MARCH 2006 DBS

Friday, March 31, 2006
And The Band Played On

Just a jump to the left...its Your Daily Board Show!

DOWN TO THE WIRE: With two more Board members voting on motion 06-04, the count now stands at 8 NO votes. If even one more member casts a vote, no matter what that vote is, it's over and Daryl will be declared ineligible for the RAL seat. Defeating Motion 06-04 now will require that the four members [Cyndie, Angie, Jan, and Karen] do not vote at all, thus denying the motion a quorum. These four members have been vocal and passionate proponents of CCs' rights in the last few weeks and we can imagine the anti-Daryl forces are sweating this one rather hard.

This state of affairs has provoked another desperate outburst from Darilee on the DISCUSS list, who apparently is seeing her dreams slip from her grasp: "I have asked for only two things...for a chance to vote in public on Daryl Lytton's eligiblity to run and hold office on the AB...and for the AB to publically vote. It's sad that I have to beg a few fellow AB members to vote. But I do..." Which in turn provoked Karen to note, "I could have been like you and voted immediately, without regional input but I chose to do my job. You do not have to "beg" nor strong arm me to vote. I have not missed a vote yet to my knowledge...What part of the Bylaws gives you the right to badger another Rep to vote?" [With this sort of thing going on in public, we can only imagine what the Sekrit Sandbox is like these days.]

Also on the DISCUSS list, one of the peanut gallery pointed out that the bylaws actually say "The USGenWeb Project shall be governed by accepted parliamentary procedure, except in those cases where such procedure conflicts with the existing bylaws of The USGenWeb Project." This would generally lead one to assume that since it does not specify that only the Board or national level must be governed by "accepted parliamentary procedure [in our case, Sturgis], and the bylaws elsewhere go to great lengths to define what is part of USGenWeb and the state projects are included in that definition, that indeed the states are governed by Sturgis. After a great deal of back and forth on DISCUSS, however, with much eloquence on each side and some stooping to personal attacks on by the usual fruit bats, no one changed their minds.

[This would be because no one actually cares what the bylaws or Sturgis say unless they support one's particular position.]

OVERLY AMBITIOUS: Somewhere in the middle of all this, NC Linda posted the following agenda for the upcoming April session:

Announcement of the posting of the minutes (approval etc
Reports from Standing Committees
... EC 1st Qtr report
Reports are due from:
... Voter Fraud Committee due March 18th (received)
... Grievance Procedure Committee Report due March 24th (not
received)
Unfinished business:
... Filling vacant RAL & SWSC Regional CC Rep seats
... Problem with non-resolution of Grievances - OH
... Discussion of revised AB Procedures from Voter Fraud
... Discussion of Grievance Procedures from the Grievance
Procedure Committee
New business
... Discussion of updated CC guidelines
... Discussion of Financial Procedures Committee
... FGS Membership
... Straw poll on ABChat, Official Logo resizing statement.
... Clarification/rewording SOP for Sturgis Parliamentary
Procedure
Announcements if there are any
Adjournment

As usual, there is a lot of carryover from the last agenda, and we expect that a great deal of these items will be carried over to May.

BONUS QUOTE: "I am satisfied with my position on the issue." --Jeff Scism

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Taking it to the bank since 1998

Posted by merope at 8:40 AM 0 comments    

Thursday, March 30, 2006
In Eclectic

Almost time for the hanging...its Your Daily Board Show!

MURDER BY DEATH: After an amusing mix-up in which NC Linda reported the results of the vote on the point of order exactly backward, she [as we predicted] ruled that the point of order was not well taken, and immediately opened the vote on Motion 06-04. Thus far the vote stands at 6 NO votes.

The vote has been enlivened by an exchange on the DISCUSS list wherein Board member Darilee "Let's Get Personal" Bednar publicly exhorted the list members to insist that their representatives vote on this issue. Nola "Batty As A Fruitcake" Duffy, who has a long-standing personal obsession with Daryl Lytton, jumped in to note "Please do what you were elected to do and take a stand."

[We note with amusement that the anti-Daryl forces must be sweating pretty hard to engage in this tactic. Under the Board's current SOP and at its current size, it would take only four members refusing to vote to kill this motion for lack of a quorum, but it would take five YES votes to defeat it outright. So a far better stragety for those who believe this motion should fail because is flawed and sets a dangerous precedent would be not to vote at all.]

Board member Karen de Groote-Johnson then explained why she has not voted so far on the motion: "I have not voted on it yet because I am uncomfortable with this motion...this vote will set a precedent that all the future CCs will have to live with. Should I vote to set this precedent or do I protect my CCs back sides if they are ever in this situation or a similar situation?" She then promised to explain the situation to her constituents in NWP, and a quick check of the regional list shows she did exactly that. She also wondered aloud why the push for a quick vote, but neither Nola nor Darilee bothered to resond.

This little exchange reminded us that SWSC representative Bettie Wood, who nearly always takes all Board business to her constituents for comment, and who publicly strokes herself on her record of voting how her constituents wish, didn't bother to ask their opinions this time. We wonder why.

TO LET: NC Linda has sent out notices that the Election Committee is looking for volunteers again. If you are interested in joining the circus, contact Shirly at shirlcullum_at_sbcglobal.net

SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS: Over on the SW list, Phyllis "Told You She'd Be Back" Rippee asked an unusual question: "If the AB considers a person has been wronged who has been delinked by the SC...could the AB give that person special status....of being a member without a State...that member linked to only from the national main page, that member being subject only to the AB and allowed to only vote on the RAL and NC?" A little bird tells us that NC Linda is basically extending a similar status to Daryl Lytton, without the voting permissions or the link. The DISCUSS list is generally open only to Project members, but Daryl, who by our current accepted definition of membership, is not a member. We are told that Linda is allowing him to continue list membership while his status is in dispute, and one or both of them have used the term "Member At Large" to describe this interesting state of affairs.

This is all well and good and we applaud Linda's flexibility. But we are curious as to why she is not extending the same courtesty to others, in particular another CC recently fired from her sole county. That CC has filed an as yet unacknowledged grievance with the Board asking for a ruling on her status, and has tried to subscribe to the DISCUSS list, yet Linda has told her that she may not subscribe to the list because she is no longer a Project member. [Linda also told her that Daryl will be unsubscribed from the list just as soon as the Board determines he is not a member.] Why is one member whose membership status is still up in the air allowed to participate on the list but another one isn't?

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Fathoming the unfathomable since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:05 AM 0 comments    

Wednesday, March 29, 2006
That Voodoo That You Do

Mystically speaking..its Your Daily Board Show!

SLOUCHING TOWARD BETHLEHEM: The Board inches slowly toward the denoument of the Daryl saga. Two more members voted "not germane" on the point of order issue, bringing the total to 4 votes for "germane" and 6 votes for "not germane". At this point, the best those who think the proposed amendment is "germane" can hope for is a tie, and since the Chair is the tiebreaker and she has already made her position perfectly clear, the point of order has thus most likely been upheld. [And this strategy of turning the issue over to the Board was a very clever one on NC Linda's part. *golf clap*] We predict that Angie's amendment will be ruled out of order today and that voting on Motion 06-04 will commence immediately.

PEOPLE COME AND PEOPLE GO: We've heard that our colleague in KSGW and fellow political junky John Schunk has resigned his sole USGenWeb county. This is sad news. He may have gone over to the Dark Side long ago, but he was one heck of a CC and we'll miss him.

BEYOND BELIEF: One of our little birds sent us a most amazing message last evening. Supposedly it's from OHGW SC Sandy Quinn and was sent privately to CCs in that state. In this message, Sandy first explains why she dumped Daryl from OHWG [and do note how many times in the quotes below she points out how much support and encouragement she's received from her "higher ups"]:

"I delinked his site because of harassing emails to me, and our list...which I felt were against our email code of ethics and because when I asked the higher ups, I was told it was perfectly in my right to do so. It was a very difficult decision for me but one that I felt I had to do because I could not tolerate even one more email from him."

Then she talks about the grievance and its aftermath:

"Daryl placed a greivance against my delinking to the AB board of USGenWeb. It was to go to mediation. Then I saw that Daryl asked for help in mediation from Theresa Lindquist...a Member Not in Good Standing who was also removed from the USGenWeb project several years ago...she is also a yellow journalist that has a daily news blog called "The DailyBoard Show". Back in the summer it was pointed out to me that I was a regular on this show...and that I was basically the target and joke of the show for many months...I refused mediation as I did not think that the greivance hearing should be a turned into a circus for her show...Much to my shock the AB board made a recommendation after reading some of the emails, that I take him back as they did not see the threats in the email as I did. I asked if this was a ruling or a recommendation. I was told it was a recommendation. If something is a recommendation then it appeared to me that I still had a choice. I chose not to follow their recommendation."

[Ah, so the Board, or someone on it, gave her leave to ignore its findings. Interesting.]

After some more complaining about Daryl and his grievances and threatened lawsuits, Sandra gets to the meat of her email, which is essentially pleading in advance for her CCs to vote for her in the upcoming poll:

"This has put the AB board in quite a predicament and has forced them to decide if they should force me to relink Daryl, and also that they allow him to be in the running for the appointment of RAL on the board. They are deciding currently to do a poll at OHGenWeb to see where your support would lie, with Daryl or with me...this is not completely fair as I have mostly kept my troubles under my hat wherein Daryl has made the situation publicly known on many archived public lists. I really would like you all to consider my side in this. I would never delink anyone without cause as I have so readily been accused."

In support of her case, Sandra then forwarded a bunch of private emails from Daryl to her on the topic of her sick son. Apparently she had asked the members of OHGW to pray for him and the following are some snippets of what Daryl allegedly sent her.

"I pray for you too, in case you didn't know. You went into the SC position without a very good understanding of the political aspects of the USGenWeb, and you were taken advantage of by being convinced that as SC you could do anything you want, no matter what the rules say...You relied on people who had more knowledge of USGenWeb politics than you, to help guide you. It was unfair to you that those people duped you, and as a consequence unfair to me, and unfair to the OHGenWeb to be picked on in the DBS, and unfair to NC Linda and the AB to be put in a bad position in the issue...I believe that even though things don't look to good for you right now, that you and I could figure out a way to make you and OHGenWeb into a good thing and be a good example to the rest of the Project. Want to give it a try?"

"Sounds to me like a virus from the Sci-Fi channel...I'm not sure when the next meeting is at the Cathedral of Tomorrow but I think it's Saturday, although Rex will pray as soon as he hears from me.* I think I'll also call my Lytton voodoo people in Louisiana and make sure they didn't go overboard, as I had asked them for help with my OHGenWeb issues."

"...there is good voodoo and bad voodoo, and I only deal with what's good, not the ones who stick pins in dolls and model cars. But I will check it out just for our own peace of mind, because as with group prayer that sort of stuff is extremely powerful...As for who to pray for, don't forget that *you* are the one that all of these bad personal events are revolving around, and therefore do not forget to pray for yourself first. It's very important that you do that. The "...and grant me the wisdom to know the difference..." prayer would be just fine. *You could reinstated me into OH and all the problems would go away within 48 hours if not within 24, but some might believe that to just be a coincidence. The Lord works in strange ways, no matter which Lord one believes in...they're all the same entity.*"

"Good News -- Voodoo Lytton's used the "Superman Hex" as it's called...It's used when an injustice has occurred...Also, additional prayers have been sent out as I had mentioned. *Everything should be healed within ± 3 hours noon Sunday, tomorrow.* Except for the ambulances engine and the marital relationship problems. Did you pray for yourself? I can't stress how important that that is."

[We aren't sure, but we think Daryl just claimed to have used voodoo to both cause and cure Sandy's child. Either this remarkable series of emails is just in incredibly cruel bad taste, or Daryl is one seriously messed up flake of a man. In either event, boy, what a piece of work.]

Here's the kicker though in all this. Sandy has never wavered in her claim that she has the full support of "national", the "higher ups", and more explicity "some Board members," and this time is no different. Before she posted Daryl's bizarre responses to her personal plight, she told her readers this little bit of info:

"I have been told by members of the board that emails who I shared these with that emails that come to me are mine to share with whomever I wish. I was urged to share these with you as soon as possible."

So, apparently some of our elected officials are working behind the scenes to sabotage the poll before it even starts, while publicly protesting that any poll they may conduct in OHGW will not be a mere popularity contest. Let's be clear, if Daryl did indeed send those messages to Sandy he was way out of the bounds of decency or propriety, but they are not germane to the issue of his continued service in OHGW or the Board's finding that Sandy violated the few rules that OHGW has. Regardless of the personal issues between them and the private emails they exchange, Sandy violated the published code of ethics in the state, the Board found not only that she did so but that Daryl's original emails to her were not harrassing, and recommended quite clearly that he be reinstated.

We are trying to determine the extent of distribution of this email, but since it is apparently already circulating well beyond the borders of OHGW we imagine that any members that didn't get it personally will get it soon enough. We don't know how the Board can claim to run an impartial poll under these circumstances and with its own members actively sabotaging it, but we imagine they will find a way.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Not a bug but a feature since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:20 AM 1 comments    

Tuesday, March 28, 2006
Bass Ackwards

The horse before the cart...its Your Daily Board Show!

TO BE OR NOT TO BE: Shortly after Jeff rose to a point of order and requested a ruling on whether or not Angie's proposed amendent is germane to the original motion, Angie explained "Being in the same vein does not require it to cover the same identical territory. Both address the issue of Daryl's eligibility to take part in project business. This is certainly as germane a substitution as was allowed to proceed last summer." Then, however, she shoots her own argument in the foot by noting, "The issue of the preference poll is NOT the same as the issue of his eligibility to serve. There are no eligibility requirements listed in the by-laws to take part in a poll...and there were no eligibility requirements listed in the call for volunteers. Regardless of Daryl's eligibility to serve on the board, the issue of the poll needs to be dealt with...I don't think it's fair to members to delay answering a question so long that it becomes moot."

Shortly after this, NC Linda posted a lengthy message explaining the whys and wherefores of points of order and why, although the Chair of the meeting would generally rule on a point of order, she can't make up her mind what to do. She noted, "Although I, as presiding officer, agree with Jeff's Point of Order and believe that Angie's amendment has nothing to do with the subject...and has no bearing on motion 06-04, I spent considerable time yesterday discussing this very point with Josh...Josh feels that an amendment of substitution, if seconded, must be acted upon, whether or not it has anything to do with the issue that gave rise to the motion on the floor. Due to this difference of opinion between the presiding officer and the board's parliamentarian this Point of Order...is hereby deferred to the board for a decision." She then directed the Board members to vote "germane" or "not germane" with no further discussion. At press time, the vote stood at 4 for "germane" and 4 for "not germane." [We think this only has to pass by a simple majority, but we are not entirely sure of that, since Sturgis doesn't have an explicit statement that we can find on the matter.]

Incidentally, we looked "germane" up in our Webster's and it says: "truly relevant; pertinent to the point." Jeff and NC Linda haven't bothered to quote the actually germane part of Sturgis, which is on page 52 in the section on "amendment by substitution, where it says "Such an amendment must be germane to the subject of the original motion, but it may differ completely from the original motion in wording, purpose, and effect." So, it basically comes down to where one draws the line as to what is relevant. Is the broader topic of Daryl's eligibility to participate in Project business the relevant issue here, or is it the more narrow issue of eligibility to serve on the board? We would go with the former, even though we think allowing Daryl to participate in a poll is a major disservice to him, the other candidates, and the membership if he is not actually eligible to serve on the Board. You might think the Board would want to address both questions, but our guess is that once Jeff's point of order is decided in his and the Chair's favor they will simply declare Daryl ineligible for a Board seat, decide that makes him also ineligible to participate in the poll, and move on.

OUR READERS WRITE: A friend wrote in to remind us of yet another way that the "money grubbing" page for the "completely unaffiliated with USGenWeb in any way, although we are raising money for USGenWeb's dog and pony show at FGS" committee has changed. When the page was first posted [complete with USGenWeb logo and affiliation with the USGW at FGS 2006 committee proudly noted], it had two ways to donate coin of the realm. One was via Paypal and the other was via snail mail to, IWRC, Josh Taylor's address in Idaho. In the new version of the page, the Idaho address is gone and donation via Paypal remains the only option. This makes it impossible to donate anonymously and avoid being dragged into any official inquiry about any funds that might be collected in this endeavor.

Our friend also pointed out that the link provided to obtain "further information regrading USGenWeb's participation at the conference" is a dead link. This has been a dead link in all versions of the page posted thus far, so apparently you aren't meant to actually have any further information when you make your decision to give, give, give. [Spelling flames are gauche, and we've been guilty of more than one slip of the finger in our day, so while we won't enumerate the various typos in the page, we'll just hope silently that they proofread their numbers better than their letters.]

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
More fun than a barrel full of monkeys since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:10 AM 0 comments    

Monday, March 27, 2006
Deja Vu All Over Again

Reading tea leaves...its your Daily Board Show!

THREADING THE EYE OF A NEEDLE: Yesterday evening, NC Linda provided a concise recap of the status of Motion 06-04 and Angie's proposed amendment by substitution. In regards to that amendment, she noted "Although the substituted motion has nothing to do with the Daryl's challenge of the EC's report, Sturgis requires that any motion to amend the motion on the floor by substitution, if seconded, has to be submitted to discussion and voting," and asked for a second to the amendment. Karen seconded the motion and NC Linda opened the floor for discussion of the amendment [or Motion 06-04a].

Jeff, however, wondered if the amendment was germane to the original motion and Linda replied, "Josh confirmed that a motion by substitution does not have to have any relation to the original motion. Any time someone doesn't like the motion on the floor they can offer an entirely different motion as a substitution and it's up to the voting members to decide whether they want to keep the original motion or the new one." [He said that, really?] Jeff, however, was not placated, and pointed out, "...the motion to amend is NOT germane to the eligibility for the Advisory board service indicated. The amendment by substitution is changing the subject from eligibility to be on the Board to eligibility to be included on a poll of the membership. The main motion is to endorse his eligibility to serve, not his public favor. There is no point polling the members if he us ineligible to serve." He then asked for a ruling on whether the subject matter of the amendment is germane to the original motion.

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

Posted by merope at 5:45 AM 1 comments    

Sunday, March 26, 2006
Passing The Buck

Mildly amused...its Your Daily Board Show!

LET'S GET IT OVER WITH: NC Linda opened discussion on Motion 06-04. Thus far, 10 Board members have indicated they have no further discussion on the motion.

NOT SO FAST: Midway through the non-discussion phase, Angie moved "to amend the motion to read: In the absence of any requirements listed for participation in the preference poll, Daryl Lytton is eligible to be included." Shortly after Jan seconded this motion, NC Linda said she'd just have to check this out with Parliamentarian Josh, because she think's its actually a new motion. [We would assume that the Boy Wonder will rule that it's an amendment by substitution, but given his opinions of late perhaps not.]

LIFE PRESERVER: Like a drowning man who suddenly found a piece of driftwood to cling to, the Board has Found The Solution to its current dileman about how to handle Sandra Quinn. Over on the informal list, NC Linda noted that after much discussion the Board had apparently concluded that "the bottom line is pretty much what we started out with - the AB may only mediate and recommend." She enumerated several suggestions proposed to extract them from the quagmire, two of which are just too difficult and time-consuming [amend the bylaws, encourage the states to pass their own rules], one of which she felt was just too drastic [delinking the state], and one of which was just right [polling the CCs].

The last idea, of course, is the money shot. It relieves them of any duty to protect an individual CC from unfair treatment or of stepping into the murky waters of SC privilege. [7 of the current 12 Board members are SCs or ASCs, so we can imagine where their primary loyalties lie.] Even though several of them have gone to elaborate lengths to protest that the whole thing will be done without reference to personalities, they all know that the voters of OHGW will be voting for or against Daryl and not for or against the abstract principle that the SC is beholden to the same rules as everyone else. The Board knows that Daryl is not popular in OHGW and by turning the resolution of the situation there into a popularity contest, they can can be fairly assured he will lose and they can wash their hands of the whole thing and move on.

So far, 8 Board members have jumped on the "let's have a poll!" bandwagon, although several of them have stressed that any poll should clearly delineate the issues for the CCs and not just ask "should Daryl be relinked," and that any polling should be independent and anonymous. None of them raised the spectre of Sandy just refusing to either hold a poll or honor the outcome of a poll should it not be in her favor. Guess they will cross that bridge when they come to it.

[We actually like the option of polling the CCs in all similar circumstances, and would encourage the Board to adopt it as a rule for all the SCs to follow. Can you imagine how many CCs would get to keep their job if SCs had to conduct an independent poll before they fired someone?]

DODGING THE BULLET: Three other candidates have stepped up to the plate and responded to the series of questions asked by Don Tharp. Two of them, Christine Sweet-Hart and Donal O'Kelly, also whiffed on the first question, refusing to answer it because, well, that would commit them to one side or other of the issue. Daryl, of course, answered it in spades. On questions 2 & 3, Christine would refer everything to the Board, Daryl would support the CC's rights and take definitive action against the recalcitrant SC, and the Mad Leprechaun would poll everyone in sight [lucky for him the Board threw that bone out just in time.]

FUNNY MONEY: Acting on a tip from a friendly little bird, we checked out the USGW at FGS 2006 donations page and boy, have there been some changes made. First off, it appears we have a new unofficial committee. This one calls itself "Support The USGenWeb Project at the FGS 2006 Conference," and it consists of an Army Of Two: Josh Taylor and Betsy Mills. Whichever of them wrote the new page went to considerable effort to utterly disavow any relationship with the Project for which they are soliciting funds. The USGenWeb logo, formerly prominently located at the top of the page, has been removed entirely. At the top, in reasonably prominent text is the caution that "We are not an official committee of USGenWeb. Donations are not tax deductible..." At the bottom of the page, in very grey text that barely shows up on our very high-resolution monitor, there is the note, "Please note that this committee is not affilaited with The USGenWeb Project, or any official committee of the project including the USGenWeb at FGS 2006 Committee." [Hmmm...when did the USGenWeb at FGS at 2006 Committee become an official committee? Last we heard they were still thumbing their noses at Board oversight.]

Delving deeper into the budget pages of the site, we find that the original cost projections have changed considerably. Somehow this frugal two person committee has managed to whack $750 off the budget, taking the total needed from an astronomical $2500 to a more reasonable $1750. Some of the changes are minor. They whacked the "freebies" from $150 to $125 [which still better be some damn fine candy], and also cut some from the budget for "name ribbons" [which again, could be printed on a good quality printer for substantially less than $75]. The amount projected for "signage" seems to have gone down as well, but we are working from memory here. Prominently missing from the new budget is any mention of "awards" and "speaker appreciations."

With the nearly $600 that David Samuelsen finally released to the committee, and the $300 and change that has been donated so far, the new "completely unaffiliated in any way with USGenWeb, but give us your money please" committee will only need to raise about $850 for the conference. With the well-known generosity of many USGW members, that should be a piece of cake. In fact, they'll probably raise more than they need. We wonder, though, what will happen to to any remaining funds. We can't find anywhere on the page any sort of notice about what will happen with any leftover funds. Curious.

BONUS QUOTE: "In the end it comes down to the opinion of one person, and that person spoke when you were delinked." --Jeff Scism, telling it like it is to Daryl Lytton

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Following the money since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:40 AM 2 comments    

Saturday, March 25, 2006
If At First You Don't Succeed

Oy vey...its your Daily Board Show!

BACK DOOR DELIVERY: Failing to have Daryl removed from eligibility to participate in the preference poll for the RAL seat, Darilee tried another tack and moved "that Daryl Lytton is Eligible to serve on the Advisory Board." George seconded the motion, and then ensued a couple of bizarre statements from Darilee:

"George I love you and the least you could say was...with deep regrets...and I'm praying this works..."

"The NC asked for a motion. I have made the motion and much to my surprise George stepped forward to second it...this issue has spent too much time in the dark abyss of exec. and that things beinging said there need to be said in public."

Now, you might be wondering what this is all about, but it's probably pretty simple. If the motion is phrased this way, it has a greater chance of failing. At least eight of the current 12 Board members would need to affirm that Daryl is eligible. From comments both public and private I think that those on the Board who uphold Daryl's eligibility will have a hard time meeting that number. Darilee doesn't want Daryl on the Board, regardless of the circumstances of his removal from OHGW. This is a bit of a gamble, but we'd say a pretty safe one. It's kind of sad though to see Daryl jerked around this way; the Board has already determined that he is the legitimate CC of his site in OHGW and a public announcement of his eligibility for the RAL seat was made based on the ruling of the Parliamentarian. Now the Board will conduct a public vote that will most likely snatch even that pale victory from him.

DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO: Over on a handful of project lists, Don Tharp has addressed some questions to the various contenders for the two open seats. His questions pertain to how the candidates would have addressed a grievance with a remarkable resembland to the grievance between Daryl Lytton and Sandra Quinn, what the candidates would do if they personally believed the SC was correct but the Board found otherwise, and what they would do if the SC refused to follow the Board's recommendation. Thus far, only Betsy "Riot Grrrl" Mills has stepped up to the plate. She whiffed on Question #1, saying she couldn't respond "without hearing both sides of the issue." On Questions #2 and #3 she assured us all she would poll everyone in sight to determine their wishes on the matter and noted, "I would want to poll the CCs to determine if they want the CC relinked and the SC removed. If they vote to remove the SC, I would assist them in the process. If they vote to uphold the SC, then I would back off and leave the state alone." It's hard to argue with this approach, but then we recall that Betsy was a part of the Board that tried and convicted Tim Stowell and Richard Pettys and we don't recall her having such fine sensibilities then. That particular Board went forward with secret trials even though everything Betsy suggested above was done and the CCs of GAGenWeb voted to keep their SC. [The CCs of NDGenWeb weren't even asked.] We don't recall Betsy objecting to the impropriety of Tim's trial when she came onboard or upholding the rights of the CCs in GAGenWeb or NDGenWeb to have a say in the fate of their projects. But you know politicians; they'll say any old expedient thing to get their hinder in a seat. And then they develop amnesia.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Throwing the first stone since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:30 AM 0 comments    

Friday, March 24, 2006
After The Storm

Strangely quiet...its Your Daily Board Show!

BACK ON TRACK: Since NC Linda put a cork in discussion on the DISCUSS list, the hubbub has died down to an eerie quiet, which must greatly relieve those Board members who would prefer not to revisit the Late Unpleasantness in GAGenWeb. On the formal Board list, NC Linda formally declared Motion 06-03 closed and Jeff belatedly agreed to withdraw it. Linda also asked for a motion "that Daryl Lytton is eligible to serve on Advisory Board," but at press time no one had obliged her.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Nipped and tucked since 1998

Posted by merope at 5:45 AM 0 comments    

Thursday, March 23, 2006
Dangerous Territory

Cut off at the knees...its Your Daily Board Show!

RUNNING IN PLACE: Not much has happened on the Board in the last few days. NC Linda corrected the circumstances that had allowed resigned Board member David Morgan to continue posting to Board-L. She next assured us all that "The AB is addressing [Daryl's] challenge in a timely fashion," and noted "The first discussion of eligibility was held on Exec prior to the ending of the call for volunteer period. The moving of the eligibility question to Board-L was an extension of the discussion that began in Exec...Had this question of eligibility come up on the last day of the nomination period during the annual election the AB would have had two days after the close of the nomination to start a discussion...and it would have had the remainder of two weeks to arrive at a decision. Discussion, motion, discussion of the motion and voting cannot take place during a 48 hour time frame."

Yesterday, after some lively discussion on DISCUSS, Jeff Scism asked to withdraw Motion 06-03 and Darilee also withdrew her second. At this point, however, the motion has not been formally withdrawn, since NC Linda asked Jeff if he was sure he wanted to withdraw it and as of press time he has not replied.

SOAPBOX PHILOSOPHERS: The discussion on DISCUSS did indeed get a bit lively over the last couple of days. Mostly it has been highlighted by the reappearance of Don "The Mad Leprechaun" Kelly [who has now taken to calling himself "Donal O'Kelly"] on the lists. Don, who is a candidate for the same empty chair as Daryl, has argued relentlessly against Daryl's candidacy, claiming among other things to have already resolved Daryl's grievance, that Daryl's ongoing grievance is not currently before the Board, that hashing over past and precedent is pointless unless its supports his position, and that this whole unpleasant eligibility issue should be resolved at a later date when it will not affect his chances to win appointment to the Representative At Large seat.

The discussion was also enlivened by those members, among them Jeff Scism, who adamantly claimed that the bylaws do not give the Board any authority to take action against State Coordinators. We always find this most amusing, particularly in contexts similar to the present one. It makes no sense to swear that the Board simply cannot do this, that, and the other thing, when recently past events demonstrate quite convincingly that the Board CAN do this, that, and the other thing, and already HAS done this, that, and the other thing. Jeff's impassioned arguments served only to remind people of the harm done to the Project and its members by the Board's actions in GAGenWeb, and several of the more coherent of the list's members took to enumerating each and every step at which previous Boards [some of whose members still serve] violated the guidelines, bylaws, and Sturgis. When a couple of those members eloquently gave the reasons why the Board should publicly acknowledge its error and at the very least lift the MNIGS status and other restrictions off the members it attacked in the GAGW incident, as well as restore Daryl's county and voting rights to him, NC Linda stepped in quickly and terminated discussion on the topic.

BONUS QUOTE: "As RAL I will not change, nor take a different path." -Donal O'Kelly

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Going over the same old ground since 1998

Posted by merope at 5:40 AM 0 comments    

Tuesday, March 21, 2006
Over The Top

Where the weird turn pro...its Your Daily Board Show!

A TANGLED WEB: Where to begin? Yesterday, when last we published, George, Jeff, and Darilee had set up a motion to remove Daryl from the list of eligible candidates for the RAL seat, and Jeff had gone so far as to coyly suggest that while it was improper for him, as author of Motion 06-03, to move to close debate anyone else was certainly free to do so. Since then, the following has happened:

1. Jeff, growing impatient when no one took him up on his recommendation to close debate, moved to close debate himself and called the question. In doing so, he noted that that "within two days of the end of nominations." When it was pointed out to him that the nomination period for the RAL seat had closed six days previously, he backtracked and claimed instead that Daryl had only noted his objection two days ago. Darilee seconded the motion to close debate and George, acting as interim NC, renumbered the motion as if it had been amended, and opened the vote. He gave the members just a tad shy of four hours to vote, a time period that would not have even given even the members on the East Coast time to get home from work, but which would have had the vote safely completed before NC Linda was due back. When 5pm EST rolled around, no votes had been cast, and Motion 06-03 was once again opened for discussion. The "two day" issue was conveniently sidestepped by NC Linda's ruling in absentia that the whole issue was moot because "this is just a poll not an election."

2. The general cross-purposes chatter took place in the background, with some Board members portraying themselves as stalwart defenders of the CCs and others just incredulous that anyone could consider that a person who does not have any voting-eligible position in USGenWeb is eligible for office. One Board member described to us a faction that apparently thinks letting Daryl run in the poll with the expectation either that he will lose or that the Board will not appoint him is the middle ground of this issue. Another Board member tried to make Daryl eligible by finding out when he started writing for the newsletter and another pointed out that alone among all positions, the RAL seat has no qualifications listed in the bylaws. Some of the Board members have also noted that those who are opposed to Daryl's candidacy may be publicly citing the bylaws, but in secret their arguments tend more toward the personal.

3. There hasn't been a lot of talk about this issue on the membership lists, but the general tenor of the few comments made so far is that Daryl is unfortunately not a member and is not qualified for the seat. Daryl himself has posted his position on the matter:

"Those who object to my eligibility or qualifications to seek the position of RAL, seem to base their objections upon their believe that I am no longer a member of the Project...Have I been expelled from the USGenWeb? No. Have I been expelled from xxGenWeb? Yes. Did I do anything that called for expulsion from xxGenWeb? No. Did the xxGenWeb SC break any rules in expelling me? Yes...state rules, national rules, and U.S. Constitution rules...Is the AB bound to abide by the Bylaws?...Does the AB recognize me as the rightful and legitimate CC of my USGenWeb Adams County Ohio site?...What are the Rights of Members according to Stugis, which the AB is bound to follow in accordance with the Bylaws, that apply in this situation?...some AB members seek to punish me by taking away my right to vote in National matter, by taking away my right to be a candidate for office, and to declare me expelled from the USGenWeb...without a fair hearing. Some USGenWeb members support those AB members...Rights of Members...that is what this is all about...and the duty of the AB to perform those Rights. And that is my platform in trying for the RAL position...I will *always* uphold and fight for the Rights of Members and the Bylaws. Even when, as now, I have to suffer for the rights of the Members, by being wrongfully delinked. Karen is right, ".this isn't about one person...." An injustice to one member, is an injustice to the entire USGenWeb."

4. Over in OHGenWeb, Sandy Quinn has finally given Adams county to someone else, although Daryl still maintains his site, complete with OHGW and USGW logos and affiliation statements. The Board can now take the position it has taken in regards to other situations where CCs have been wrongly replaced with new models: "well, you might have been wronged, but we'd have to wrong someone else in order to provide redress, so you are SOL."

5. Elsewhere in the Project, the fear that Daryl Lytton might actually have a shot at a Board seat has brought some scary stuff out from under the rocks. Yes, Derick "Rabid Dog" Hartshorn, nasty piece of work that he is, got off his meds long enough to post this:

"When they can't take over established pages and lists, they try to infiltrate the USGenWeb pages as AB''s, CC's, volunteers, or whatever. Back in 2001, we recognized them and their tactics as electronic terrorists...Some of them have recently slithered to the top of the pond scum...While the USGenWeb Project have taken a decade to become THE pre-eminent Internet genealogical entity the pretenders seek to take it over and make it their own. They offer their help, through volunteerism, graphic contributions and advisors, in order to ingratiate themselves with the newer (or naive) members...Every few years, we need to inform our newer members of the fact that genealogy is not the pure and clean avocation we had envisioned. Just like Islamic terrorists, some of these folks patiently wait for us to relax our guard so that they may do their dirty deeds. Please don't judge this treatise as alarmist. Some folks were with me when the NCGenweb faced some very difficult times. THEY KNOW THE TRUTH!"

Thankfully, the NCGW SC smacked him on the nose with a rolled up newspaper and the good members of NCGW should be spared any more of Derick's flying spittle.

[What provoked this outburst is apparently not only Daryl's candidacy, but the presence of Fred Smoot in NCGenWeb. Fred has allegedly taken up a co-CC position with someone in the state and is, my god, helping her with web design and graphics among other things. If we understand what is going on, the CC who brought him on board was shortly thereafter fired from NCGenWeb and there is now an ongoing effort to get her reinstated since she was making an honest effort to comply with NCGenWeb's state guidelines. Apparently the idea that someone might help someone else just infuriates Derick the Mad.]

BONUS QUOTE: "My suggestion to Daryl would be to take another county/project in another state and after a year, to run for office." --Suzanne Shephard

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Feeding the lions since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:05 AM 1 comments    

Monday, March 20, 2006
Rush To Judgement

Troublemakers have the same rights as anyone else...its Your Daily Board Show!

REMEMBER, REMEMBER THE 5TH OF NOVEMBER: Now that NC Linda has opened the floodgates, the interlink is burning up with discussion of Daryl Lytton's eligibility for the RAL seat. Some of this information is public, and some not so much. Although it's hard to tease out, the Board appears to be divided into roughly two camps: those who believe that the Board found that Daryl should be relinked and those who believe that the Board decided to return the matter to Sandra with a recommendation that he be relinked. In a nutshell, the basic argument comes down to who gets to decide who is a member, the Board or the SC?

In a round-about way this matters, because if the Board did indeed determine that Daryl was removed from membership inappropriately and Sandy has improperly refused to reinstate him, it could have profound implications for any candidate for national office whose SC prefers that they don't run. On the other hand, if the Board can at will override the SCs' decisions as to who participates in their state projects or not, this constitutes a huge transfer power to the Board.

In Daryl's particular case, he has no other qualifications for the seat than his wrongfully delinked Adams county, OHGenWeb site. Under the reasoning of some Board members, the finding that his county was wrongfully delinked means he is still a member, albeit one that has no counties or other positions in USGenWeb that would qualify him for a vote. This camp would include Jan, Karen, Cyndie, Angie. The other camp claims that without a county Daryl simply cannot be a member and the Board has no independent authority to make him a member and that he is therefore simply ineligible for the seat. This camp would include Jeff, Darilee, Bettie

To be sure, there are nuances to this argument, many of which stem from the main argument and some of which rely on the fine splitting of hairs. There are also, for instance, those who have pointed out that the Board has also been debating two very different questions: 1) Is Daryl eligible to participate in the preference poll? and 2) is Daryl eligible to hold the RAL seat? The bylaws, of course, do not provide rules on the eligibility of members to participate in preference polls, nor do they, according to our Parliamentarian, contain rules about who is eligible for an appointed seat, but we can see where Daryl winning the poll but being ineligible to serve might put the Board in a bit of a bind.

In other developments, we've asked the several Board members to tell us whether or not there was any sort of poll or straw vote on the matter of letting Daryl participate in the preference poll, and although NC Linda reminded us that it's none of our business until she says it is, other Board members have indicated there was no poll or vote. This decision was all Linda's. Darilee made a public comment about some punishment or other that the Board is considering for Sandy, which Darilee claimed originated with Jan. We asked about that, but Jan denied she had anything to do with it and provided no further details. Another Board member tells us that, despite the impassioned public rhetoric about Daryl's membership status, the discussion in the Sekrit Sandbox actually revolved more around the interesting question of just who gets to decide who is a member, and whether a single person can defy the decision of a group of representatives elected by the entire Project membership. And finally, a couple of Board members have told us that our NC has decided to let Daryl run because he has threatened the entire Board with lawsuits if he does not have his county returned and he is not declared eligible for the RAL seat.

Anyways, in the middle of all this, NC Linda stepped out for a bit and left the reins in George Waller's hands. The door had barely hit her heinie when Jeff moved that "Daryl Lytton be dropped from the list of qualified persons available for the Representative at Large office appointment process." This motion was seconded by Darilee, George promptly numbered it 06-03 and opened the floor for discussion. Jeff immediately began maneuvering to close discussion on the motion, citing a rule in the EC's guidelines that require the Board to make its determination no more than two days after the nominations period closed, a deadline they've already missed by several days. When George pointed this out, Jeff encouraged someone else to call the question so they could move on to a quickie vote.

OTHER STUFF: NC Linda posted the almost-final list of candidates for the SWSC representative preference poll; it includes Phyllis Rippee, Betsy Mills, Katy Hestand, Donna Allen, and Douglas Anderson. She also notified the Board that the Voter Fraud Committee has submitted its latest report, but she's going to sit on it until the Daryl issue is resolved.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Never a dull moment since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:15 AM 2 comments    

Sunday, March 19, 2006
Linda In The Sky With Diamonds

Down the rabbit hole again...its Your Daily Board Show!

SMOKING CRACK: Yesterday we heard from a most distraught little bird who asked us to call our shamelessly inept leadership on the carpet for allowing an unqualified person to remain in the running for a vacant Board seat. By the time we managed to get more details from them, Board member Darilee Bednar had posted this bombshell to the Board's formal list:

"I do not believe that the people that wrote the by-laws intended a person not affiliated with any State or recognized group should be allowed to run for the AB...[it] is the EC's job to validate the eligibility of a person and we, the AB, have allowed them to do so and should continue to follow their opinions...I do not nor will I ever approve a non-member running for office...especially after the EC found him ineligible...I supported the decision of the SC to remove this person as a CC...I felt our recommendations were following the by-laws...I did not mean my approval of that recommendation to indicate support of the CC...who has since threatened the AB with a lawsuit. I have never ever used my right as a dissenting AB member to voice my opinion....I hope my right will not be denied as the rights of the SCs."

Hot on Darilee's heels, Jeff Scism posted this:

"...a person needs to be qualified for the position by meeting all the rules needed as if they were running for election to the position...Daryl Lytton doesn't meet the full twelve months requirement, the method of his delinking not withstanding, also he is not certified under the Election committee guidelines and verified by the applicable SC, Ohio...He has no other qualifying memberships. So in my opinion he is disqualified to be considered for the RAL position."

In short order, NC Linda "Pretzel Logic" Davenport posted the "reasoning" behind the apparent decision to allow Daryl to remain in the running for the vacant RAL seat:

"Since Darilee and Jeff have commented here I will explain the situation and the discussion will continue here on Board-L...The EC found that Daryl Lytton does not meet [the] requirements as he is not eligible to vote because he is not associated with any recognized state or special project and has not had one year of continuous service in the Project. Daryl has challenged this finding and...it is up to the AB to make a final determination of eligibility. For the past five years the EC has used [Article VI] of the by-laws...to determine eligibility for those members who are a candidate for a seat on the AB, whether they were nominated or volunteered. This procedure was called into question by a AB member and Josh, as parliamentarian, was consulted. Josh...issued his opinion that the by-laws set forth the requirements for a nominee but does not set forth any requirements for actually serving on the Advisory Board. Since the filling of two vacant seats on the AB will be by appointed...the AB has the right to appoint anyone to serve on the AB whether that person qualifies as a member or not. The discussion of Daryl's eligibility in Exec centered around the grievance filed by Daryl, the AB's recommendations that Daryl be relinked and the fact that the SC declined to do so. The details of the grievance may not be discussed in public but otherwise discussion is open on whether or not Daryl Lytton should be included in the Preference Poll and whether or not he may be considered for appointment to serve on the AB."

So there you have it. Our little bird tells us that the Sekrit Sandbox is a shambles. As expected the EC determined that Daryl was not qualified for the seat. Not only has he not been restored to his OHGenWeb county, he also does not meet the other qualifications for office [ie, being eligible to vote for 12 months prior to this time]. This actually was a no-brainer on the EC's part; in the circumstances, they could really make no other determination and in the circumstances, it was also the right decision. However, Jan "Sore Loser" Cortez and Karen "Seems Sensible But Who Knows" De Groote-Johnson have used the secret list to thoroughly trash Sandra Quinn, who apparently by beating Jan in a fair election managed somehow to align herself with Satan. Other Board members have defended her and made a point to remind their colleagues just how much Daryl likes to stir things up and be in the limelight. Apparently though, NC Linda decided by fiat that "everyone is wrong" and Daryl will be allowed to run anyways.

Incidentally, as bizarre as the Boy Wonder's take on the bylaws may appear, it is not without precedent. We've made this argument before, usually to point out how easily the bylaws can be interpreted in wacky ways. Back in the day, it was apparently the interpretation that Dick Harrison used to remove us from the Board in all but name and avoid a public fight over removing an elected representative. Ole Dick kept his reasoning sekrit, and perhaps that's all for the better, since it would have made it difficult for Shari Handley to later remove Rich Howland from office based on the fact that he no longer was a USGenWeb member. Now that the idea that the Board "has the right" to appoint whoever it chooses regardless of qualification or even of membership is out in the open we predict some interesting times ahead. For instance, we ourselves suddenly become as eligible as anyone else for appointment to future vacancies, as do Tim Stowell and Richard Pettys [not these vacancies though, since NC Linda conveniently managed to make her decision after the nominations closed]. Any non-member out there could also be eligible, should the Board choose to decide that they'd like them to serve. It also means that, as far as appointments go, there is no reason for the Board to honor the regional distinctions we know and love. Got a vacant NWPL seat but no suitable candidates for it? Just pick someone from any other place in the Project and appoint them and the problem is solved.

We are, as noted elsewhere, curious as to the point of all this. Is the NC trying to garner more power for the Board or is she just trying to head off the threatened lawsuit? Is she trying to cover all the right bases in the well-founded expectation that Daryl hasn't a hope in a hot place of winning the preference poll and if he does, he will almost certainly not be appointed to the Board? Are some Board members actively trying to put him on the Board to smack Sandy Quinn around for defying them? Somehow we doubt that anyone on the Board actually wants Daryl admitted to the club, so it's entirely possible that all this defense of the Board's right to appoint anyone of its choosing is all just payback for a SC who thumbed her nose at them. Or, is the hope that by taking this whole sordid mess public, the Board can force the issue to a popularity contest? Since whether or not Daryl can be considered for the seat rests on an interpretation of the bylaws, it seems more than a little dangerous to allow popular sentiment to determine what those interpretations are. After all, the peanut gallery are a fickle lot.

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

Posted by merope at 7:30 AM 0 comments    

Saturday, March 18, 2006
Our Readers Write

When you have something to say...its Your Daily Board Show!

ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT: The Board has been quiet since NC Linda sent out reminders that the nominations period for the SWSC position was about to close. [It closed last night]. Today ought to be a busy day, however. NC Linda should be announcing the final list of candidates for the position [and possibly an actual date for the poll], and the revised report from the Voter Harrassment Com..., er, we mean Voter Fraud Committee is due. But since it's quiet we'll go over some reader mail.

UNQUESTIONED ANSWERS: We've been corresponding with a couple of CCs who are quite confused by this whole FGS thing. They are particularly disoriented by the confusing information they've received from their Board reps and the outright obfuscation from the NC. One of them sent us a particularly insightful list of questions, which hopefully since they don't come from us, the Board might actually consider addressing forthrightly and honestly. Here they are reprinted:

"What I don't understand is how did this FGS 2006 committee come about? It just appeared, fully staffed, out of the blue. I thought there are parliamentary procedures for the formation of organizational committees. And if the excuse is used, "this is an unofficial committee," then why the heck is this "unofficial" committee allowed to use the project name, the project logo and obtain funding through the project newsletter and lists, all without any approval or oversight whatsoever from the organization's governing board? When will the next "unofficial" committee be secretly formed by individual members, affiliating our...organization with yet another and using the project name, logo, lists and newsletter to obtain funding? Has not precedent already been set twice now?"

Good questions. We imagine we will get answers to them about the same time as pigs fly.

SOMEONE TO WATCH OVER YOU: On roughly the same topic, we hear that someone who is concerned about the unsupervised fund-raising occurring in the Project's name has initiated a conversation with the Internal Revenue Service, which allegedly is of the opinion that the solicited donations constitute income for someone. We have no further information on this matter and hope it doesn't end up where it could easily end up, but those members considering "donating" money to the FGS committee [unofficial yet soliciting money under USGW's name and logo] for its dog and pony show might want to consider that this issue could get quite unpleasant for everyone involved.

EVERYONE'S DOING IT: Someone sent us an URL for yet another USGenWeb-related blog. This one is apparently run by usual suspect Shari "WWJD" Handley, although whoever runs it is coy enough to use only their initials and describe themselves as a "secretary and former NC of the USGW Project." Speculation is that this blog:

http://usgwminutes.blogspot.com/

is run by the same person who runs this one:

http://meropeunwarped.blogspot.com/

but we are unconvinced. Although our evil twin started publishing around the same time that "SH" apparently lost interest in her project, the anti-merope's writing style is not at all similar to Shari's and Shari, in our opinion, isn't clever enough to fake such a distinctive voice. In any event, it's nice to see that USGenWeb has such a wealth of news and opinion sources at its disposal, even if two-thirds of them aren't proud enough of their work to sign it.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Laying it on the line since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:00 AM 0 comments    

Thursday, March 16, 2006
Lemons And Lemonade

Girding for battle...its Your Daily Board Show!

LIKE A THEIF IN THE NIGHT: A few more candidates applied for the jobs of Representative at Large and SWSC CC rep. These are the complete lists:

SWSC Rep: Phyllis Rippee, Donna Allen, Katy Hestand, Betsy Mills, Douglas Anderson

[Yes, you will note that Betsy "Glutton For Punishment" Mills' name is now on the list for the SWSC representative. It wasn't on the list yesterday. Betsy does best in a crowded field, where the "Sweet jesus, anyone but her" vote is diluted. Last time she was appointed to a Board position it was with just 21% of the vote in the preference poll. The rest of the field is weak [either dangerously unstable like Phyllis, severely overextended like Katy, or virtually unknown like the others]; unless someone truly impressive steps up our prediction is that Betsy will once again ooze her corseted self onto the Board and those of us who she considers "the color of jerk" in the SWSC region will be short one representative. We figured she'd have her hands full picking the poc...er, soliciting donations from the membership for the FGS 2006 Dog & Pony show, but apparently the opportunity to once more mix it up on the national stage was just too good to pass up. Ah well, every cloud has a silver lining and we are already sharpening our nibs.]

RAL: Jason Mendenhall, Don Kelly, Daryl Lytton, Linda K. Lewis, Christine L. Sweet-Hart, Scott Burow

[We are very sorry to see that Robert Bremer apparently declined the nomination for the RAL seat; on a happier note, Scott Burow accepted his nomination. In a just world, he ought to be a shoo-in, but USGenWeb is rarely just so we'll see what happens. Daryl Lytton is still on the list, but we imagine that will change when the EC fails to verify his qualifications.]

The nominations period for the RAL position is closed; there are a still a couple of days for nominations to the SWSC seat.

DODGING AND WEAVING: We got our answer from NC Linda "Let's See How Long I Can Avoid Answering A Legitimate Question From a Member" Davenport yesterday regarding the mysterious FGS dues payment. As expected, it was short, uninformative, and utterly dismissive, which is practically becoming Linda's trademark. She said, "The FGS item is on the agenda and will come up in order. That's not the answer you are looking for but it's all I can give you at this time." We wonder sometimes if we asked her what color the sky is if she would ignore us until we asked the question again and then tell us we basically have no business knowing until such time as she decides otherwise. We don't know what disease afflicts Board members once they take office, but apparently it prevents them from honestly answering the simplest question in a timely and responsive fashion and deludes them into believing that the most minor things are some sort of state secret. Maybe it's just good old-fashioned power madness, but whatever it is it appears to be quite contagious. Most of them seem to come down with it shortly after exposure to the Sekrit Sandbox.

Just to go through the motions, we will once again remind readers that this administration pledged openness and responsiveness just a few short months ago. Apparently they work out of a different dictionary than the rest of us.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Stifling the urge to giggle since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:00 AM 0 comments    

Wednesday, March 15, 2006
When A Cold Wind Blows

Dragging the sweaters back out of the closet...its Your Daily Board Show!

BREAD UPON THE WATERS: Barely coming in under the wire, a few more nominations for the vacant RAL and SWSC CC rep seats were made. The lists of candidates we know so far:

RAL: Jason Mendenhall, Don Kelley, Daryl Lytton [who will probably be disqualified], Linda K. Lewis, Robert Bremer [who was nominated, but who has not to our knowledge formally accepted], Christine L. Sweet-Hart [who has the best name ever]

SWSC: Phyllis Rippee, Donna Allen, Katy Hestand [who sent a resume as long as her arm]

Nominations closed last night, so unless there were some truly last minute nominations, this is who you will have to choose from in a few weeks.

AROUND AND AROUND: The Board has not discussed the burning issue of unresolved grievances much, other than to forward member emails from other lists [apparently including Sooper Sekrit Board-Exec]. The discussion on other project lists is about evenly divided between the "give the Board teeth" and "OMG, what are you thinking?!" crowds, with a surprisingly large number of respondents endorsing changing the bylaws to give the Board the authority to force the rest of the Project to follow its dictates. [We don't have a resolution to the current dilemna, but something tells us that giving the Board more power is not going to make anything better for any of us.]

UNQUESTIONED ANSWERS: Readers may recall that several days ago now, we asked how much of the donations for the upcoming FGS conference would go toward reimbursing the anonymous benefactors who ponied up the change for the recent FGS dues. FGS 2006 committee member Josh Taylor was johnny-on-the-spot in assuring us that none of of the funds would be used for that purpose, but he fell strangely silent when we asked our follow-up question: "Was the payment of these dues on behalf of the Project approved by the Board?" NC Linda hasn't piped up either, so we asked the question again today, and we'll see where that gets us.

In the interim, we have heard from a handful of members who tell us they have also privately asked their Board reps about these dues. From the responses so far, it appears that the Board either was notified or was not notified and either did approve it or did not approve it. How can this be, you might wonder. Well, some Board members are telling their constituents that the Board was notified and did approve the payment in advance, and others are telling their constituents that the Board heard nothing about it until it was over and done with and thus did not approve anything. While we would not go so far as to wonder which of these responses is an actual lie, we are curious as to how both of those situations can have occurred. We have faith that someone or other out there will be able to clear this confusion up for us.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Buying a pig in a poke since 1998

Posted by merope at 5:40 AM 0 comments    

Sunday, March 12, 2006
Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don't

When all hell breaks loose...its Your Daily Board Show!

A BONE TO PICK: A couple of Board members took the "unresolved grievance" issue in their teeth and attempted to gnaw it to death. After two full screens of jibber-jabber, Jeff suggested [as he usually does] that the only way to resolve this issue is by amending the bylaws. Among his recommendations are making the grievance process binding on all members; that the grandfather clause that keeps a tiny number of SCs in office be revoked; and that "default" parliamentary procedures be instituted in those states that refuse to get with the ball and write their own state bylaws.

[Jeff failed to articulate how bylaws amendments would actually prevent a recurrence of the current situation, wherein an elected SC violated existing state guidelines that were voted on by the state project's members and then lost in the grievance filed in the matter and refused to implement the Board's recommendation. The Board would be in no less of a pickle if the bylaws made the outcome of a grievance process binding, since it would still have to decide whether or not to delink an SC who refused to abide both by state guidelines and by the Board's rulings.]

Karen rather wordily noted that she was just shocked to discover that there are SCs in USGenWeb who gleefully wield unchecked and unlimited power within their own little fiefdoms. She offered no suggestions but encouraged members to write her and the other Board members if they had possible solutions for the continuing crisis.

IT'S HARD OUT HERE FOR A PIMP: As promised, NC Linda brought this issue to the Project's discussion lists for the people in the cheap seats to chew over. First, however, she felt the need to post a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" message that apparently was intended to garner some sympathy for the Board. This attempt appears to have failed, since several CCs have pointed out that the Board has a duty to protect them, a duty the Board was more than happy to perform when it ousted Tim Stowell from two states. Linda has publicly stated she doesn't want to discuss the Georgia Solution, but its basically the 900 pound gorilla sitting in the middle of any discussion of what to do about rogue SCs. An unfortunate fact is that the Board, despite its whinging to the contrary, has clearly and unequivocally demonstrated that it does have the power to impose its recommendations on any SC on which it chooses to drop the hammer. Its hard to see that its present quandary stems from anything less than an unwillingness to do that in every situation where someone thumbs their nose at them. [Although we suspect that if they did it just once, the SCs would be more careful about keeping their houses in order.]

One of the CCs suggested that the Board file its own grievance against members who do not heed its rulings. RAL candidate Daryl Lytton noted that any SC who fails to follow either local or national bylaws and/or guidelines is "in violation of established guidelines/standards of the Project," and as it turns out one of the duties of the Advisory Board is removing links to sites that don't uphold the rule of the Project.

Over on the State Coordinator list, Betsy "Miss Popularity" Mills suggested that the Board merely poll the CCs and determine whether or not the rest of them want the SC to stay. This is an interesting suggestion. It basically turns the outcome of a grievance into a popularity contest which, regardless of the egregiousness of their conduct, nearly any SC is bound to win since most SCs handpick their CCs and many CCs who want to keep their jobs will realize that reprisals are likely to fall heavy if they vote against their Dear Leader. Even if CCs recognize the violence done to all members of the state when their SC violates local rules, many of them will figure that the risks inherent in voting against the SC outweigh the mostly rhetorical benefits of ensuring the rules are not applied at the SC's whim. Plus, at least in the grievance that precipitated this discussion, the CC in question isn't all that popular, and basic human nature would lead us to predict that he'd lose any popularity contest, regardless of the merits of his claims.

Its also worth noting that holding a popularity poll to remove an SC is a violation of the bylaws, which are very specific about how SCs may be removed. Its also worth noting that the last time the Board failed dismally to remove an SC using the provisions in the bylaws, and they were reduced to removing a recalcitrant SC by force. The few other SCs that have spoken up on this issue have, as might be expected, pointed out that the Board has no authority to take any action whatsoever against an SC.

BONUS QUOTE: "The SC declined the recommendation, delinked the party, and placed the county up a new Local Coordinator." --Jeff Scism, describing what must have been a very painful process for all concerned

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Vanishing and reappearing since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:40 AM 0 comments    

Saturday, March 11, 2006
Ease On Down The Road

Trying something new...its Your Daily Board Show!

THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY: After a bit more whining by Jeff, who said "Since only 4 board members have responded in any way to this, and several members have written stating the RAL has no job, I suggest we...move on. Perhaps we should drop the RAL position as well and leave it empty," NC Linda declared the "job descriptions" topic over and done with.

OUR HANDS ARE TIED: Skipping over the unneccesary [and possibly dangerously interesting to the IRS] Financial Procedures Committee, NC Linda then moved the group on to discussing the issue of "unresolved grievances." She noted, "Over the years...the AB has...rendered recommendations to the parties of a grievance. However...it has been up to the parties of the grievance whether or not to follow the AB's recommendations...This AB was recently involved in a grievance filed by a CC against an SC over the delinking of the CC. The AB members...rendered a set of recommendation, one of which was for the SC to relink the CC. The SC declined...citing past precedent that an SC has the right to delink any CC they wish and there is no requirement for grievance recommendations to be implemented. The decision of the SC resulted in yet more grievances being filed and e-mails from members demanding that the AB 'do something.' The AB has discussed this situation in Exec (the place to discuss grievances) and...has decided to bring this issue of non-resolution of grievances to open discussion to try to find a workable solution to the problem."

This issue is of particular timeliness because the CC, Daryl Lytton, is currently a nominee for the vacant RAL position, and the county from which he was improperly delinked in OHGenWeb is his only qualifying position. There is only a short time remaining for this to be resolved before the Board will have to decide whether or not he is eligible to run for the seat. There are also are broader implications to the Board's inability to see to it that its recommendations are followed. The SC who delinked Daryl, Sandra Quinn, unfortunately learned at the knee of usual suspect and former NC Shari Handley, who was NC when Sandy first took over OHGW and from all appearances filled her head with all sorts of notions about how to be a buff, burly, no-nonsense SC. Sandy might have a leg to stand on in this argument if OHGW didn't have established, CC-approved procedures for removing members, but it does and she didn't follow them. Given that USGW has paid lip service for years to the idea of states having their own bylaws and guidelines, allowing Sandy to negate them at her will sets a dangerous precedent. What good are state guidelines and bylaws if the SCs are free to ignore them when they are inconvenient?

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
The devil you know since 1998

Posted by merope at 7:29 PM 0 comments    

Friday, March 10, 2006
Good Money After Bad

Behind the curve...its Your Daily Board Show!

SOUR GRAPES: Discussion on the RAL job description continued, with Jeff whining that if he incorporated all the suggestions for modifying his proposal the RAL would have no specific duties at all. Angie pointed out that this is why "it's not terribly necessary to write job descriptions for our elected positions."

We have to agree on this. The only Board member that has a list of special duties in the bylaws is the National Coordinator, and presumably the RAL's "job description" is included in the several paragraphs of duties outlined for all Board members in Article VI of the bylaws. Also, if for some reason there is a crying need for the RAL to have a job description over and above that of other Board members, wouldn't it be more appropriate to amend the bylaws to include it rather than establishing a job description in the standing procedures, which as we have been told many times can be changed at whim?

SHE'S BACK: In only barely surprising news, former Board member and accomplished stomping-off-in-a-huffer Phyllis Rippee has come out of her self-imposed exile to accept a nomination for the vacant SWSC representative seat.

DAY OLD NEWS: The USGenWeb Newsletter has come out for, as far as we know, the first time since December. It has the usual bland pleasantries from the NC, who pats herself on the back for updating the CC guidelines, pats the CCs on the back for doing such great work on their pages [except for those of us who maintain "old dusty websites setting stagnant"], solicits members to design a new "Friends of USGenWeb" logo, commiserates about the recent loss of two Board members, and discusses the upcoming report of the Grievance Procedures Committee [but makes no mention of the even more imminent report of the Voter Fraud Committee]. At the end of the report, there is a little bit of fluff about the Family Group Sheet project and the US BLM records.

The heart of the newsletter [and probably the reason it was published] is the money beg from the USGenWeb at FGS 2006 committee. We were told awhile ago by someone in the know that Boy Toy and the Sugar Mamas had more or less said that the remaining funds from last year's dog and pony show would cover the expenses this year, but if that's the case, we have to wonder what they were smoking. David was sitting on slightly less than $600 and the convention this year is projected to cost $2500. Although we have to wonder about some of the stuff on the budget. Signage? What happened to the spiff new banner David bought us last year? A hundred and fifty bucks worth of "freebies"? We would think a couple of pounds of candy would suffice, but at $150 that had better be some damn fine candy. Speaker appreciations? Isn't this pretty much the committee buying itself and its friends presents? Awards? Who knew we were having an awards ceremony? A hundred dollars for name ribbons? We can print off attractive name badges on our computer for about 5 cents a piece. Anyways, the leftovers from last year don't even come close to covering the presumed needs of the committee, so they are passing the tin cup with the hopes of raising over $2,000 so they can go to the convention in style.

In a move hardly guaranteed to have the money rolling in, the committee appointed Betsy "Scary From Any Angle" Mills to handle the cash. She's keeping the budget and stuff on her personal website; the donations link and log are being kept on a googlepage. She has put together a professional looking budget site; lets hope it stays updated for longer than David's page did. So far, the committee has bought itself a second booth with funds donated for the purpose and Josh has gone to Kinko's to print some "preconference advertising".

In related news, Josh was kind enough to respond to our question about the provenance of the funds for the FGS dues paid in January, allegedly without the Board's knowledge or approval. He informed us that the dues came from "private donations...not members of the USGenWeb at FGS 2006 committee" and that no part of the donations from either of the FGS conferences will be used reimburse them.

[Also, we apologize for being a couple days late in reporting on the newsletter. We aren't permitted to receive it via email and it hasn't been posted to the national website yet, so we had to scare up a copy from other sources. Our thanks to all of you who sent us copies of both the newsletter and Josh's hilarious correction.]

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
The color of jerk since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:45 AM 0 comments    

Thursday, March 09, 2006
Picking Pockets

Behind the times...its Your Daily Board Show!

PLUGGING THE LEAK: After a bit of brief discussion about putting David's now vacant SWSC rep position on the preference poll ballot, NC Linda posted an announcement to various lists opening the position for nominations. As with the RAL job, you need to email Linda personally if you want to volunteer or you want to nominate someone for the job, and you need to be a member of the SWSC region. The nominations period is open from March 9 through March 17.

In related news, NC Linda noted that the time frame originally provided for the preference poll does not include the ten day registration period required by the EC guidelines, so she has decided to leave the time frame for the elections up to the EC.

PADDING THE RESUME: The Board continued its tepid discussion of Jeff's proposed RAL description. A couple of Board members supported Jeff's proposal as written, although it requires the RAL to chair a nonexistent committee. Jeff, for his part, wasn't capable of leaving well enough alone, and in responding to a constituent's concerns about the RAL chairing any committee, made this comment: "It may be a tad bit poorly worded...but the essence is that ral's job is to represent, even more so than the other Board members. The Ral is like an Ombudsman." [*sigh*] The RAL is not like an ombudsman. An ombudsman is a "public official appointed to investigate citizens' complaints against local or national government agencies who may be infringing on the rights of individuals", or in a more expanded definition a person who fulfills a similar function at a business or newspaper. Our RAL is most definitely not appointed and is most definitely not charged with investigating complaints against the Board or with defending anyone's rights. More often than not, the RAL is one of the usual suspects and the absolute last thing one would expect them to do is champion the rights of anyone but their cronies. One does not appoint foxes to investigate other foxes when they are accused of raiding the henhouse. Maybe when Jeff's birthday rolls around, someone can spring for a dictionary.

BONUS QUOTE: "The Call for Donations for USGenWeb FGS 2006 contained an error that needs to be corrected. The sentence, "Please note that your donations will be used to cover expenses of private individuals assisting with USGenWeb at FGS 2006." should read "Please note that your donations will NOT be used to cover expenses of private individuals assisting with USGenWeb at FGS 2006." Donations will only be used to cover the expenses as outlined in the budget, not for the expenses of private individuals." --Josh Taylor

DOUBLE BONUS QUOTE: "In the cases where the RAL does actively represent, The Ral should put aside all other positions in favor of the represented, whether it is the membership at large or a single person. The NC does the same for the good of the Project, over personal feelings and goals." --Jeff Scism, who made us laugh out loud with this one

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Following the money since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:00 AM 0 comments    

Tuesday, March 07, 2006
Never A Dull Moment

The hills have eyes...its Your Daily Board Show!

HEADING FOR HIGH GROUND: The DBS is sad [believe it or not] to report that SWSC CC rep David Morgan has thrown in the towel and resigned, effective immediately. He cited extreme difficulty in keeping up with Board business, since he currently has only limited access to a computer. A couple of Board members have expressed surprise and regret at this unexpected news. [We have had our differences with David in the past and will probably have them in the future, but he's turned out to be a surprisingly agreeable and reasonable voice on the Board. If nothing else, he has kept Jeff Scism's wild flights of fanciful rhetoric on a short leash. We are sorry to see him go.]

We imagine that the EC can run both the RAL and SWSC rep preference polls simultaneously, so expect a call for volunteers shortly.

OLD NEWS: NC Linda announced the formal passage of Motion 06-02. The EC now officially has new marching orders. Whether it will pay any attention to them is another matter.

THERE HE GOES AGAIN: NC Linda moved the Board onto the next item on the March agenda and asked the reps to discuss the RAL and appointed position job descriptions on the chatty list. Jeff Scism immediately provided his vision of the RAL's job, which includes representing all Project members on the Board, serving as the pro tem Chair of the Board when the NC is absent, and serving as the Chair of the "Bylaws/rules committee." [Which we don't have and won't have, given the profound lack of interest in such a committee by anyone but Jeff.] After two posts by Jeff on the subject, Angie noted "I just don't know that I think it's appropriate, or necessary, to write job descriptions for elective positions."

HAT IN THE RING: Jason Mendenhall has joined the list of nominees for the vacant RAL position.

Speaking of that seat, fellow nominee Daryl Lytton told us that he is still the Adams county OHGW CC, even though Sandra Quinn has put the county up for adoption. His Adams county page still bears both the USGenWeb and OHGenWeb logos, and according to him, "Sandra...felt I had broken the OHGenWeb List Code of Ethics by posting harassing messages, which she has refused to point out...she unsubbed me from the list, then said that because all CCs are required to be subbed to the list, that I was no longer a CC and she delinked my county. The Code of Ethics only allow for me to be moderated for one week, they specifically state that the county will remain linked, and they do not give an SC the authority to expel someone." You will recall that the Board determined that Daryl had been improperly removed from his position and recommended that his county be relinked. Sandra has thus far refused to do so and we think it is unlikely that she will verify that Daryl is a member of OHGenWeb.

The Board will thus be in an interesting position. Sandra will almost certainly deny that Daryl is a member of OHGW. The EC will almost certainly fail to certify Daryl as a valid candidate. Daryl will almost certainly appeal this ruling to the Board. At that point, what the Board will do is not so certain. It has already determined that Sandra violated the OHGW rules when she expelled Daryl and already recommended that his position be returned to him. There is, however, a long tradition of deferring to the SC, no matter how crazy or vindictive they are, in deciding who is permitted to serve as a volunteer. So will the Board wallow in its own impotence, agree with Sandra and the EC, and declare Daryl not qualified for the seat? Or will it bypass them, note that Daryl is by its own determination still an OHGW CC, and certify him as a candidate, thus potentially putting in office a person who actually does not have any official position in USGW? Time will tell, but our money is on Door #1.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Around the bend since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:10 AM 1 comments    

Monday, March 06, 2006
All Over That

Eat your Wheaties...its Your Daily Board Show!

SHAKEN NOT STIRRED: Although the voting period ended Saturday evening, there has been no formal announcement of the outcome of Motion 06-02 as of yet. The Other Linda tossed her support behind having at least a brief discussion period once a motion goes gold on the formal list.

In other news, the February minutes were posted. Very little happened in February, but then it is a very short month.

CREAM OF THE CROP: NC Linda also announced the first crop of nominees for the vacant RAL position. They are:

Daryll Lytton [perennial man-about-the-Project]
Don Kelly [really needs no introduction]
Linda K. Lewis [no, not that Linda Lewis]

Its an interesting list. Daryll does not currently have a county anywhere in the Project that we could find. Although his list of qualifications included Adams county OHGW CC, a quick check this morning confirmed that Sandy never gave him the county back. Don, of course, is just Don. He apparently feels that he still has a contribution to make to the political arena and has tossed his hat into the ring. Look for some great poetry. Linda "Not the Loony One" Lewis is our co-CC in Johnson county, KS. Although we don't know her at all other than through her work on the county site and we think she's a newcomer to the Project, she is certainly doing wondrous things with the cemeteries there.


-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Tired of little gold men since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:00 AM 0 comments    

Saturday, March 04, 2006
The Gods Must Be Crazy

Someday we'll learn...its Your Daily Board Show!

BUMP IN THE ROAD: The vote count on Motion 06-02 now stands at 12 YES votes. The motion has all but officially passed. Of course, no Board vote would be complete without someone pointing out that NC Linda promised not to call for votes without at least a brief discussion period, and yet once again called for a vote without allowing even a token period for the reps to check with their constituents. This time the honor fell to Cyndie Enfinger, who noted "...the final wording of a motion is not fixed until it is brought to BOARD-L and I'd like to allow feedback on motions in their final form from my area prior to voting." After Linda basically blew her off with some fiddle-faddle about how they'd already had a discussion phase on the chatty list, Cyndi pointed out "You agreed previously to have a brief discussion period prior to a vote. This is not the first time after agreeing to do so that you have rushed to a vote without one...I didn't realize there was a stipulation that you were going to pick and choose when it would actually happen...there are members who are not interested in being subbed to [ABCHAT] but are interested in what is being voted on...By the time I saw that voting had begun, the voting period was half over. I don't want to miss the opportunity to vote because you are not consistent in how you manage motions." Jan Cortez helpfully pointed out that there are clearly stated proper procedures elucided in the Board's choice of parliamentary reference and that these procedures are almost never followed on either Board-L or ABCHAT. She noted, "It certainly would alert members in advance of what motions are coming and when discussion is being asked for, for the last time."

IN OTHER NEWS: NC Linda told the Board that the EC would be able to run the preference poll for the vacant RAL seat no earlier than March 19. The call for nominees went out this morning. Nominations will be accepted by Linda personally from March 5 through March 14. We'd recommend cc'ing one of your Board reps on any email you send to our NC; we'd hate for any of the nominations to slip through the cracks.

SHADOW GOVERNMENT: But enough about our elected Board; now le'ts talk about the real government of this project. Acting on a friendly tip the other day, we asked NC Linda about the cryptic mention of the FGS in membership the March agenda. We were curious because its way too early for our dues to be due. Linda told us rather blandly that it was just basic unfinished business, that the Board had never gotten around to developing a SOP for memberships. Well, as it turns out, our FGS dues did come due again and recently. Back in January, Josh Taylor notified the FGS 2006 committee that the dues were due. And you know what Boy Toy and the Sugar Mommas did? They ponied up the hundred plus bucks personally and bought us a new membership. Did they take this to the Board? Nope. Do you know why? Apparently they were afraid that if they waited for the Board to vote on renewing the membership it would take too long and in some way jeopardize their precious track at the upcoming conference. We are told that Board wasn't notified until a month after the dues had been paid and now is trying desperately to find some way to tell the members about this without looking like the impotent puppets the FGS 2006 committee treats them as.

We'll leave aside for a moment our doubts about FGS in general. [After all, what kind of organization would disrupt their own convention because the elected representatives of one their member organizations were a little late in ponying up a measly $100 or so? That wouldn't look very good, would it?] We'll avert our gaze from the fact that our yearly dues came up again a mere 6 months after we paid them the first time. [FGS must have a shorter year than every one else.] We won't bother wondering what happened to our original donor who, IWRC, committed to pay renewal dues as well as the original sign-up fee. [We may be remembering that wrong anyways.] We are awfully curious, though, as to how unelected members of an unofficial committee who answers to no one can decide on their lonesome to buy USGenWeb a membership in any organization and not be called on the carpet for it, immediately and publicly. Why has the Board hidden this? Why was this was not brought immediately to the attention of the membership and why was official endorsement of the FGS 2006 committee not immediately withdrawn? [Yeah, we do think it is in the best interests of the USGenWeb Project to prevent unelected members from acting however they choose in its name, particularly when they've richly demonstrated their utter contempt for the membership and its elected representatives. Even if that jeopardizes some cheesy little show they are putting on at some lame convention.] Surely the Board can find other Project members to manage the committee's business. Perhaps they can even find some who will agree to represent the Project on an official committee that answers to our elected representatives, instead of some rogue committee that disdains even the occasional report of its activities. Don't forget, BT&tSM will shortly be asking you for money to pay for their convention, but since they are clearly acting only on their own authority, we have to wonder how wise it would be to give them even the change from under the sofa cushions. We'd hate to have another one of those embarrassing "David Samuelsen" incidents.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Working for the weekend since 1998

Posted by merope at 1:00 PM 0 comments    

Friday, March 03, 2006
Rocket Science

No ifs, ands, or buts...its Your Daily Board Show!

FULL SPEED AHEAD: The Board is progressing on one of the top agenda items for March. Last evening, NC Linda asked for and got a motion to accept unchanged the proposed revisions to the Election Committee guidelines submitted by the Voter Fraud Committee. Jeff made the motion, Karen seconded it and Linda gave it number 06-02 and then opened the voting immediately without any further discussion period. Thus far, three Board members have voted YES and one left town until voting was over but didn't cast a vote.

SILVER LINING: We've heard through the rumor mill that Ken Gilkey [one of the message board admins down Kentucky way that was so abruptly kicked to the curb by Root$web] finally managed to get past "elaine" and talk to a real person at the Evil Empire. And mirabile dictu, Root$web has agreed to return the Caldwell county message board to its long-time admin Vicki Stewart within the next couple of days. There was no explanation of why Root$web made such a boneheaded move in the first place [the rumor mill also told us that "Marilyn Heitz" currently manages at least 78 message boards, apparently very poorly], but still, this is good news for the genealogists of Caldwell county.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Still in shock since 1998

Posted by merope at 5:35 AM 0 comments    

Thursday, March 02, 2006
Nothing But Net

Res ipsa loquitur...its Your Daily Board Show!

A NEW BEGINNING: After a few basic housekeeping items, mostly noting that the agenda items they never get to will stay on the agenda and Jeff's latest wordsmithing attempt will join them on the bottom of the dance card, NC Linda formally adjourned the February meeting and called the March meeting to order. Here is the agenda for the upcoming month:

Announcement of the posting of the minutes (approval etc)
No Reports are due from Standing Committees during March
Reports are due from:
... Voter Fraud Committee due March 18th
... Grievance Procedure Committee Report due March 24th
Unfinished business
... Filling vacant RAL seat.
... Vote on proposed EC Guidelines from the Voter Fraud Committee
... Discussion of revised AB Procedures from Voter Fraud
Committee
... Discussion of Grievance Procedures from the Grievance
Procedure Committee
... Job Descriptions for appointed positions
... Job Descriptions for RAL
New business
... Discussion of Financial Procedures Committee
... Problem with non-resolution of Grievances
... FGS Membership
... Straw poll on ABChat, Official Logo resizing statement.
... Clarification/rewording SOP for Sturgis Parlimentary
Procedure
Announcements if there are any
Adjournment

SWINE BEFORE PEARLS: As a throw-away, NC Linda also updated us all on a few of the things that the Board has been discussing in the Sekrit Sandbox. Of course, such a condescension would not be the same without the prerequisite "of course we rarely use Board-Exec" statement and this time is no different. Linda said, "...I have been remiss in notifying the membership when the AB is discussing something in Exec. By and large Exec is very quite but here is a list of what was discussed in Exec during Jan and Feb:

Discussion of an on-going grievance - problem with non resolution
of grievances has been added to the agenda.
Answering some requests for special projects. All of the requests
were ideas and none were actual websites. If any become actual
websites the discussion will be on ABChat.
Answering a complaint from an SC about copyright infringement.
Answering a complaint from a CC about a state election.
A question about the resizing of the Project's logo was brought
up - will come up as a straw poll on ABChat shortly.
Answering a request to add a dual state to the Project.
Question about Friends of the USGenWeb Project logo - was brought
up on ABChat.
Request to add membership in FGS to the agenda - now added to the
agenda"

While its nice to have even a late and partial accounting of their secret doings, this laundry list leaves out what the Board was secretly discussing in November and December. The last time NC Linda notified us the Board was playing in the Sekrit Sandbox was November 4, when they needed to retire to discuss some sooper sekrit affair of state. Apparently that session never ended and they've been handling all sorts of other business there ever since.

We recall those heady days of early September when NC Linda assured us, 1) that Board-Exec would only be used to discuss specific things that truly required confidentiality [such as grievances and other personnel issues] and not to hash out trivial issues in advance of taking them to public lists; and 2) that we would be informed before the board went off to play in the Sekrit Sandbox and not some two months after the fact. We see but one or two issues on the list above that would fall under the grievance/personnel issue rubric; all of the others could have easily been discussed out in the open. Are we suprised that after two whole months of a brave new order the Board has slipped back into its old sekrit ways? Not in the least; we expected it and we were not disappointed. We gave up asking if the Board was in executive session months ago, when it became obvious that they were and that NC Linda would just ignore the question indefinitely. At least this NC apparently will throw us a bone now and again.

BONUS QUOTE: "...I do believe that the use of Board-Exec as a place to discuss all other issues should cease. In the final days of this past term the AB members voted to require the new Grievance Procedures Committee to meet on an open public list where all of the committee member's words, actions and deeds will be open for public scrutiny. I strongly believe that if we, the AB, require this of our committee members then we need to require it of ourselves." --Linda Haas Davenport, 10 Sep 2005

DOUBLE BONUS QUOTE: "Board-Exec will be used to discuss issues or items that involve individuals - i.e. grievances, appointments, etc...I will announce when the AB is in Board-Exec and what they are discussing, as I have done with the grievance and appointments. When the discussion is finished and a resolution reached that will also be announced on Board-L. Otherwise the board's discussions should all be held openly in the informal meeting." --Linda Haas Davenport, 7 Sep 2005

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Seen it all since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:05 AM 0 comments    

Wednesday, March 01, 2006
A Brief Hour Upon The Stage

In like a lion...its Your Daily Board Show!

GRIPPING DRAMA: A handful of Board members continued to discuss whether it was better to limit the number of nominees allowed to participate in the upcoming preference poll for a new RAL or to let all interested and qualified parties participate. David and Bettie in particular went at it and looked to be heading for a spectacular tiff when NC Linda told them both to take their conversation private. At one point the discussion veered into the requirements for federal elections, and apparently Jeff thinks that persons running for U.S. President are required to attain a 2/3 majority. [Presidents, as we all know, commonly are elected with less than a 50% majority, and can win even when they lose.] The Other Linda provided this interesting perspective on the utility of popularity polls:

"The last appointment made to the position of RAL asked for applications from interested parties...There were 8 applicants; a total of 344 votes were cast...and the leader in the poll had 21% of the total votes...with eight volunteers the vote was spread thin - 21% of the voters in the poll selected the RAL appointed in 2004 and that would mean approximately 3.25 % of the total membership selected that person...it wouldn't be a bad idea for this sort of poll to be done according to the same criteria whenever it is used by the AB to ascertain the will of the members...with the low turn out we normally see in our elections and polls, consideration of what the actual numbers mean should be looked at."

[Actually, polls and elections are more like statistical samples. The idea, or perhaps the hope, is that those who vote accurately represent the will of those who don't, so that it may not correct to say that only 3.25% of the electorate preferred the last RAL appointee, but that the preferences reflected in the poll accurately represent what we would have seen if everyone voted. While 21% of the electorate is a very small plurality, with a crowded field it will not be unusual. It is also however correct to say that although 21% of the electorate may have preferred Betsy to the other candidates, 79% preferred someone else to her. That is the danger of picking the winner of a preference poll if there is a large field and no candidate preferred by the majority or at least a substantially large plurality. You might end up picking someone that the majority of members wouldn't actually vote for.]

The only comments not on this topic came from Bettie and David. Bettie told Jeff she didn't think that the intent of Motion 01-35 needed to be clarified any further, and Bettie and David bantered about personal business for a few messages.

NOW YOU SEE 'EM, NOW YOU DON'T: So a few people have been telling us about some big hoohah in KYGenWeb over some mysteriously missing obituaries. Its taken us a couple of days and a couple of informants to get a reasonably clear picture of what is going on, and we aren't sure we understand it entirely, but we'll give it a shot in hopes that some one out there can clarify the situation. Vicki Stewart, who is the CC for Caldwell county, KYGW, has been maintaining a county message board since 1997. Ken Gilkey, one of her assistant CCs, both assists her with board maintenance and posts obituaries to this message board. In fact, he's been using the board to post county-specific obituaries since 1998 and has by now posted over 5000 them. A short time ago, he noticed that some 300 of the obituaries he had posted since last October had disappeared. At the same time, Vicki realized that she had been shut out of the message board, someone named Marilyn Heitz [who no one appears to know] had been put in charge of it, and the links to the Caldwell county page had been removed. Further, both she and Ken had been removed from the board admin mailing list. All of this was done without any communication from Root$web and neither Vicki nor Ken have any idea why they were removed as board administrators. Apparently, attempts to talk to "Marilyn Heitz" have not been succesful. [We checked her out a bit, and it turns out she's been a Root$web board admin for a long time, and she's been moving messages around from place to place on the Root$web message boards since at least 2003.]

After some determined digging, Ken received a message from "elaine" who is the "Message Board Coordinator" for Root$web. "elaine" assured Ken that none of his obituaries had been deleted; they had instead "been relocated to more appropriate surname boards within the system." There is speculation that the choice to remove the obituaries and place them elsewhere is the decision of the new Root$web-appointed board administrator, but according to another KYGW CC a similar thing happened to her last year and Root$web told her flat-out that it was its own perogative to move obituaries to other boards and delete them from the county boards and she was not to interfere with its decisions. Her message came from the same "elaine" who wrote to Ken.

So, what do we have here? Why would Root$web remove two long-term, local, conscientious, and apparently prolific board admins without notice, replace them with a new board admin with no apparent ties to the county [she's never made a post to the board and doesn't live in the area or apparently have ancestors from there], and then proceed to allow her to alienate people who have posted thousands of obits to the message boards over the years? [Remember, at Root$web, its all about the content.] That seems more than a little like shooting yourself in the foot. Several people have already pledged to find somewhere else to host their hard work, since Root$web apparently doesn't value their contributions enough to respect their choice of where to display them.

Is this just a rogue board admin with no real feel for how county-oriented genealogical research works and no apparent desire to learn? Or does this reflect a wholesale program on Root$web's part to move obits and other surname-specific posts to the surname boards? [Which might explain why they removed the board admins, who they probably figured would not go for this at all.] We realize that Root$web often "fixes" things that aren't broken, usually without even the slightest concern for the small niceties of actually notifying people in advance of their intentions or responding politely when users express concern over sledgehammer tactics, but this seems a particularly foolish thing to do, even for them.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Biting the hands that feed us since 1998

Posted by merope at 6:15 AM