 files online this week that I transcribed for gagenweb sites, is really uncaring. 4)...since I have not received complaints, it would be best if the emails were forwarded for us to see so we could see what these people really want. Since the guidelines call for Tim to oversee the RC, I am hereby submitting this to him for further review in accordance with the guidelines." [Brenda also includes the results from an HTML Toolbox assessment of the Butts county page, which apparently found no bad links.
Linda to Tim, 14 December 2004: [Linda notes that this only went to Tim and she never received an answer. She says "Not long after this the front page of the Butts County site changed to a different background and some working links but most of the links were never made active and work stopped on the site after a short time. The Johnson County site changed to a site that had been a previous page for Johnson County...it was shown as up for adoption but it still had Myra Watkins listed as the CC. The link for the CC...when clicked on took you back to the other Johnson County page."] In her letter to Tim, Linda says: "I don't use "web checkers" when I am trying to find information on a website. I go to the internet and "navigate" the websites...A lot of the things on Butts County that are frustrating to researchers don't show up on "web checkers.'" She then proceeds to list them: "1) Top right hand corner of front page - Mailing List: Documentation I don't understand the correlation between this documentation and the Mailing list information. 2) The Search Engine isn't set to the correct parameters. I wrote Myra about this 7 or 8 months ago...and Myra didn't reply but you did Brenda. 3) In the table on the front page in the right hand side. You have FAMILY GROUP SHEET PROJECT - BUTTS COUNTY and the link opens up a new page that is a Free Find Search Engine page...4) Every web page in the site...has a link at the bottom that says Return to Butts, which one would assume would return you to the front page but it doesn't it takes you to a blank page with nothing on it but the following - Welcome To Butts County, Georgia Copyright 2002 - PP&B Designs - "Articles Transcribed by Virginia Harrison & compiled by Brenda Pierce for this website. Sept. 2002 "Links to Index Only are permissible on this site." Please contact the webmaster if you have any questions...5)...there is no History of Butts County included, nor a last updated date, nor a link to Butts County Archives Table of Contents which are required by the GAGenWeb guidelines...6) On the page of "The Don Bankston Files" there are numerous links that don't work or go where they state they go, .jpgs missing...I could go on but there is no need to. It is obvious by your response that you aren't concerned about whether or not the Butts County researchers have a place to research. That was all I needed to know, I made the offer and apparently you aren't interested."
Linda states, "...I feel it is important for AB members to know that some of the frustrations in GAGenWeb by CC's were due to circumstances as pointed out above. There were so many sites that were not functional, did not have data and in many cases did not have responsive CC's that other CC's were tired of answering questions/complaints about these sites. They were tired of being rebuffed if they brought the matter up...In addition, CC's who tried every way possible to see some changes occur began being targeted by some members of the council and Mr. Stowell."
Ginger Cisewski posts a note to let the Board know that she is evacuating for Hurricane Jeanne and will be offline for several days. Several Board members express wishes for her safety and Shari recesses the trial until September 27. She notes "additional evidence may still be posted to the list over the weekend, but discussion is suspended until Monday."
Linda posts more allegedly noncompliant sites:
Campbell, Cherokee, Dekalb, Douglas, Fulton, Gwinnett, Paulding CountiesBack on BOARD-EXEC, Darilee responds to David's question about why this process was taking so long: "this email bothers me...In June and July I waited for those in the know to present the information. As one of the few people on the AB without my fingers in Georgia I had no "data" to present. I did have experience with the troubles in Georgia havin' to vote in 2003 about other charges against Mr. Stowell and "Richard". I voted innocent. I also didn't vote to bring the charges against them this time. I don't want to do this. I hate doing this. I've argued against some of the charges...The charge we are hearing is the important charge...When I vote on this charge I will be showing my opinion...So as one of the People (who apparently didn't do anything in June and July).. I tried to ignore the situation until forced to. I voted when told to. I thought about issues as the issues were brought up...I absolutely hate this but I do know that Mr. Stowell and "Richard" have been given a better hearing then they gave any of their dismissed CC's...Fool me once; Shame on you. Fool me twice; Shame on me." She apologizes to Shari for not being sorry enough not to send the message.
CC'd by Brenda Pierce; Also served as Metro Regional Coordinator and First Assistant State Coordinator;
USGenWeb Bylaws -
Cherokee County - Vanessa Sanders & Chuck Pierce listed as CC's on the GAGenWeb Table of Counties; Actual front page of website showed Brenda & Chuck Pierce as CC's; Some inner pages had Wyndell Taylor listed as CC; Resources - NO; Lookups - NO; Dekalb - copyright - 2002 Fulton - Copyright - NOT ON FRONT PAGE; 2002 ON TABLE OF CONTENTS AND OTHER PAGES Gwinnett - No CC listed on front page; Brenda Pierce listed as RC; Resources - LINK TO ARCHIVES FILE WITH ADDRESS INFORMATION FOR GWINNETT; Lookups - NO; USGenWeb Logo - Modified version; Copyright - NOT ON FRONT PAGE; ON TOC 2002-2004;
GAGenWeb Guidelines -
#15 (GAGENWEB GUIDELINES - SECTION 12 - CC NO MORE THAN 3 COUNTIES AFTER JUNE 2002) - Violation; #16A (16A - GAGENWEB LOGO ON FRONT PAGE- LINKED TO GA FRONT PAGE)- Violations on Cherokee, Dekalb - YES, BUT THERE ARE TWO LOGOS - THE OFFICIAL ONE AND ONE THAT VIOLATES GAGENWEB GUIDELINES ACCORDING TO TIM STOWELL, SC; "ILLEGAL" LOGOS ON OTHER PAGES ALSO; Gwinnett & Paulding Counties - YES BUT IN VIOLATION OF REQUIREMENTS STATED BY TIM STOWELL, SC; #16B - (16B - ALL PAGES IDENTIFIED AS GAGENWEB)- All counties in violation; #16C - (16C LINK ON MAIN PAGE TO TOC) - Fulton in violation; #16E - (16E - LINKS TO SURROUNDING COUNTIES FROM FRONT PAGE) - Cherokee, Dekalb, Fulton, Gwinnett in Violation; #16F - (16F - RESOURCE CONTACT INFO) Cherokee in Violation; #16G - (16G - FRONT PAGE CC & RC EMAIL & NAME)- Campbell, Fulton, Gwinnet in violation; #16H - (16H - EACH PAGE LAST UPDATED NOTICE - MAINTAINED) - Campbell County - Most Cherokee County - YES - MOST 2002; OLD FRONT PAGE WHERE MOST LINKS ARE FROM IS LAST UPDATE - 10 DEC 2003; Dekalb County - FRONT PAGE MAY 2004; OTHERS HAVE 04 JUNE 2002; INDEX PAGE HAS NONE Douglas County - FRONT PAGE - 11 DEC 2003; MOST OTHERS DON'T HAVE ANY DATE ON THEM Fulton County - "FRONT PAGE - 5/22/2004; TABLE OF CONTENTS HAS THIS NOTE ON IT Last Updated - Brenda Pierce Site Compilation copyright upto 2002 - Present Day Believed to be in compliance with new guidelines as of 5/3/2002. " Gwinnett County - NO Paulding County - NO 16J - (16J Each county site's main page must include a link to the county's mailing list) Campbell & Douglas - No #21 - (SECTION 21 - UPON PASSAGE - 45 DAYS TO COMPLY) Campbell County - NO - SEE ARCHIVE.ORG'S WAYBACK MACHINE FOR THIS URL - NOV 10 2000; SEE NUMEROUS BROKEN LINKS ON FRONT PAGE OF SITE - SOME ARE THE SAME LINKS THAT HAVE BEEN ON THIS PAGE SINCE 2000 All others - NO;
Candler & McDuffie Counties
CC'd by Marsha Reese
"Candler was given to Marsha Reese in the early part of 2003 and McDuffie in 2004 even though Candler County never met the guidelines for USGenWeb or GAGenWeb; I know that others offered to adopt McDuffie County who had research interests there; I don't know of anyone who believes that "Marsha Reese" is a real CC - don't have proof but several things point to this being another of the Regional Coordinators doing these sites;
Candler County - No USGenWeb Logo; No copyright date; GAGenWeb Guidelines - In violation of 16B, 16E ((16E - LINKS TO SURROUNDING COUNTIES FROM FRONT PAGE -NOT ON MAIN PAGE - THERE ARE 3 LINKS LINK MARKED "NEIGHBORS" - 1 IS DEAD; ONE GOES TO A NEIGHBORS PAGE; ONE GOES TO REGIONAL PAGES;))16H, 16K, 21; McDuffie County - USGenWeb - Resources - NO; GAGenWeb Guidelines Violations - 16B, 16E, 16F,16H, 21;
Other Counties in violation -
"Mr. Stowell's own County sites were in violation of several GAGenWeb Guidelines and at least one USGenWeb Bylaw...I was written a year or more ago by a person who transcribes a lot of material for Coweta County and told that he refused to add data she submitted to him for Coweta County...Margie Daniels, also a Regional Coordinator, had violations on each of her county websites of one or more GAGenWeb Guidelines; Mr. Richard Pettys county sites all had violations of GAGenWeb and USGenWeb Guidelines/Bylaws"
Columbia County - CC'd by Teri Hopper - numerous violations
"I don't mean to beat a dead horse but the point being made here is that numerous counties in GAGenWeb were allowed to violate both USGenWeb Bylaws and GAGenWeb Guidelines for long periods of time with nothing being done about them while other CC's were targeted for harrassment and removal over minor, sometimes non existant violations."
Day 35--Circa 25 September 2004
On the trial list, Cyndi notes that she will also probably be without power due to the hurricane and the Board members banter about hurricane preparedness a bit.
On BOARD-EXEC, Denise also responds to David's concern about how long the process is taking: "...I'll give you my answer to this question which is from the perspective of a CC rep that represents CCs of GA but...personally had no involvement or even knowledge of the events in GA prior to being on the AB a year ago. In June and July the charges were being formalized by going through the volues of information on list and from people's complaints...I was alarmed and concerned about the amount of time it was taking, especially considering the length of the suspension that was given. I think at the time...that everyone thought the 60 days would be plenty of time to gather the facts and conduct the hearing...I think we as a group seriously underestimated how much time it would take. It has even been mentioned...that charges should have been ready to go when the suspension was handed out. However...the straw that broke the camel's back...was the dismissal of the CCs in GA. At that point...the AB stepped up...Hard decisions had to be made and in hindsight, a different approach may have been better...t is inappropriate to begin discussing [the final outcome of this hearing] on this list or any other until the hearing is completed. I have already began forming opinions myself and will offer my suggestions then."
[Ed. Note. While we can possibly understand why the Board felt it was imperative that they "do something about Tim" immediately (after all, he was firing their friends), that 'something' did not need to include 1) suspending him from all of USGenWeb PRIOR to any charges even being formulated; 2) removing him from NDGenWeb, where no complaints about him had ever been received; or 3) removing the entire management of GAGenWeb, delinking the state, imposing an interim SC on the state, and holding irrevocable elections prior to determining Tim's or anyone else's innocence or guilt. So basically, they punished him first, then worked up some charges to make it look like they just HAD to take action [OMG, he was displaying an incorrect logo!], and then they held a trial to justify the punishment they had already meted out. Darilee's comment that she is one of a few Board members that don't have their fingers in Georgia is also instructive.]
David replies, "With 90 days to decide this, from June 1 to September 1, I didn't really think I would have to deal with this at all."
Day 36--Circa 26 September 2004
Linda Blum-Barton supplies more evidence against Tim:
"After the petition was signed in 2003, one of the criticisms of GAGenWeb CC's was that they had not followed the proper channels in trying to have issues resolved. My prior post concerning Butts County was an attempt at that...I was not the only person trying to effect some changes but those people were as frustrated as I was with the responses received. The usual consequence was to be labeled "page police" or a "troublemaker" and ensuing retribution in one form or another...Debra Crosby, Donna Parrish and Sylvia C. Rankin were targeted...because of being vocal about issues that the administration of GAGenWeb did not want to address. Carolyn Golowka told me...she believed she was targeted because of an incident that occurred on an Alabama County Mail List with Margie Daniels. It has been stated that Donna Parrish wasn't dismissed as a CC in GAGenWeb but quit. Yes, she did after having been harassed for several years, treated with disrespect by members of the GAGenWeb Council; the harassment began again in December of 2003 with notices of her county site...being out of compliance with the guidelines and she resigned after a triple bypass surgery following a heart attack because...she did not need the added stress. The following is a "history" of the status of one county that many believed was assigned to a "ghost CC" during the early part of 2003 and continued to languish for months afterward....Gordon County had previously been CC'd by Donna Parrish and she gave it up after she tired of the political wrangling in GAGenWeb."[Ed. Note. Linda forgets to mention that Bill Clody died of a heart attack just a month before the Board started its trial against Tim and the rest of the management team in GAGenWeb. Prior to that the new management in GAGenWeb had stripped him of his position as Regional Coordinator, taken his counties, and removed him from the state mailing list. Bill was one of the earliest members of GAGenWeb, was an active and friendly RC, and from all appearances was a credit to both GAGenWeb and USGenWeb. At the time of his death, he was preparing to join another online genealogy program as it had been made apparent he was no longer welcome in the Board's version of GAGW.]
Tim Stowell to GAGEN, 9 Feb 2003: Tim lists several new CCs [one of whom is Jan Cortez], and a notice that Gordon county was still up for adoption.
Donna Parish to GAGEN: 17 Apr 2003: "...that's why the link should have been changed to http://www.rootsweb.com/~gadawson/gagen/ ...after I gave up Gordon County and asked...for the link to be changed to the new page, SOME RC told me they probably weren't ready and it had been up how many days? and my logos gone how long? and this page doesn't have any logos http://www.rootsweb.com/~gacrawfo/gacrawford.htm therefore it has been abandoned."
Donna Parris to GAGEN-L, 21 June 2003: "On Hall, I need to be removed...on Gordon someone needs to be added. I gave these up in Jan or Feb and Jerry Prager had a page up by Feb 19 & Deane Akins has been added. It is not fair to them to show the page as Up for Adoption when they have been working so hard. http://www.rootsweb.com/~gagordo2/newindex.htm
Chuck Pierce to Jan Cortez: 21 June 2003: "Things have been going smooth for a while - Time to stir the POT." [In response to an email from Jan asking if the RCs were beginning to do page checks.--Ed.]
Debra Crosby to GAGEN-L, 22 June 2003: "...it would seem to me that someone needs to sent the SC a message like he sent Bettie Wood. At least Donna has stipulated what needs to be fixed which is more courtesy than Bettie was afforded."
Richard Pettys to GAGEN-L, 21 June 2003: [apparently directed at Jan Cortez] "...I would like to know what was stipulated that needed to be fixed?...would you prefer that site compliance notices be sent via the GAGEN list than privately? Hard as it is to believe, we are all on the same side here."
Linda Blum-Barton to GAGEN-L, 21 June 2004: "I also believe the majority of County Coordinators in GA GenWeb have brought their sites into compliance with the Georgia Guidelines that were voted on by the County Coordinators in 2002. I also believe it is a disservice to ALL of the County Coordinators...for there to be county sites that do not meet the guidelines as egregiously as some...look at the website in question...It has been "public" for 4 months. Are you proud to have it as part of GA GenWeb?"
Richard to Linda, 21 June 2003: "I have not looked at that site, and have no intention of doing so. I am too busy working on various counties and projects together with my RC duties to have time to police other people's pages. I am certainly glad that you and others have sufficient time on your hands to visit other pages...the proper mechanism to make these concerns known is to address the CC, his or her RC, or the SC and ASC *privately*, and not publicly on the list where doing so is only going to upset some, embarass others, and run others away from the Project."
Linda to Richard, 21 June 2003: "...I was referencing the post of Donna's concerning the "new" Gordon County page being listed on CC Pics as "up for adoption"
Richard to Linda, 21 June 2003: "...since Gordon County is not in my region and the assignment of counties is not one of my duties, I am not aware of the situation."
Linda to Richard, via GAGEN-L, 22 June 2003: "I believe it goes much deeper and to points of more importance than "policeing pages". I am sorry to hear that you as a CC, RC and ASC are not interested."
Linda notes: "The above thread began over a post concerning a link on a CC Pics page showing Gordon County as Up for Adoption months after it had been adopted by Jerry Prager & Dean Akins. In the posts below, some of these links are still "live" so you can look at the pages in question yourself. Below this response from Bill Clody, the Regional Coordinator for Gordon County is the letter I sent him in an attempt to go through the "chain of command".
Bill Clody to Linda, 22 June 2003: "...I began an audit of the sites which I am responsible for...about a month ago...The timing was most unfortunate because I had already had plans for a week long vacation with my kids which was shortly after I started the review...I will go through tomorrow and check Gordon County as it is now against section 16 of the guidelines. I did note that the Gordon County CC did not respond when I queried all of the regional CC's."
Linda to Bill, 21 June 2003: "...I have a problem with the Gordon County page. This site has been like this for 4 months. There is no material here and the links are all broken. They weren't all broken about a month ago when I followed a link to a page that had the following information on it...I don't feel this is appropriate content for a US GenWeb site." Linda includes a blurb that was apparently on the Gordon county page at one time:"This is the About Gordon County, Georgia page. This will be a work in progress continuously as I add items that I think will interest (Jerry and Deane), but most of all you...Complaints: Serious Researchers can send concerns or complaints to us and if we do not meet your needs you may seek to speak to our RC...the following statement is not for the serious researchers, or for 99.99999 % of the visitors that will come here, so please do not be offended. The gnats know who they are. Complaints by gnats and mutts? Don't bother we will cheerfully ignore."Linda notes that the Gordon county guestbook page takes her to a "parent directory" and asks "is this appropriate for a US GenWeb county site?" She includes what is apparently another blurb: "Views of this page may not reflect the views of GaGenWeb or USGenWeb in some/any/all respects." She notes "...these are supposed to be websites for genealogical records and research not "opinion" sites...if you...View Source and read down to the bottom of the page, there is this note...'If you are looking here for code, I have 2 words for you... Good Luck, if you are looking for something to gripe about then go on and find another hole to climb in ...with people like you we don't need jerks.'" Linda notes that people check source code all the time and wonders if this is an appropriate message. She notes, "Searching...on Google, I don't find where either of these CC's are experienced with US GenWeb sites or are active in the genealogical research world...It appears they may be having some trouble with building pages that meet the Georgia GenWeb guidelines. This page has been up...3 months longer than our guidelines allow us to have a page up without CONTENT on it...the only place that Dean Akins shows up on rootsweb other than our Georgia pages are two different obituaries...Jerry Prager does not show up at all on rootsweb except Georgia. In addition it appears that neither of these CC's were ever announced on GAGEN-L as new County Coordinators. While this is not "law" it has been the accepted practice...In addition there was the allegation that this website was uploaded through an IP address belonging to an ASC and RC...I know that these questions have been answered before with "it is none of your business". Please, I hope you will have more respect for me than that. It is my business as I, too, am a volunteer in the GA GenWeb and US GenWeb projects...It is a slap in my face to have sites like this linked from our State Page when I put as much work as I do into my volunteer efforts within this project. Have you personally corresponded with these two county coordinators? It seems to me that if they are to be included on our rolls as county coordinators and as "voting members" then they should have to go by the same rules that I abide by. I would appreciate a personal response to this message in a timely manner."
Here Linda notes that Bill Clody "followed this through to the end but apparently ran into some opposition along the way from Council Members."
Bill Clody to Linda Barton, 22 June 2003: "I totally agree with your final statement and just revisited the site in question...I will be sending them a message shortly...I think that we will move very quickly to declare the site abandoned. The 30 day notice probably is necessary but if there is no response to the message which I send I will push to have it marked as available more quickly. I can't imagine why an ASC or other RC would have been involved in the process...It truly looks like these guys have done something and moved on. I doubt that there is any intent or interest on their parts in fixing it. This is one of the pages that Donna gave up back towards the first of the year. I have a feeling that what happened is the page fell through a crack getting it reassigned because the timing is right for it to have happened about the time Carla stepped down as RC and I took over. I am sure there were a number of weeks in there where someone else was filling in on making assignments. Anyway I will be moving to get it cleaned up ASAP."[Ed. Note. The first time I read this message I literally started laughing so hard I pulled a muscle. If I had a dollar for everytime I saw a "there's a huge conspiracy going on and I'm in danger if I tell anyone," message from someone in this project, I could afford that Alienware gaming computer I've lusted after for a year now. I know that Linda intends this to be "evidence" but this is nothing more than her opinion and her possibly fevered imagination. If anyone truly needs to get off the computer and out of the house, its her.]
"Mail Delivery System" to Linda , 31 August 2003: " This message was created automatically by mail delivery software (Exim). A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed: email@example.com SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO:firstname.lastname@example.org: host smtp-in.load.com [126.96.36.199]: 550 Invalid RECIPIENT address: User does not exist."
Linda to email@example.com, 31 Aug 2003: "Hi, I have received correspondence from someone looking for Gordon County Records. Could you please contact me so I can forward their name to you?"
Linda to Bill, 2 Oct 2003: "I have similar "bounced emails" from this email address beginning several months ago......according to posts in the guestbook, others do also. Have you been able to contact them? Are these CC's on the voter list for GAGenWeb?" [Which would be none of her business.--Ed.]
"Mail Delivery System" to Linda, 2 Oct 2003: "This message was created automatically by mail delivery software (Exim). A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed: firstname.lastname@example.org SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO:email@example.com: host smtp-in.load.com [188.8.131.52]: 550 Invalid RECIPIENT address: User does not exist"
Linda to firstname.lastname@example.org, 2 Oct 2003: "Could you please contact me when the broken links on Gordon County are repaired. I have been trying for months to do some research there."
Linda to Bill, 2 Oct 2003: "I was just wondering if you have been able to get in touch with Jerry & Dean concerning the Gordon County website? Have you looked at the guestbook recently? It is apparently beginning to affect researchers."
Bill to Linda, 2 Oct 2003: "...I declared both Gordon and Carroll Counties abandoned at least 3 weeks ago. [Tim] put up a page...with Carroll County but for some reason did not on Gordon County. I have requested new space for Carroll County because the old site went AGHP and have been attempting to get the password for Gordon County but have not had success there so I will be requesting new space for it from RW today...as many times as I have emailed Jerry or Dean I have never gotten a bounce but I have never gotten an answer either."
Linda to Bill, 2 October 2003: "The attached forwarded "bounced" email attempt to contact Jerry Prager...CC of TWO counties has been occurring for months also...obviously this is not good for the project."
"Mail Delivery System" to Linda, 2 Oct 2003: "This is the Postfix program at host imta27.mta.everyone.net. I'm sorry to have to inform you that the message returned below could not be delivered to one or more destinations. For further assistance, please contact email@example.com If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your own text from the message returned below." The Postfix program firstname.lastname@example.org: the recipient's mailbox is full or would exceed quota"
Linda to Bill, 2 Oct 2003: "Thanks so much for replying. I...appreciate that you have been concerned enough about this situation to try and do something...it is so bad for The GAGenWeb Project and the USGenWeb Project to have sites like this linked for so long."
Bill to Linda, 2 Oct 2003: "...I have gone back and sent emails to everyone in the Gordon County Guestbook who have signed it more recently than June...I am actively seeking a replacement for Messrs Prager and Akin and have sent numerous emails to both over the summer to no response. I have also now requested new hosting space from RootsWeb...after exhausting all attempts to obtain the password to the existing space."
Linda to Bill, 2 Oct 2003: "The attached forwarded "bounced" email attempt to contact Jerry Prager."
Bill to Linda, 2 Oct 2003: "If people simply would tell you I am quitting instead of quietly stealing off into the night it would make things a lot easier...I also seemed to run into some reluctance to dump these particular two guys like they were someone's buddies and I don't quite know where that is coming from. I have had several messages of the "well have you tried to see if we have alternate email addresses for them"...it should be at least partially the CC's responsibility to remain reachable by his/her RC...If they had simply said - "we don't want to do this anymore" when I polled my CC's...I would be 4 months down the road with having replaced this site...if you haven't looked at it go to the site and do a view source and look at the comments in the head of their source code."
Linda to Bill, 2 Oct 2004: "Have you tried the email address that Jerry is using on the Morgan county pages? There are two there..... email@example.com and firstname.lastname@example.org "
Linda to Bill, 2 Oct 2003: "...I don't believe either of these two CC's ever REALLY existed. I know you probably don't want to believe that but I am convinced of it...I have been refused Greene [county] twice. Greene county was "adopted" by Kerry Akins....but nothing was ever done to it except a front page put up with broken links, just like Gordon...(Kerry & Dean Akins had the same email address)...The page that is up for Greene now is still linked to Kerry's page....under Greene Co History. I have also seen proof that the uploads to Greene & Gordon were done by a couple who are ASC, RC and have NUMEROUS counties in GAGenWeb under their control. I believe the comments in the source code came from them and there is a reason they don't want these counties freed up to people who really exist and have a mind of their own. Please don't share this with anyone and I hope you don't think I am nuts. I have been looking at this stuff in many counties in Georgia for 8 months now and it isn't all coincidence. There are many more counties involved and I am not the only one who has noted this...I never even thought of getting involved in the politics of this project..I was given [Henry county] before I started looking around and "speaking out" about issues I thought were important to the integrity of this project. I doubt I would ever be given another county in GAGenWeb now. I am not a troublemaker...I believe it is against CC's rights for others to "hoard" counties for political purposes...and I believe that is what is going on in Georgia. I believe it is wrong for some CC's to be "harassed" and "removed" or "run off" for violations much less serious than some that currently exist in...on counties controlled by "those in charge". There are probably only one or two people on Council that you could share this with without causing my removal from GAGenWeb. I hope that you will keep this information to yourself...you may want to keep your eyes and ears open for your own good. You might want to take note of the number of "new CC's" who came on board beginning in January of 2003...and are now "quietly disappearing"...were mostly never announced on GAGEN and their departure has never been mentioned...I would NEVER bring my concerns to my RC or to either of the ASC's or to most of the other RC's....because of what I know. There would become a reason to get rid of me if I did. I tried early on to take some of my concerns to SC but was only met with smart aleck replies and NEVER a straight answer to anything. I am not the only person in GAGenWeb that feels this way. The group is larger than was shown by the percentages in the votes we took this year...probably due to the number of questionable CC's. Okay, I will stop before you really think I am off my rocker...I hope you will take this as food for thought and keep it between us...PS - As a recent example.....I asked Tim if it was proper for a page with this statement on it [link to Greene county which is now offline] was an appropriate link from a GAGenWeb page...and his reply was "better than being linked to nothing"."
Bill to Linda, 2 Oct 2003: "I don't really want to reach him...I am sure that if I were to reach either of the co-cc's for Gordon county I would end up having to give them the month to fix the site and nothing would happen for another month...it is time for closure. I want the sites back up and useful for real people...And there is an old adage out their that you need to take to heart "Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean that they are not out to get you"...I am sure that there is all kinds of petty stuff going on at some levels. I have heard CC's and RC's who I thought had leanings in a particular direction come down on both sides of the same issue over a relatively short period of time. I really don't understand some of this stuff...At times it seems like the entire project is bogged down in stuff that just doesn't...matter. I hadn't even thought about the idea of a phony non-existent CC but it would certainly keep a site in parked mode for a period of time and it might explain some of the reluctance to move on...The Gordon County Site has still got Jerry and Dean listed as co-cc's in the table 3 days after I emailed Tim for the most recent time that I am declaring the site abandoned...I have more that given adequate notice."At this point, Linda switches to a history of Greene county. She notes "Please note the *CC's* name - a brand new CC in 2003, after I requested to adopt it in March. I believe it was alluded to that Dean (Gordon County with Jerry Prager) & Kerri Akins were husband and wife...from Jimmy Epperson's statement made in 2003...the webpage for Greene was loaded on 3/29/2003. The page was loaded and sat that way for months with broken links.
Linda notes that Gordon County was eventually adopted by a CC who actively works on the site and states, "The above correspondence references the *CC's* - Jerry Prager and Dean Akins. Please note those names concerning the next two submittals."
Brenda Pierce to Linda Blum-Barton, 12 Mar 2003: "I believe I responded on the GaGenList to all of these at that time. [This was in response to a Guestbook entry made by Linda that noted she'd first requested Greene county on Mar 6 and had received no reply.]Here Linda turns to discussing the Jenkins and Treutlen county sites, which apparently were of great concern to her. She notes "Jenkins and Treutlen County were the same circumstance...The GAGenWeb Jenkins County site linked from the GAGenWeb County Selection List in Nov, 2003...the link here "For more Greene County History see Jenkins Co. History " goes to a site marked as a NON GAGenWeb site (note in the link above - Greene County is used when it should be Jenkins County History)"
Brenda to Linda, 11 March 2003: "...I responded to the many questions on the list of counties/adoptions & below is my message from 3/3/2003 .... which I thought I had answered in response to yours...The status of several counties is still not settled, we have had as many as 7 people asking for one county, and some of these people have been interested for a year, some since October, etc...I have boards set up for this activity going forward and will not be utilizing the interest form...when these requests are submitted they will go to the boards so that they will have the information and the I accept the guidelines, etc. information attached etc. and they will be searchable etc with commentaries to keep them current...I will be reviewing counties for compliance, and will address that in the metro region mailings that I will begin again with next week. In the meantime if you have questions, or need assistance, I am here to listen, I don't recall that we had any difficulties in the past, and I see no reason to have any in the future."
Brenda Pierce to GAGEN-L, 3 Mar 2003: "There are several "newcomers" that have been sent the guidelines for GaGenWeb, USGenWeb and the forms to fill out regarding the counties. I have been in touch with some former cc's, some cc's from other states, and some people that had written with an interest previously, when I have received back the necessary forms from all we will advise of the status."
Linda to Brenda, 12 Mar 2003: "I did not remember any posts coming through on GAGEN-L since I made this request on 3/06/03...I went back and checked...and do not find any posts to the GAGEN-L made by you on or since 3/06/03...I don't see anyone listed on the "interest" page for Greene County. The website has apparently not been updated since July 2, 2001 as posted on the front page of the website...It appears...that Laura Schmidt gave this county up on Sunday, Feb 16, 2003...It is not shown on the TOC as up for adoption but I believe that it should be according to the guidelines...I don't know of any violations of GAGenWeb guidelines or USGenWeb guidelines on the other two counties that I have in Georgia."
Here Linda notes, "After the petition was voted on and things settled down, *new CC's* that had adopted counties during the period between January and March/April 2003 began to slowly disappear without ever having done anything with the sites they adopted. Reference Gordon County - Jerry Prager and Dean Akins; Greene County - Kerri Akins; Liberty County - Lawrence Joshlin and Melba Jean Taylor."
Linda to Chuck Pierce, 14 September 2003: "I would like to request Greene County again if it has not already been assigned a new county coordinator."
Chuck to Linda [and the RCs], 14 September 2003: "The Greene County Adoption is presently under consideration for adoption by several persons residing in the County. I will take your request under advisement as well."
Linda to Chuck, 14 Sept 2003: "...I am so glad to hear that there are residents of Greene County interested in adopting it...It is such an important county in the history of Georgia and the website hasn't reflected that for far too long. There is so much available on Greene County history that there should be a great website available for researchers there."
Richard Pettys to Linda [and the RCs], 14 September 2003: "If you are interested in Evans or Echols County, I might be willing to make one of them available, as neither Katie nor I have time to do much with either county right now."
Linda to Richard [and the RCs], 15 Sept 2003: "I would prefer to stay with counties that I have personal knowledge of and research in as I would have more to offer the researchers in those counties."
Richard to Linda [and the RCs], 15 Sept 2003: "Actually, [Evans county] was placed up for adoption and there was zero interest, so Katie and I chose to hold onto it."
Linda to Tim Stowell, 15 Sept 2003: "As SC of The GAGenWeb Project, could you please explain to me this note on the front page of this website linked from the regional page? I also don't understand why the email address for Kerry Akins on this website is the same as is linked to Chuck Pierce on the state page."
Linda then copies the entire source code for Jenkins county adoption page to the trial list. She apparently did this because she objected to a couple of notices within the page:
Jenkins County/B was. BRFor more Greene County History see /FONTA href="http://www.rootsweb.com/~gajenkin/"Jenkins Co. History /ALinda also includes the source code for the page she claims was linked to from the adoptions page, again apparently because she took offense at statements on the page:
PJENKINS COUNTY/B is up for adoption. Please contact /FONTA href="mailto:email@example.com"Chuck Pierce/AFONT face=Courier (Regional Coordinator) if you wish to adopt this county. You must review these /FONTA href="http://www.rootsweb.com/~gagenweb/guidelines.htm"guidelines/AFONT face=Courier and agree to abide by them, in addition to a few other criteria (i.e., abilities to design and edit web pages.) http://www.rootsweb.com/~gagenweb/guidelines.htm BI know there were people that lived in Jenkins County, GA that were previously interested in maintaining this site. Please let me hear from you, I will be willing to work with you to get data online on this site. /FONTFONT face=Courier size=2This site can not be connected to any other project, society, etc., please do not respond if this is your desire as it is not allowed by this project.
height=26This site is not associated with USGenWeb/MARQUEEBRAShe next includes some correspondence from July 2003 regarding the sites.
Linda Blum-Barton to Tim Stowell, 5 Jul 2003: "...recently I sent letters asking for support as a candidate for SEMA CC Rep to alot of County Coordinators in several states. The majority of the bounces I received were from Georgia GenWeb...The email address you have on the TOC for Susie Fender, new CC of Jenkins County is firstname.lastname@example.org. On the Jenkins County website, she has almost all of her Email links going to email@example.com except for one where she states "send to ME" which goes to firstname.lastname@example.org. I thought the Election Committee should probably be notified of the error with her email address also so I am sending this note to them...I will forward my letter to Susie to the address for Susan Fender also."More Linda, more source code, more Greene county. She post the source code for the Greene county surnames and Bible records pages. [There appears to be nothing even remotely offensive on either of these pages, so who knows what she was getting at.--Ed.]
Margie Daniels to Tim Stowell, cc'd to Linda, 5 Jul 2003: "Are you saying that my email address is still on Jenkins? I managed Jenkins a very long time ago when I was RC over that region and my email address would have been on the county until someone adopted it...if my email address has not been changed to the new RC will you please direct let the CC know so she/he can make the changes."
Linda to Margie, cc'd to Tim: 5 Jul 2003: "...your email address is not listed on the Jenkins County site as a Regional Coordinator. The website lists Tim as Regional Coordinator."
Margie to Linda, 5 Jul 2003: I am confused...Did you mean on the Jenkins site? If so perhaps the old info was never removed when the RC changed."
Linda to Chuck Pierce, 28 Nov 2003: "...I see that Tim has announced a new CC for Jenkins County so I am glad to see that Jenkins will be given some attention. I hope that the information that previously belonged to the Jenkins County GenWeb site will be available for the new CC...My intention is not to beat a dead horse but I just realized that Jenkins County is the exact situation as Greene County only with a different new/disappearing CC...The official GAGenWeb site for Jenkins county...links to a site purportedly by Susan or Susie Fender...which was for some months the GAGenWeb site for Jenkins County although it never had anything on the site just a couple of front pages with this design...but now, it has "inside" pages with USGenWeb and GAGenWeb all over them although on the front page it states it is NOT a part of USGenWeb...In addition, on this page the top email link...goes to email@example.com and another email link on this page goes to firstname.lastname@example.org There is reference here to submissions by Lynn Cheek and a volunteer by her to do lookups...does Lynn Cheek know that her contributions are no longer associated with GAGenWeb?...it appears that all of the information on this "non" GAGenWeb site was actually part of the site that Laura Schmidt had for a long time...Has Laura given permission for all of her work to be removed from GAGenWeb and moved to this other site? And for that matter have all of the submitters of this information including surnames, etc. asked for their information to be removed from GAGenWeb?...As a volunteer in these projects, I believe this situation violates both the bylaws/guidelines and the spirit of GAGenWeb and The USGenWeb Project and do not feel that it is proper to have such a site linked from these projects...In addition, Treutlen county apparently is in the middle of being "removed from GAGenWeb". I am sorry but I don't understand what is going on here. Bob Fender is another CC who appeared in the early part of 2003, never did anything with the county website and has now mysteriously disappeared...The Treutlen County GAGenWeb Page is just like Greene and Jenkins...and when you follow the "Treutlen County History" link you are taken to a NON GAGENWEB SITE...The email link on that page goes to...the email address "Bob Fender"...used when he was a CC for GAGenWeb and a few months ago had an automated answering system set up which returned a "leave a message" email to people who tried to contact him...has Bob Fender now in the process of taking GAGenWeb information away from GAGenWeb to a "non affiliated" website. Have the submitters of this information asked for this to be done?"
Brenda to Linda, 28 November 2003: "I am at loss as to why you are appearing to be the "page police". Apparently you are not aware of the problems that the cc's caused several months ago, although I don't understand how you could not be aware, as the comments were ongoing on the cc list...Chuck is working with people on these sites...As for the items on the sites, THE PERSON THAT SUBMITS THE INFORMATION CAN ALLOW ANYONE TO UTILIZED THAT INFORMATION!!!!! It can be submitted to more than one place. Who are YOU to tell them they can't allow someone to put it on ANY SITE?...I don't see where you are concerned that alot of the other pages in the project only have links to the archives, and maybe 3 links of real data for GaGenWeb...have you contacted those people and their RCs?...I don't believe you understand the damage that the cc's in this project has done to many cc's that were attempting to learn...I seem to recall it being said that you had a project site and sat on for over a year and did nothing with it...I know there was a reluctance from the group to allow you to have your first site because something was made mention of they thought you had...that site previously and sat on it...As I recall you did not know html either...Your concerns are noted, but I believe if you take a look around you are unfairly looking at a few and those have have NO data at all you have not even addressed...Just because someone has data in another project or another society does not mean it is on GAGENWEB."
Linda to Chuck and Brenda Pierce, 29 November 2003: "1) I am quite aware of all of the problems within GAGenWeb in the last year to year and a half. 2) I did start with no experience...but my sites have content and work. 3) If Chuck is working with people on these sites, that is great but the fact of the matter is that the three sites...do not comply with GAGenWeb or USGenWeb guidelines/bylaws....it has been 7 to 10 months on most. 4) ...Are you saying that all of the submitters of information to the Greene, Jenkins, and Treutlen County GAGenWeb sites have given permission or asked for their submissions to be removed from GAGenWeb? That is the point, not that people can't submit their information to a thousand sites if they want to. 5) ...I haven't told anyone they couldn't allow someone to put anything on any site. 6) ...I have issues with numerous sites within GAGenWeb...I feel it is more productive to try and work for some positive changes within GAGenWeb to make it the QUALITY project it could and should be... 7) ...don't know what county you are referencing here Brenda, but you are the RC and I believe it is your job to deal with that issue if you have a problem with it...8) This is not an attempt to run anyone off...it is an attempt to try and see a quality project across the board in GAGenWeb and just in case I need to add it to my "resume"...last spring when all of the powers that be within the "political gaming" going on in GAGenWeb were too busy to do anything else..and a new CC had been announced for several weeks...but hadn't even been "officially notified" that they had gotten their county...I taught that person how to use MS Front Page over the internet in less than four hours total effort and they were off and running...the first website I ever had was Fayette County...If there was a reluctance...to allow me to have Fayette, you made no mention of it when you awarded it to me...I had never had a website of any kind...I asked for Fayette County because I have a great interest in the county. As far as my personal life goes, I don't think it has anything to do with my volunteer efforts for GAGenWeb or any other project. 9) ...I believe these sites are unfair to all of the existing County Coordinators...who take their volunteer efforts here seriously...if these people who have been CC's for 9 or 10 months had needed help, they should have gotten it long before now. 10) I keep hearing accusations of new CC's not being given a chance, being "jumped on by other CC's" and being run off before they get started....I have seen none of that by any GA County Coordinators on any lists I have been on - I have seen LOTS of accusations and that is the reason I sat up and started paying attention because the people I saw leaving GAGenWeb in disgust were people with experience and knowledge who had worked hard and who felt hopeless...These feelings weren't caused by any County Coordinators who only held positions of County Coordinators. 11) As far as hurting people's feelings, I have heard a lot of accusations about that but have seen nothing to support those accusations. I haven't "hurt" anyone's feelings by writing to Chuck about counties in his region. It is my right as a county coordinator to expect quality from this project...I haven't bashed any CC's on any mailing lists nor in personal emails or in any other way. I see these issues as a "smoke screen" to hide the real issue here...there are a whole lot of counties within GAGenWeb that need help..they have no content, they have links that don't work and the people being short changed here are the RESEARCHERS...There are numerous instances of people with research interests in certain counties...who have tried over and over to adopt some of these counties only to be ignored and see them go to people who do absolutely nothing with them...when I write someone about a problem with a county site...I am not being "page police", I am doing what all of the sites ask to be done and that is "contact me with any problems with broken links"...just as I wrote you twice in the last six weeks about non working search engines on the Gwinnett County sites...the fact that you haven't responded to my emails about that makes me wonder if you would have responded to one of these other researchers if they had contacted you about it...I am not "kicking" at anyone, Brenda, so please respect the fact that we are all adults here, we are all volunteers here...don't try to belittle this situation by calling me "names such as page police" ..I am not the only person who sees these problems."
Chuck to Linda, 29 November 2003: "The point was and still is -- the temporary sites "SHOW" "UP FOR ADOPTION" WE DON'T OWN PAGES THAT ARE NOT LISTED AS "NON USGENWEB/GAGENWEB SITES".
Brenda to Linda, 28 Nov 2003: [in regards to Jenkins and Treutlin counties] "Hopefully with my changing the temporary pages and Chuck's contacting of ex cc's your needs have been met. As far as your resume, I don't believe that this project is purported to be for the benefit of anyone's resume...I have looked all the way back to October and see no messages from you in re to Gwinnett...If you resend I will be happy to address your issues. I can't be responsible if other people do not respond to the request to click on a link to send email to someone...As far as Chuck not responding to your email, he discussed it with me, I told him to wait until I came back to town and I would review it, and see if we could address the issues, he simply did not understand what it was you were wanting, and I myself will have to tell you that I had problems figuring out the real issue was the history section...that part will be resolved and this is again History."
Linda to Brenda, Nov 29 2003: "I have forwarded the email from Oct 9, about Gwinnett. I clicked on a link on the website to send it to you originally...I am not interested in my resume either as I don't really need one but the point was that I don't try to "run Cc's off", I help people who are looking for help. I think I was real clear about the problems I was addressing if you read the email in its totality and followed the links I included. Since Chuck made these temporary pages, he had to know where the "History" link was going on each site."
Brenda to Linda, 28 Nov 2003: "Chuck did NOT make the temporary pages, I did. He does not have access to place those up as he does not have the password. I believe I stated that previously, maybe not clearly enough. I think it is all under control now, so we should be done with all of this."
Linda to Tim Stowell, 28 Nov 2003: "I would think that part of Chucks job as RC would be to communicate. I dont know if that is the best way to proceed or not but will wait to see some results...My next two largest concerns are Jenkins & Treutlen as they are mirrors of Greene...what happened to the Fenders? And for that matter what happened to Jerry Prager & Dean & Kerri Akins? Havent seen any thing about them leaving. The next email will be to forward an email I had written before the Holidays were upon us and havent sent yet but would like for it to be on record even though it appears Jenkins will be taken care of within a week...I hope you will keep me posted as to what is going on with Treutlen & Greene Counties."
Here Linda notes that Jenkins county was eventually adopted by Marvin Thorpe, who she heard was trying to adopt the county for over a year. She also notes, "Treutlen was the same circumstance as Greene & Jenkins county - was adopted early in 2003 by Bob Fender (Susie or Susan's husband, I believe?) She provides some Wayback Machine urls [none of which work for me.--Ed.] for the Treutlen county site and provides the then-current site address, which she claims was part of the American History and Genealogy Project and which was "linked from Chuck Pierce's UP for Adoption page that had the statement "not a part of GAGenWeb" referenced in prior correspondence. The email address on this site is that of Chuck Pierces."
Tim Stowell to Linda Blum-Barton, 22 Nov 2003: "Pending a reply from Chuck...may I at that time send this to the Georgia Council, if [Chuck] has not replied with sufficient reasons as to why this is so?...Thanks for being the squeaky wheel on this. You have my attention."Linda then discusses another issue which arose in November 2003, when the coordinator for Franklin County posted a link on the GAGEN-L suggesting folks might want to link to it which turned out to be a money making proposition. She posts the correspondence which followed that event:
Linda to Tim, 22 Nov 2003: "...I am not trying to cause trouble...it is unfair to me and to all of the other volunteers in this project and to the researchers for this type of activity to be allowed under the volunteer “umbrella” that we are all a part of...I just can’t think of any “sufficient reason” for this to be allowed to continue. This is not the only site that I have issues with but it is one of the most egregious and...important ecause it is a “gateway” to thousands and thousands of people researching in Georgia...you may send this to council on Monday if that is the next best step to take."
Tim to Linda, 29 Nov 2003: "...I've decided to write the prospective CC, to ascertain just what Chuck told them. This person is a former CC in Georgia, so their work is known. Why Chuck is so non-communicative is beyond me. As for the other county ...I'm going to take that problem on myself since the RC is away. Will keep you posted."
Tim to Linda, 11 Nov 2003: "...I don't see a problem with [your site] while I do with the Franklin County one...it appears to be a ripoff...why would I pay for something, especially at those prices when one can buy their own domain for about $15 and have it hosted a lot of places for as little as $60 / yr. I find said site in poor taste - especially using the genealogy hook. But then that's me."Here Linda notes that to her knowledge, the issue "never went to Council...The end result was that Chuck Pierce Adopted Greene County," which Tim announced to GAGEN-L on January 24, 2004.
Linda to Margie, 10 Nov 2003: "In reference to the post to GAGEN-L by David Stephenson, the Franklin County CC concerning the following link...of course, we don t have to link to it...but he has linked to this site from the front page of the Franklin County GAGenWeb site...I am assuming that a link to a personal $$ making website is also inappropriate for a County page within The GAGenWeb & USGenWeb projects. Thanks for taking care of this."
Tim to Linda, 16 Nov 2003: [This appears to be a mix of messages, one from Linda to Tim and Tim's response; I'm going to try to tease them apart.--Ed]Linda: "...what I was looking for is some evenly distributed compliance with the GAGenWeb guidelines for websites...the only reason I was ever given for not being able to adopt Greene County...was the email from Margie stating that I had a link to the Henry/Clayton County Genealogical Society on my front page and that they had items for sale on their website...when I received this email, I promptly removed the link from the front page and left the one that I had on the Resources page."
Tim: "...I understand where you are coming from and I agree, as Margie has in the past - that if we are going to have rules and if those rules are to be enforced - then it should be for everyone...What I was saying with regards to your link mentioned above...I don't see a problem linking to the Historical or Genealogy society for the county...I would not oppose a Guidelines change to reflect this and would in fact welcome such a move."
Linda: "...I never heard from anyone about Greene County again. In the meantime, the county site has had nothing on it of any value to anyone and I don t see a lot of other people jumping to adopt it."
Tim: "...I asked the RCs for an accounting of the counties in their region that showed either up for adoption, under construction or had new CCs (to see how they are doing) that we don't lose them for lack of assistance - if they need it."
Linda: "...back to Franklin County...the only reason that is a concern to me is that it shouldn t be advertised on a GAGenWeb site. It is a link from a front page of a GAGenWeb site to a website whose sole purpose is to make $$ and apparently it is for the CC of Franklin to make money off of."
Tim: "I'll certainly take this up the line that this item be removed from the county site pronto. Thanks for further explaining your thoughts on this matter."
Linda to Tim, 22 Nov 2003: "I appreciate your response to this matter. I hope that something will be done about it soon. It is still there as of 11/22/2003."
Tim to Linda, 22 Nov 2003: "...along with the Greene county situation and a couple of others, it appears the time of change is at hand if a couple of RCs don't get their house in order."
[Ed. Note. Sweet merciful Jesus, what a nosy, meddlesome, obnoxious woman! Although she claims repeatedly to be neither a troublemaker nor batshit crazy, she's pretty clearly both. For some reason she seems to have had nothing better to do with her time for over a year than to obsess about conspiracy theories and visit numerous Georgia counties and check the source code for things that offended her and subsequently pester the GA RCs about it until they must have absolutely dreaded seeing her name in their inboxes. She's actually lucky that Bill, Chuck, Brenda, et al. continued to deal with her for so many months. I'd have realized what a useless freak she is and added her to my spam filter within days.]
Day 37--circa 26 September 2004
The Board members talk a bit about how large files sent to the list can be and why some of Linda's copious evidence is missing. Linda promises to resend it.
Linda resends the second part of the Greene county evidence set. The first set contains the source code for the "page for Greene County linked from the GAGenWeb County Selection List and the "For more Greene County History see Green Co. History" link on this page linked to the page above - marked as a "Standalone site". Again, she appears to be upset by notices that appeared on the page:
BI know there were people that lived in Greene County, GA that were previously interested in maintaining this site. Please let me hear from you, I will be willing to work with you to get data online on this site. /FONTFONT face=Courier size=2This site can not be connected to any other project, society, etc., please do not respond if this is your desire as it is not allowed by this project./FONTFONTShe also sends the source code for a page linked in October 2003, which contains the following:
pThis page is not the GAGENWEB project. This site is a standalone site, the purpose of which is to provide help and transcribed materials to researchers in this county without the hassles of a bureaucracy. I hope you will continue to visit us and to provide information that will be helpful to others./font/font/p /centerLinda includes a response she received from Tim when she asked about these pages:
Tim to Linda, 15 Sept 2003: [Their various portions are separated--Ed.]Linda remembers that in November 2003 "after nothing had changed about this website", she wrote to Chuck Pierce about it:
Linda: "As SC of The GAGenWeb Project, could you please explain to me this note on the front page of this website linked from the regional page?"
Tim: "Better linked to something than nothing."
Linda: "I also don't understand why the email address for Kerry Akins...is the same as is linked to Chuck Pierce on the state page."
Tim: "Because I made a mistake. I'll fix that this PM."
Linda Blum-Barton to Chuck Pierce, 22 Nov 2003: "It has been eight or nine weeks since I requested to adopt Greene County again and you replied that you had several people who were interested in adopting it that lived there...This website has had nothing on it for months now and I don’t quite understand what is going on with it...I thought that Kerry Akins had left GAGenWeb but he/she still maintains a Greene County website...The page up for GAGenWeb at the moment for Greene County links to a page by Kerry Akins...What troubles me about that page being linked from the “official” Greene County Website which is linked from the GAGenWeb Table of Contents...is the following statement on the front page:Bettie Wood notes that she was also a victim. She says, "...it was because while I was on Council I voted against dismissing CCs, I signed a petition, & because I volunteered in the Archives...The first thing that I remember happening, was the delinking of the GA FGS Project, shortly after my removal from the Council (in FEB 2003)...The first linking I could find on Wayback Machine shows 04 Apr 2002...The update done on 19-Apr-2003 no longer shows this project. Of course, it was stated that this never was a Special Project, even though this message was sent when the Council was taking a vote on removing some CCs 29 Jan 2003:This page is not the GAGENWEB project. This site is a standalone site, the purpose of which is to provide help and transcribed materials to researchers in this county without the hassles of a bureaucracy. I hope you will continue to visit us and to provide information that will be helpful to others.The email links on that page [are not going to] the same address that Kerry was using previously on the Greene county site and our table of contents...the above email address for Kerry is the same email address that your name on the GAGenWeb Table of counties is going to for Greene County. So, are you doing this site with Kerry outside the GAGenWeb and USGenWeb? I was wondering if the information on Kerry Akins Greene County website which is no longer part of GAGenWeb is from the original Greene County GenWeb sites that would have been donated to GAGenWeb?...I have to wonder if the people you/Kerri have listed on the Lookups page are under the impression that they are doing lookups for a GAGenWeb & USGenWeb project when it clearly states on the front page of this site that it isn’t part of GAGenWeb...I...see that most all of the information that is on the NON GenWeb Site was on the site that was coordinated by Laura Schmidt for several years...Did Kerry Akins receive permission from Laura Schmidt to move this information off of GAGenWeb? As a volunteer in these projects, I believe this situation violates both the bylaws/guidelines and the spirit of GAGenWeb and The USGenWeb Project and do not feel that it is proper to have such a site linked from these projects...The...note in fine print at the bottom of this page is misleading to researchers...I could go on but I believe I have made the point. I believe that the several situations such as this that exist in GAGenWeb denigrate the integrity of the project and of The USGenWeb Project. I would appreciate a timely response on this matter."
Richard Pettys: [to Bettie] "You are not part of the Council. You are not entitled to a vote on a straw vote of the Council. You will *not* be delinked because of your opinions. Tim is not that way."...SP were up to the SC until the guidelines were passed...I'm not sure why after almost a year it was decided to delink it. It was also stated that the reason I was on Council was due to maintaining the Unknown Queries Project, which I never got a password for...It was recently stated that this was not a Special Project either. It remained linked, & kept all the project logos on the site."
Tim Stowell: "Actually I added her in December. If there is any fault here, it is mine. I felt the Family Group Sheets qualified as a Special Project. If the Council wants to vote on that as well, I'll not stand in your way of doing so."
Tim, 30 Jan 2003: "It was my feeling...that Bettie's Family Group Sheets - covering the entire state qualified as a Special Project of Georgia. I do not have a problem...allowing the rest of the Council to approve of any new future SPs."
Bettie goes on to say that she also felt targetted because she was no longer allowed to adopt counties even though she was not at the limit of three, nor was she allowed to have co-CCs. She notes, "...many times I tried to adopt McDuffie County as it was a neighbor to Richmond County that I maintained. It sat there for months, & months with nothing happening...being out of compliance, etc. Several researchers would write me, wanting me to put McDuffie info on the Richmond County site, or help them reach someone that could put the info on that county." She includes this history of the county from the Wayback Machine.:
15 Nov 2001--adoptableBettie notes that on 24 January 2004 Tim posted a list of counties that were available for adoption and McDuffie was listed among them. She had written to Tim the next day and said "Still would like to do McDuffie County with hubby too. I was sure sorry to see Michelle go. She did a lot with that site." Chuck Pierce replied to her on 2 Feb 2004 that the county had already been spoken for. Bettie asked Chuck to put her and her husband's name on the waiting list for the site in case the new person didn't work out. On 6 Feb 2003 and 20 Feb 2003, McDuffie county again appeared on published lists of adoptable counties. On 21 February the county appeared on the "adoption pending" list, and Tim told Bettie that he would add her name to the "county interest" page [sort of GAGenWeb's waiting list], a page which was removed on March 1. On March 1, Bettie sent another request to adopt the page via the adoption form, which went to all the RCs, the ASCs and to Tim. In a short time, the form was changed so that only Tim, Brenda/Chuck Pierce, and Richard Pettys received it. On 6 April 2003, a Michele Lewis was listed as the new CC of McDuffie county [Bettie notes she was doing an excellent job.--Ed.], but by 4 January 2004 it was listed as available again and remained that way until 8 April 2004.
11 Dec 2001--adoptable
4 Feb 2002 -- adotpion pending
2 Oct 2002--shows Laura Schmidt (the RC)
Dec 05, 2002--same
Bettie then noticed that Stewart & Randolph counties were available. She says "I got kind of excited since I had recently learned that MY ancestors...were in that area. It had been stated to other GA CCs that GA wanted "new blood" in GAGenWeb...Since I was maintaining sites that my husband's ancestor's were from & since new blood was wanted, my husband, Bob, applied for Randolph County. In about 2 weeks or so, he was told that it had been adopted. He then applied for Stewart County. He was told later that the same person applied for that one too, but the SC didn't want any new people coming in & adopting more than one county at a time, so he had a good chance of getting it.. Bob wrote several times, & the RC was usually good about responding, but he never did get Stewart under the old leadership."
On the issue of co-CCs, Bettie recalls, "...In FEB 2003, I requested Bob as my Co-CC for Richmond & Walton Counties. Previous to that request I had asked for Co-CCs, & was either ignored or turned down. I even tried to get an already approved GA CC of my choosing, but they wouldn't allow that either...The only reason I ever got for her not being my Co-CC had nothing to do with her abilities to maintain web pages, but had to do with her lifestyle...In 2004, I started requesting Bob as a Co-CC again." Over the month of March, Bettie sent three letters to Tim with this request, and on April 6, Tim replied, "You'll have to take that up with the respective RCs - I leave such decisions to them." Bettie then posts her correspondence on this matter with Brenda Pierce:
Brenda Pierce to Bettie Wood, 8 April: "While I am delighted that your husband wants to work with you, and hope that he will, my statement to the council still stands, "I do not feel we should be creating new categories until the GRC and National have had passage of their bills. We can set up a working model from those categories and work within those across the board in a fair and equitable manner based on those models."Bettie continues, "...the National Bylaws allow for Co-CC's and the revised National Bylaws haven't been voted on yet...the GAGenWeb Guidelines at the time allowed for Co-CC's, and there were instances in GA of sites with CO-CC's including one that was adopted with a CO-CC on 3 Apr 2004. The Guidelines Revision Committee had been "put on hold" and there is no reason to wait and see whether or not it is allowed to continue or whether or not the revisions will be approved by Council and the CC's."
Brenda to Bettie, 9 April: "...Perhaps if you read the purpose of the USGenWeb project and their bylaws, that will make you feel better about having helpers that are not co-cc's....it seems you are saying you have become unable to take care of your Georgia sites or at the very least over extended yourself, and that concerns me greatly. If your husband is helping with all of the other stuff too, it does not seem realistic to me that this would alleviate your problem. There are at least two people that have offered to help with Richmond and Walton in the past, if you are interested in their help, please let me know. I do realize with your special project that takes up a great deal of time, as well as probably your Texas and MS sites, ASC's, AB Board member, etc....sometimes one just has to take a look at their plate and when it's too full they have to make a choice about what they can and can not do realistically."
Bettie to Brenda, 9 April: "If you want him to help anyway & not be called my Co-CC...you all would boot me out for having help without permission. You all have made that quite clear in the past when I requested help...I know what the bylaws say, as I just read them again looking for those new categories you spoike of earlier.You said I couldn't have my husband since a new catergory would have to be created or something like that. I have asked for an explanation of what that means, but dont' see one in this email...I have found info we gathered from our last trip to GA & that is what I need help in transcribing & putting online...You have never told me of anyone that offered to help before, not until I request one of my choosing?...I update my pages all the time, & also keep within the guidelines of any given state...I manage my time & by requesting a helper does not insinuate anything else but I want a trusted helper of my choosing, not yours."
Bettie to Roger Swafford [The Project's quasi-official, uncredentialed parliamentarian], 15 April 2004: "...I wonder if you could help me out. I got this message below & haven't a clue what they mean. I have asked them, & they can't explain it. I have asked others, they don't know what she means, & I have looked for answers in botht the state, & national. I guess you're my last "hope" in finding the answer. I had requested a Co-CC for a county I maintain in GAGenWeb."
Roger to Bettie, 16 April 2004: "...it refers to the proposed changes to the national bylaws regarding CC's being limited to having one co-CC, both with national voting rights...It appears your being stalled by using the work of the GA Guidelines Review Committee...and the National Bylaws Revision Committee as an excuse not to allow you a co-CC of your choice."
Brenda to Bettie, 10 Apr 2004: "I guess I don't understand how your husband transcribing/submitting, to this project is in your mind illegal?...Since you have been proactive with the GRC, I feel sure you must be knowledeable about the proposed changes. Define them in classes, categories, etc., there are different classifications - same with what was being discussed at one point with national...In the meantime, if you are opposed to your husband transcribing and submitting, then perhaps you let him transcribe or put up data for the other sites while you concentrate on your counties in Georgia...Hopefully this will enlighten you successfully and you can find a resolution from one of the scenarios above...Hope this has provided you with the "help" requested."
In early June 2003, Bettie received a message from Tim Stowell noting that her Richmond county site was not in compliance with the GAGenWeb guidelines and giving her 30 days to correct the problems. Bettie notes, "I had several people helping me try to find out what was non compliant, & promptly fixed anything that could be misconstrued as non complaint....the reason for my "non complaint" county was not mentioned in the guidelines as being part of a non compliant county." On 17 June, Tim finally sent Bettie the reasons her page was out of compliance; it consisted of a list of over 70 broken links. On 17 June Bettie notified Tim that she had corrected all the broken links and thanked him for letting her know about them. She asked if there was anything further she needed to do to get the "seal of 'complaince' approval." The apparent response to this from Tim and the RCs was another huge list of broken links [I didn't count them, but it 34 'page down' clicks to get to the bottom of the list.--Ed.], about which Bettie notes, "...each time I received an email about "broken links", that these were fixed in less than 24 hours." Bettie says she received other messages about broken links but claims that over 200 of them "did not have the / at the end of the URLs." She wrote to Tim on 21 June and asked, "I am trying to find out if I am now in compliance or is there something else I need to fix on my web site...Will you please tell me as I like to fix things as soon as they come up?" On 23 June, Tim told her to update the name of the RC on her page. This confuses Bettie, who had apparently continued to list Chuck Pierce as an interim RC and to include the name of the former RC, Laura Schmidt. Bettie made the requested change and on 23 June 2004, Chuck notified her, "Until I have time to go over your pages with a fine tooth comb---please consider your pages to be in compliance." Bettie asked Chuck many times if she needed to hear this from Tim as well, since he was the original contact.
Bettie goes on to discuss two more reasons she felt Tim and the RCs were targetting her. She notes "At the same time I was receiving the non compliant emails...my address was changed on the county table--back an old one that hadn't worked in quite a while. She sent Tim an email about in on 18 June 2003 and it was resolved, although she never found out why it had originally been changed.
Bettie then posts an email from Tim dated 25 April 2004 in which he includes her vote to declare him a Member Not In Good Standing on Motion 04-11, and in which he threatens, "I was prepared to give you some concessions in return for a positive vote...Since you decided to right is wrong and wrong is right, those concessions just flew out the window."
Bettie continues, "In July 2003, during the national election period, I was nominated to run for SEMA CC rep, & decided to accept the nomination. Even though it had never been said to me...it was said that I was not eligible to run for office because I was MNIGS in GA." [NB: This preceded by a considerable amount of time Tim's threat above.--Ed.] In August 2003, Tim publicly [on GAGEN] apologized for this:
"During the nomination period for the USGenWeb election...I received a message from...the Election Committee to verify your status as a member of GAGenWeb and if you qualified under the terms outlined in the Bylaws as qualified to run for the position SE/MA CC Rep. I replied...that while you were a member of GAGenWeb for the amount of time required by the Bylaws you were in fact a member not in good standing. This was appealed by the EC and perhaps yourself to the Advisory Board....the AB discarded such a claim but I believe by that time you had withdrawn from this race and were instead running for a AB position in the Southwest Region. The main point of this note is to offer my apology for declaring you as such to the EC...without prior notice to you of such a determination of status, it was an incorrect response to give the EC and for that I apologize...I have come to the conclusion that MNIGS is a designation that serves no useful purpose within our organization...it was and has been used for purely political purposes...Therefore, there is no such designation of such attached to you as far as GAGenWeb is concerned. As we have previously agreed in private to move forward...together to grow and improve GAGenWeb, it is my hope that this public apology in this matter, will suffice to put this matter behind us as well."Bettie replied to GAGEN that Tim's apology was accepted and they "did not LITERALLY bury the hatchet."
Linda sends more information about her attempts to adopt Greene county:
Linda Blum-Barton to Tim Stowell, 15 September 2003: "What happened to the information that was previously on the Greene County site?" She also includes the source code for the page [again] which contains the notice that it is a stand-alone site.
Day 38--Circa 28 September 2004
Linda notices a few things about Tim's comments regarding Carolyn Golowka: "[Tim] stated the following...'In the case of Carolyn - data a contributor had made, she placed in the Archives rather than the county site...Brenda Pierce wrote the contributor to ask if she would allow the data to be added to the county site...Whether or not that particular submitter assumed it was going to the county site rather than the Archives, I don't know.'...the file in question...was sent...using the archives submittal forms which may remove the question of whether Ms. Stowe chose to place the file in the archives or Carolyn Golowka made that decision...I would assume that Kay Stowe probably submitted this bible record herself using the forms available...I do sometimes submit information through the forms that people send to me for the archives just because it makes my job easier as a file manager." [Well and good, but sometimes those forms just say "Submit information to the County, which while perhaps not deliberately misleading, does pretty much imply that the data are going to the county and not to the Archives...] Linda continues, "...I received the following email from a person who submits lots of newspaper transcriptions to the Georgia USGenWeb Archives using the forms and they cover a large number of counties. She had also been contacted by Mrs. Pierce."
P. Thompson to Linda, 24 May 2004: "...I have been transcribing newspaper articles for about 6 or 7 months. Most of these articles end up in the Newton County Georgia archives, but I have articles in quite a few county's in Georgia. Whenever I have had a question pertaining to my transcriptions, I have contacted Carolyn Golowka, and she has always been more than helpful...I am a bit confused at the e mail I received from Brenda Pierce [see below--Ed.], asking permission to place my transcriptions on the GaGenWeb County sites that they pertain to...Ms. Pierce should leave the county sites to the folks who maintain them...I am extremely satisfied with the way that Mrs. Golowka maintains both of the Newton County Sites. And I hope that she continues to maintain the Newton County, Georgia sites. Thank you for allowing me to complain."Linda notes, "we should note the time between Mrs. Pierce's first letter to Carolyn Golowka concerning this data - May 12, 2004; and the date of her dismissal letter - May 18, 2004. This violates the guideline requiring notice of 30 days to correct any problems...When Carolyn Golowka contacted me concerning her dismissal over this, I again went and looked at some other websites. One I found interesting...was Mr. Stowell's Troup County...site because it was mostly links to offsite files...it appeared to be pretty much the same as it was when Keith Giddeon left the project with the exception of queries being updated."
Brenda Pierce to P. Thompson, 12 May 2004: This is Brenda Pierce, and I am part of the GAGenWeb online project...I noticed that you had placed several transcriptions online, and wondered if you would allow the GAGenWeb county sites to place them on their sites, with your approval, and your information as the transcriber...Thanking you in advance for your kind consideration of this request, and for your time. I also appreciate your putting data online for other transcribers to view for free...I look forward to hearing from you..."http://www.rootsweb.com/~gagenweb/table.htm - shows the links to all the county sites. These are different than the "archives" project that you have submitted to, the counties allow html pages and the archives do not. The county sites are the repository for the GAGenWeb project."
Linda includes a note from Vicki Thauvin, accounts manager at Root$web, to Carolyn Golowka:
Vicki Thauvin to Carolyn Golowka: 27 May 2004: "...RootsWeb has received notification that your garockda is no longer part of the GAGenWeb. If this notification is in error, please let us know and contact your Georgia state coordinator."Linda says, "I was sent a note on 5/31/2004 after Brenda Pierce...had put up a new Newton County site to replace Carolyn Golowka's site. It stated this...'You'll notice that the current Newton County project is Piggybacking on Butts County listed to Myra Watkins.'" [I don't know what this means either.--Ed.]
Over on BOARD-EXEC, Jan Cortez notes "The buck needs to stop some where and that should be with Tim Stowell...[I] talked to him on numerous occasions about what Brenda, Margie and Richard were doing, and he always said changes were coming, but they never did. Any time something big blew up...Tim disappeared...he was sick, his wife was sick, a friend or relative died, he was sooooo busy at work, he was cleaning cat hair out of his mouse...I think that they all had something on him, and he was afraid to speak up...Heaven only knows what it may have been. Maybe Jimmy Epperson's charges against him, that he mysteriously dropped...Was he threatened with a lawsuit by Tim and Petty's?...Don't think we'll ever get to the bottom of it or know the answers."
Day 39--Circa 29 September 2004
Linda begins the day by opening discussion on Morgan county, another site "that lots of questions were raised about." [What this has to do with Carolyn Golowka or the other members Tim dismissed is not clear.--Ed.] She notes "...I received a Biography for my Henry County website and was asked by the contributor if I knew how to get it posted to Morgan County also...She stated that she had tried to submit it there with no luck." Linda includes some correspondence between herself, Don McHugh [who was the CC of Morgan county], and the GA Council:
Linda Blum-Barton to Don McHugh, 14 Mar 2003: "Could you please contact me. I...have someone who is trying to post material to the Morgan County Site. She said she could not contact you."Linda notes that "...Tim Stowell announced Don McHugh's retirement...on 2/19/03. By 3/25/03 the County Selection Table listed Jerry Prager as CC of Morgan County...On 3/25/03, the Morgan County site was shown as under construction...On 3/28/2003 - three files were updated for the site but no obvious changes were made. All of the pages still showed Don McHugh as CC. This website never showed Jerry Prager's name on the actual website...After Jerry Prager disappeared from GAGenWeb, some of the email contacts on the website were changed to email@example.com. The name of the CC on the County Selection List did not change...Penelope never had a last name and was never put on the county selection list...On [the] county selection list...showing last update of Feb 7, 2004 - Sheila Forester is shown as CC of Morgan County and Clayton County, New CC as of Jan 24, 2004."
Linda to the GA Council, 14 Mar 2003: "...The Morgan County GenWeb site has been shown as adoption pending since at least February 8, 2003. I have someone who submitted information to me for the Henry County site which also pertains to Morgan County. She was apparently told that Don McHugh had resigned as CC for Morgan County. Is anyone maintaining this site?"
Don McHugh to Linda, 14 March 2003: "...I have given up the Morgan County site. I've just got too many demands on my time and I'd like to give it to someone who has the time to make it something really special...I've already notified Brenda and Tim of my resignation and they are searching for a replacement. I have not deliberately ignored anyone that I know of."
Linda to Brenda, 14 Mar 2003: "...I meant to ask in this same email if you know why all of Richard Petty's emails are bouncing. Several sent to him in the last few days have been returned."
Brenda Pierce to Linda, 14 March 2003: "you can forward to me@ present and I'll work it out with Don...I am also handling Richard's area at present, please advise if you need assistance."
Linda continues the discussion of the [irrelevant] Morgan county site: "Shelia Forester did not stay on the county selection list for a long period of time...maybe a week or two. The county was...up for adoption again on the county selection list. By this time, I was hearing lots of complaints about the Morgan County site." Linda also tried to adopt Morgan county, and includes some correspondence with Brenda Pierce and the GA Council:
Brenda Pierce to Linda Blum-Barton, 25 February 2004: "Thank you for your interest, Morgan is undergoing a major reconstruction before the new cc takes over that does not know server sides and css."Linda goes on to claim, "After this, Morgan County was "adopted" by Marlene Berry. The front page of the website was redesigned and reflected this change in CC. The balance of the website remained the same as inherited from Don McHugh...I could never navigate the site after this...additional questions arose about Morgan County because members of the Guidelines Revision Committee...were unable to get a response from Marlene Berry...Questions concerning this county and this CC were met with accusations of trying to start something or to embarrass a new CC...Sylvia C. Rankin was admonished by Brenda Pierce for asking about this CC on the GAGEN-L. I posted in agreement with her...I was moderated from posting to GAGEN-L because of this and so was Sylvia. I didn't even realize I was moderated as I wasn't notified...Morgan County stayed in this "state" until June, 2004 when it was removed from The USGenWeb Project...Apparently, Marlene Berry, never learned CSS and server sides."
Linda to Brenda and the Council, 25 Feb 2004: "If Morgan County is actually up for adoption, why would it be undergoing a major reconstruction before a new CC takes it over?...if the concern is whether or not a new CC knows server sides and css, then wouldn't the proper thing to do be to ask whether or not they know about that? I don't really see what difference that makes anyway, as the new CC is not required to keep the same format as is presently on the site, are they?...Is that what the problem was with Jerry Prager, he didn't know server sides and css?...Is that why Penelope gave the county up without doing anything to it for six months or being announced or added to the TOC because she didn't know server sides and css?...is that why Shelia Forrester...adopted two counties and gave them up within a week or two, because she didn't know server sides and css?...if we are so desperate for volunteers to adopt counties and make quality contributions to this project, I don't understand your response to me in the least bit. I would like a clearer explanation. Is this a NO, you may not adopt Morgan County? When I corresponded with Don McHugh last year...his reply to me insinuated that he really hoped someone would be found to take Morgan County who would care about the county site. Well, I do and would care about the Morgan County website, I care about the QUALITY of all of the websites in GAGenWeb...If you have a problem with either of my websites that I currently hold in GAGenWeb, I have never heard a word about that so the least I expect here is a straight answer - a Yes or a No."
Bill Clody to Linda, 26 Feb 2004: "...Jerry Prager also had a county in my region and never did anything including responding to emails. I don't think that it is necessary to understand shtml...or CSS to respond to an email message."
Brenda to Linda, 26 Feb 2004: "...RCs are here to help and assist cc's, including new ones. Do you realize how much of my time you waste with these diatribes, and how much of yours?...I don't understand your negativity, I have done nothing to you to warrant such, and your continued attacks are becoming tiresome...You certainly have 2 sites in GaGenWeb and I believe 5 archives sites, and I know you are on numerous mailing lists doing your own personal research, and on the ab board...There is no reason why you can't work with the cc's to get information on the county sites...if you have all this extra time on your hands, I could surely use another transcriber for documents, and microfilm. Just let me know, and I will be happy to mail them to you."
Linda to Brenda and the GA Council, 26 Feb 2004: "...I don't understand your email at all....Can I adopt Morgan County?...I don't see my response to you as a waste of time. Nor did I think my offering to adopt Morgan County...as a waste of time. There is nothing negative about anything I have said...I am not being critical either...My concerns about the state of GAGenWeb are not meant as criticism, they are meant to try and see some improvements made. Morgan County has sat for over a year waiting on someone to adopt it....Jerry disappeared from GAGenWeb without ever doing anything to either of two counties he adopted early in 2003, with no notice of his departure or anything. In addition, he left...without those two counties being put up for adoption for months and months. Then the website was apparently hosted by Penelope...I never saw Penelope announced as a new CC. I never saw Penelope added to the TOC as the CC for Morgan County. Who is Penelope? Did she have a last name?...Penelope never did anything to the site either...Sheila Forrester adopted Morgan County & Clayton County within the last couple of weeks...both of those are up for adoption again...Sheila is the person who CC'd Fayette County before I adopted it. Sheila is the person who had the whole mail list for Fayette County in an uproar because she wouldn't post materials offered to her by researchers. But, obviously, she serves a better purpose than helping researchers...I thought the big problem county sites in GA were having is not putting data online...So, why would Sheila Forrester be more eligible to adopt a county website within GAGenWeb than I am?...I don't think there is a CC in GAGenWeb or anywhere else for that matter that could say all of their counties' records are online. But, all of the records for my counties that are online are navigable and easy to use. My pages are updated and checked on a regular basis. I respond to researchers in a timely manner. I have never refused to add information submitted by anyone. I have offered to adopt Greene County numerous times in the last year because it has had virtually nothing on it and had not been updated for months or years...Each time I made the request, Chuck said "adoption is pending" "I am working with a resident of Greene County who wants to adopt it" ...and...Chuck kept it...I would like a written response from Chuck Pierce...stating why I was not allowed to adopt it...if you won't let me adopt Morgan County, then I would like a written response from you explaining why I can't adopt Morgan County...I am sorry that you feel anyone who expresses concern over a volunteer project that they contribute to is "attacking you". I am also surprised that your reaction over someone volunteering to adopt a county is "attacking you" or "wasting time"...It is my choice to continue to try and improve the quality of GAGenWeb and to improve the manner in which CC's and researchers are treated by members of GAGenWeb...when I corresponded with Tim about the Greene, Treutlen & Jenkins County websites being non compliant with GAGenWeb & USGenWeb Project guidelines and about the researcher contributed data on Greene having been moved to a non project website...Tim thanked me...Your response to that issue was that Chuck did not set the "adoption pages" up to link to these sites in that way but that you did...I'm sorry but I don't see that this type of action by "leaders" in GAGenWeb as good for the projects...nor can it be good for the researchers and contributors to be caught in the middle of whatever caused this type of thing to be done. It seems to me that GAGenWeb should be welcoming any volunteers for any jobs within the project. I look forward to my requests being answered in a timely manner."
Tim Stowell to Linda and the Council, 1 Mar 2004: "Not that it is any of your business - Shelia had real life come crashing in her door...and thus felt she could not do the sites justice. I commend her for realizing such rather than let them sit dormant...Although other correspondance has passed back and forth since this note, I'm answering here - NO, you may not adopt Morgan County. Why? Because I requested Brenda not let you adopt it....I'd rather have new blood in GAGenWeb than existing CCs adopting more counties...I'd rather not reward a person who is playing page police, sending snide notes if everything isn't kosher on a site. You've not been elected to such a role, it is not your job to do such and I find it detrimental...I'd rather not reward folks who are working behind the scenes discussing the abolition of the Georgia Guidelines by fiat."
Linda to Tim and the Council, 2 Mar 2004: "...My original request to adopt Morgan County only had to be answered with Yes or No, not the reply I originally got which still leaves the question of why it is shown as "Up for Adoption" on the TOC if it is indeed not up for adoption. Nor does it answer who Penelope@japan.com is/was and why "she" is shown all over the Morgan County GAGenWeb site as a contact when she has never been announced as a CC nor listed on the TOC. Is she on the voter list? I am not sure what you are referring to when you label me "page police". I have pointed out drastic issues that I have seen on county pages...that I feel are detrimental to GAGenWeb and USGenWeb...this is after they have been non compliant for months...If I have to adhere to guidelines, then all other CC's, especially including SC & RC's should also...I get my rewards from the researchers/volunteers on my sites and working with other CC's...not from the hierarchy of GAGenWeb. Maybe this is part of the problem, if you and the RC's feel you are "rewarding" volunteers when you "allow" them to adopt a county...The only Fiat I have ever been involved with was a car...the last thing I would want to see is GAGenWeb without Guidelines...I believe the guidelines could use some revisions...The position I have been elected to is that of SEMA CC Rep to AB - that fact has nothing to do with my, as a CC using the current "guidelines" of GAGenWeb to report major problems on websites. If you believe I am the "lone" CC in GAGenWeb that has issues with other "people" being allowed to have websites that are egregiously in violation of GAGenWeb guidelines, then you are wrong. My concern is for the rights of volunteer CC's in GAGenWeb. My concern is for the overall image being presented to the public...If my concerns cause me to be "labeled" as others before me - then so be it. I appreciate the direct answer to one of my questions. I hope the others will be answered soon."
Linda also discusses another person who tried repeatedly adopt Morgan county and her includes her correspondence with him:
Ken to Linda, 4 May 2004: "You probably know that I had some interest in becoming a CC for Morgan County and that I am on Tim's s--- list. After Don McHugh gave it up last year, I put in my name for it, but it was given to someone else...it was a ghost CC and I can't remember whose computer that David [Crosby] traced the emails to. Earlier this year, I noticed that firstname.lastname@example.org was the new CC...emails to her were never answered...Soon after email@example.com was CC, Morgan County became available again. John R. Clarke...put his name in for it and so did I...Now wouldn't you think that Tim would give it to someone who already had ties to Morgan County? No. And notice, too, that whenever a new CC comes on board to GA, that it is announced on the GAGEN mail list and everyone welcomes the new member. This never happened! However, after a few weeks of not hearing from Tim, I wrote him and he replied:Here Linda adds links to the 9 May 2004 posts that allegedly got both her and Sylvia Rankin moderated on GAGEN-L and some "ensuing correspondence." In the list messages, Sylvia Rankin asks the Morgan county CC to contact her, and Brenda engage in some back and forth about where links and such can be found on the page. At one point, Brenda specifically asks that further discussion be taken offline. Linda notes that after her first post in the sequence, she attempted to post again to point out yet more problems with the Morgan county site but "That post did not make it to the list." Another message she sent that day was not forwarded to the list until May 15. Linda wrote to Tim on 19 May 2004:Tim to Ken: "...I hope this gets to you for it is bouncing...on the GAGEN list. I was told the lady's name but can't for the life of me remember what her name is for as my wife will gladly tell anyone, I have to be told things several times before they 'get through'.""Did you ever know a SC that didn't know who their CC's were? Two weeks later he wrote back to me:Tim to Ken: "I finally have the person's name who is taking on Morgan County. I'll be getting that information to the county table this evening.""...I have written 3 emails to this Marlene Berry, CC for Morgan County, as I like to share information and get acquainted with the CC's that I am file manager for the same counties. There has not been any reply to my emails as of yet. I just think there is a lot of funny stuff going on. It's not fair. I do not want it but would like to see John Clarke get it. John keeps the Morgan County list very active. I don't know anyone who knows more about Morgan County and their families than John does."
Ken to Linda, 10 June 2003: "One of my file submitters sent me the following email [see below--Ed.] regarding some documents that were in the Morgan Co. Archives and wanted to put them on the Morgan Co. page. I...have a problem with who the CC is for Morgan County. The State site lists Jerry Prager, the Morgan Co. page lists Don McHugh, but Margie Daniels contacts one of my submitters to put the info on the Morgan Co. page. Many months have passed since Don McHugh resigned, more than enough time to redo the pages. Just WHO is doing Morgan County?" Ken includes the email Margie Daniels sent to the submitter:Margie to Patsy: "I am one of the Regional Coordinators for Georgia Genweb. GAGenWeb. I received the notification that you have donated data to...the Morgan County archives. I am writing to get permission to add those records to the county site as well. Thank you for all your hard work in helping other in their research. Morgan County would certainly love to include these records."
Linda to Tim, 19 May 2004: "Please don't pick and choose what posts of mine you send to the list...Either stop them all or send them all...3) I received no warning from anyone...I received no notification that I was being moderated...5) I did not attack anyone - I pointed out a fact. If you had not stopped my second post concerning this matter - you would have seen that I conceded one problem with what I posted...You would think that it would be more important to make the site accessible to ALL researchers than to "punish" me...>6) You lifted the rules for GAGEN-L - obviously the rules are being applied to some and not to others...It is blatantly clear to all that certain people are allowed to post anything they want right now but others aren't...I would like an official notification of the terms of my moderation on GAGEN-L...I would like an official notification of the "rules" for GAGEN-L...how long is the free for all by certain people going to go on?...I look forward to timely receipt of the requested information."Linda claims that after this exchange of messages she was "apparently put back on moderated status without being notified," and she again wrote Tim about it:
Tim to Linda: "Everyone was informed not to bring such to GAGEN but contact the ASC privately...How a coordinator decides to set up their web site is their business. While the SC/RC or anyone else can make suggestions for improving a visitor's experience, we can not say you have to do it this way or else for one of our basic planks state CCs can design their sites as they see fit...The remainder of your questions I belive will be answered in a message to GAGEN."
Linda to Tim: "...apparently you have moderated me again from posting to this list. I would like an explanation of why. I have made no post since you posted this that could be considered by anyone to be in violation of the list rules...the only reason I know you are moderating my posts is because of this post I made on the 28th of May that you have forwarded tonight, May 30th. You have not notified me of any violation of list rules I have made to warrant such action."Linda also forwards some correspondence concerning the alleged moderation of Sylvia Rankin on the mailing list:
Tim to Linda, 2 June 2004: "You act illegally against the Bylaws and wonder why you get moderated? You were moderated because I was asked to do so...by folks who got tired of AB reps spamming the list with political BS. I was urged to fire you long ago - for I know you've been backstabbing me for a long time. Yet, I asked to give you another chance...Remember the birds will come home to roost on those who do others dirty, so you folks sleep well at night for without warning you could get pooped on. Who, what or when the pooping will come is in the Lord's hands for He said "vengenance is mine". So someday..." [IIRC, by this time, Tim had been summarily removed from his position as State Coordinator in GAGenWeb. He was evidently upset about it.--Ed.]
Sylvia Rankin to Bill Clody, cc'd to Linda Geiger, 15 May 2004: "...Still waiting for word from you...on why my posts to the GAGenWeb list are either not being allowed at all or moderated. I deserve an explanation..." > > Bill Clody to Sylvia Rankin, 16 May 2004: "Tim apparently did place you on moderated status about a week ago. He forwarded one of your posts to the list but felt the other one was just total negative feedback and didn't send it through."According to Linda, this constitutes all she has on Morgan county.
Sylvia Rankin to Bill Clody, cc'd to Linda Geiger, 16 May 2004: "...let me understand this: Tim will moderate the responses that are negative to him? Not moderate the response that are favorable to him? Gee, that seems so one sided, doesn't it? Does the rest of the list know that it is being selectively moderated?"
[Ed. Note. Linda fails entirely to explain what any of this information has to do with Charge #3. Other than that she managed to work Sylvia Rankin's name into it, it appears to be entirely irrelevant to the charge.]
Although she is done with Morgan county, Linda is not apparently done with the Board. Her next emails concern "Targeting CCs," and consist of forwarded emails from one CC who provides circumstantial evidence of other CCs who were she felt were "targeted." [The evidence appears to be solicited; we presume that Linda did not bother to solicit evidence from CCs who were entirely satisfied with Tim's management of the state project.--Ed.]
Virginia Crilley to Linda Blum-Barton, 10 September 2004: "Tim and some of the Council RCs targeted individuals and worked towards their removal while not applying any of the guidelines against other CCs who were essentially doing nothing at all with their pages. The first target was Paulette Moon, Jackson CC who was removed simply because Keith Giddeon was helping her with HTML. The Council vote on Paulette is an issue by itself and illustrates how voting was controlled by adding or dismissing individuals to the Council according to their voting needs. The second was Lisa Graham...who was dismissed based on a private e-mail that she sent to Margie Daniels...which used foul language. Lisa said that the e-mail which Margie distributed had been doctored to make it worst than the original, but Lisa didn't have a copy of the original to prove this....there would be periodic "banning" of CCs for speaking out on the GAGen list...At the same time, RCs could say anything, be rude, make false accusations...Council messages were kept strictly private...after Tim's MNIG issue was on the AB, those members of the AB who were also CCs in GAGenWeb came under target. Tim...directed two RCs to...prepare a new site for...Jan Cortez's county...In the same Council message he names he other AB members involved...though no action was officially taken against any of them, I do feel that it had been intended, and would have happened if the AB continued to investigate."Over on BOARD-EXEC David Morgan makes the statement that has had State Coordinators quaking in their boots ever since the transcripts of this trial hit the ether:
Virginia to Linda, 11 September 2004: "...some of the Council Members used their interpretation of the Guidelines to force me to make changes on the Taylor County Page...Because I work closely with the Taylor County Genealogical Society, I try to promote membership in their organization...I did have their announcement with information about "how to join" and the cost of membership on the front page...in the interest of trying to get along, I did remove the Amount of money, and simply linked to the Taylor County Society...they then came back with, "you cannot link to a page from your front page which sells anything on their front page"...For a while, I did remove the information about Taylor County Society just so I wouldn't be removed...This is just another example of how they would interpret Guidelines to fit whatever need they had to remove a CC...Since county page URLs did sometimes change, the Council made the ruling that all the CC has to do was to "link" to the Table of Counties. Linking to the Table of Counties was already a Guideline. This issue was mentioned several times on GAGen list, as most people did not feel it too much of a problem to make the changes if a county page did move."
"I think we should finish Georgia, then Ohio, then Wyoming. Wyoming is the worst I have seen, now that Alaska is apparently being taken care of. I think we should set a time limit on how long we will dwell on these cases, once we get started. We have already spent way too long on Georgia."[Ed. Note. We are SURE David is mistaken about the Board's intentions here. Surely, they meant only to right wrongs committed by Tim in Georgia and to protect the fine volunteers in North Dakota should his insatiable need to be Evil cause him to start in on them once Georgia was closed off. Surely their intent was not to start bringing the rest of the states to heel, nor to use Georgia and Tim as a test of the limits of their power. Right? We do notice though, that not a single Board member found the suggestion that the Board would be moving on to other states once they had cleaned up Georgia even a little surprising. For what its worth, I visited the states David feels aren't up to snuff and, other than not being fancy, there appears to be nothing wrong with them. Wyoming still has links to GenConnect, but I don't see anything in our bylaws or guidelines that makes that a crime.]
In response to David, Gail Meyer Kilgore, who has heretofore been pretty quiet, notes "...rushing through the handling of GA is not the answer. It has consumed much of the AB's time this past year and a little while longer is not going to make that much difference." David responds, "120 days (so far) is not rushing. If we can't come to a resolution in 90 days, then the defendant should be declared innocent." Don Kelly notes that, "...we need to ignore the buzz words and get the job done. Time is important, but justice outranks time." Angie Rayfield wonders, "How is picking an arbitrary time limit and then saying "Doesn't matter what you did, gonna let you off the hook" justice?" David responds that "...it comes from the idea that everyone is entitled to a fair and speedy trial. It is the burden of the prosecution to prove their case. The defense does not have to prove anything. If the prosecution cannot get their act together in a reasonable amount of time, then the defense wins." Angie notes, "...the concept of a speedy trial refers to the period between the bringing of the charges and the beginning of the trial...There's no jurisdiction that requires that a trial END within a specified time period. Trials...take however long it takes to present the evidence...the complaints against Tim & Richard WERE made within the time period specified in the project's grievance procedure, and the process IS moving forward in what seems to be a reasonable manner." Don notes, "...three parts of a defense are delay, delay, delay."
Also on BOARD-EXEC, Don Kelly treats the Board to a treatise on how he does things in his state: "As an SC I had...to be flexible in such matters...Our standing procedure allowed a CC 30 days to bring their website into compliance or be removed. Those who flatly refused were removed at the end of thirty days. Those who at the end of thirty days said they would try were allowed an additional 30 days...Those who at the end of 60 days showed good progress were given an additional 30 days. I was severely criticised for not treating CCs equally, and guilty as charged, but four...came through inside 90 days and that justified...the unequal treatment. If a state only has one problem...do they really need 30 days to fix it, or is...the 30 day waiting period mandated by our bylaws? Don goes on to note further: "I can't judge on one single point not even on twenty points. But to play devil's advocate, that link may be leftover.....certainly the page it reaches is as tired as the mindset that invisioned it...I would think by now some movement toward compliance would have been shown...in prodding around for an hour or so, even sites with no USGenWeb logo visible seem in spots to feature lots of onsite data and developing databases. As for defaced logos, the eagle is certainly wounded, but in balance...their own state logo comes in about twenty colors...Some sites seem neutral between two projects, but most sites are hosted by Rootsweb...Did you notice that Merope still features our proud eagle? She'll never get rid of the MNIGS label that way...will she?"
[Ed. Note. For those of you who may be wondering what Don is smoking, here's a plain english interpretation of what he just said. He is discussing a link on a state project homepage that once linked to an old DBS protest page that was put up following the illegal delinking of the Census Project. It features a call to quiet civil disobedience and features a darkened "mourning" logo. A long time ago the Board once considered declaring anyone who linked to this logo a Member Not In Good Standing, but nothing ever came of it. Though no complaints have been filed against the state and its coordinator, Don is apparently miffed by it enough to consider going after this state as they did GAGW. Its also interesting that he notes that many sites that don't bother to display the USGenWeb logo are nevertheless active and functional sites. Given his adamant earlier stance of enforcing the bylaws to the letter against Tim, one wonders if he is now ready to pursue these other states with the same vigor. And he's wrong about Radio Free USGenWeb featuring their "proud eagle." That graphic was designed for me by a reader, although I am sure if Don would like to display it on his home pages he would be granted permission to do so.]
David Morgan compliments Linda on her organizational skills, noting she is "doing an excellent job of putting all the information together...Way to go!" [Perhaps he does not realize just how long she has been working on "organizing" the evidence she has presented?--Ed.] Linda responds, "...the time frame is mostly my fault...the "organization" of the evidence...is a main reason. That amount of information and trying to go through 5 times that much to pare it down has been rather time consuming...I felt it was important to lay it all on the table now and not have to revisit these issues...I apologize to all of you for it being so time consuming but in the interest of the CC's of GAGenWeb's rights....I feel it is necessary." Don Kelly also compliments her, but on the trial list: "Good job Linda...this documentation is huge. Some of it will be more useful than others, but leave anything out and we lose context...which is equally as important."
Back over on the trial list, Linda finally gets on with providing evidence that is relevant to the charge at hand. She notes that much of the correspondence that follows is a repeat but she's "just trying to make sure all of the correspondence I have received is posted to the hearing list." [I have posted below only what is new]
Debra Crosby to Richard Harrison, 22 May 2004: "I am filing an official complaint with the board. I have been officially delinked from the GAGenWeb project...for no other specified reason than for being "disgruntled"...is anyone ever going to protect the rights of CC's from these kind of vindictive actions? I will not remove the logos from my pages and I fully expect the board to do something about Tim Stowell who has now removed two CC's in less than a week. He is a MNIGS and it is time this must stop. My pages are in full compliance not only with the USGenWeb Project but with the GAGenWeb Project..."Day 40
Debra Crosby to ?, 19 May 2004: "...I am hanging on by a thread trying to think that I might be proud to be a part of the USGenWeb Project but at this moment I am absolutely hanging my head in shame that I am part of the GAGenWeb Project"
Vicki Thauvin to Debra Crosby, 27 May 2004: "To keep your accounts, you will need to remove any text or graphics which may lead people to believe you are part of the GAGenWeb or USGenWeb project...do not post any comments regarding your departure with the project in question."
Debra Crosby to Vicki Thauvin, cc'd to Richard Harrison, Jacki Jonas, Linda Blum-Barton, 28 May 2004: "I have now removed any GAGenWeb reference from the pages located at http://www.rootsweb.com/~galee/ and http://www.rootsweb.com/~gadoughe/ As for the account http://www.rootsweb.com/~gabaker/ I am reluctant to make any changes to those pages as long as my entire stolen web site remains at http://www.rootsweb.com/~gaquitma/ for the entire web to see...While the GAGenWeb State CC has...dismissed me from the GAGenWeb project...I have taken this up with the USGenWeb Board and am in dispute with this State CC...Regardless of whether I have been removed from that project or not though does not give ANYONE the legal right to take my entire web site and place it on their account...while Mr. Stowell claims that I have been removed the the GAGenWeb project he still plainly links to my pages...on his state table...I would like for you to protect my account of ~gabaker until this matter can be resolved and please advise me what to do about this blantant theft."
Debra to Vicki, 27 May 2004: "...please is there something that I can do to retain the accounts...If there is a charge I'd be happy to consider paying."
Debra to Vicki, 27 May 2004: "...I opened those accounts for those counties and I really do not want rootsweb to give my accounts to Tim Stowell and if you can contact Richard Isaiah Harrison, national coordinator he can verify that the decision to remove me is being appealed. Please don't let Tim Stowell take my accounts..."
Vicki to Carolyn Golowka, 27 May 2004: "...RootsWeb has received notification that your galee is no longer part of the GAGenWeb. If this notification is in error, please let us know and contact your Georgia state coordinator."
Vicki to Debra 28 May 2004: "Who is Terri Hopper? She's not the account holder for gaquitma"
Debra to Vicki, 28 May 2004: "There has been a long dispute with the GAGenWeb and the person who is state coordinator now. He has...regional coordinators...one of those is Margie Daniels and since we can only have 3 counties there has been evidence that this "Teri Hopper" who she claims to be her "sister" is in fact her...grievances about this "false person" have been filed with the USGenWeb Advisory board and this has all be going on for well over a year...Richard Isaiah Harrison...can verifiy that this is indeed part of a grievance complaint in that Margie is using a false name to control counties...they are playing games and I just don't appreciate it."
Vicki to Debra, 28 May 2004: "Thank you for clearing this up. My records do not show Terri Hopper as being the account holder of gaquitma account."
Debra Crosby to herself, Denise Woodside, Richard Harrison, cc'd to the other Board members, Ed Gordon, Linda Blum-Barton, Virginia Crilley, and Root$web, 27 May 2004: "It seems when this person took my site they had it on their local directory which changed the file location whoever this is seems to have held the files in a directory called Margie..."
Debra Crosby to Denise Woodside, Richard Harrison, cc'd to the other Board members, Ed Gordon, Linda Blum-Barton, Virginia Crilley, and Root$web, 27 May 2004: "She's taken my entire site including all groupsheets. If you replace gabaker with gaquitma on the links you'll see this person has ALL of my site..."
Debra Crosby to Richard Harrison, Root$web, cc'd to the Board members, 27 May 2004: "I would like to request that you discontinue the account for whomever is managing the ~gaquitma account...This person has without my permission stolen my entire ~gabaker site and that to my knowledge is still and illegal action and one I hope will not be condoned by rootsweb...I have also been asked to remove my GAGenWeb logos...but in light of the fact that my web site has been taken and I'm sure the others probably have as well I am very reluctant to make any changes on my pages at this point."
[Ed. Note. There are no materials in the transcript for this day.]
Day 41--Circa 3 October 2004
Shari forwards a message from Ginger Cisewski in which Ginger says the following:
"...it occurred to me you may not realize I'm back online. I guess I should have sent a note to you, but...I was just trying to read the mail coming in on the hearing list and didn't want to interrupt, so was waiting until somebody let me know it was "my turn". I have not been able to communicate with Tim since I had to evacuate...if action could be delayed for a few more days that would be wonderful. I don't feel right just launching into something on his behalf when he hasn't communicated with me. I'm sorry to have further complicated the proceedings, and you can believe that if we can find worthy employment back home (South Dakota) we will move in a heartbeat. Three of these storms in just six weeks is almost more than anyone's sanity can bear."Day 42--Circa 5 October 2004
Shari starts the day out with a message exhorting the Board to get "back on track." She notes, "We are currently working on Charge #3...If no more evidence is forthcoming, and if no statement is received from Tim (either sent directly to the list and forwarded by me, or through Ginger) by the end of the day Wednesday, October 6, I will call for a vote on Thursday, October 7."
THE TRIAL CONTINUES...
|© 2004 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved. The opinions expressed above are solely those of the author; they may not reflect those of the USGenWeb Project or its members. The USGenWeb Project Advisory Board does not endorse this site and is not affiliated with it. Several people have helped me research this material, I'd like to thank them by name, but as they are still project members to do so would invite reprisals against them. So You Know Who You Are, and you have my thanks!|