From merope@Radix.Net Fri Jun 1 14:07:48 2001 Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 14:07:47 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show, 6/1/2001 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: Only your hairdresser knows for sure...its Your Daily Board Show! *warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk! Thursday 31 May 2001: Voting proceeds on the motion to table Motion 01-11. Thus far 12 Board members have voted "yes". [The motion is effectively tabled; interesting that just a few days ago they were all opposed to tableing it. *shrug*] Maggie Stewart moves "that the "Census Agreement" motion be next in the line of discussion on the floor ahead of Motion 01-19 "Unban". [Boy, they _really_ do not want to deal with that one, do they? see below.] Tim Stowell gives Joy Fisher's motion to rescind Motion 01-10 and leave the Census rep seat vacant indefinitely number 01-20. Friday 1 June 2001: Joy Fisher moves that "we postpone a vote on writing to RootsWeb and/or Ancestry on behalf of our banned CCs." She notes "The wheels have already been set in motion for each of the banned to write and ask to be re-instated. They can write to jgehring@ancestry.com stating they have been banned, that they will abide by the AUP, and ask that they be re-instated." Shari Handley seconds this motion. Tim asks if there is any objection to taking Motion 01-20 out of order. [In a post elsewhere, Tim has indicated that motions will be addressed in order in response to concerns that the Board was going to put this off indefinitely.] Shari Handley thanks Sundee Maynez for volunteering for the Board Secretary position and asks her to respond to the following questions: "1. Do you have a working knowledge of RRO and Parliamentary Procedure? 2. Are you well-versed and familiar with the USGenWeb Bylaws? 3. Would you feel qualified to advise the NC and/or the AB with regards to procedures under these guidelines? 4. Do you have the time to log on daily (or nearly so) in order to keep up with the duties historically performed by the Secretary? 5. Do you feel you would be able to maintain yourself "above the fray", if you will . . . in other words, in an impartial, non-political way?" === Curiouser and Curiouser Corner: The banning issue is reaching an unusual height of ludicrousness, even for USGW. Rich Howland, who seems to think he has something to do with any of this, has been carrying on extensive [and of necessity one-sided] conversation with me on the -ALL list, in which he claims that an offer has been made by Root$web to reinstate the bans at our request [I have been able to respond to diatribes only by having someone risk banning themselves by forwarding mail from me to the lists]. To date, I have seen no such offer, although I have seen an offer by Jake Gehring, Executive Producer of Root$web, to unilaterally lift the bans immediately. Rich saw fit to nip this offer in the bud, for reasons he won't reveal, although he has been asked repeatedly. Now Board member Joy Fisher is also making the claim that an offer for reinstatement has been extended to us by Root$web and is using that as an excuse to postpone indefinitely the motion currently before the Board. This will of course save the Board the embarrassment of going on record as refusing to help to bat for project members. The bannees have been told for two years now that it is up to us to get reinstated and several of us have tried to do just that, either through the intervention of our SCs or by contacting Root$web personnel directly. As it turns out, however, those were apparently wasted efforts. Just a few moments ago, Board member Teri Pettit sent a message to both the CC-L and -ALL lists noting that even though the Board has claimed for two years that it could not interfere in a matter between CCs and Root$web, Root$web in fact "did not want to make any changes in the suspensions unless they knew that the USGenWeb Advisory Board was in concurrence" and was in fact actually _waiting_ to hear from the Board about it. So, as it turns out we six are indeed special among Root$web bannees. We need to have the approval of our elected representatives before we can be reinstated. This does not surprise me in the least. I have always suspected both that I was powerless to get reinstated on my own and that the Board could have taken care of it anytime it chose to. That they not only chose not to but were so cowardly as to claim for two years they could do nothing rather than admit it to is pretty much just business as usual. By the Way Corner: Nominations for the upcoming election are supposed to open today, yet the Election Committee has been remarkably quiet. Do you suppose they aren't ready? [Insert "oops" and "day late and a dollar short" comments here] === "When a government becomes powerful, it is destructive, extravagant and violent; it is a usurer which takes bread from innocent mouths and deprives honorable men of their substance for votes with which to perpetuate itself." ---Marcus Tullius Cicero This has been your Daily Board Show. -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net ------- Daily Board Show, (c) 2001 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved. From merope@Radix.Net Sun Jun 3 08:59:01 2001 Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 08:59:00 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show, 6/3/2001 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: A day late and a dollar short...its Your Daily Board Show! *warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk! Friday 1 June 2001: Voting continues on the motion to table Motion 01-11. Thus far 13 Board members have voted yes. Saturday 2 June 2001: Tim Stowell asks Joy Fisher if she is requesting to table Motion 01-19 [regarding the Root$web bans] when it has not even been opened for discussion. Tim declares Motion 01-11 tabled. There were 13 votes in favor of tabling it. Two Board members did not vote. Shari Handly asks for a report from the Election Committee. She wonders if a voting system is in place and wants details on any third party software or server chosen. She also notes she was expecting an announcement regarding the nominations period [which was due to open June 1] from the EC and asks "To whom should nominations be sent?" George Waller was unware that Sundee Maynez was under consideration for the Board Secretary job. He notes " Examining Sundee's posts to -ALL makes me wonder about her qualifications." George later apologizes for "making personal comments about Sundee on this list." Tim posts the EC's report [it will follow this issue of the DBS in full]. Sunday 3 June 2001: Tim posts list statistics for Board-L. There are current 103 list subscribers and 37 digest subscribers. === Its About Time Corner: Although he apparently had to die to get the recognition he deserved, Jeff Murphy has finally been publicly recognized as "one of the people responsible for the birth of the USGenWeb Project." A memorial for him has been posted at: http://www.usgenweb.com/about/memorial.html We note however that there is still not mention of his efforts in founding this project in the "official" project history at: http://www.usgenweb.com/about/history.html]. We find it amusing that, although the DBS suggested a memorial to Jeff over a month ago, it took prodding from none other than Linda "Mine" Lewis to make it happen. As you will recall, Linda was the person primarily responsible for forcing Jeff out of the project five years ago. Its About Time, Part Deux Corner: The Election Committee has posted its web page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgwelections/ [note, this page does not appear to be linked to the main USGW pages yet, so don't lose the url.] In a departure from tradition [IIRC] one person, Linda Haas Davenport [EC Chair] is accepting all nominations this year. Also of interest, the Census Project seat is listed as open for nomination; we are curious as to which project(s) they are accepting nominations from for that seat. The pages are nicely put together, if incomplete. We have found one glaring area of confusion over who gets to vote for the SC rep positions and have written the committee for clarification. We also note that _all_ of the Archive's little subprojects [pensions, maps, etc] are listed as separate Special Projects here: http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgwelections/regions.htm. That is very interesting. The _only_ Special Projects that currently exist are Archives, Tombstone and Census; none of these others went through the procedure set up in the bylaws for establishing Special Projects. We've asked about this too, since it is confusing based on this table to figure out who gets to vote in which SP election. === "I always wanted to get into politics, but I was never light enough to make the team." ---Art Buchwald This has been your Daily Board Show. -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net ------- Daily Board Show, (c) 2001 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved. From merope@Radix.Net Mon Jun 4 07:49:41 2001 Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 07:49:37 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Election Committee Report Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: This is the Election Committee Report, submitted by Linda Haas Davenport to the USGenWeb Advisory Board on 2 June 2001 === The USGenWeb Election Committee hereby respectfully submits the following report to the USGenWeb Advisory Board. Prior to the seating of the Election Committee, Linda Haas Davenport acting as temporary chair of the Committee requested web space and an e-mail list from Rootsweb. Rootsweb granted her request for web space but also told her that the Election Committee e-mail list already existed and was available from the National Coordinator. The National Coordinator turned over the list to the temporary chair who added all Election Committee members. The EC (Election Committee) is made up of: Two members for each of the four regions of the Project; Two members for the Special Projects and two members at-large for a total of twelve members. Eleven members may vote and the Chair may only vote in the case of a tie. The USGenWeb Election Committee was seated and began business January 29, 2001. The Temporary Chair called for nominations for permanent Chairperson. Linda Haas Davenport was unanimously elected as Chairperson and was formally approved by the Advisory Board on Feb 7, 2001. Upon taking her position as Chair, Linda called for nominations for the office of Publicist-Secretary for the Committee. Upon a call for votes Debbie Anderson was elected to the position unanimously. Her first order of business was to construct the Election Committee's web site which would be hosted by Rootsweb. One of the Committee members voiced her concerns about how the Project members would view the use of Rootsweb as the server for the Election Committee's web site and mailing list. The Chair opened the item for discussion. During this discussion it was pointed out that the voter software and the full voter list would not be stored on a Rootsweb server, that only the web site and e-mail list would be. It was felt, by the vast majority of the EC members, that since the National Web Site and the majority of the Projects state and county sites were hosted by Rootsweb that the EC's web site should be also. The Chair called for a vote. Ten members voted to use Rootsweb and one member voted against using Rootsweb The Chair issued a Welcome Message that included the "rules" by which the Committee and e-mail list would operate. One of these "rules" was that the Committee would operate as a confidential list. This was to insure that the members would be able to voice their thoughts, concerns and make suggestions without having to worry about what someone outside of the committee would say or think. One of the members, Carol C-H, was not happy with this. The Chair opened the issue for discussion. During this discussion it was pointed out that the Chair had not issued a gag order but rather required that each member keep confidential the discussions taking place or that would take place on the list. The Chair called for a vote. Ten votes were cast in favor of the list being confidential and one vote was in favor of an open list. As a result of the vote Carol C-H resigned from the committee. The Chair asked for nominations for a replacement for Carol C-H. Keith Giddeon was nominated.. Keith was selected by a unanimous vote of the EC. He was approved by the AB and seated on the committee. Following the Guidelines established by the Election Study Committee there were actually two "first order"s of business. One was to find available voting software that conformed to the requirements of the Guidelines. And the other was to secure a copy of the prior election committee's voting list. The Chair was placed in charge of securing the voter list and the rest of the EC began the search for voting software. The Chair was unable to secure a list of the prior voter's list for a few weeks. And, after four weeks of searching the web the EC was unable to find any voter software that conformed to the Guidelines. Two sites were found where the voting software met all requirements, except one, both of these sites charged fees. The EC held a lengthy discussion and it was decided that the EC should oversee the development of voting software for the use of the Project. A search was begun for a programmer or programmers who would be willing to develop voting software for the Project. Michael Anderson volunteered to write the code for the Voting Software and Keith Giddeon and Kenneth Thomas (EC members) agreed to work with Michael to develop the software. Michael is not a member of the USGenWeb and has no interest in genealogy. The Election Study Committee had conducted a survey of Project Members and during this survey it was suggested (by one of the respondents) that the EC look at the voting software developed by the IA State and Local Coordinators that was in use for the state of IA. It was agreed upon by the EC that the Chair should contact the IA people and determine if the EC could review their voting software. The Chair contacted Loren Toomsen and he was kind enough to set up a test of the IA's software for the EC members. The voting software was excellent but there were several areas that did not conform to the Guidelines set forth by the Election Study Committee. A discussion was held to determine if the IA's software could be modified to fit the Guidelines and it was determined that it would require paying the original software programmer to modify the code. Therefore the EC unanimously agreed to go forward with the development of voting software program for the Project. While the development of the software was underway the EC members contacted all State and Special Project Coordinators for a list of names and e-mail addresses of all LCs in their states or projects. This was a slow process and in several instances the Committee members found it necessary to visit the state site and collect names and addresses themselves. Once all lists were completed they were turned over to Keith and Kenneth to compile into one membership list. This process is now underway. During this same time frame the Chair tried to secure the voter list from the prior election committee. This list was not received until most of the EC members had already compiled their own lists. However, last year's list was used as a comparison to this year's list. The EC is very aware of the problems of past elections and the way that some Project members feel about Rootsweb, therefore - Once the decision was reached to develop voting software a search for a secure server was begun. One of the concerns voiced by the Election Study Committee was that some (if not many) volunteers would object to their name being placed in a voter list if the list could be harvested and some members would object to a list being housed on a Rootsweb server. The EC kept that thought in mind as they searched for a secure server. There were several sites suggested and the Chair visited each and signed up for server space, using a different name for each site. Within a week the Chair started receiving spam under each name she had used. In a casual discussion the Chair was having with a friend about the problems of finding a secure server, the friend (Ms. Keuchler) suggested that the Chair contact a friend of hers who has a large server system. The Chair contacted Mr, Kettmann and he agreed to allow the voting software and the membership list to reside on one of his servers. Mr. Kettmann has no connection with nor interest in genealogy or the USGenWeb Project. His servers are as secure as the EC could find and as far outside of Project as possible. At this time Michael is working with Mr. Kettmann set up the server space and to upload the voter software. Keith and Kenneth will upload the membership/voter list as soon as the final list is complete. Once everything is in place a test will be conducted by the EC. After this test the software will be adjusted for any problems encountered and then the software will be set up for a test election and all members of the Project will be invited to participate in the test. The EC will welcome any and all comments, suggestions or criticisms after the test. One final item needs to be mentioned - Debbie Anderson, our PR/Secretary has tendered her resignation due to her pending promotion which will leave her no time for outside activities. Therefore, as Chair, I am submitting this report on her behalf. The EC will notify the AB as soon as replacement has been selected by the committee. The EC will issue another report as soon as the test is completed. In the meantime we will be glad to answer any questions you may have. Linda Davenport Chair USGenWeb Project. From merope@Radix.Net Mon Jun 4 13:15:56 2001 Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 13:15:55 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show, 6/4/2001 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O X-Status: Going for broke...its Your Daily Board Show! *warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk! Sunday 3 June 2001: Explaining why she has moved to postpone Motion 01-10, Joy Fisher notes, "We have no authority to speak for these adults and promise they will abide by the AUP. Only they can do that. Until they write Jake, it is not our place to intercede. When Teri made her motion, I thought these folks had written recently and asked to be re-instated...I ask that this motion be tabled or postponed until the banned make an effort on their own this week. If their requests are turned down, they should forward all their recent communications between themselves and Jake to the AB -- and then we will take up Teri's motion." Tim Stowell calls the vote on the motion to postpone Motion 01-19 [although he persists in calling it a motion to table]. Teri Pettit raises two points of order regarding the motion to postpone: "1. A motion to Postpone must be discussed before it can be voted on. 2. The discussion of Motion 01-19 has ALREADY been postponed, and not reopened, and I have publicly stated that I see no reason to ASK that it be opened for discussion. Since Motion 01-19 cannot be called for a vote until it is opened for discussion, a motion to postpone voting is completely redundant." She notes further that she will withdraw Motion 01-19 when Jake Gehring (Root$web's Executive Producer) publicly announces the same policy he announced secretly to Richard Harrison and which was forwarded, again secretly, to the rest of the Board [for some reason, Jake does not want this communication shared with the banned members]. She indicates that Jake will shortly be making a formal announcement to the project lists regarding the terms for reinstatement and asks "Why go through the rigamarole of formally postponing a vote on a motion whose discussion has already been postponed, and that will almost certainly be withdrawn within a day or two? It is a waste of Board time. We should be discussing how to deal with the Census situation in a way that will give clear direction to the Election Committee." [Ah, but Teri, shafting the banned members yet again is so much more FUN than actually dealing with the substantive issues before the Board. Plus, there's absolutely political capital to waste in washing their hands of the matter one more time. Anyways, it was a nice try.] Shari Handley reports Sundee Maynez's answers to her questions to the Board. Sundee "feels" she has a working knowledge of RRoO and parliamentary procedure [but fails to provide any actual evidence of experience]; she claims to be "well versed" with the bylaws, based on the fact she's been in the project for 2 years or more; she says she'd have no problem advising the Board on the bylaws, RRoO and parliamentary procedure because "I like Tim and everyone else on the board and I do not have any grudges with anyone"; and she's actually looking forward to being BS because "I don't have to be "political"!LOL and I can remain impartial.!" Monday 4 June 2001: Tim responds to Teri Pettit's points by noting that Joy's motion is a "motion to table" [wrong, wrong, wrong] and "a motion to table does not have to be discussed - voting begins as soon as it is recognized." He also claims that Motion 01-19 was never postponed [technically true] and states again that Joy made a motion to table. [yes folks, our Esteemed National Commander apparently does not actually read his email.] Tim notes finally that "The only way to move on to Motion 01-20 is to handle Motion 01-19 in some manner. Since no vote was taken on the motion, it had to be tabled or withdrawn for the next motion to be brought to the floor." [yes, and now that this particular annoying little piece of business has been disposed of they can get on with bickering about the census projects.] Voting proceeds on the motion to postpone Motion 01-19; thus far 12 Board members voted yes to postpone the motion. Tim, still laboring under the misapprehension that it was a motion to table, announces that Motion 01-19 is tabled with 11 yes votes. [One Board member voted after Tim had announced the motion was "tabled"] Tim opens Motion 01-20 for discussion. This is the motion rescinding Motion 00-10 and leaving the CP seat vacant indefinitely. [Talk about avoiding the issues...] Richard Harrison suggests sticking with Joe Zsedeny's original plan. He notes "I think Joe's proposal is the best solution offered so far for dealing with the Census Project situation...Joe's proposal was to link both of the Census Projects. Linking of the former USGW Census Project is not prohibited by Motion 00-10, it is prohibited by Executive Order 2000-E-1...Motion 00-10 doesn't say "the Project would have nothing to do with the Inc. group," it says "sever its relationship with the USGenWeb Census Project, Inc.," i.e. it would no longer be the official USGW Census Project...There is no requirement that previous actions be rescinded in the order they were adopted. There is no conflict. Motion 00-10 deals with the relationship; Executive Order 2000-E-1 deals with links." Joe Zsedeny agrees with Richard and says "I believe that Tim's ruling that Motion 00-10 must be rescinded was in error. Only Executive Order 2000-E-1 need be rescinded." He asks Tim to reverse his ruling. === Election News Corner: Linda Haas Davenport has made the following announcement: "The Election Web Page has been updated. http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgwelections/ The Nomination Period has been extended until Midnight June 18th. If you wish to submit a nomination please visit the web page or e-mail the nomination to me." [her address is lhaasdav@mindspring.com] On the Lighter Sider Corner: A reader has written to inform us that the Hormel company no longer objects to the word "spam" being used to described unsolicited commercial or bulk email. However, Hormel stresses that "...if the term is to be used, it should be used in all lower-case letters to distinguish it from our trademark SPAM, which should be used with all uppercase letters..." So, remember folks, when you are describing the Root$web Review to your friends and loved ones, its "spam", not "SPAM". === "To err is human. To blame someone else is politics." ---Hubert Humphrey This has been your Daily Board Show. -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net ------- Daily Board Show, (c) 2001 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved. From merope@Radix.Net Mon Jun 4 19:53:14 2001 Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 19:53:13 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show--News Flash! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O X-Status: The following post just came over the USGENWEB-ALL list: === From: SuzanCook@aol.com Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 18:02:36 EDT Subject: [USGENWEB-ALL-L] Unbanned? - Testing To: USGENWEB-ALL-L@rootsweb.com Just testing to see if I can post. If this goes through, I've been unbanned! :) === We wrote to Susan and she says she wrote to Jake Gehring and he was very gracious about the whole situation. Looks like, no thanks to the Board, after 871 days the "30 day" bans are being finally being lifted. Heh heh. -Teresa merope@radix.net From merope@Radix.Net Tue Jun 5 11:14:32 2001 Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 11:14:32 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show, 6/5/2001 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O X-Status: Nobody does it better...its Your Daily Board Show! *warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk! Tuesday 5 June 2001 Voting continues on the motion to postpone ["table" according to Tim] Motion 01-19. Tim Stowell publishes revised vote totals showing 13 Board members voted to postpone action on the motion. Tim responds to Richard Harrison's observations by noting "If Joe's proposal was the best solution, then pray tell why you and the rest of the Board voted to table it?" He explains his position on rescinding Executive Order 2000-1 and Motion 00-10 by noting that "If one cuts ones relationship with something, one has nothing to do with the severed part..As of now, by the action of 00-10, the inc.ed group is not the official Census Project. E00-1 broke the link, 00-10 the relationship. As I've said before I've no problem with overturning of E00-1 but since 00-10 says we've broken our relationship with that entity, a link to that entity would seem to fly in the face of the spirit of 00-10...Overturning E00-1, would acknowledge a group that 00-10 requires be ignored. As each new action comes along, old actions are either reversed or overwritten...since 00-10 came after the EO, it must be dealt with first." He notes that to "stick with Joe's plan" as Richard suggested, they would have to first untable motion 01-11 and for now, they have to deal with Motion 01-20. Maggie Stewart makes a suggestion that she hopes won't be ignored because of its source: "For the Good of the USGenWeb Project volunteers and visitors, I move that the following actions be instituted, 1) The USGenWeb Webmaster be directed to create a page and place two links on it side by side - The USGenWeb Census Project http://www.rootsweb.com/~census and The USGenWeb Census Project, Inc. http://www.us-census.org/ 2) The USGenWeb Webmaster be directed to place a link from the official USGenWeb Project to that page saying "Census Information". 3) The National Coordinator be directed to have the redirect http://www.usgenweb.org/census directed to the page created in section 1." She says the vacant Board seat needs to be addressed separately and she has "no suggestions beyond leaving it vacant and rewriting the bylaws to remove it." Joe Zsedeny points out that Richard's comments did not have to do with Motion 01-11, but his suggestion posted previously regarding having the two Census Project leaderships work with the Board on a compromise. === Today's quote was submitted by a reader: "I have long since given up on the notion that it is my job to prevent people from wallowing in ignorance if that is what makes them happy." ---Richard Schultz This has been your Daily Board Show. -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net ------- Daily Board Show, (c) 2001 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved. From merope@Radix.Net Tue Jun 5 17:32:11 2001 Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 17:32:10 -0400 (EDT) From: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show, News Flash! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O X-Status: The following message just came over the USGENWEB-ALL list. It speaks for itself. A big thanks to Teri Pettit and Jake Gehring and to all those folks who have supported the RootsWeb Four and free speech for all 871 days of the ban. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 17:24:44 -0400 (EDT) From: merope To: USGENWEB-ALL-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [USGENWEB-ALL-L] Here goes nothing Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 14:24:41 -0700 Resent-From: USGENWEB-ALL-L@rootsweb.com I'm back. -Teresa btw, Brian, told ya so ;) ==== USGENWEB-ALL Mailing List ==== Remember the elections start July 1. From merope@Radix.Net Wed Jun 6 16:16:11 2001 Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 16:16:10 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show, 6/6/2001 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: Don't believe it for a second...its Your Daily Board Show! *warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk! Tuesday 5 June 2001: Richard Harrison confirms that he was referencing Joe Zsedeny's "Census Agreement" message and not Motion 01-11. He notes "Just because one severs a relationship with a group or person doesn't mean one won't have another different relationship with that group or person...Just because they are the FORMER USGenWeb Census Project doesn't mean we can't link to them." He recommends rescinding Executive Order 00-1 since "it doesn't contribute to the current effort to resolve the census problems." Richard also notes "If E00-1 and 00-10 dealt with the same issues or involved some kind of connected actions, there might be a reason to remove them in the same order that they were put in place. But although E100-1 and 00-10 both deal with the same group, they deal with seperate issues--with linking and with official recognition as part of the project. If 00-10 were revoked they would again be the USGenWeb Census Project, but so long as E00-1 were still in force we couldn't link to them. If E00-1 were rescinded we could link to them but they still would not be the official USGenWeb Census Project." Rather than taking a hardline approach to the issue, he suggests opting "for a more reasonable "let's see what we need to do to get back together" approach." Holly Timm concurs with Richard and says she is "100% for the "let's see what we need to do to get back together" approach and would add to that let's be as inclusive as possible." Wednesday 6 June 2001: Richard moves that "the Advisory Board instruct the webmaster to add links from the Project website to the former UsGenWeb Census Project and to the former USGenWeb Archives Census Project as follows: 1) On the "Projects" page, http://www.usgenweb.com/projects/projects.html, create the additional category "Other Projects" in the same size and style as the header "The Projects." 2) Include under it the disclaimer "The following links are to pages not officially a part of the USGenWeb Project, but may be of use to researchers." 3) Include under that a link to each census project, listing them by whichever name each project chooses. 4) Any other links or redirects on The USGenWeb Project website referring to "Census Projects" should take the visitor to the "Other Projects" header on the "Projects" page." Tim Stowell asks for a second. Richard moves that "the Advisory Board of The USGenWeb Project formally request the National Coordinator to rescind Executive Order 2000-E-1, "Delinking of the Census Project." Tim asks for a second. === Election Update: Election Committee Chair Linda Haas Davenport has released the following description of the nominations process: "All nominations are sent to me. I then forward the nomination to the Regional Team EC members They will write to the nominee to be sure the person WANTS to run If they do not the nominator will be notified that their nominee has declined If the nominee does want to run then the EC team will verify that the nominee has served in their position for 12 months by Jul 1, 2001 and that they have been nominated for a slot that they are qualified to run in. (In other words if I'm an LC in NW region I can't run for LC rep of the SW region) As soon as that verification is complete, and if the person qualifies then their name will be posted on the nominee page immediately...So far the EC has received only a very few nominations...They are all being handled by the EC teams. As soon as we know if a person is qualified then their name will be posted." End of an Era Corner: Well, the big news today is the lifting of the bans on two of the Root$web Four after only 71 days. We've updated the RootsWeb Four webpage at: http://www.radix.net/rw4.htm to reflect current events and will probably be posting a page with a timeline of events associated with the ban shortly. Again, thanks for all your support over the years. Doesn't seem like that long, but then, time does fly when you're having fun. === "In those wretched countries where a man cannot call his tongue his own, he can scarce call anything his own... Who ever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech." ---Benjamin Franklin This has been your Daily Board Show. -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net ------- Daily Board Show, (c) 2001 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved. From merope@Radix.Net Fri Jun 8 14:14:47 2001 Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 14:14:47 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show, 6/8/2001 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: Smelling like victory...its Your Daily Board Show! *warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk! Wednesday 6 June 2001: Tim Stowell notes that much of Richard Harrison's motions regarding creating a links page to the Census Projects' pages is similar to Maggie Stewart's previous motion. He suggests seconding and modifying Maggie's motion as needed. Richard notes that Maggie did not actually make a motion, she suggested one, a motion from someone not associated with either CP is "more neutral", and he was working on his motion first. He has written to Maggie and asked for her support and suggestions. Tim notes this is "fair enough". Thursday 7 June 2001: Shari Handley moves to "approve Sundee Maynez as Board Secretary." Tim asks for a second and Tina Vickery and Richard oblige. Tim notes that the problem with linking to both CPs equally is that it may confuse visitors. He notes that if the main page links to the incorporated Census Project "and their pages say as they now do that they ARE the USGenWeb Census Project and that they ARE a Special Project of the USGenWeb Project that by linking to them we legitimize them and/or their claims." Richard agrees that this may be confusing and suggests asking the Census Project if they would be willing to remove these references. He also notes that "the positive value of resolving this situation outweighs the confusion that might result from the conflicting claims." He also suggests that "Perhaps the two CPs and the Board could work out a BRIEF joint statement regarding their differences in this matter and that could be posted on all three sites, replacing the claims on Ron's CP pages and replacing the proposed disclaimer on the USGenWeb "Projects" page." Joy Fisher moves to amend Motion 01-20 to read "I move that we overturn Executive Order 2000-E-1. I further move that we link from a page on the national web site, without prejudice, to the census projects located at www.rootsweb.com/~census and www.us-census.org" Joe Zsedeny seconds this motion. Friday 8 June 2001: Tim gives the Board Secretary motion number 01-21 and opens the floor for discussion. Maggie calls the question. Tim calls for a vote, and thus far 4 Board members have voted yes. Tim acknowledges the amendment to Motion 01-20 and indicates that discussion may proceed. Tim publishes the following list of open issues: "Motion 01-20 - Overturn of Motion 00-10 and census seat with proposed amendment; Motion 01-20 amended - Overturn EO and create links; Motion 01-21 - Secretary; Deciding status of CP seat for this year's AB elections; Filling empty seat on Grievance Committee; Waiting for another report from the Election Committee"." [Grievance Committee??? Is he talking about the Mediation panel opening?] He also notes that there is a motion by Richard awaiting a second. He asks for anything else that should be included. [Well, both Motions 01-11 and 01-19 should be included. They are merely postponed/tabled, not closed.] Maggie asks Tim "If Executive Order 2000-E-1 is overturned, what is then the status of the two existing census projects? What will be the ramifications on the USGenWeb Project as a whole?" [*sigh* if EO 200-E-1 is overturned it just means we can link to them again...] Tim notes that his mention of a "Grievance Committee" was a misstatement on his part. Tim publishes his conception of the effect that rescinding EO-2000-1 will have: "In re-reading EO-00-1, it would appear that re-linking to the Inc'd group would invalidate Motion 00-10 since 00-10 says that the Project would have NOTHING to do with the Inc'd group. That being the case, if 00-10 is then invalidated, the Inc'd group would by default be the official USGenWeb Census Project. On the other hand if 00-10 were repealed it would pave the way for the EO to be done away with, would legitimize the Inc'd group's claim to the Census seat on the AB as they would be the Census Project...the fact remains E0-00-1 and Motion 00-10 are tied together like a horse and cart that sink or swim together. The USGenWeb Census Project housed at Rootsweb, the original census project, that picked up the pieces left by the departure of the Inc'd group, improved and moved forward with the original mission of including transcriptions in the Project's Digital Library, would then be relegated to what would appear to be the second string and/or an independent census Project...it would appear that in the process of including a group previously removed from the Project it would at the same time alienate a group that has stuck with the Project through thick and thin." [The faulty logic in this opinion is readily apparent. We will point out only that the original Census Project resides at http://www.us-census.org and they were not exactly given the opportunity to stick "with the Project through thick and thin." Our National Commander is apparently so blindly wedded to the PFKATACP that opinion has become fact as far as he is concerned. === Storms A'Brewing Corner: The first rumblings of what may another full-fledged copyright issue are being heard from the SCGenWeb. Recently, Pickens county CC Traci Parsons-Holder had her county webpage passwords handed over to her SC by Root$web staff and her counties were taken away from her in the dead of night. Way back in April 2001, Traci and the original Pickens county CC were contacted by the SCGW SC, Victoria Proctor. Victoria asked them to remove the click-through ad banners on their pages, saying this was a violation of USGenWeb policy. She also raised some concerns about material on the site, and asked the two if they had permission to post some of the materials they had on their webpages. She delinked Pickens county at that time, due to its "blatant commercial aspect." [We understand that at least some of "blatant commercialism" was actually raising money to preserve old local cemeteries. The remainder were ads for Root$web's corporate daddy, Ancestry.com]. In a response to Victoria, Traci noted that she would remove the banners and that she did have permission to reproduce all the material on her site and forwarded emails providing evidence of that. She also pointed out that a substantial number of USGenWeb sites have commercial advertisements and click-throughs on them of some sort or other. [The SCGenWeb state itself pops up a commercial ad, for what its worth.] Victoria replied to her, telling her that, historic preservation or no, the banners would have to go and that her evidence of permission to reproduce was not sufficient. Shortly thereafter, Traci was removed without notice as the Pickens county CC. Her Newberry county pages were also taken from her, although she had not previously corresponded with Victoria about them and there was apparently nothing wrong with them. Apparently Victoria was able to get the passwords from Root$web by using some sort of subterfuge, and according to Traci, she was also able to obtain the passwords for the Old Newberry District Chapter of the South Carolina Genealogical Society, an entity for which Traci serves as webmaster and which is independent of her SCGenWeb pages. Traci claims the pages now posted for both Pickens and Newberry counties contain substantial amounts of her words and graphics, although they are no longer attributed to her. Of more concern, however, is the substantial amount of transcribed materials that were also taken from her with the sites, data which apparently neither USGenWeb, SCGenWeb, nor the Archives has permission to continue to reproduce. Traci has sent messages to several Board members, including Holly Timm, Tim Stowell, her regional reps and the Archives rep. So far she has not heard anything back. She has also been in contact with Root$web, but has not received any response from them either. Ancestry.com and MyFamily.com have corresponded with her, however, and she describes them as sympathetic to her concerns. Her message to the Board members will follow this publication in full. We know that the Board has no control whatsoever over the State Coordinators, and that is probably as it should be. Traci seems disinclined to continue her participation in SCGW in any case, so her reinstatement is not an issue. However, it appears that the SC in question has in turn violated Traci's copyright by taking, modifying and then reposting her county pages. Traci maintains that the SC lied to Root$web in order to obtain the passwords; keeping and continuing to use Traci's work under these circumstances seems like nothing other than blatant misappropriation, something that our bylaws and guidelines firmly advise against. It also appears that the permissions Traci obtained for the data that she has posted to her pages were not given to USGenWeb, the Archives, or to any other entity, but to Traci personally. Traci has provided an extensive list of copyrighted works that need to be removed; as of this writing they are still posted. Election News: The first nominee has been posted to the nominationgs page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgwelections/nominations.html Several other nominations are pending and we expect this page will be updated soon. Boo-boo Corner: The other day, in writing about the lifting of the Root$web bans, we made this statement: "Well, the big news today is the lifting of the bans on two of the Root$web Four after only 71 days." That of course should read "871 days". My bad, sorry for any confusion. === "It gives me great pleasure indeed to see the stubbornness of an incorrigible nonconformist warmly acclaimed." ---Albert Einstein This has been your Daily Board Show. -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net ------- Daily Board Show, (c) 2001 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved. From merope@Radix.Net Fri Jun 8 14:20:11 2001 Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 14:20:10 -0400 (EDT) From: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: SCGenWeb--Notice to the Board Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: The following is the notice that Traci Parsons-Holder sent to members of the USGenWeb Advisory Board regarding her Pickens and Newberry county sites. === TO THE USGenWeb GOVERNING BODIES/BOARD AND THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH REMOVING ME AS COORDINATOR FOR THE PICKENS & NEWBERRY COUNTY SC USGenWeb: I have been removed as coordinator for the Pickens & Newberry Co SC USGenWeb sites and want to voice my disapproval. I & my volunteers have spent COUNTLESS hours transcribing and I have spent my own money driving from Texas to Pickens and Newberry County SC to gather records to transcribe. We won't even mention the money I spent purchasing things for volunteers or the equipment to gather records such as a hand held scanner, two digital cameras, portable copy/fax/scanner, laptop, and wiring my truck so I could do this on the road. And I won't mention all the time my 4 kids spent in the hot sun, cleaning headstones so I could photograph them, or in the basement of the Pickens or Oconee courthouse or the Pendleton Historical Building, the Clayton Research room or the Probate Court, just BORED to tears while I scanned and copied.... entire summers thrown out by someone who never bothers to answer emails, update sites etc. etc. Another thing I would like to note that these records are NOT donated to the USGenWeb, they are MY property that I shared with others as the web administrator, and/or they were donated to me and/or Blue Skies Publishing which I, Traci Parsons, am the owner of, for my exclusive use, with the understanding that they would NOT be placed in the USGenWeb archives or for their use. <<<
>>> Now granted, I understand that the above states that you are not to pocket any money for yourself, but EVERY one of the below websites is either using click throughs, banner exchange, or selling some sort of product (books) on the web site. (these are ALL USGenWeb SITES and most are located on Rootsweb) and I did not take the time to go to every single county and check to see if they were in compliance, this is just a few I scanned through.... http://www.scioto.org/OHGenWeb/ http://www.usgennet.org/usa/ky/county/jessamine/ http://www.rootsweb.com/~msitawam/ http://www.rootsweb.com/~argenweb/ http://www.rootsweb.com/~arboone/boone.html http://www.rootsweb.com/~kyallen/ebook.html http://www.ballardconet.com/GenWeb/ballard.html http://www.rootsweb.com/~gajasper/books.htm http://www.tngenweb.org/bedford/announce.htm http://www.tngenweb.org/bledsoe/misc.htm#HELP_MISC http://www.kyseeker.com/christian/index.html http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Village/9757/clinton.html http://www.tngenweb.org/dekalb/ http://www.rootsweb.com/~kypendle/ http://home.hiwaay.net/~woliver/WKYPubs.html http://www.tngenweb.org/putnam/putnres.htm http://www.rootsweb.com/~tnwashin/Links/neighbor.htm#Friends http://www.rootsweb.com/~tnloudon/ldpub.html http://www.rootsweb.com/~alautaug/ http://www.rootsweb.com/~mslafaye/ http://www.rootsweb.com/~mscalhou/toc.html http://www.rootsweb.com/~gaclarke/Current/Books.htm http://www.rootsweb.com/~gahabers/ http://www.researchonline.net/richmond/ http://www.rootsweb.com/~msyalobu/society.html http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncgreene/ The following web addresses have MY work or work that MY publishing company have EXCLUSIVE permission to use, NOT the USGenWeb and not the SCGenWeb nor the USGenWeb Archives or ANY part of the USGenWeb. I want my work in the following addresses REMOVED completely from any part of the USGenWeb. Each of these sites has MY graphics I designed which have embedded copyrights and are registered, MY photos which have embedded copyrights and are registered, MY layout, MY original artwork, or original works from various authors and/or transcribers who granted exclusive permission to Me and/or Blue Skies Publishing, which is registered as my D.B.A. in the Parker County TX Courthouse since 1996. 1. http://www.rootsweb.com/~scpicken/ - ALL FILES IN THE PICKENS COUNTY SC SITE NEED TO BE REMOVED including ALL subfolders, the main page; which is MY design/layout/colors and some of my wording, also the other pages contain my works including but not limited to: all graphics, all wording, all images such as photos, all transcriptions, all HTML, Etc., that are MY work or my volunteers work, with the exception of these, which were there before I took over: (gee, for an uncaring coordinator, I sure did a lot of work since I had over 2500 pages in there.) Black Family Cemetery - 1790 Census by Paul R. Sarrett, Jr. 1800 Census by Paul R. Sarrett, Jr. 1810 Census by Paul R. Sarrett, Jr. 1820Census by Paul R. Sarrett, Jr. 2. http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/sc/sca_pick.html - This site has works/transcriptions that I own and/or I and/or Blue Skies Publishing has WRITTEN permission to use on any site I maintain and have control of, with the specific request that their work not be placed in any archive or part of the USGenWeb. 3. http://www.rootsweb.com/~scnewber/ - Legal notice to Victoria Proctor, you CAN NOT just change my art, my design, my HTML, my wording or cut a page down, change a couple of links, and then post it as your own work. You are personally LIABLE for theft of MY copyrighted/registered work. (ALL FILES HERE NEED TO BE REMOVED. ALL OF THIS WORK IS MINE and BLUE SKIES PUBLISHING. You will have to create a new page with NONE of my work on it) 4. http://www.rootsweb.com/~cemetery/southcarolina/newberry.html - Any of the work here that were not submitted directly to the USGenWeb or the SCGenweb need to be removed immediately. (the files that came from the Newberry site I maintained need to be removed) 5. http://www.rootsweb.com/~scnewber/newberry_bible.htm - Any of the works here that were not submitted directly to the USGenWeb or the SCGenweb need to be removed immediately. (the files that came from the Newberry site I maintained need to be removed) 6. http://www.rootsweb.com/~scnewber/newberry_links.htm - this entire page must be removed as it is MY research; gathering & putting the links together, MY design, MY art work, and MY HTML. Again, Victoria Proctor, you CAN NOT just change my art, my design, my HTML, my wording or cut a page down, change a couple of links, and then post it as your own work. You are personally LIABLE for theft of MY copyrighted registered work. (ALL FILES HERE NEED TO BE REMOVED. ALL OF THIS WORK IS MINE and BLUE SKIES PUBLISHING, You will have to create a new page with NONE of my work on it.) [snip personal correspondence between Traci and Victoria] === -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net From merope@Radix.Net Sat Jun 9 10:12:32 2001 Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 10:12:31 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show, 6/9/2001 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O X-Status: Dark clouds on the horizon...its Your Daily Board Show! *warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk! Friday 8 June 2001: Richard Harrison says his goal is to see the two Census Projects reunited with each other and with USGenWeb. He notes "One thing we don't need to do is use the history of the situation as a roadblock to prevent a solution. The Board has neither the authority nor the moral suasion to issue fiats to reunite the CPs with each other...Now that they are both functioning out from under the authority of the Archives the resolution should be simplier. Whether they join completely or find some way to associate under an umbrella or whatever other arrangement they might come up with, the solution is theirs to find...The Board does have the ability to take action to begin the reunion of the CPs with the USGWP. The small step that the Board can easily take at this time is to link to the two CPs without prejudice. The only thing that stands in the way is Executive Order 2000-1." He recommends rescinding the EO. Saturday 9 June 2001: Maggie Stewart comments that "The merits of that question can't be discussed without getting into the history of the situation that prompted the EO in the first place." She notes that per the bylaws "It follows that if the AB has the authority to remove links then it certainly has the authority to create them" and asks how the EO prevents the Board from doing that. She also asks if establishing links is part of "administering the domains". [No, I don't know where she's going with this, other than making sure the USGW Census Project is never welcomed back into the project.] Voting proceeds on motion 01-21. Thus far 11 Board members have voted yes. [This motion has passed; the DBS welcomes Sundee Maynez to the fray.] === Pointing Fingers Corner: The discussion of the issues involving the removal of SCGenWeb CC Traci Parsons-Holder from her two counties [or more accurately the removal of her two counties from her] continues. Victoria Proctor, State Coordinator for SCGenWeb, has responded to the allegations: "Someone suggested that I knew the CC was still active because there had been recent contact. I suppose this depends on your definition of "recent" and your consideration of circumstances. I don't particularly call an email sent to me on May 5th wherein the CC says she'll take care of any Bylaws violations as "recent", not under the circumstances. The site was _not_ brought into compliance and the CC didn't let me know she objected to the request. If she disagreed with what was being asked of her, should she not have said, "Hey, I disagree, I've changed my mind", something, anything?...Putting the counties up for adoption was done in good faith and only as a last resort. No one at Rootsweb supplied anyone's passwords to me, nor would they." Other than this, she does not address the substantive issues of Traci's complaint, notably the disposition of some 2500 pages of transcribed data and how exactly she came to have control of the accounts, some portions of which are not part of USGenWeb. Victoria did not respond to the suggestion that Root$web changed the passwords and gave her the new ones [which would both lock out Traci and give Victoria control of the sites]. This concern in and of itself is troubling and none of RW's employees on the list have stepped forward to address it even though at least one of them has been asked directly. According to Rich Howland, Victoria told Root$web the accounts were abandoned; Victoria also did not speak to this directly, but from her message above she apparently considers one month between emails sufficient evidence that a site has been "abandoned" even if there is substantial email traffic regarding updates, the site was last updated May 31, and the CC in question commonly receives kudos from visitors to her site for work and accessibility. There is a _lot_ of concern being expressed by project members as to how exactly Victoria Proctor came to have control of those accounts. Since so many of us have accounts on Root$web, their policy about "abandoned" accounts and the data they contain is of substantial interest. For her part, Traci notes that 1) the accounts were very active and she has email from Root$web verifying this; 2) It is clear that someone has accessed Traci's accounts and altered her pages because she has screenshots showing her work still remaining in the code for the pages that still remain online; and 3) she has still not received word one from anyone on the Board about this. More news as it develops. === "All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression." ---Thomas Jefferson This has been your Daily Board Show. -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net ------- Daily Board Show, (c) 2001 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved. From merope@Radix.Net Sun Jun 10 09:09:50 2001 Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 09:09:49 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show, 6/10/2001 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O X-Status: Winning one for the Gipper...its Your Daily Board Show! *warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk! Saturday 9 June 2001: Richard Harrison notes that the Executive Order needs to be overturned because it prohibits linking to the CP. He suggests that the Board not let history obstruct their pursuit of a "suitably solution" to the Census Project issue. He also notes that even if the EO were appropriate when it was made, "it no longer benefits the USGWP." Voting proceeds on Motion 01-21; thus far 12 Board members have voted yes. === Let Justice Be Served Corner: Traci Parsons-Holder announced late yesterday that she has regained control of both her Root$web accounts and all her data for the Pickens and Newberry county sites. She will apparently not return as the CC for those two counties; they are still listed for adoption on the SCGenWeb page. And left entirely unanswered is how exactly Victoria Proctor obtained control of those accounts from Root$web. Still this is a refreshing change from business as usual; its not often that a CC wins one in USGenWeb. Pride Goeth Before a Fall Corner: This hilarious bit of hyperbole is from the latest New Zoo Review: "As the crowning achievement of the last 1,000 years and a logical successor to moveable type, microfilm, and the microchip, we are happy to announce the imminent launch of our new message boards system. Ancestry.com and RootsWeb.com are working on the final stages of a version 2.0 of the popular genealogical message boards that users currently access on RootsWeb.com, Ancestry.com, and FamilyHistory.com. The new system has loads of new benefits like more powerful searching, better stability, and better admin tools. In fact, the new message boards database will be by far the largest collection of such messages on the Internet." [Heh, looks like Brian "Purple Prose" Leverich is still writing copy for the RWR. It also looks like all you GenConnect board admins are shortly going to be working for Ancestry. As far as I know, this is the first consolidation of Root$web and Ancestry resources since the sell-out.] === "The humblest citizen of all the land when clad in the armor of a righteous cause, is stronger than all the hosts of Error." ---William Jennings Bryan This has been your Daily Board Show. -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net ------- Daily Board Show, (c) 2001 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.