From merope@Radix.Net Mon May 15 10:12:24 2000 Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 10:12:23 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O X-Status: The pot calling the kettle black...its Your Daily Board Show! *warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk! Sunday 14 May 2000-Monday 15 May 2000: Tim announces the final vote on Motion 00-11: 3 "yes" votes, 2 "no" votes, and one abstention. A quorum was not met and the motion is declared "not passed." While casting her vote, Pam Reid notes "I am not real sure that a "fair forum" is possible in this situation. Where are these people coming from? What will we do with the results they come up with? How will they be implemented?" She believes that, with elections coming on so close, "If the Projects members, the thousands of them that are out there, are SO concerned, that is their forum. The can nominate and elect people that they believe in." Ginger Cisewski tells Pam that she believes that for many people they will have to wait a full year before they can elect people "they believe in," and asks "Should these grievances be ignored for another full year?" Tina Vickery forwards a message from project member Roger Swafford that originally appeared on USGENWEB-ALL. Roger notes that "Events of the past few days have reached the point of causing irreversible damage to the public image of USGW"; he points out that two other Board members have links to the Civil Disobedience site. In his opinion "there is no excuse for the above links of protest, and those of other CC's with similarly held positions." He suggests that Jim Powell, author of Motion 00-11, and GingerC, its second, of failing to meet the duties of their office because they forwarded a poorly written motion. He requests publicly "that both the above members remove the inappropriate content/links from their county sites and also exert any influence they may have upon others involved to do so as well...Ifthey hold steadfast to displaying such content/links then IMO ... they should resign." [All due respect, Roger, but with one Board member consigning project members to the DBS for a "fair hearing", another telling them to wait until after the election, and most of the rest apparently willing to ignore the issue entirely, the court of public opinion is the only court we have. If anything we should go more public. Newsgroups, anyone?] GingerC notes that "Since the unlawful delinking of the USGenWeb Census Project, the national website has been out of compliance with the Bylaws of the USGenWeb Project." [Article VI, Section 4] She moves "that the Webmaster of the USGenWeb Project's national website be required to immediately place a link on the main page of the national website to the USGenWeb Census Project, which is now located at: http://www.us-census.org/ to bring the national website into compliance with the Bylaws." === Vote of Confidence Corner: We hear that at least two states are currently running internal votes on whether to formally support the actions of the NC and the Advisory Board or to publicly censure them. One state, Nebraska, has already published a statement of non-support which reads in part, "Since the National Coordinator has seen fit to delink a national special project, and then did not relink that project when the Advisory Board failed to ratify that delinking, and since the National Coordinator has now decided to read something into a motion that wasn't there by declaring that the motion to sever its relationship with the USGenWeb Census Project, Inc. also meant (by reading between the lines) that the relationship with the domain name was severed, we will no longer actively support any National USGenWeb Special Project in our position as the NEGenWeb Project State Coordinator and NEGenWeb Project Advisory Committee. Our State website will follow the By-laws and we will provide the required links on our website, not necessarily on our main page. We will not encourage any of our volunteers to submit files to any national project. Our State Project will continue to serve the researchers who visit us at the State level." Public Disclosure Corner: Thanks to the beneficence of the IRS and the Freedom of Information Act, I have received the entire application for tax-exempt status for GenSoc.org, Inc., Root$web's mysterious non-profit. As you will recall, GenSoc was granted tax-exempt status in Jaunary 2000, but nary a word of this has escaped RW's lips in the last five months, except for a celebration party a few months ago to which most of RW's big donors were invited. As soon as I have a chance to sit at a scanner, you can see the application too. === "Thieves respect property. They merely wish the property to become their property that they may more perfectly respect it." ---G.K. Chesterton This has been your Daily Board Show. -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net ------- Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved. From merope@Radix.Net Tue May 16 10:29:41 2000 Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 10:29:40 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O X-Status: Better than sliced bread...its Your Daily Board S how! *warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk! Monday 15 May 2000-Tuesday 16 May 2000: Ginger Cisewski withdraws her motion requiring the webmaster place a link to the USGenWeb Census Project on the USGW home page. Jim Powell responds to Roger Swafford's concerns about the blackened logo and links to the Civil Disobedience page and an on the issue of poorly worded motions he says, "I have made motions that may not have been in the best "form". It is strange to me that the motions that some of us make are scrutinized more harshly than others, but I can live with that. I had good intentions with the last one that I made. The previous, better thought out motion was declared not in compliance with the Bylaws when it was removed for lack of a second." Jim also notes that "I have removed the links from my darkened logos in the spirit of compromise, but I will keep my darkened logos. I am not saying that it is "right" or okay. I am saying that I feel strongly that there was a serious violation of our Bylaws by our NC and in protest, I will leave my logos up. If there is a fair forum and the grievances are addressed, I will remove them, no matter what the outcome is." Jim notes that that he will read each and every piece of mail delivered to him on this issue, even the flames. Jim proposes a new motion, which Roger Swafford helped him to write [see below]. He says he will submit it later today and include any comments that the Board members may wish to make. === A Skunk By Any Other Name Corner: Back in the day when the Archives was at least pretending to be interested in amicably merging the two census projects, a major sticking point in the negotiations was the name of the project. Linda "Ethics" Lewis maintained that the name of the project _must_ remain the "Archives Census Project" in order to reflect not only its original name but also that it was part and parcel of the Archives. It was, more or less, one of the "non-negotiable" terms discussed in the several talks. Yet now the ACP is calling itself the "USGenWeb Census Project" on its home pages and in its correspondence to staff and transcribers. [cf. http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/census/]. Why might this be? One hypothesis making the rounds is that the ACP has conveniently dropped the word "Archives" from its name in order to continue using the CART program. Phil Beshear, CART programmer, has forbidden its use by the ACP, but phrased his notice of same to state that the program was solely for the use of the "USGenWeb Census Project". Voila! By dropping a single word from its name, the ACP can now continue to use a program that has been explicitly withdrawn from them and can continue to claim that the program was designed for them. At least one ACP staff member has been using official ACP project lists to encourage fellow ACP members to use CART: "We currently have three different custom transcription programs available, CTA, CART, and CENTRANS. Please choose the one that best meets your needs, all three were specifically developed for this project, and are perfectly acceptable for your use. While CART is in several ways the least preferable of the three available programs, you certainly may use all past and current versions of it in your work." [Kevin Fraley, USGW-CENSUS-STATE-COORDINATORS-L@rootsweb.com] [This message was originally sent on May 4, the same day that Phil Beshear published his notice that the ACP could not use CART. Yet another impressive display of "ethics", Archives-style!] Another hypothesis is that the "Archives" was dropped from the name of the project in order to bring the project into compliance with the bylaws and to claim the empty Census Project representative seat on the Board. Please note that that these hypotheses are not mutually exclusive. Given that elections are so close, I imagine that they will probably wait to fill the seat then, but I will bet a box of rocks that the election committee will be instructed to accept only nominees from the ACP. === "I guess I shouldn't be surprised that some members of the AB cannot even vote to take action on an issue that is clearly relegated to the AB. Why on earth can they not fulfill their responsibilities?" ---Nathan Zipfel, 15 May 2000, USGENWEB-ALL This has been your Daily Board Show. -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net ------- Daily Board Show, (2) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved. === Full text of Jim Powell's proposed motion: "I move to commit the consideration of the grievance submitted regarding SC/PAGenWeb -vs NC et al to a special committee as follows; 1) The committee shall consist of twelve USGW members selected by ballot from open nominations of candidates by each Advisory Board member in turn until sufficient candidates have been elected. A plurality shall elect Nominees shall consist of 7 CC's and 5 SC's no two committee members may be from the same state. 2) The Advisory Board shall elect a Committee Chairperson by ballot from the Committee membership. A plurality shall elect. 3) The committee is authorized to obtain any information deemed necessary for investigation of grievances, including but not limited to public and private e-mails, obtaining statements from the parties involved, and other USGW members as related to the investigation. 4) The committee shall meet on a closed archived e-list under the same restrictions of secrecy regarding deliberations as for executive session of the Advisory Board. 5) The committee deliberations shall adhere to accepted parliamentary procedures for committees and USGW bylaws. Nine members shall constitute a quorum for the conduct of committee business. A 2/3 majority of members voting on main motions is required for approval. 5) The committee Chair shall submit reports directly to the NC. The NC shall present the report to the AB only while in Executive Session. Recommendations of the committee are not binding upon the AB for administrative or disciplinary action toward the person(s) involved. Acceptance of the report does not constitute adoption. 6) Supplemental instructions may be given to the committee in accordance accepted parliamentary procedures." From merope@Radix.Net Wed May 17 12:03:14 2000 Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 12:03:13 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O X-Status: Making hay while the sun shines...its Your Daily Board Show! *warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk! Tuesday 16 May 2000-Wednesday 17 May 2000: Concerning Jim's proposed motion to form a committee to address grievances against the NC and Board members, Richard Howland responds "You think that we should set a precedent of each time that the NC or AB makes a decision that contrary to the feeling of some. We should have a committee to review the actions taken be the NC or AB. So when this committee makes a decision contrary to what some think we set up a committee to look in on the committee?" He then proposes a hypothetical scenario of numerous committees all reviewing each other's decisions and notes "If this seems redundant and boring it is. The NC made a decision. Then a majority of the board failed to over turn this decision." He asks "How would a committee who's recommendations that are not binding upon the AB for administrative or disciplinary action toward the person(s) involved help?" Rich considers that the "sky is not falling," and there are not plans for a coup by the NC. Instead there is "Just an attempt to stop one small group from smearing a good and proud organization. One who's day-to-day administration of was forced to be put on hold by continual deceptions." Rich recommends "Maybe it is time for you and others to support the USGWP, and not the people that wish to Inc. it for their own reasons." Richard moves "to declare the members displaying the assorted logos (know as protest logo's) to be found to be displaying inappropriate content, and in non-compliance with guidelines for web pages. I also move that they be found in "NOT" good standing with USGWP." [Which would have the added benefit of making everyone who protests the illegal actions of the NC and the Board ineligible to run in the upcoming elections. Nifty.] The motion is seconded by Maggie Stewart Zimmerman, who notes "The pages of the USGWP are not the place for our visitors to be seeing these protests. Complain in private if you must but keep a smile on the face of the USGWP's image to the public." Tim Stowell gives the motion number 00-12 and opens the floor for discussion. Ginger Hayes, noting "it would behoove us all to think about those comments and whether we really want to wander down the path suggested by Rich's motion," posts comments by Ellen Pack that originally appeared on USGENWEB-ALL. Ellen notes that she would "consider it a badge of honor were I to be delinked for displaying a blackened piece of clipart, on my counties, placed there as a quiet and dignified protest of what I consider to be illegal and unethical moves by the NC and AB." She reminds the Board that words such as "inappropriate content" and "bad image" are highly subjective and says "I am horrified that one person, or small group of persons, would attempt to exercise such extraordinary power and control over those who disagree with them." She suggests that it is not the protesters who are giving USGW the bad reputation and urges her representatives to vote no, should the motion come to a vote. Joy Fisher says she likes the blackened logos and moves to make them official USGW logos. This motion is seconded by GingerH. Jim Powell tells the Board that he has requested that USGW members using the black logos, which he designed, stop using them because "there is no sense in loosing any good volunteers over something that I feel I started." He says that some members have replaces the logos with a small black ribbon graphic with no link and says "Only those in the know, will know. It could mean anything in the world. If you disagree with that, you may want to add it to the motion." [Actually, Motion 00-12 is already written in such a way that it can inlcude _any_ graphic that the Board wishes to consider inappropriate. The specific blackened USGW logo is not mentioned.] Pam Reid thanks Richard for his motion and says "even though I respect these people and their work they are exhibiting blatant disregard for the standards set for State and County pages LONG before there were any bylaws. I completely understand that the people who are doing this are doing it in protest of what they believe to be a severe violation of the bylaws by the NC and the Board...However, there is no reason to add insult to injury by using these blackened logos. What is needed (and highly unlikely to happen) is a some kind of healing process." [Pam fails to explain how declaring project members not in good standing will facilitate any sort of healing process.] Pam says she feels like she's in a Civil War and says she didn't join the project for that sort of thing. She notes "we have abandoned our ideal of sharing and giving somewhere along the way and replaced those principals with an attitude of "who is right" and "who is wrong" and "do it my way or I will take my ball and go home". If USGW is to survive, we MUST find a way to settle our differences and continue our original goals of placing data online for the sake of researchers and for the sake of posterity. I am SO disappointed in all of us right now." Betsy Mills seconds this sentiment. Tim Stowell tells the Board he has appointed Kevin Fraley to serve as an "ombudsman". He describes the duties of this person as follows: "This person will be given the resposibility to look into, consider filed 'grievances' of one sort or another, to judge the merits of a case, as an impartial outside opinion. This person would make recommendations to the NC regarding their findings unless the grievance in question concerned the NC. In that case, recommendations would be made to the Advisory Board." [Kevin Fraley would hardly provide an "impartial outside opinion" in the grievances currently before the Board. He is a staff member of the ACP, has recently told people in that project they may use CART over the expressly stated wishes of its programmer, and has repeatedly written negative posts regarding the Census Project in which he called its members liars and thieves and supported the illegal delinking of the Census Project.] Pam asks Tim if this ombudsman thing is a "done deal" or does the Board have any say in it. Barbara Dore posts an excerpt from Roberts Rules of Order [1990 edition] in which provision is made for disciplining and/or expelling members of an organization who act to harm the organization. The topic covered is "Disciplinary Procedures; Offenses Elsewhere than in a Meeting; Trials" and reads in part: "If there is an article on discipline in the bylaws...it may specify a number of offenses outside meetings for which penalties listed at the top of page 639 can be imposed in a member of the organization. Frequently such an article provides for their imposition on any member found guilty of conduct described, for example, as "tending to injure the good name of the organization, disturb its well being, or hamper it in its work." In any society, behavior of this nature is a serious offense properly subject to disciplinary action, whether the bylaws make mention of it or not. If improper conduct by a member of a society occurs elsewhere than at a meeting, the members generally have no first-hand knowledge of the case. Therefore, if disciplinary action is to be taken, charges must first be preferred and a formal trial held before the assembly of the society, or before a committee---standing or special--- which should be required to report its findings and recommendations to the assembly for action." [Babs does not give the "penalties" from page 639. Yes, folks, you have just seen a USGW Board member propose witch trials against selected members.] Ginger Cisewski posts a snippet of a call for volunteers for an election committee and asks "when, where and how was this decided upon??" Richard posts a clarification of Motion 00-12, that "it is not a motion to delink. It is a motion to find these logos (know as protest logo's) as inappropriate and in non-compliance, and those displaying them to be "NOT" in good standing with USGWP." He then amends his motion to read "I move to find the logos (know as protest logo's) as inappropriate and in non-compliance, and those displaying them after 23:59 on 21 May, 2000 "NOT" to be in good standing with USGWP." === Taking My Toys and Going Home Corner: John Rigdon, Census Transcription Assistant [CTA] programmer, has rescinded permission for anyone to use the program if their transcriptions will be stored on Root$web. In a message sent to several project lists earlier today, John says: "As the author and copyright holder of the Census Transcription Assistant (CTA) I hereby rescind my permission to use the program today (May 17, 2000) for further transcriptions for use on any Rootsweb servers. Any pages posted on these servers in the future will be deemed to be in violation of my copyright unless my royalty fee of $25 per page has been paid to me...If Rootsweb is going to continue to benefit from my efforts, I intend to be compensated...Any and all monies I receive from royalties on this program will be used 100% for the original purpose of my writing the program - to provide FREE non-commercial access to census records." John expressly gives permission for the USGenWeb Census Project [headed by Ron Eason] permission to continue to use the CTA. Open Book Corner: John Jacoby, who briefly participated in merger talks between the two census projects back in the fall, has written to the head of the USGenWeb Census Project [Ron Eason's] and suggested that they open their mailing lists to members of the Archives Census Project. In return, the ACP would open its mailing lists to the CP members. He notes "Maybe, it will help solve some of the problems that plague our projects. At the very least, it would be interesting to get another point of view. I have to be honest. Their list [ACP's] isn't as active as yours." [What? Can't Linda "Moral" Lewis find anyone on the list to forward the CP's business to her?] Committee Business Corner: The Board is now soliciting volunteers for the Nominations Committee for the upcoming elections. If you are interested in volunteering, send an email to nominate_2000@yahoo.com by May 21. There is an elections page set up at: http://www.usgenweb.com/elections/election-central.html if you are interested in open positions. === "It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of citizens, and one of the noblest characteristics of the late Revolution. The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. They saw all the consequences in the principle, and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle." ---James Madison This has been your Daily Board Show. -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net ------- Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved. From merope@Radix.Net Thu May 18 14:47:06 2000 Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 14:47:05 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show cc: USGW-CC-L@usgennet.org Subject: Another proposed amendment to the USGW bylaws Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/ALTERNATIVE; BOUNDARY=MS_Mac_OE_3041500214_161058_MIME_Part Content-ID: Status: RO X-Status: --MS_Mac_OE_3041500214_161058_MIME_Part Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-ID: Another proposed amendment to the USGW bylaws. Read it all the way through. It really changes some things. We hear that Tim Stowell Himself is flogging this in various places. -Teresa === Current Version: ARTICLE XIII. SPECIAL PROJECTS Section 1. Special projects shall be established by The USGenWeb Project to promote the gathering of information in specialized areas. A coordinator shall be appointed by the Advisory Board to organize the project and enlist volunteers. In addition, each special project shall have an Assistant Project Coordinator or other support team in place that can take charge in case the Project Coordinator becomes unavailable for a period of 30 days, unless there are extenuating circumstances. Special projects shall be repositories for public domain or research documents and shall provide an easily accessible website for online research by the genealogical community. A collection of links does not constitute a special project, although links to appropriate websites maintained by other individuals or organizations are encouraged. Section 2. The name of the special project shall be The USGenWeb ______ Project Section 3. The staff members of The USGenWeb Archives Project, The USGenWeb Project, and The USGenWeb Tombstone Project shall each elect one Special Project Representative to serve as a voting member of The USGenWeb Project Advisory Board. Section 4. Project Coordinators shall be elected to those positions by the project staff. Section 5. Project Coordinators are subject to possible removal by a 2/3 vote of the Advisory Board and a 2/3 vote of the project staff. A quorum of 75% of the project staff shall participate in order for the vote to be binding. Section 6. If a Project Coordinator is unable to perform his/her duties, the Assistant Project Coordinator, or other support team, shall serve until an election can take place among the project staff. In the case of special projects with more than one Assistant Project Coordinator, they shall choose one among themselves to serve in the interim. ** Proposed Version: Article XIII. THE ARCHIVES PROJECT Section 1. The USGenWeb Archives Project shall have a Coordinator and an Assistant Coordinator or other support team in place that can take charge in case the Coordinator becomes unavailable for a period of 30 days, unless there are extenuating circumstances. The USGenWeb Archives(Digital Library) shall be a repository for public domain or research documents and shall provide an easily accessible website for online research by the genealogical community. Section 2. The name of the project shall be The USGenWeb Archives Project. Section 3. The staff members of The USGenWeb Archives Project shall elect one Representative to serve as a voting member of The USGenWeb Project Advisory Board. Section 4. The Archives Project Coordinator shall be elected by the project staff. The Coordinator in place at the time this section of the Bylaws is amended shall be exempt from election procedures, unless he/she is removed, resigns or is unable to perform his/her duties. Section 5. The Archives Project Coordinator is subject to possible removal by a 2/3 vote of the Advisory Board and a 2/3 vote of the project staff. A quorum of 75% of the project staff shall participate in order for the vote to be binding. Section 6. If the Archives Project Coordinator is unable to perform his/her duties, the Assistant Coordinator, or other support team, shall serve until an election can take place among the project staff. In the case of more than one Assistant Coordinator, they shall choose among themselves to serve in the interim. ** Other Proposed Changes: Article II. Section 2. Change "The USGenWeb Project Archives" to "The USGenWeb Archives Project" Article V. Change "one(1) representative each from The USGenWeb Archives Project, The USGenWeb Census Project, and the USGenWeb Tombstone Project," to "one(1) representative from The USGenWeb Archives Project," Article VI. Section 9. Change "and Special Project Representative" to "and Archives Project Representative" Change "with the Special Projects" to "with the Archives Project" Article VIII. Section 1. Change "Eight(8) voting members of the Advisory Board shall constitute a quorum." to "Seven(7) voting members of the Advisory Board shall constitute a quorum." Article XII. Section 2. Change "The USGenWeb Project Archives" to "The USGenWeb Archives Project" === --MS_Mac_OE_3041500214_161058_MIME_Part-- From merope@Radix.Net Thu May 18 15:53:31 2000 Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 15:53:30 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show [USGENWEB] Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: Taking it to the limit...its Your Daily Board Show! *warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk! Wednesday 17 May 2000: Ginger Cisewski forwards to the Board the letter from John Rigdon in which he rescinds permission for the use of the CTA program "for further transcriptions for use on any Rootsweb servers" but continues to allow the USGenWeb Census Project to use it [as they are no longer on RW]. Maggie Stewart Zimmerman does not object to Rich's amendment to Motion 00-12. [Tim has not yet numbered the motion to make the blackened "mourning" logos official.] === Giving Away the Store Corner: There's a new proposed amendment to the bylaws making the rounds that was supposedly composed by a small group of Board members and supporters. The amendment proposes to eliminate all "Special Projects" in favor of the "USGenWeb Archives Project". It proposes to replace all mention of "Special Projects" and "USGenWeb Project Archives" with "USGenWeb Archives Project." It would also eliminate two Board seats, those of the Tombstone and Census Project representatives. This proposed amendment places _all_ control of _all_ data transcribed for the USGenWeb Project under the control of one person [Linda Lewis], and will likewise insure that the data continue to make money for the for-profit RootsWeb.com, Inc. [This amendment was sent under separate cover.] Ask Me No Questions, I'll Tell You No Lies Corner: Our Esteemed NC Tim Stowell has been claiming on at least one project mailing list that the "USGenWeb Census Project has unsubbed and kicked out anyone who dared to raise their hand in protest to his [Ron Eason] and his admins moves. Furthermore, prospective volunteers were asked questions of a personal nature before being 'allowed' to join his 'group'." Despite requests for documentation of this claim Tim has failed to provide any evidence to support it. Tim has also been asked why some people are not allowed to subscribe to Board-L even though it is now an open "read-only" project mailing list. A county coordinator states "When I subscribed to Board-L in order to watch the motions votes etc. I was immediately unsubscribed , without reason or explanation. When I tried once more to subscribe I received an email from you Tim stating that I had been rejected from the list. I emailed you asking Why and received no response. Is this how the USGW is being run? If you do not agree you get rejected?" There is no answer from Tim on this one either, but this is the third person from whom I have heard a similar story. Linda "Ethics Is My Middle Name" Lewis has been publicly challenged to explain why the sudden the name change for the Archives Census Project [it has suddenly dropped the "Archives" from its name]. She has also not bothered to answer the question, but instead has retreated to her favorite refuge, the Root$web mailing list archives, which she has mined for old emails from people that used to support her but who no longer do. Fair and Impartial Hearing Corner: We've received a snippet of correspondence from one Kevin Fraley, who among his other duties for USGenWeb is the state coordinator for the Oregon portion of the ACP. Kevin has recently been unilaterally appointed to the post of "ombudsman" for the project by Tim Stowell. In response to a Census Project volunteer who was upset that Kevin was misrepresenting himself as a Census Project member, Kevin has this to say: "I am exactly whom I say I am, and my project is the USGenweb Census Project. It is also the only such project, despite the outrageous claims of the imposter group. You have clearly swallowed some enormous lies, I'm sorry for you. Nobody is making you do anything, we can easily use another proofreader. Incidentally, [name deleted] signed up originally for the former Archives Census Project, which no longer exists, now that all USGenweb sponsored census transcription projects have merged. She never at any time volunteered for Ron Eason's renegade project, either before or after Eason's termination from USGenweb. I will inform [name deleted] once again that you have changed your mind about proofreading [county] , and we will go forward from there. Another incidental is that [name deleted] is another of our Oregon transcribers and has publically condemned Ron Eason and Stacey Ochard and their illegal and outrageous behavior. Like it or not, USGenweb has only one census transcription project again, and thank God. Good luck in your future with that gang of unprincipled cutthroats, you will need it." [According to the OED, an ombudsman is "an official appointed to investigate complaints by individuals against maladministration by public authorities".] All the known grievances [and there are several] before the Board 1) are against the NC and some Board members; and 2) are concerned with the delinking and other actions against the Census Project. In addition to his sterling treatment of a project volunteer given above, Kevin has also been a vocal partisan supporter of and volunteer for the Archives, and fully supports the Board's actions in regard to the Census Project. Just how fair a hearing into the alleged "maladministration" do you think the submitters of the current crop of grievances are going to get from him? === "If you think of yourselves as helpless and ineffectual, it is certain that you will create a despotic government to be your master. The wise despot, therefore, maintains among his subjects a popular sense that they are helpless and ineffectual." ---Frank Herbert This has been your Daily Board Show. -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net ------- Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved. From merope@Radix.Net Fri May 19 20:48:37 2000 Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 20:48:33 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: Sent to bed without supper...its Your Daily Board Show! *warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk! Friday 19 May 2000: Gloria Mayfield says she agrees with Pam's sentiments [from May 16] "100%". [The motion to make the mourning logos official is still not numbered; Tim must be too busy to take care of that little "day to day" business.] === Takin' It to The Streets Corner: Maybe one reason why the Board is so quiet today is that many of them spent several hours online last night chatting up the good folks at MSGenWeb. MSGW is currently considering holding a vote on whether or not to issue a statement of "no confidence" in the Board and the NC, and their State Coordinator invited the Board members to attend a chat. Tim Stowell, Tina Vickery, Betsy Mills, Joy Fisher, Maggie Stewart Zimmerman, Barbara Dore, Holly Fee Timm, Rich Howland, Ginger Hayes, and Shari Handley showed up and answered questions about themselves and recent Board actions. As may be expected, they tried diligently to put a positive spin on the illegal delinking of the Census Project and the current motion to declare members of the project "not in good standing" for publicly protesting that illegal action. Particularly interesting is that the at least one board member who does not support the recent pogrom against the CP was not invited to participate in the chat. Turns out the invite was sent to Tim Stowell, who was supposed to forward it to all the Board members; guess he "forgot" some. Hot topics were the bylaws, the Census Project, the Archives, Linda "Shoot From the Hip" Lewis, and project malcontents and what to do about them. There were several interesting comments made during the chat: " and that's the way the bylaws are - open to interpretation" [Foggy is Tim Stowell] " The only way to properly express your opinion is at the ballot box." [Maggie Stewart Zimmerman] "...FWIW: I don't have a single file in the CP, ACP or ARCHIVES. I am NOT employed by RW." [Barbara Dore] " Sorry y'all, this is all fine and good, but I still find it ironic that an NC was drummed out of office for attempting the same intrepretation of "day to day operations" as is being touted now" [Ginger Hayes] " If anyone really cares to notice... it's NOt those who have a unquestioned loyality to the USGWP who are doing the screaming! Ask yourself WHY??" [Barbara Dore; who fails to realize that unquestioned "loyality" is not the same as blind obedience or blissful ignorance] " Jackie - that is a common misunderstanding, I think, that all those census files from Ron's project were lost. That is not the case. Isn't that correct, Maggie? [19:11] Correct Shari. [Shari Handley, and Maggie Stewart Zimmerman, who seems to be admitting that the ACP will be keeping the CP's files] " Amen, RootsLady. I haven't read such a *sensical* post as Corky's in a very long time. And Fred Smoot sent a nasty-gram in response. That's just plain mean-spirited, and that is the kind of junk I'm sick of seeing." [Shari Handley, referring to a post originally made on STATE-COORD-L] why wasn't the board consulted prior? why wasn't the board consulted prior??? why wasn't the board consulted prior to delinking? then (one more time) why wasn't the board consulted prior to delinking? let's see...."why wasn't the board consulted prior to delinking? Tim, please answer...why wasn't the board consulted prior to delinking? The board was consulted With this type of confusion over bylaws, I again ask...why wasn't the board consulted prior to delinking? Anyone care to answer that? answer this...why wasn't the board consulted prior to delinking? Boo - I didn't say that the Board was consulted or not consulted I've answered Mr/Mrs/Ms boo's question [Don't know who "boo" is, Richard is Rich Howland, and Foggy is Tim Stowell. "Boo" first asked her question at 21:07 and Tim claimed to answer it at 21:36. Many non-related comments were deleted, but the comments above appear in order. Apparently, Richard Howland was consulted on the delinking prior to it happening; was the rest of the Board? A quick perusal of Board-L in the days following the delinking would not lead one to believe that it was.] Partial chat is posted at http://www2.netdoor.com/~isumpin/msgw/MSGWchat.txt [it apparently covers the time that all the Board members were present; some of the above quotes occurred after the posted log was closed out] === "There is one safeguard known generally to the wise, which is an advantage and security to all, but especially to democracies as against despots. What is it? Distrust." ---Demosthenes This has been your Daily Board Show. -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net ------- Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved. From merope@Radix.Net Sat May 20 16:41:35 2000 Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 16:41:34 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: Nothing better to do on a rainy Saturday...its Your Daily Board Show! *warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk. Saturday 20 May 2000: Nate Zipfel withdraws his grievance against the Board and the National Coordinator, noting "I have come to the conclusion that the by-laws do not adequately address a procedure for the AB to follow in hearing a grievance. The recent announcement of the appointment of an Ombudsman (my esteemed colleague, the SC of Hawaii) would not based upon e-mail history that I've reviewed provide a fair and unbiased hearing of the grievance." Tim Stowell declares the motion to make the "mourning logos" a "frivolous motion" and says "it is now dead." [O, what raw power!] Tim opens the vote on Motion 00-12 "to find the logos (know as protest logo's) as inappropriate and in non-compliance, and those displaying them after 23:59 on 21 May, 2000 "NOT" to be in good standing with USGWP." No one has voted thus far. Teri Pettit responds to Ginger Cisewski's message from a couple of days ago noting that the decision to seek volunteers for the Election Committee was not made through any forum she was aware of. She does agree that proceeding with the Election Committee is timely, but doubts the advisability of: "(1) Deciding upon any election-committee-filling procedure without discussion. (2) Asking that volunteers send their notices of willingness to serve to a non-public email address...(3) Closing the request for volunteers only 4 1/2 days after opening it." She notes that the use of a private mailbox makes it easy for whoever is it managing it [and she doesn't know either] to "filter out volunteers" and would prefer that the Board "use the public BOARD-L to decide upon some procedure for filling the committee, and that whatever procedure it was, would be likewise conducted publicly, and that the committee would not be closed for at least 10 days." She also believes there should be "some rule to guarantee that the current Board...cannot filter out volunteers that they may disagree with. Something like saying that anybody who volunteers by a certain date is guaranteed a spot on the committee, or something else that gives us none of us any veto power over any volunteer." === Open Invitation Corner: Turns out that three of the five Board members who did not attend the MSGenWeb chat the other evening were not invited. Jim Powell was not invited by Tim, but did know of the chat through other means. He asked to have any questions sent to him by email during the chat, but none were. Teri Pettit says the Board members know she does not have access to IRC and would not invite her for that reason, but she did not see the invitation come over any Board forum to which she is subscribed [nor were the logs sent to her, as she requested] . Ginger Cisewski was not invited by Tim or any other Board member and did not know of the chat until after it occurred. Pam Reid and Joe Zsedeny have not responded to inquiries as to whether or not they were invited. === "Imagine hav[ing] the gall to have an opinion." ---Richard Howland, STATE-COORD-L, 20 May 2000 This has been your Daily Board Show. -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net ------- Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved. From merope@Radix.Net Sun May 21 14:53:34 2000 Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 14:53:33 -0400 (EDT) From: merope Reply-To: merope To: Daily Board Show Subject: Daily Board Show Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: Fighting like cats and dogs...its Your Daily Board Show! *warning* contains editorial content. Read at your own risk! Saturday 20 May 2000--Sunday 21 May 2000: In response to a question from a constituent regarding the determination of the regions for this year's election, Teri Pettit writes "Since terms are staggered, it would be rather awkward to rearrange the regions...It would require a pretty compelling reason to justify making such a change. Should one of us formally move that we keep the same regional divisions as the last election?" Voting continues on Motion 00-12; thus far eight Board members have voted "yes" and two have voted "no". [Folks, this travesty is going to pass; those of you are intending to run for office or vote in the upcoming election had better get those logos --indeed, ANY logo the Board might take offense to-- off your web pages, pronto.] While placing his vote on Motion 00-12, Joe Zsedeny notes "Consistency and conviction compels me to support this motion because the actions against which it was put forth also violates the ByLaws. We can't have it both ways, support what you like and ignore when it's convenient." Teri Pettit responds that she doesn't think its fair for Joe to characterize "no" votes on Motion 00-12 as "ignoring the bylaws when its convenient." She notes "Motion 00-12 is precisely to answer that question, "are the protest logos in violation of the Bylaws, or are they allowed under the Bylaws?" People can have different opinions on that question without 'ignoring' any of the Bylaws...I cannot find anything in the Bylaws that would disallow a protest display so long as it did not modify a copyrighted graphic...There is a Section (IX.1) that requires "prominent display of The USGenWeb Project logo on the home page", but Motion 00-12 is not to find failure to display The USGenWeb Project logo non-compliant..It is instead to find display of the "logos known as protest logos" non-compliant...If you and others see something in the Bylaws that prohibits protest logos that don't modify a copyrighted graphic being displayed...then you certainly have the right to your interpretation. But it is not fair to suggest that those who don't find anything in the Bylaws that prohibits protest graphics are somehow supporting what they like and ignoring the Bylaws when its convenient for them." Tim Stowell responds that he doesn't think Joe was referencing how AB members voted on the motion, but was instead "refering to the actions of those who caused the motion to be written in the first place." While making her vote on Motion 00-12, GingerC notes "This Motion is far to vague to be supportable and opens the door to a vatiety of abuses. Which logos qualify as "protest logos"? Who is going to police the pages to ferret out those logos deemed "protest logos"??" She wonders if a "Policing Committee" will be necessary to make sure no one is displaying any logos the Board deems to be "protest logos". In response to the questions asked by Teri Pettit regarding the election committee, Tim Stowell says "If you don't read your mail - for the invitation to the MS chat or the note about Elections - you of course won't know what's happening." Ginger Cisewski notes that she also "received nothing regarding the formation of an election committee or any invitation to the MS chat." === One Big Happy Family Corner: Our Esteemed National Coordinator Tim Stowell informs me that it is his understanding that my offer to volunteer for the Elections Committee has been received. No word yet on the status of my grievance against him and other Board members though. === "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." ---Samuel Adams -Teresa Lindquist merope@radix.net ------- Daily Board Show, (c) 2000 by Teresa Lindquist, all rights reserved.