JUNE 2006 DBS

Friday, June 30, 2006
That Time Of Year Again

A rising tide floats all boats...its Your Daily Board Show!

JUGGLING ACT: The Board is now discussing two basic topics, the GPC proposal and the July agenda. Scott Burow is fielding all questions on the topic both on the Board's chatty list and on the SWSC list, where Bettie has opened the topic for discussion. He certainly is an articulate gent, although a bit stubborn. It's a pity his vision for the handling of grievance procedures is a bit panglossian; such optimism is generally misplaced in USGenWeb. However, thus far he's competently answered questions about the training of candidates and the necessity of a bylaws amendment; we imagine that with such a clever proponent, his procedures are well on their way to passage

On the topic of the July agenda, Bettie wondered why our "appeal" of Motion 02-12 is not on the agenda and Jeff reminded her that it's not exactly an appeal. [We are asking that it be rescinded; whichever, it's certainly not on NC Linda's radar for the remainder of this term] They also discussed appointing someone to fill Angie's vacant seat but, as some have pointed out, with a scant 60 days left in the term it seems a little pointless. Jeff has suggested appointing the winner of the election, but that particular race has five candidates and it is likely that there will be a runoff. By the time the winner is known, the start of the new term will be about two weeks away.

IN OTHER NEWS: Daryl Lytton is no longer moderated on the DISCUSS list, although some others have been reporting that their messages are not going through. Sandra Quinn and Lorraine Newsome have both dropped out of the NENC CC rep race, leaving the field to Jeff "It's All About The Bylaws" Scism and dark horse candidate Alice Allen. NC candidate Bill Oliver has publicly supported violating both established rules and the rights of individual CCs in order to accomplish whatever he considers a greater good [in this case, getting rid of a pest he doesn't personally like]. RAL candidate Fred Smoot and NWPL CC candidate Greta Thompson have had a wee bit of back and forth about separating the executive functions of the Board from the judicial functions of the Board. Fred and NC Linda have gone back and forth about opening up the Exec list for public scrutiny [she's opposed, he's for] and a few others have wondered how the Board can possibly function without its Sekrit Sandbox. And, of course, Tina "The T-ster" Vickery is back poisoning the well once again with her cheerful missives. [If her buttons weren't so obvious they'd wouldn't be so easy to push.]

At this point, the various discussions are wide-ranging enough that interested parties should go slog through them themselves; trying to summarize them won't do justice to, shall we say, the more subtle nuances of the conversations. Plus, it is proving to be a great way to see the candidates in action and get a glimpse of their management styles and governing philosophies. So far, it is not looking too good for any of them.

BONUS QUOTE: "Teresa, I am not T. to you. T. is reserved for friends and family, which you are *not*. My name is Tina or Mrs. Vickery. Please afford me that courtesy." --Tina Vickery, spreading collegiality on DISCUSS

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Stunned and amazed since 1998

Posted by merope at 7:00 AM 0 comments    

Thursday, June 29, 2006
Filibluster

You got that right...its Your Daily Board Show!

ONWARD AND UPWARD: With Larry's consent to withdraw his second, Motion 06-12 is safely laid to rest, at least for the time being. The Board has now moved on to discussion of the Grievance Procedures Committee report. Jeff Scism posted a longish list of questions, which GPC Chair Scott Burow patiently answered at the same time he diplomatically managed to tell Jeff to RTFP. Jeff in particular had an issue with the "member in good standing" reference in the document, which Scott patiently explained twice, and with the binding and compulsory nature of the procedures. [We have a problem with this last bit ourselves, not because we think the procedures shouldn't necessarily be compulsory or binding, but because it is just setting up another opportunity for the Board to be inconsistent in how it perceives and carries out its duties. It is easy enough to say "the results are binding on all parties" and much harder to actually enforce it when someone says "whatever." And its an order of magnitude more difficult to be consistent about it from year to year given the changing personalities on the Board and the swift ebb and flow of the political tides in the Project.]

NC Linda also published the July agenda. Its pretty much the same as last month's agenda, and although Bettie Wood asked to put rescinding Motion 02-12 on the agenda, it's not there. So much for that.

ALL THE NEWS THAT'S FIT TO PRINT: As requested, we wrote newsletter editor Denise Wells yesterday to let her know we didn't receive our copy. It turns out that it is online, it just hasn't been linked to from the newsletter page. Why we didn't get ours via email was unaddressed. It's the usual blandly uninformative newsy news. There's a blurb from NC Linda about the elections, a couple of nice county highlights [one from our old friend Gentleman Jim Powell!], and a vanishingly small advert for the FGS conference. There is also an article for the Lineage Project wherein they managed to misspell "lineage". Twice.

If you didn't get yours in the mail either, you can read it here:

http://www.usgenweb.org/newsletter/NL-06-2006.shtml

HAND IN YOUR POCKET: The USGW@FGS2006 committee people have apparently given up on fundraising in USGenWeb; the advertisement in the newsletter just exhorts people to attend the conference and doesn't even give the donations link [which still hasn't been updated since April]. There is a link to a very poorly formatted information page, but even that doesn't give the donations link. We kinda wonder why that is. Do they have another of their secretive angel donors out there they don't want to tell us about? Are they waiting until it's down to the wire so they can guilt members into ponying up to pay for their adventures in Genealogy-Land? Think they'll tell us?

IT'S DEAD, JIM: The discussion of the election continues on the several lists, but what started as a promising brainstorm of different ideas has turned into the same old "I'm different than anyone else and things will change if you elect me. And I love CCs" stuff recycled from elections past. We've heard it before and we all know what we will see come September. The only bold statement so far is from Fred Smoot, who claims that if elected his first order of business will be to push to make the Sekrit Sandbox a public playground. Fred has also apparently accomplished the nearly impossible trick of quieting Don Kelly's fixation on IP addresses, merely by asking him to identify the senders of a handful of spam IP addresses.

CREEPY CRAWLY: On the DISCUSS list the talk has turned to focus on the different list management styles of our current NC [who, despite a couple of minor gaffes, has managed the list with an even and light hand] and Tina Vickery [who is mostly remembered for her "destructive management" and of the list]. Tina, as usual when she shows up for her regular dose of the limelight, manages to bring back onto the list the very things she claims to find so reprehensible when the "perpetual dissenters" are allowed their voice. Griping, naysaying, name-calling, personal attacks, you name it and it's OK when she does it. No worries, though, since Tina is a private citizen now with apparently no further pretensions to public office and she's only as important as anyone else, including the publisher of the Project's daily rag. And that is apparently just exactly what frosts her grits.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Eating hot dogs without the buns since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:10 AM 0 comments    

Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Tiger Run Around The Tree

Purring contentedly...its Your Daily Board Show!

BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD: Because of the "spirited discussion" on the SWSC list and in order to allow the Board to move on to other business, George Waller moved to "withdraw motion 06-12, asking permission for the committee to present it later after taking under consideration the concerns and comments of some of the members." Bettie seconded and Jeff Scism concurred.

JUNE MADNESS: On the project discussion lists the election and other discussions proceed apace. Don "Hobgoblin of Little Minds" Kelly continues to not disappoint us with his stubborn insistence on providing the electorate with every reason not to vote for him. Jeff Scism, after publicly avoiding answering the question of how he would use the bully pulpit promote free genealogy, wrote us privately to tell us he didn't think it was really the Board's job to do that. He noted, "Simply the duties of the Board are not ONLY promoting "free genealogy" which is done by EVERY member under Article IV. How it changes at Board level is not significant, IF the Board member still maintains their own sites, and acts responsibly on the Board to do ALL of the Board duties."

A discussion of the Advisory Board's original and current purposes has developed into a discussion of bylaws interpretation and the need or lack thereof for bylaws revisions. NC Linda published a fine concise history of the Board, she ended up with a whine about how tough the Board has it: "...the problem with the bylaws assigning responsibilities to the AB and then not granting it the authority to carry out those responsibilities is an impossible situation. The AB is between the proverbial rock and hard place. If it doesn't carry out its assigned responsibilities then the AB is publicly chastised for ignoring its responsibilities. If the AB does carry out its assigned responsibilities it's publicly chastised for over stepping its bounds. It is a no-win situation."

Project member Bob Franks [who we understand has recently been lumped in with the gripers] noted that "..in some instances the board does carry out those responsibilities even without authority and then in some instances the board does NOT carry out of those responsibiities saying they have no authority to do such....It's either one way or the other, and shouldn't change from one case to the next. Consistency is the key...the board is placing their own selves between a rock and a hard place by simply not being consistent..."

This prompted Jeff Scism to note, "Historically there are rules applied which are bylaws violations, not that the application was "wrong" for the project, but the process of application by amending the Bylaws as needed doesn't exist in an doable form," and then proceeded to once again flog the need for bylaws revision. [It amazes us that he can go on at length about how bad the bylaws are and how open they are to numerous competing interpretations, and then utterly fail to see how deeply confusing his own 20 page set of rules is. It's also amazing that anyone running for public office would publicly note that bylaws violations are just fine so long as they are "good for the project." He also firmly advocates strong top-down authority in the Project, up to and including adopting Sturgis project-wide.]

These two continued to pursue the discussion, with Jeff continuing to insist that each different Board has interpreted the bylaws differently based on it's own mindset and goals and that his proposals would change all that, and Bob insisting that "...the "wrongness"...is not the fact that there is no method in place to implement rulings, but the fact that the AB HAS implemented rulings, albeit not consistently...this is not a bylaws issue that will be solved by a new set of bylaws. You simply cannot legislate through bylaws, acting consistently on the bylaws and adopted parliamentary procedure at hand."

And last but not least, Tina "Killjoy" Vickery has crawled out from under her rock to tootle her own horn, attack a random handful of volunteers, and ask the candidates, "As an Advisory Board member how will each of the candidates shift from a he said, she said mentality and promotion of and discussion of the daily blogs and other reprehensible postings on many Project lists, to that of celebrating and promoting the USGenWeb Project?" [Didn't someone already ask that?] Thus far only Greta Thompson has responded and her response was basically that she's already spreading USGenWeb joy and if the Board sucks that out of her, she'll be happy to move on to other things.

PSA: NC Linda announced that there was some kind of problem with the delivery of the newsletter last week. Which is interesting, since the newsletter uses the EC's mailing list. Apparently the problem extends to posting the newsletter online since it isn't up yet. Anyways, if you didn't get one delivered to you doorstep, write Editor Denise at DAWells2@aol.com to let her know.

BONUS QUOTE: "This is a habit of some nine years that will not change. The answers to questions asked last year and the year before will not change." --Don Kelly

DOUBLE BONUS QUOTE: "This should be fun! It should NEVER EVER be anything else." --Tina Vickery

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Reprehensible since 1998

Posted by merope at 5:55 AM 0 comments    

Tuesday, June 27, 2006
And The Beat Goes On

A penny for your thoughts...its Your Daily Board Show!

GRANDMASTER FLASH: Although the Board maintains its silence, the cacaphony out in the hinterlands continues. The DISCUSS list is mostly focused on the upcoming election and the SWSC list is splitting its time between that and the registration fraud issue.

On the registration fraud issue, Don Kelly and Fred Smoot played back and forth a bit with the IP address issue, with Fred posting a challenge to Don to identify a handful of IP addresses recently sent to the TNGenWeb mailing list. No word back from Don yet on his success with that. Someone named Billie Walsh suggested that what we really need is a national level registry and ID Number, an idea that will die on the vine in very short order.

Candidates for office are basically focusing on two topics: that of just why it is that SCs feel justified in their run for a CC-level representative seat, and how they would use their Board seat to promote free genealogy.

Thus far, only a couple of the SCs have responded to the question about why they are running for CC seats. Debby Beheler noted that "It is not easy to get good volunteers," several CCs declined nomination, and she herself "did not want to be one of the people who is not willing to serve." Greta Thompson pointed to her experience as an SC as a benefit to CCs, and suggested that all the time she has spent helping the CCs in her state, "is a genuine plus...for anyone seeking to represent the CCs." Scott Burow, although not a candidate for a CC seat, astutely noted that most CCs are quite content doing what they do on the local level and either don't want to do more or aren't able to do more. He noted, "That small group of individuals who are willing to serve above and beyond the role of CC have already done so in their state and special projects. The candidates who accept nomination usually come from that group of individuals - with the resulting disproportionate number of SC's and ASC's on the slate." He also noted that he asked 7 CCs if he could nominate them and all seven declined. Good and insightful answers all.

The other question, which we asked on several Project lists, has to do with the sole purpose for USGenWeb's existence, the promotion of free genealogy. We figured this would be a no-brainer, but we've been quite surprised at the range of answers. Compare and contrast:

Bill Oliver [NC candidate] suggested incorporation as a 501c3 organization.

Mike Peterson [RAL candidate] noted "I would like to see a method...which provides a focused and concerted effort in CC's aids in gathering and presenting genealogy data. I would like to see more public nationwide display of the positive things we do and also at the state and local levels...I would like to see more publication of the successes of the local and state levels and perhaps some lessons learned from those experiences to the gain of others who are struggling...I would like to see something which would inspire more involvement of CC's...I would like to see what is going across our own mailing lists to be more positive idea generating..." He then moved on into how to improve the mechanics of Board operations; apparently by handling more than one motion at a time all these good things will come to pass.

Fred Smoot [RAL candidate] noted "...the best way to enhance our efforts in keeping genealogical data free is to create an environment where all of our volunteers feel comfortable that they are NOT serving a commercial monopoly...the project should become a registered not-for-profit unincorporated association, a nonprofit corporation, or some other legally recognized entity that can own property and guarantees that contributed data won't be slipped to commercial entities." [Fred obsesses about this like Jeff obsesses about the bylaws.] He also suggested that the first step toward improving the situation would be to vote incumbent candidates out of office.

Greta Thompson [NWPL CC candidate] noted "Free genealogy means having freely available data," and recommended more focus on those sites that have lots of data and information as encouragement to others. She also suggested a bit of real-world political activism, particularly in regards to efforts at various levels of government to close off genealogically relevant records.

Alice Allen [NENC CC candidate] noted that the Board seems to have drifted from its main purpose of advising and appears more concerned with "internal matters" than with USGenWeb's overall purpose. She said, "...perhaps the AB can turn their attention to advising how to get the data online and how to promote it. For the data-poor sites, suggestions on how to add to the sites may be something to consider. For the data-rich sites, promoting those as such in the USGW newsletter and on the main page, etc."

Jeff Scism [NENC CC candidate] decided to spend his reply splitting hairs on the difference between "free genealogy" and "freely accessible genealogy", pointed out the inability of any individual Board member to do anything alone, and wrapped up by tying the whole thing into a need to change the bylaws.

Donna Allen [SEMA CC candidate], noting that the Board has become little more than a power trip for some office holders, suggested "I would completely support something on the State levels where volunteers are recognized for their contributions...This might help to bring forth more submissions. We might also go more in depth on how to obtain records...indepth education on locating records would definately be something worth while...Each individual on the AB and all USGenWeb members really have to work TOGETHER to accomplish the overall goal of providing free research. It's my hope that this will happen."

Don Kelly [SWSC CC candidate] basically refused to answer the question, but tried to play cute with it. [He's actually refusing to answer questions about his candidacy in general, preferring to stick to the IP address subject, which for some reason he appears to think works for him.]

No other candidates have responded at this time, but we are encouraged by at least some of the answers by those who have. There are a few good ideas out there; we particularly liked Greta Thompson's idea of using the weight of USGenWeb to lobby for openness of public records. That truly would benefit genealogy as a whole and its one of the more novel ideas presented thus far.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Bringing it all back home since 1998

Posted by merope at 5:55 AM 1 comments    

Monday, June 26, 2006
Election Madness

There they go again...its Your Daily Board Show!

KISS MY GRITS: The Board has been quiet the last couple of days, but we at least finally got our official notification that our appeal of the EC's decision to find us ineligible to run for public office was denied. Of course, our formal notice came only after Tim Stowell publicly asked for his and we had to remind NC Linda that we never received one either. She did at least go through the polite public fiction of telling everyone she had planned to send us personal notices but had somehow managed not to do it.

RUMBLE IN THE JUNGLE: While most of the Project slumbers, the DISCUSS and SWSC lists are hotbeds of activity these days. Discussion is ranging from Motion 06-12 [the VFC motion] to questions to candidates. Phyllis Rippee doesn't think that Motion 06-12 should be passed on the assumption that it will be tweaked later, but she doesn't mind allowing people to anonymously accuse each other. Don "Doesn't Get It" Kelly continues to pursue his notion of an IP address as some sort of personal tattoo that identifies without fail the identity of whoever posted an email, while other smarter people explain to him why this just isn't so. Candidate Greta Thompson is accentuating the positive, while managing to slam Daryl Lytton and Sandra Quinn for accentuating the negative. Sandra and Daryl are attacking each other, Daryl by asking Sandra to explain why CCs should trust her to ever do the right thing by them and Sandra by accusing Daryl of sending her and others "private threatening emails," every single one of which she claims to have saved. Jeff "Hey, Look At Me" Scism chimed in with a reminder to everyone that he knows everything but sadly is not at liberty to discuss it; apparently his declaration of omniscience was intended to reassure us. Don Tharp posted a longish and interesting breakdown of the CC and SC representation on the Board and noted that once again in this election, six SCs are running for CC seats. Don "Oy Vey" Kelly dodged the issue by deciding it was not a "designated subject" for discussion and saving it for a later day.

Just another day of Campaign Season here in USGenWeb, where actual genealogy always comes in a distant second.

BONUS QUOTE: "Please keep in mind that this blog is mostly "facts" as someone else sees them & does not represent the whole truth of what the AB does, or at least what has gone on during my terms in office. Because the AB has a confidentiality agreement, we cannot correct anything that is presented on this blog, so the DBS is not something we discuss on this list." --Bettie Wood

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Swept under the carpet since 1998

Posted by merope at 5:45 AM 2 comments    

Saturday, June 24, 2006
The Value Of Every Possible Change Is Subjective

Barefoot in the park...its Your Daily Board Show!

LET THE GAMES BEGIN: Phyllis Rippee continued to try and get George to answer her question about what it will take to start an investigation of suspected aliases. She noted "Please just tell me if this interpretation of your comment is correct. The individual reporting suspected Fraudulent Registrations will bear the burden of proof and must present at a minimum the bogus names and email addresses. If this is a correct interpretation, I have no further discussion of the procedures." George, who has taken to comparing himself to Biblical figures, answered her question in the same way he answered ours, by noting that a simple accusation would be enough to start an investigation. As he noted, "Otherwise someone (the NC) would have to make a judgement call as to whether the accusation is valid or not before it even got to the investigation step." He also refused to further discuss Phyllis' question about the proposed Technical Advisor, saying "I believe we have discussed that to the point where the great majority of the board have 'no further discussion.' I have nothing more to say on it either."

[So, yes, all you will have to do to kick-start an investigation of someone you have a beef with is accuse them of having registered aliases. This should keep the Board, the EC, and the Technical Advisor busy. Let the games begin!]

Jan Cortez expressed some concerns about the Board's ability to prove that any person intended to commit fraud, noting "We just don't have the resources to do this and to put this responsibility on a technical advisor is a bit much. What if this person is wrong and we have wrongly accused some one? I see the ramifications as limitless and shudder when I think about it." George pointed out that since the investigators will be required to give the accused the benefit of the doubt if they can come up with a reasonable explanation, "That should prevent erroneous conclusions by investigators." [This is more than a little weak. "Reasonable" is often in the eyes of the beholder and we don't have too hard a time imagining a situation in which no explanation given by certain persons would ever be reasonable enough to qualify. And if the investigators reject an explanation, they still run the risk of being wrong.] Jan continued to pursue the issue of the "awesome responsibility" placed on the Technical Advisor, but George has not responded further.

SEPARATED AT BIRTH: Bettie Wood has, as is her wont, taken the VFC proposal to the SWSC list, where it is being discussed at some length by a handful of members. Amidst the usual naysayers and bandwagon-jumpers, who between them find nothing either good or bad from the Board, is an extraordinary conversation between Don "Rambling Man" Kelly and one Douglas Anderson, who appeared out of nowhere a couple of months ago. Between the two of them, the incoherency, weird metaphors, and non sequiter's are so thick you could cut 'em with a butter knife. At one point, the analogy of a white horse and a buggy was introduced, but we are stumped as to their deeper meaning. Reading their exchange is both amusing and scary, and if we didn't suspect that Mr. Dark Horse was having a good old game with Don, we'd weep for the children.

[We admit we had a hard time picking out today's BQ. It was a toss-up between the one we chose and Don's mumbling disquisition on democracy. But we finally settled on the one we did because we suspect it harbors a great deal of irony. If you doubt, go visit Donal "Irish Spring" O'Kelly's web pages. Not to fret though; Don got today's title as a consolation prize.]

THE OLD COLLEGE TRY: Mike St. Clair has re-opened the Candidate's Forum. He ran one last year, with varying amounts of success, and we'd like to see it more fully utilized this year, because it's a good idea. The URL is here:

http://election.on-theweb.com/

Go and play and ask the hard questions.

BONUS QUOTE: "Excellent thoughts. Commitment, honesty, integrity, fairness, and justice. I have read many of your comments, and you are a great voice of information and vision. I have also visited your county web site, and it is really, really, really something to see. Really Great. My young son especially enjoyed it." --Douglas Anderson to Don Kelly

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Chopped liver since 1998

Posted by merope at 7:30 AM 2 comments    

Friday, June 23, 2006
Banana Republic

Tell it like it is...its Your Daily Board Show!

EMPTY PROMISES: A few more Board members have indicated they have no further discussion to offer on Motion 06-12. Phyllis, however, popped up with a rhetorical question, wondering if all she would have to do to start an investigation is accuse someone of having aliases. George Waller helpfully told her that the anonymouse accuser will have to provide whatever information they have available, and that "In this case (a bogus report of fraudulent registration) the evidence will result in a finding of innocence." We must admit we admire George's ability to not only predict the future but to resolve investigations before they have even happened. And of course, to neatly sidestep the question. Phyllis' question didn't ask about the outcome of an investigation; she asked what it would take to start one. Apparently, any old accusation will be enough.

SOMETHING IN THE WATER: It's old news by now that NC Linda has moderated Daryl Lytton on the DISCUSS list for a couple of weeks, since he persisted in repeatedly bringing up his troubles with Board puppet Sandra Quinn on the list, even after she told him not to. Since she gagged him, Linda has forwarded a handful of Daryl's less inflammatory posts to the list. It turns out, however, that our Dear Leader has also taken it upon herself to alter messages from Daryl that she's posted to the list. Here's what Linda posted from Daryl on June 21:

"I miss you, Ann :) Problems with the wrongful delinking of CCs has been an ongoing issue for years, it causes problems for other CCs, it causes problem for the AB when they have to deal with grievances for this. I feel that it is in the best interest of the USGenWeb for all members to be treated fairly, equally, in accordance with the rules, and that we have members of the AB who not only feel the same way, but also their actions demonstrate that they feel this way. Still your friend, Daryl"

Here's the full text of what Daryl tried to post on June 20:

"I miss you, Ann :) Problems with the wrongful delinking of CCs has been an ongoing issue for years, it causes problems for other CCs, it causes problem for the AB when they have to deal with grievances for this. I feel that it is in the best interest of the USGenWeb for all members to be treated fairly, equally, in accordance with the rules, and that we have members of the AB who not only feel the same way, but also their actions demonstrate that they feel this way. To elect someone to the AB as a CC Rep who has a record of breaking state and national rules and denying members their rights, or to elect a CC Rep who condones those actions, is a disservice to the AB and to the membership in general. We can't make informed decisions about who to elect, if we don't know what candidates stances are, or if we are not allowed to ask candidates questions about their beliefs or actions. OHGenWeb SC Sandra Quinn, a candidate for a CC Rep, wanted to keep me quiet on the required state list because I exercised my right to speak on debatable issues and was critical of her leadership. She unsubbed me from the required state list, citing that I had broken the "List Code of Ethics," delinked my Adams County, and expelled me with no fair hearing. That "Code of Ethics" only gives authority to place someone on moderation for 7 days, and specifically says that the offenders county shall remain linked. And a "fair hearing" before punishment is not only a right of all members, due process is also a right of all Americans. So...here we have someone running for a CC Rep, who has a reputation for breaking state and national rules, and for denying a member their rights. Bill Oliver, also a candidate for a CC Rep and also a OHGenWeb CC, publicly condoned SC Quinn's actions. Quinn's actions also denied me my right to be a candidate in the upcoming elections. The AB will allow the person who broke the rules to run for office...but the AB denied me, who did not break the rules, my right to run. Be careful of who you vote for. Still your friend, Daryl"

Easily three quarters of Daryl's original post is completely missing. Now, we don't always mind list moderation when it's done fairly and to her credit NC Linda has used the gag stick sparingly. Censorship, particularly on behalf of a couple of candidates, is an entirely different matter.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
One-trick pony since 1998

Posted by merope at 5:55 AM 0 comments    

Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Meh

Mighty like a whale...its Your Daily Board Show!

SEARCHING FOR ENTHUSIASM: NC Linda announced the final results of Tim Stowell's appeal; it, of course, failed with 10 votes to uphold the EC, none to uphold the appeal, and 1 abstention. Linda then asked for a second to George's Voter Fraud Committee motion. Both Larry Flesher and Jeff Scism obliged and Linda numbered it Motion 06-12 and opened it for discussion. Thus far a handful of Board members have declined to discuss the motion further, but Larry asked "...regarding the Technical
Advisor - will this be a standing position, to be appointed (when?) or will a TA be appointed ad hoc to serve each individual process?" George responded, as he has in the past, that the position would not be ad hoc, but would be selected by the Board shortly after September 1 each year. He also sounded a wee bit peeved when he noted, "I hope the board can establish this by precedent rather than take it back to committee for the third time." Since there have been no comments on the motion for two days now, we imagine that it will go to a vote in short order.

TALK TO THE HAND: Bettie's observation that the Board has another appeal to address before moving to the VFC report has thus far been ignored.

WORD SALAD: Meanwhile, over on the DISCUSS list, the election show proceeds apace. Jeff Scism has been testily and wordily explaining just why it is he obsesses over revising the bylaws. Apparently revising the bylaws will magically heal all the problems in the Project, although we'd gladly give 12 quatloos to anyone who can show us exactly how the bloated set he's resting his candidacy on will accomplish that. Most of it is so unintellibly complicated and contradictory that it could keep a mildly obsessive blogger busy for a year mocking it. He's also slung the first mud of the campaign [see below], although it was such a feeble attempt it only made him look kind of silly. For her part, Sandra Quinn has gamely tried to explain how it's OK to violate the rights of one CC so long as you have the support of other CCs and how it is that one of the more abusive SCs on recent record is actually "representing" her CCs when she violates her state's ethics rules, which were voted in by, you guessed it, CCs. Really, Lewis Carrol couldn't make some of this stuff up.

FADING INTEREST: Apparently the fine staff over at the "not affiliated with The USGenWeb Project, or any official committee of the project including the USGenWeb at FGS 2006 Committee Support the USGenWeb Project at the FGS 2006 Conference" committee have lost interest in showing you how it's managing your money. We are now three quarters of the way through June and there are no budget details posted for May. They got a donation in late May and they finally updated the front page to match the actual amount of donated dollars and even fixed some typos [although the link to the USGW at FGS 2006 page is still broken], but the budget details pages are woefully out of date. We guess those are Betsy Mills' job, since she's the treasurer.

BONUS QUOTE: "Most of the Project is blissfully unaware of the problems and the nay sayers. That doesn't reduce the negative effects of bloggers, disgruntled former members, and those who have abused others." --Jeff Scism, who we guess falls into the third group

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Unimpressed since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:00 AM 1 comments    

Sunday, June 18, 2006
Horror Hayride

How sausages are made..its Your Daily Board Show!

NO PONY FOR YOU: About 30 seconds after we posted the DBS yesterday, NC Linda published the formal results on our appeal of the EC's decision to find us ineligible to run for national office. After the results were published, the last Board member sent in her vote for the EC, bringing the count to 11 in favor of the EC, 1 vote to uphold the appeal, and one abstention. When we asked NC Linda how it is that the Board can be in compliance with EC rules requiring that appeals be resolved within 2 days of the close of nominations we were told, as expected, that "It does not say the AB's decision has to be rendered no later than two days...The AB did address your challenge timely."

Of course, she is exactly right. What we wonder about sometimes, but only idly, is why there are some rules the Board feels constrained to follow to the letter, such as the EC guidelines, and other rules, such as the rules in Sturgis regarding disciplining members, they don't seem so concerned about. Another mystery for the ages, we suppose.

Incidentally, Bettie's request to have rescinding Motion 02-12 put on the agenda was ignored. See you all next year.

ON TO THE NEXT VICTIM: Shortly after dashing our hopes for yet another year, the Board moved on to the matter of Tim Stowell's appeal. After a barely decent discussion period of slightly more than three hours NC Linda opened up the voting period. At press time, 10 members voted to uphold the EC's findings and 1 had abstained, and Tim's appeal has also failed. The Project is safe for yet another year.

Tim's appeal was on much shakier ground than was ours, mostly because he did indeed get the benefit of a trial before he was disciplined. However, it is apparently not relevant that it was a kangaroo trial in which he was railroaded by people who had been out to get him ever since they decided he was of no further use to them, in which evidence and testimony was provided by the same people who then turned around and voted on his fate, and in which he was punished for doing the same sorts of things for which the Board has many times declined to punish other SCs. However, going by the letter of the rules, [at least the ones that don't require a "fair hearing" and a vote of the membership prior to disciplining a member], the Board could really take no other approach.

Tim was also invited to challenge the original ruling at another time; we imagine that will join our invitation in the circular file.

LET THE GAMES BEGIN: With the safe removal of the scary candidates from the running, the election season is now in full swing, and it's once again Lip Service time here in USGenWeb-land. As is usual this time of year, the air is fulled with campaign rhetoric, most of which will be forgotten one minute after midnight on September 1, and the few campaign webpages that are up are overflowing with love for the CCs, USGenWeb, and genealogy in general, but with one exception remarkably short on details.

Here are some of the various election-related absurdities we observed in our brief perusal of the currently posted candidate webpages and the Project discussion lists:

More than one person has pointed out to us the rich irony inherent in CC rep candidate Phyllis Rippee's solemn belief "...that the CCs should actually be the backbone of the Project," apparently written while she was voting against a CC's appeal. Please note, however, that Phyllis' ability to spout about how much she loves the CCs at the same time she is using whatever means necessary to smack them down is exactly what makes her the fine politician she is.

Ever wonder why even SC candidates claim they love CCs more than anything and that the SCs are merely there to serve them? Don't you ever just wish that one of them would come out and say they are being elected as a SC rep and, by god, they are going to represent the SCs, CCs be damned? Probably won't happen this election, and the only campaign page for an SC candidate that is up so far [Freddie Spradlin's] is not exactly breaking the mold. To hear him tell it, he'll apparantly represent the SCs by representing the CCs.

CC rep candidate Jeff Scism's webpage is all about the bylaws and getting them fixed. We are beginning to find his obsession with the bylaws, which as he reminds us has gone on now for five years, more than little creepy, but finding out that he is a stay-at-home mom makes the reasons why he obviously has too much time on his hands a little more clear.

CC rep candidate Sandra Quinn is refusing to publicly answer questions put to her by a CC. This is par for the course for her; she generally only plays in friendly playgrounds where she can take her ball and go home when the game gets a little rough. We wonder how refusing to publicly answer questions squares with her desire to be a representative of the members, or how an SC who has publicly demonstrated the high regard in which she holds CC rights thinks she can adequately represent CCs, but in any case, she's not running opposed anymore. There are now two other candidates for that seat, and we imagine that Sandra's chances to play in a bigger playground just circled the drain.

Last but not least, NC Linda has put the DISCUSS list on notice that during the election she expects civil discussion and will moderate anyone who doesn't comply. We imagine this will scare most candidates off to the alternate CC list, where they can mudsling to their hearts' content. This may be Linda's goal; the alternate list is not archived and doesn't serve as a monument to nastiness that many of the Project's official lists do.

Stay tuned for more election shenanigans; they are sure to be entertaining!

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Still doesn't have a pony since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:30 AM 0 comments    

Saturday, June 17, 2006
Like Pulling Teeth

Better than a ringside seat...it's Your Daily Board Show!

COMING UP SHORT: After NC Linda extended the voting period by 24 hours, two more Board members have voted to uphold the EC's ruling that we are ineligible to run for office and one has abstained. This puts the count at 10 for upholding the EC, one for upholding the appeal [Yay, George], and one abstention. By extending the vote for an extra 48 hours, NC Linda made it more or less impossible for the Board to resolve the issue within two days of the close of the nominations period, as the unitiated or naive might think they are required to do. If the challenge were to our eligibility to vote and the Board missed its deadline, the rules require them to give us the benefit of the doubt and let us vote. Somehow, we doubt that the Board will be giving us the benefit of the doubt. Also, if one nitpicks the EC rules carefully, all the Board is required to do is "address" the appeal within two days. So dragging a vote out for an extra day or discussing Tim Stowell's appeal in secret for the last three days most likely will be considered to meet the strict meaning of the word "address," although that in no way was the intent of the committee that created the original EC guidelines. They could, if they wanted to, "address" these appeals until the end of their term.

BEATING YOUR HEAD AGAINST THE WALL: Project gadfly Daryl Lytton has filed another grievance challenging Sandra Quinn's eligibility for office and basically asked the Board to find her a member not-in-good standing. He published it a couple times to the alternate CC list [he's apparently still in time out on DISCUSS] and followed it up with a request for the Board to find her guilty or not guilty of various acts of malfeasance regarding himself. He then followed that up with a motion for the Board to do the same. NC Linda did not bother to acknowledge any of his grievances or motions.

Daryl would save himself time and grief if he could gracefully accept the reality that a Board seat is Sandy's reward for kissing "National's" nether end and getting rid [at least temporarily] of him. We personally relish the opportunity to report on her activities while on the Board, and we promise her a most interesting tenure.

WHERE'S WALDO: SWSC CC rep candidate Don Kelly has demonstrated his deep understanding and love for the region by listing his COGenWeb county site as a "Qualifiying SW/SC Website."

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Firmly grounded since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:00 AM 0 comments    

Friday, June 16, 2006
Head Like A Hole

Down and out...it's Your Daily Board Show!

ALWAYS A BRIDESMAID: Yesterday, NC Linda asked the Board members to vote to uphold either the EC's finding that we are ineligible to run for office or our appeal of that finding. At press time, 8 Board members had voted with the EC and one had voted to uphold the appeal [Yay George!]. While we were aware that this outcome was a foregone conclusion before we even submitted our appeal, we are a bit surprised at the votes by some of the so-called "CC rights advocates." But, as several members have pointed out, the Board's concern is not with doing the right thing, it is with preventing us from getting back into office, and particularly with preventing us from ever being NC. Now that several NCs have asserted the power of the office, they are quite concerned about who sits in that seat. Ah well, better luck next time. Which is OK; we weren't exactly rearranging our social calendar around the possibility of being NC.

The Board has apparently declined to address our request to rescind Motion 02-12 in a timely fashion, even though that was an integral part of our appeal. This has permitted them the easy out of strictly voting on the EC's finding of our current status, which is all the rules require them to do. Going the extra mile, while something conscientious public representatives would do as a matter of course, nowhere appears in the bylaws, EC guidelines, or Sturgis. Although several of them over the past year have noted that they think the status was improperly assigned and is illegally continued [and there is a parliamentarian ruling supporting them], they will no doubt find the matter not a pressing concern for the remainder of this Board's term. There is no benefit to them of pursuing it, especially when they can now joyfully move on to criminalizing volunteers, instituting an ungodly complicated grievance procedure that will change absolutely nothing, and messing about with the bylaws. Besides, the hallmark of a lame duck government is passing the hard stuff onto the next administration.

ANOTHER FOREGONE CONCLUSION: The Board also still must address, today, an appeal by Tim Stowell. The EC of course also found him ineligible to run for office and he filed an appeal of Scism-like proportions. According to NC Linda the appeal was sent to the Sekrit Sandbox and there has not been a public peep about it since. The EC rules require that the Board rule on appeals no more than two days after the close of nominations, so unless they are planning on something creative, they must deal with this by the end of today.

DECK CHAIRS ON THE HINDENBURG: Speaking of the next administration, here's the apparent line-up for the upcoming election:

NC: Scott Burow, Paulette Carpenter, Bill Oliver
RAL: Bobbie Dunn, Mike Peterson, Fred Smoot
NENC CC (1 yr): Sandra Quinn
NENC CC (2 yr): Alice Allen, Lorraine Newsome, Jeff Scism
NWPL CC: Jason Mendenhall, Greta Thompson
SEMA SC: Darrel Bell, Paul Buckley, Mari Byers, Heather De George, Freddie Spradlin
SEMA CC: Donna Allen, Linda Blum-Barton
SWSC SC: Larry Flesher
SWSC CC: Don Kelly, Phyllis Rippee

The EC nominations page still has a lot of missing information on many candidates, so there may be more candidates added in the next two days. What is of interest is that Sandra "Puppet On A String" Quinn will apparently be unchallenged in the race for the one year NCNE CC rep seat. She was originally running for the 2 year seat, but apparently changed her mind, or had it changed for her. How nice for the usual suspects to have managed to insert one of their more malleable sycophants into public office, and how nice for Sandy to finally be a part of the "National" she has so often called upon to support her as she abuses her CCs. We'll be surpised if she lasts more than a few months on the Board.

The only other unopposed race, and one that has no missing information on candidates, is the SWSC SC seat. Larry Flesher will be returning to that seat. He's been a steady and mostly inoffensive seat warmer throughout his tenure, if entirely uninteresting. All the excitement in SWSC comes from the CC reps, who usually tend to be more than a little bizarre, one way or another.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Ringside at the Theatre of the Absurd since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:45 AM 0 comments    

Wednesday, June 14, 2006
While Rome Burns

In a blaze of glory...its Your Daily Board Show!

MOLASSES IN JANUARY: Yesterday, we told the Board that if it would make things simpler for them we would explicitly ask them to rescind Motion 02-12 in time for us to accept a nomination for the upcoming election [because apparently they couldn't figure that out on their own]. We were shortly informed by both NC Linda and a handful of other Board members that this latest shot in the dark was being discussed in the Sekrit Sandbox. In the meanwhile, Jan Cortez plopped herself firmly in the "must be a MIGS for at least a year to be eligible" camp, and Bettie Wood noted that she considered that our latest request "leaves no doubt & complies with what the motion originally asked for," and suggested, "If we can't find her eligible this year, I think she should at least be eligible for next year's elections."

LET THE GAMES BEGIN: With only two days more to go, the election nominations have heated up a bit. Two more candidates have accepted nominations for NC, so Scott "Emporer In Training" Burow might have a bit of competition. The RAL position is also now a horse race and one of the horses is Fred Smoot, which must be causing some bunched drawers in certain circles. Jeff Scism and Lorraine Newsome have both decided they'd rather serve for two years and withdrew their candidacies for the one year NENC CC race, leaving that race with no candidates. Among the other candidates for the two year seat is OHGW SC and oddity Sandra Quinn, of whom someone once remarked "She knows so little, she'd be putty in the hands of most anyone who wanted to mold her." There are still just two candidates for the NWPL CC seat and one for the SEMA CC seat. The big race is the SEMA SC race. That race has five candidates, one of which is Linda Lewis' right hand man in VAGenWeb. In SWSC, the SC race still has but one candidate and the CC race has two candidates, Phyllis Rippee and Don Kelly, which is basically a choice between batty as a fruitcake and a deck short a few cards. The nominations list is still inaccurate and incomplete, as the EC is continuing to refuse to process nominations for candidates it has already deemed ineligible. There's no reason for it other than that they don't really want people knowing how many nominations some people have received. It interferes with their claim that certain people are just troublemakers out on the fringe and of no real consequence.

BONUS QUOTE: "Just remember, four legs are better than two. Two heads are better than one. Therefore, four eyes are better than two. And, six eyes are better than four, etc., etc." --Douglas Anderson, on the upcoming election

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Considering alternatives since 1998

Posted by merope at 5:50 AM 0 comments    

Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Crystal Clear

Making landfall...its Your Daily Board Show!

AIMLESSLY MILLING: Since we asked the Board to overturn the MNIGS status on the grounds that it was illegally applied in the first place so that we can run for office, the following has happened:

1) NC Linda put aside the VFC report momentarily so that the Board could discuss our appeal of the EC's ruling of ineligibility.

2) Jeff "Hell Hath No Fury Like a Pipsqueak Scorned" Scism posted another of his longish and ill-informed screeds. He basically pointed out that we had our chance to have the status lifted way back when he personally was so kind as to move to have it lifted. However, since that attempt failed and we have not jumped through whatever secret hoops the Board apparently wants us to jump through, he noted "...to revisit it now would be fruitless, unless Ms. Lindquist exercises her option to comply with the original ruling. This appeal of the Finding of ineligibility is focused ONLY on her current status, and should not include the undoing of previous rulings made years ago by a previous Board...the eligibility determination is based on her current status, and not on 'how' she got into the current status...The onus is on Ms. Lindquist to change her status."

[It's also probably fair to mention that since we have not since been appropriately grateful to Jeff for his benevolence, he now thinks the status should remain until we beg for forgiveness and promise not to do it again, even though he has freely admitted that the status was illegally applied and is illegally continued. Apparently he thought he was going to get some kind of "get out of the DBS free" card by getting our status lifted. It seems that some good old-fashioned groveling might now be necessary for us get to back into his good graces.]

3) Suzanne noted that even if the status were lifted now, we "still won't have 12 months as MIGS to be eligible." Phyllis similarly noted that we are ineligible because we don't meet "the 12 months continuous service in good standing requirement stated in the bylaws." [Saw that one coming, didn't we?]

4) The Other Linda noted we are ineligible due to our current status of MNIGS. [It apparently blew right past her that we have asked that the status be lifted so that we can run for office.]

5) George supports our eligibility based on the reasons given in our appeal [Yay George!], but also noted he was basically a lonely voice in a hostile crowd. He also suggested that we could "show our sincerity" by assuring the Board that if we are elected we will not divulge confidential information. [We might note that if we were to be elected there would be no confidential Board business, but that's another matter.] In any case, it's apparently not enough to do the right thing just because its the right thing; we must also make fruitless attempts to soothe the Board's fears.

[We are not sure we understand how so many apparently intelligent people can be unclear on the concept. Motion 02-12 was illegal under Sturgis. Several of them admitted this at the same time they were voting to keep the MNIGS status. Their own parliamentarian recommended it be rescinded. The repercussions of a former Board's illegal actions, which they do not have the bal...er...fortitude to rescind, are now preventing other Project members from exercising their right to nominate members of their choosing and to vote for them in fair elections. We are a member in good standing by every single criterion listed in the bylaws; if the Board feels otherwise, it should hold a proper trial to determine specifically when and how we have violated the bylaws, establish a proper punishment, and bring it to the membership for a vote, as is required under the rules they have adopted and followed for the last five years. We recognize that ignoring Sturgis and their own parliamentarian is convenient but we would think that at some point the utter ridiculousness of their position would become apparent even to them. Apparently they are so desperate to keep us out of their playground that it trumps every other consideration, including their own integrity.]

6) We have been informed by several people that our additional nominations will not be added to the Nominations pages because the EC is refusing to process them. The nominations pages will thus be an incorrect and incomplete record of this election, which we suppose also suits their purposes.

IN OTHER NEWS: NC Linda finally managed to get the GPC report published, although not to either of the Board lists. It's too wordy for Root$web's system to accept it, so she posted a link to the document. Thus far, there have been no comments on the proposal.

CORRECTION: A fellow member was kind enough to point out that the Board has until two days after the close of the nominations period to make a ruling on our appeal, and not until July 1, as we had supposed yesterday. In our obviously too-quick glance at the EC's guidelines [and kudos to Ellen Pack for the nifty page redesign], we missed this important provision, and we apologize for any confusion.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Taking names since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:15 AM 0 comments    

Monday, June 12, 2006
A Song For The Darkest Hour

Tweedledum and Tweedledee...its Your Daily Board Show!

CONTINUING SAGA: After first asking George to withdraw his Voter Fraud Committee motion so that the Board could discuss the Grievance Procedures Committee's proposed bylaws amendment, NC Linda then asked George to resubmit the motion because "some of the AB members want to complete the Voter's Fraud Committee's Report." George complied, but as of press time the resubmitted motion had not received a second.

CONSPICUOUSLY ABSENT: The Grievance Procedures Committee report and its proposed bylaws amendment still have not been posted to the informal list and there still has been no discussion of either of them publicly by any Board member. It is looking ever more unlikely that they will meet Scott's self-imposed June 15 deadline, but there seems to be little concern about that. Speaking of which, a correspondent wrote us about this and pointed out that it would be quite difficult for the EC to actually run the special ballot in conjunction with the regular ballot. In the matter of urgent amendments, the bylaws specify that the voting period runs only five days and that 2/3 of the members voting in that time-frame are required for passage. The regular election runs for a full month, and the EC would basically have to run separate ballots with separate voting time frames for the regular and special elections. Talk about confusing. There's not really much of a point to forcing the so-called "urgent" amendment onto the looming regular election, and it doesn't appear that the Board is too interested in pursuing it in any case.

THINNING THE HERD: Right on cue, the EC notified us that it simply could not verify our eligibility to run for the office of National Coordinator because as a Member Not In Good Standing the bylaws do not permit us to run for national level office. We have appealed the decision to the Board, based on relevant portions of Sturgis, and were informed last night that the appeal had been forwarded to the Sekrit Sandbox for the Board to play with for a bit. Although we asked for the matter to be decided by June 15, it is not really necessary. The nomination was made prior to June 15 and we accepted it prior to June 15, and although the Board is required to rule on the appeal in a timely fashion, they actually have right up until July 1 to make their decision. That would be rough on the EC though, so we imagine that we'll hear that the appeal has been denied in the next couple of days.

Tim Stowell has, we have heard, also been denied to opportunity to run for office. We have no idea if he is appealing or not, but this brings the number of denials just in this election up to four [myself, Charles Barnum, Daryl Lytton, and Tim Stowell]. The EC is certainly on a roll these days.

CORRECTION: We misspoke yesterday in regards to one of our nominations. We were informed by several people that our nomination for RAL was submitted a few days ago and not at the opening of the nominations period. We apologize for any confusion. We still have not heard anything about either this nomination or the SWSC nomination, and neither appear on the EC's nominations webpage, but we understand that the nominators have been contacted and told that we are not eligible to be nominated.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Outside looking in since 1998

Posted by merope at 5:35 AM 0 comments    

Sunday, June 11, 2006
Fairy Glamour

All in how you look at it...its Your Daily Board Show!

ROLL OVER: George Waller also agreed to withdraw his motion to adopt the Voter Fraud Committee proposal, noting that "although I endorse the idea of expediting the vote on the procedures, the GPC report has a time constraint whereas the procedures do not." Despite this acquiesence to the GPC Chair's request, nothing further has been done with the GPC's report. It still has not even been posted to the informal list and there has been no public discussion of any of its provisions. [NC Linda has been quite busy over on the SC list posting plaintive emails from disappointed USGW visitors and smacking people who point out what a good job the vast majority of the volunteers do. Apparently, she's also been busy trying to get Root$web to respond to county and password requests; to hear folks tell, it's running about two months behind on even simple requests.]

Incidentally, the GPC's report does not have a time constraint, other than the artificial one constructed for it. The bylaws provide for a special ballot when urgent amendments are considered; there is no requirement that amendments occur in tandem with a regularly scheduled election. This, of course, permits the Project to amend its bylaws relatively quickly in the event of a truly urgent matter [which this is not]. Rushing the amendment through in order to get it on the July ballot would perhaps make things easier for the EC [but maybe not], but it certainly has the advantage of preventing much in the way of discussion by either the Board or the general membership. When people have time to discuss these things and think about them a bit, they often decide they aren't such a great idea after all.

CURIOUSER AND CURIOUSER: Those of you who frequent the alternate CC list will know that we have been nominated for the National Coordinator position. We love a charade as much as the next person, so we have accepted the nomination. The EC will tell us we are ineligible in short order and then we will proceed with an appeal to the Board. Our notice of the nomination on the mail list did prompt some interesting feedback. It seems that our nomination for NC is not the only nomination we have received; we've also been nominated for RAL [over a week ago, or so we are told] and for SWSC CC rep. This is news to us; we've not received any notification from the EC about either position and our name is conspicuously absent from the nominations pages for those positions. We do note, however, that Betsy Mills, who so recently was trying to get herself appointed to the Board, has declined to put herself in front of the voters this time around and has turned down both of her nominations.

SHOWN THE DOOR: In other election news, our old friend Charles Barnum has been formally notified by the Election Committee that he is ineligible to run for office because of his brief accidental resignation. Apparently, the EC was unable to get timely confirmation on Charles' status from his SC and kicked the issue of his eligibility to the Board. The Board has decided to apply Sturgis, which is not an accepted parliamentary authority in any state but OHGW [as far as we know], to Charles' case and has determined that his resignation as a CC in NMGW and elsewhere was effective immediately upon receipt. We were unaware that Sturgis' rules were in effect in the sovereign states, but apparently they are. This could have most interesting repercussions should the Board choose to pursue its new-found authority.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
How the cookie crumbles since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:40 AM 1 comments    

Saturday, June 10, 2006
Bang The Drum Slowly

Houston, we have a problem...its Your Daily Board Show!

RAMMING SPEED: After tidying up the little matter of Daryl Lytton [he's now formally ineligible to run for office this round, in case you were wondering], NC Linda asked George Waller and Jeff Scism to withdraw their motion and second to accept the recommendations of the Voter Fraud Committee. Seems that GPC Chair Scott Burow wants his committee's report to take precedence so he can get his proposed bylaws amendment on the ballot for the upcoming election. NC Linda also said she'd place the GPC proposal on the chatty list so the Board could get to discussing it, but she apparently forgot to do that.

Jeff, always happy to comply with any request from our glorious leader, immediately agreed to withdraw his second, but then wondered 1) if this meant they were planning on processing the bylaws amendment as an emergency amendment, and 2) why the June 15th deadline? Scott helpfully noted that the EC needs to have the amendment approved by June 15 in order to get it on the ballot, and the Board must first propose the motion, then within two days they must post it to a website where it must remain for three days, at which point a "special ballot" must be prepared. So at a minimum, we are talking here about 1) the Board discussing the proposed amendment for some unspecified number of days [which, because it hasn't been posted they haven't even begun to do], 2) the Board voting on the amendment [which may take up to 48 hours], and then the required three day comment period. With June 15 only 5 days away, the Board would need to move with record speed in order to even get to the point where the amendment is posted for public comment.

It appears that the sailing will not be smooth for Scott's amendment, however. Shortly after NC Linda posted her request for the withdrawal of the VFC proposal motion, The Other Linda, Phyllis, Suzanne, and Bettie all noted that they would prefer to finish up the fraudulent revisions business before any further business is conducted. Phyllis noted, "I see no emergency when the GPC could not report out within the time frame established for it. Had notification been given that an amendment needed to be presented to the membership prior to the possible implementation of the procedures, it stands to reason that it could have been done long before it needed to be considered an emergency." Scott tried to gloss over their concerns by noting that the Board members should have all been subscribed to the GPC list and thus already sufficiently familiar with the amendment, presumably meaning they wouldn't feel a need to discuss it and would rubberstamp it quickly enough that the Board could move on to its other pressing business. Phyllis also offered to replace Jeff as the second on the motion, should George decline to withdraw it. So far, though, George has not withdrawn the motion and no further discussion has taken place on either the VFC or the GPC proposals on either of the Board's two public lists.

ELECTION BLUES: We've been chatting back and forth with a little bird who tells us that the EC is struggling a bit with one of the nominations. The nominee has accepted the nomination, but may or may not have had a very, very brief break in service. It seems that about three weeks ago he sent Bettie Wood a notice that he had resigned all his USGenWeb counties, but the very next day he sent her an email noting that he had misspoke and had not resigned one of his counties. He has told us that he did not mean to resign the one county and had immediately rescinded his mistaken resignation with state leadership. This person has pointed out correctly that in USGenWeb, one does not resign to one's Board representatives but to one's SC. We are told, however, that the EC is using the nominee's emails to Bettie Wood as evidence of a break in service of less than 24 hours and trying to deny him candidacy based on that break. The nominee denies that any break in service occurred at all, since he rescinded his accidental resignation before it was accepted by his SC. Now, we don't know the correct resolution to this issue, and it may come down to splitting some pretty fine hairs, but we do imagine that if the nominee were nearly anyone else, his name would be posted as a candidate by now. The EC always gives the right sort of person the benefit of the doubt.

Speaking of which, we notice that our favorite former Board member Betsy "Color of Jerk" Mills still has neither accepted nor declined her nomination for SC rep in the SW/SC region. We are now way past the EC's two day rule for replying to a nomination, so she should be removed as a nominee from that list.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Back in the saddle since 1998

Posted by merope at 7:35 AM 0 comments    

Thursday, June 08, 2006
Broad Daylight In The Garden of Good And Evil

Gone but not forgotten...its Your Daily Board Show!

PSA: Sorry for the sporadic DBS this week; we've been upgrading the apparatus here in the newscube and haven't had internet access consistently enough, or enough free time, to sit down and do some good yellow journalism. Here we are now though and we'll try to bang out something or other before we lose signal.

GETTING DOWN TO BRASS TACKS: After several days of doing nothing, the Board sprang back into action and is once again wrestling old news, in the person of Daryl "Never Say Die" Lytton, back into some semblance of submission. After NC Linda adjourned the May meeting and posted the June agenda [five full days into June and with two, count 'em, items of "immediate" business], the Board moved immediately to affirm the latest finding of the EC that Poor Old Daryl is simply not qualified under the bylaws to run for any national level office, including that of NC [for which he apparently nominated himself]. To be frank, although Daryl has been busily pontificating on the DISCUSS list [until he was moderated by NC Linda] and elsewhere, we haven't bothered to read most of what he has blathered on about. Its the same old, same old we've heard before and we imagine that in short order it will be followed by some vague and unspecified threat of legal action. In any case, regardless of the wrong done to Daryl by his nutty former SC and by the limp-wristed Board that could not uphold its own findings on behalf of a member, he is not qualified to run for office no matter how the bologna is sliced. By press time, eleven of the Board members had voted to accept the EC's finding of ineligibility and one [Scott Burow] had abstained. It looks like Daryl will need to sit on his hands for another year before he once again gets his shot at the bully pulpit. In the meantime, at least one Board member [Jeff Scism] has taken the "Betsy Mills approach" to constituent email and put Daryl on permanent ignore, apparently on the advice of his real or imagined attorney.

SPEAKING OF ELECTIONS: Halfway into the nominations period, we have but one candidate for NC; thus far all other eligible candidates, including current NC Linda Haas Davenport, have declined the nomination. The sole candidate at this time is Scott Burow, who apparently sees himself moving up in the world. There are currently no candidates for RAL, one for one of the two NENC CC rep positions, three for NWP CC rep [although the EC is still apparently trying to find a way to make one of them ineligible], none for the SEMA SC seat, one for the SEMA CC seat, one for the SWSC SC seat [although Betsy "Can't Get Enough Punishment" Mills hasn't yet declined], and two for the SWSC CC rep seat. Several incumbents, including Phyllis Rippee, Scott Burow, Larry Flesher, and Jeff Scism are either trying to keep their seats or trying to upgrade to the next highest level of the jet set. Given either their lack of opposition or the identities of their opponents, at this point they are all shoo-ins. Incumbents who are not returning include NC Linda Haas Davenport, Jan Cortez, and Darilee Bednar, all of whom declined nominations.

IN OTHER NEWS: George Waller tried to get the Voter Fraud Committee proposition on the table again, but was slapped down by NC Linda and told to wait until after the Board had finished carving up Daryl. Over on the Grievance Procedures Committee list, Chair Scott Burow opened the mailing list for a brief pro forma comment period; as expected, the only comments that led to any changes involved typos and grammatical errors. The GPC has since voted to accept the proposed grievance procedures as written, complicated as they are, Scott notified the group that he intended to present the report to NC Linda yesterday. We imagine we can expect to see them before the Board whenever it gets finished with its two "immediate" pieces of business [unhorsing Daryl and seating or not seating someone in Angie's vacant SEMA seat], and with finally moving on the VFC report. Scott reserved to himself the right to make unilateral "unsubstantive" changes to the report, but did say he'd bring anything substantive back to the GPC for discussion. Jeff's proposed bylaws appear to have died; we don't even recall the last time anyone mentioned them publicly.

BONUS QUOTE: "This man lives to make trouble." -Suzanne Shepherd, on Daryl

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Lights on, no one home since 1998

Posted by merope at 7:25 AM 1 comments    

Saturday, June 03, 2006
Drive-by Blogging

In a rush...its Your Daily Board Show!

UPDATE: Not much has happened with the Board in the last couple of days. As it turns, their other current committee chair, George Waller, was also making unilateral changes to the Voter Fraud Committee report. However, instead of insisting over and over again that it was perfectly ok, he notified the Board that he would be taking the report to the committee so it could approve the changes, and would then bring the report back to the Board. The Chair of the Grievance Procedures committee has reopened the mailing list for general comment on the proposed procedures. The list will close on Sunday night, and he will be calling for a vote by the committee on Monday. The list is USGW-GPC, and thus far there has been a small bit of discussion. And that's all there is, folks!

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Straight and narrow since 1998

Posted by merope at 7:40 AM 1 comments    

Thursday, June 01, 2006
Sounds Of Silence

Nothing going on...its Your Daily Board Show!

THAT TIME OF THE MONTH AGAIN: It's now the beginning of June, the month where people begin counting down in earnest the time remaining in the current Board's session. And despite the very important business on its plate, the Board has gone silent again. The last post was five days ago, when NC Linda asked George to move to accept the Voter Fraud Committee's report. As of press time, he had not done so. The Board has shown no interest in chewing over Jeff's bylaws revisions, perhaps because at 20 pages it's just too daunting a task for the lazy days of summer. They've done nothing further about filling the vacant SEMA SC rep seat. There is no sign of an agenda for this month, and even the EC's recent announcement hasn't yet made it to the Board.

ELECTION NEWS: EC Secretary Shirly Cullum sent out the nominations notice yesterday. The nominations form opens today and the EC will accept nominations for two weeks. The 2006 elections page, with links to the nominations form, is here:

http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgwelections/national-2006/index.html

There are lots of empty seats and plenty of good people to fill 'em. Knock yourselves out!

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Getting up too early since 1998

Posted by merope at 5:55 AM