NOVEMBER 2005 DBS

Wednesday, November 30, 2005
A Hard Rain Is Gonna Fall
Somewhere over the rainbow...its Your Daily Board Show!

BASIC ACCOUNTING: In its formal meeting, the Board continued to discuss the EC's proposed slate of volunteers. NC Linda forwarded a response to Mike's questions from EC Chair Tina "Rewriting History" Vickery, who noted that the EC received 10 responses to its call for volunteers and that only one of the volunteers has previously served on the committee. When Mike noted that he would like to know to which regions the EC plans to initially assign its new members, Linda essentially told him it was none of the Board's business and that she'd like to move the whole process along so that the EC could start training its new members. Mike pressed the issue and noted "This is the first time there has just been a list without indicating where they would begin their service. I'd prefer to continue that precedent. Is there any reason not to?" Tina responded, "...the call for volunteers is non-region specific. While the assignments may very well fall within those parameters, the presentation of the slate to the Advisory Board did not include it...I would like to see...a "buddy system", with remaining EC members mentoring the new members. Assignments will be made when all are seated." [In other words, MYOB.]

In response to David's comment, NC Linda noted "Originally an EC member was selected from a particular region and was assigned that region's membership list...the procedures were changed... because there were instances when there was no volunteers for a particular region and sometimes a member resigned and another member, not of that particular region, had to step in and take over." [She did not address David's observation that the EC's website is apparently out of date.] On the informal list, Jeff suggested leaving approval of the EC slate until the December meeting, but this suggestion was ignored. On the formal list a couple of hours later he moved "to accept the slate as indicated herein," and George Waller seconded it. Motion 05-24 was opened for discussion by NC Linda last night but thus far there has been none. We predict that the slate, as all slates before it, will be approved.

[There are a couple of interesting side notes to this proposed slate. First, a little bird has sung outside our window and put forth the interesting speculation that one of the EC's proposed new members is a "shell" person for current EC member Nola Duffy. Allegedly, this person has held a county in NCGenWeb on Nola's behalf for years, and our little feathered friend suspects that she will be Nola's ticket to continue on the EC if Nola is pressured to step down as a result of her unseemly attack on a Project member. We think its unlikely, but stranger things have happened. A couple of other Project members have written to discuss Betsy "Large And In Charge" Mills' sudden interest in the EC. We figured she's just bored not having her fingers in a national pie, but we are told that Tina is apparently already beginning to fret about her successor. If we were her, we'd worry more about our legacy, but that's just us. We've always assumed they are grooming Boy Wonder Josh Taylor for the job since he is already handling a quarter of the EC's positions, but perhaps they feel that he is not mature or vicious enough to face down the howling opposition that will no doubt track his every move. Betsy easily fills both those job requirements and has the added benefit of absolutely not caring about the real or apparent legality of anything she does, so long as it advances the usual suspects' agenda. At the very least, she'd be cracked from the same mold that produced all of the other EC Chairs, and we can see how that might comfort Tina when she considers the future.]

WILL WONDERS NEVER CEASE: Yesterday, NC Linda forwarded not one but two of the EC's delinquent quarterly reports, leaving them just one in arrears. Given the brief and obviously slapped together nature of the reports, it is not surprising that at least one of them contains glaring errors. The EC's second quarter report, covering the months of April, May, and June, supposedly reports the "final slate of candidates" for the July election, but it is missing three races entirely and numerous candidates in other races are not listed. [It appears that the list of candidates is actually the list of candidates who participated in the runoff election]. As one Board member noted in another forum, "A pretty sloppy report that doesn't name all the candidates," and as we have noted previously, we certainly hope they pay more attention to detail when they are deciding who is fit to vote. We eagerly await the third quarter report and hope it won't take it another seven months to get it.

ROUNDING OUT THE FIELD: Both Jeff Scism and Sundee Maynez have volunteered to serve as mediators, bringing the Board up to six candidates for five mediator slots.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Asking no quarter since 1998

posted by merope at 6:10 AM 2 comments   
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Back In The Saddle
Gone but not forgotten...its Your Daily Board Show!

TANNED, RESTED, AND READY: The Board reconvened yesterday morning and the first order of business was filling the vacant mediator slots. NC Linda noted there were four volunteers [The Other Linda, Darilee, Cyndie, and Karen, to refresh your memory] and asked if anyone else was interested in serving. Sundee claimed to have also previously volunteered but we can find no record of this in the Board's public mail.

NC Linda also forwared the following slate of volunteers for the Election Committee: Donna Allen, Jo Branch, Debbie Gerischer, Nancy Janyszeski, Betsy Mills [told you she'd wash up again somewhere], Winona Solomon, and Denise Wells. Linda asked for a motion to approve the slate of volunteers, but a couple of Board members decided they wanted to discuss the issue first. Mike wanted to know how many members volunteered to serve on the EC and if any of the proposed members had previously served on the EC. David wondered why the prospective volunteers haven't been "matched up" with their prospective position on the EC as in past years.

Over on the informal list, Jeff asked for additional comments on his upcoming motion to establish a standing bylaws committee. He noted, "...the...motion would establish a Standing Bylaws committee...and the purposes of the standing committee would be more than just coming up with bylaws proposals. This motion specifies that the revision have the goal of separating procedures from structural rules, and that the authority be granted to adjust such processes by simple voting majority of the Advisory Board. The actual changes to any of the existing procedures will be the subject of future discussion and recommendations of the Committee." Mike is in favor of a standing bylaws committee, with "a broader function than Jeff has spelled out so far," and requested more time to discuss the issue. Jeff graciously granted him two whole days for additional discussion, and noted that he intends to formally introduce the motion when the Board convenes its December meeting.

IN OTHER NEWS: The Grievance Procedures Committee has been silent for a week now. Our old friend Nate Zipfel is the new SC of MTGenWeb, and his new ASC is Vicki Gray. Over in MSGenWeb, which has labored under the thumb of Ellen Pack since dirt was new, Lori Thornton is the new SC and Deb Haines the new ASC. Gratz to all!

CATCHING UP: Wherein we follow up on some old news stories. In OHGenWeb, the members are currently voting on the first section of a motion to establish procedures for holding meetings and revising bylaws. After some concern about the lack of a confidential voting mechanism, the OHGW SC established a mechanims whereby members could send their votes privately to her and to one other party. Daryl Lytton's suspension has been lifted and he is once again posting to the state mailing list. In IAGenWeb, we've heard, some members were threatened with expulsion after our story about immediate past SC Sharyll Ferral, who now sits on the GPC. Apparently she is now IAGW's page police and she is allegedly using that position to harrass members she thinks might have dissed her to the press. A couple of KYGW members have written in response to Nancy Trice's comments of last week. One described the fallout from the announcement of the revitalized KY Records Repository as including "273 emails flying across KYGEN that got nasty and malicious and created hurt feelings...so that 3-4 CC's have quit, taking approx 5-6 counties. Another ACC has refused to have 5,000 pages of information contributed to 4 counties included in the Repostitory...the counties that are adoptable haven't been officially announced as such by the SC although the CC's publicly resigned." Apparently the process by which the KRR was instituted wasn't viewed as benignly by the membership as some members of KYGW would have liked it to have been.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Same old, same old since 1998

posted by merope at 6:15 AM 0 comments   
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
Out The Door
Free the turkeys!...its Your Daily Board Show!

WRAPPING UP: The Board is about to leave for its holiday recess and there has been very little activity on either of its public business lists. The Other Linda volunteered to serve as a mediator and thanked former Webmaster Mike Jarvis.

PARTING SHOT: The DBS newsbunker was graced with a visit by former NC and KYGW SC Nancy "Sold My Soul To Root$web" Trice, who apparently took a great deal of umbrage at our report on the KY Records Repository. It seems we failed to grasp the deep significance of the project. Anyways, here's her rebuttal:

"I spent over 7 yrs as SC watching one person after another leave...and take everything that had been contributed to the county with them...I myself was an original CC for a Colo. county who put up...info sent to me...as well as my own data, all of which has disappeared over time...I asked Sherri Hall what she thought of the idea of creating a "Vault" or "Records Repository", under the control of the SC, where a copy of contributed data could be placed for safekeeping...Sherri thought it was a good idea. We asked Suzanne Shepherd if she would head it up until it was up and running. Suzanne agreed...A committee was formed and the idea was put before the CCs for discussion and ultimately a vote of all the CCs and ACCs, the majority of which was in agreement. During this same vote a name was also selected by the CCs. There are no "regions" as you reported and no one has yet been "selected" for anything. The call has gone out to find out which CCs are interested in uploading their own info and/or volunteering to do it for other counties...Using the Repository is 100% voluntary...Who told you that Suzanne Shepherd had the "only key"?...The pw for the acct has been given to the people who need it, just as it will be given to those who need it in the future...Bottom line here is that those of us who want to be sure there is always a copy of our info available for our researchers can create that backup copy and put it where it will always be available...and we can do so without putting the files in Linda Lewis' Archives...None of us that want to see this happen have any interest in trying to steal anyone's work or in trying to make an 'html archives'.

There you have it. We have no idea which version of events is correct, or which parts of which version of events are accurate. We will just note that in a message on the KYGen list from two days ago, Suzanne did mention that CCs would be assigned to groups of counties and be responsible for uploading data from those counties; although the word "region" wasn't mentioned in that message, we are assured that its been used in other correspondence. And just as an aside, Nancy seems pretty convinced that there's but one malcontent who is sending us "hogwash." But judging from our inbox, there are quite a few KY CCs who are a bit alarmed at the sudden resurrection of this project and the effort that is going into it. Some of them do believe quite seriously that they will be pressured to contribute and their dedication and loyalty will be questioned if they do not.

PREPARE TO GET STUFFED: Since the Board will be recessing, the DBS will also retire to our tropical island compound for a little R&R. As usual, the lowest n00b intern will be manning the wires in case anything interesting goes down. We hope all our readers have a happy holiday, that you all eat more than is good for you, and that everyone has something to be thankful for this year.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Thanking our lucky stars since 1998

posted by merope at 7:30 PM 0 comments   
Monday, November 21, 2005
Desolation Row
Counting our chickens before they hatch...its Your Daily Board Show!

DAILY REHASH: On the formal list, NC Linda welcomed Julie McGrew-Ayres onboard as the new Webmaster and noted, "Julie is now busy working on several things that will not only improve the looks of the site but increase its usability." Parliamentarian Josh Taylor agreed to abide by Linda's gag rule so that he too can play in the Sekrit Sandbox.

Over on the informal list, the Board once again jumped the rails and started discussing something other than the EC's proposed guidelines changes, namely revising the bylaws. Jan recommended that the Board form a standing committee "...that takes up areas within the bylaws that have been identified as problem areas and each passed individually. It would seem more prudent to take care of these areas before any changes are made as far as aliases and EC procedural changes." David Morgan disagreed and thought it imprudent to wait another four years [which is how long the last Bylaws Revisions Committee took to put forward doomed amendments] before they address the issue of aliases. Undeterred by this tiny voice of reason, Jeff "Always Do It The Hard Way" Scism proposed another of his several paragraphs long motions. Basically it can be shortened to "form yet another standing bylaws revisions committee, move all the procedural stuff to a document that the Board can change at the will of a majority of its members, use this committee to decide when infractions of the bylaws have occurred [yay, more police!], and allow this committee to pass judgement on all future proposed bylaws revisions regardless of their source." David jumped the gun with a NO vote on this proposed motion and Darilee Bednar just sort of shook her head over the whole thing.

BONUS QUOTE: "Why do I feel that you never listen to anything I say...and that you speak another language then I do..." --Darilee Bednar, to Jeff Scism

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Nothing up our sleeves since 1998

posted by merope at 5:55 AM 0 comments   
Sunday, November 20, 2005
Hunters And Gatherers
Dreaming of stuffed turkey...its Your Daily Board Show!

EXTREME MAKEOVER: On the formal list, NC Linda formalized the appointment of Julie McGrew-Ayres to the Webmaster position after 13 Board members agreed to the appointment. She also thanked outgoing Webmaster Mike Jarvis for his "outstanding job on the national web site."

Linda next announced that the Board is currently playing with a couple of grievances in the Sekrit Sandbox and that the Board felt it necessary to invite Parliamentarian Josh Taylor to sit in on playtime. So Linda insulted him by asking him if he would agree to the same gag order she imposed on everyone else. At press time he had not responded. Linda also called for volunteer mediators [we wondered when she would get around to that] to handle these grievances; thus far, Darilee Bednar, Cyndie Enfinger, and Karen de Groote-Johnson have volunteered.

There has been no further discussion of the EC's proposed guidelines changes.

TIT FOR TAT: One of the grievances on the Board's plate may be the one allegedly filed a couple of days ago by Daryl Lytton against Nola Duffy. Nola, who is the EC's Publicist/Secretary, apparently spent much of two full days sending harrassing and abusive emails to Daryl in which she threatened to adopt a county in OHGW so that she could continue to harrass him in a public venue. Although they have a history together from their time in NCGW, Nola apparently contacted Daryl out of the blue when she found out he is the person that has been giving OHGW SC Sandra Quinn fits over the last couple of weeks. In these emails, Nola threatens to expose Daryl as "the biggest liar the USGenWeb has ever seen," to willfully cause him "more emotional stress," and to personally make it her business to see to it that he does not get "too out of line and irrational." Now, normally we would think that personal email exchanged between two people is just that, personal email exchanged between two people. Neither Daryl nor Nola is a good poster child for civility and rationality, so if they want to flail at each other in private email they are welcome to go to it.

Funny thing is, though, we can't find evidence that our Miss Nola is a CC anywhere other than NCGenWeb. She's publicly stated before that she has no desire to do anything but be a CC in her little corner of the genealogy world. By a perhaps not so odd coincidence, OHGenWeb is in a different corner of the genealogy world, one in which she'd be allowed to vote in another regions's elections. So here we have a member of the EC threatening to take on a county so she can harrass another volunteer and disrupt state business, and as an added benefit get herself another vote. We seem to recall the EC once upon a time expressing some distress over those supposed members of USGenWeb who adopt counties and sit on them so they end up with votes in different regions. Perhaps someone over there can talk her out of her current temper tantrum.

Does this little hissy fit rise to the level of a grievable offense? Probably not, at least not until Nola makes good her threat to join a state in which she has no genealogical interest solely to get a public platform to attack another volunteer. And we sincerely doubt that Sandy will allow that to happen. At least, we hope Sandy won't allow that to happen. Although we do suppose Miss Nola could always make herself an alias to get in the door.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Clear on the concept since 1998

posted by merope at 7:25 AM 1 comments   
Friday, November 18, 2005
State Of The Union
All's well that ends well...its Your Daily Board Show!

PASSING THE BATON: Yesterday, Linda Haas Davenport asked the Board members to indicate their agreement or disagreement with the appointment of Julie McGrew-Ayres to the webmaster position. At press time, 11 Board members have signaled agreement with the appointment, and it looks like Julie will be our new webmaster.

There was no further discussion of the issue of aliases or the proposed EC guidelines on either of the Board's lists.

STATE OF THE STATES: The Board is quiet, but there's all kinds of stuff going on out in the hinterlands. Some of this stuff has already trickled up to the Board, and some involves sitting Board members, so lets take a look.

GO WEST, YOUNG MAN: Our first stop is OHGenWeb, which just can't seem to keep itself out of the news. On the State-Coordinators list a couple of the SCs suggested that Sandy just get rid of her rogue CC or, failing that, shut him up by preventing him from posting to the state list. And yesterday that is exactly what she did. After Daryl made a short and very bland post to the public list suggesting that she should ask the CCs what they want and then actually listen to them, Sandy moderated him on the state list for "sending harassing emails both publicly and privately which are against the Email Code of Ethics for OHGenWeb." She also noted that "he will be reinstated when the /*group*/ establishes procedures for these types of actions." Unfortunately, however, such an open-ended punishment [and Sandy's method of imposing it] are against OHGW's existing rules, which require not only that specific procedures be followed prior to moderation, but that moderation last no more than one week. When this was pointed out to her, Sandy retracted the endless punishment provision of Daryl's sentence, but also threatened all the other CCs with removal if they forwarded messages from Daryl to "any list." Sadly enough, one of her CCs actually had to tell her that "moderation" is not the same as "banning," and that one of her duties as SC should she choose to moderate a CC is to read their posts to the list and forward those that do not violate list rules. Although Sandy tried to retract and clarify her earlier statements, its still not clear that she has any grasp of the concept at all.

As a small side-note to all this, Election Committee member Nola Duffy has decided to personally threaten Daryl because of his interest in OHGW politics. In a letter to him forwarded to us by a little bird, she informed him of her intention to get a county in OHGenWeb and see to it personally that everyone in OHGW knows of his past in other projects [namely IIGS and NCGW]. Now if Sandy wants to see an example of a threatening, harrassing, vicious, spittle-flying letter, Nola's would be a sterling example. Daryl has been sending Sandy boxes of chocolate in comparison.

WHAT'S YOURS IS OURS: The next stop on our tour is KYGenWeb. A year ago or so [probably the last time the issue of CCs running off with the goods surfaced] a group of KYGW members, including Sherri Hall, Nancy Trice, Carole Palmer, Josh Taylor, Bill Utterback & Suzanne Shepherd, came up with the idea of creating an off-site repository where CCs could deposit their entire websites for safe-keeping. Some members of KYGW have taken to calling this the "Vault", but its official name is the "KY Records Repository." A committee was formed to develop guidelines and present them to the state for approval, but the committee ended up just going forward with implementing the idea. They set up regions and appointed members responsible for warehousing the websites from each region. When this was announced, there was a great furor among the state members [who probably couldn't remember ever voting on this], and Suzanne Shepard allegedly made an unfortunate comment that anyone who opposed the idea and refused to participate was probably planning to sneak off in the night with their website and all their data. After the hubbub died down, though, people forgot all about the project and it was apparently moribund. A couple of weeks ago, however, it was resurrected and Suzanne announced that it was ready for submissions.

Now, on its face, such a website repository is not a bad idea. CCs should be encouraged to think of it as a free backup, and backups are good. But many of the KYGW CCs are more concerned about simple procedural details. The KYRR is apparently truly a "vault" and only one person, Suzanne Shepard, has the key. And although the project is at this time not mandatory and members are free not to participate, there is nothing to prevent Suzanne or anyone else from just copying someone's website into the vault without telling them. No submission guidelines have been forthcoming, so no one is sure what protections exist for the CCs who choose to submit their websites or for those who choose not to submit their websites. No one is sure that websites can or will be removed from the vault if CCs decide they don't want to participate after all. And the vault itself is not viewable by anyone but the Keymaster, so no one knows what it is really in it. Many members suspect that this is a way to get full copies of materials held off of Root$web, so that websites can easily be moved in whole to that server if a CC gets fired. And more than a few fear that participation in the vault will become mandatory and nonparticipation grounds for dismissal in short order. Others worry that this is little more than a ploy to move data from the local site into a central repository, creating a de facto HTML archives. Several of the movers and shakers of the KYRR [Nancy, Sherri, Suzanne] are big fans of the Archives project and don't much like that USGenWeb's rules settle ownership of websites and data onto the CCs instead of with the state or national projects. This vaulting project is believed to be their first steps toward changing that focus in KYGenWeb.

LAND OF NUTS AND ALPACAS: We love California, really we do. Truly, it is a paradise on earth. Which is why are going all the way to the Left Coast for the next tour stop. Once upon a time ago, a couple of CAGenWeb members came into a trove of historical records they wanted to transcribe and post online. They obtained space on the server that belongs to CAGW SC Richard Wilson, who was interested in forming an independent CAGW Archives because the USGenWeb Archives Project version of that state was so crappy. The California Genealogy and History Archives was born and eventually grew to over 10,000 files, the majority of them transcribed by the original founders, but with some donated by others. In spring of 2005 Joy Fisher [of the crappy Archives] claimed that a file in the CAGHA repository was a copyrighted file taken from another site [gawd, that is rich], and although the file was immediately removed the incident provoked an unpleasant and stressful dispute that ended with the two founders resigning from the project. It is probably no coincidence that the discussion turned ugly just about the time CAGW ASC Jana Black got involved in it [or so the little bird says].

Richard managed the CAGHA himself for a bit but then turned it over to Jana, who apparently managed to do very little with it for months, other than fail to post donations and plot to move the whole kit and kaboodle over to Root$web. The direction, or lack thereof, of the CAGHA greatly bothered the two founders and in September 2005 they requested that the project be returned to their guidance. Jana is reported to have objected to this mightily, since the co-managers intended to move the archives to a private server where they had arranged to personally pay for space to house the files. Jana claimed there is a policy that all CAGW sites must remain on Richard's server [patently untrue; there is no written policy and there are several county sites that aren't housed on his server], and that the co-managers needed her supervision. Jana also claimed that the project itself and all the files belonged to CAGW because the two co-managers had agreed to work for that project. When it was pointed out to her that the USGenWeb guidelines and bylaws are pretty clear that data belongs to the transcribers and websites belong to their creators, Jana claimed that state-based web sites have different criteria than county sites, and that the files and the web site belong to CAGW under those different criteria. [We imagine she failed to cite those "different criteria" because they don't actually exist anywhere but her imagination.]

Richard returned the CAGHA to its founders, who did indeed move it off his server to a private server, where it continues to function as CAGenWeb's archives. Everyone appears happy with this state of affairs but Jana, who objected voceriferously [and no doubt with many asterisks] to the move and encouraged CAGW members to file formal complaints about the matter to the Advisory Board. She herself claims to have done so, although on what grounds we haven't a clue, and she apparently also told the CAGW CCs that she has a great understanding of national level politics and much influence at the national level due to her stint as a Board member a few years ago. Then she resigned her position as Assistant State Coordinator. [So we must conclude that every cloud does indeed have a silver lining]. This appears to be more or less a happy conclusion to this tale, since we can't imagine the Board will do any more with this complaint [if she actually made one] than decide it is without merit.

BONUS QUOTE: "I have always told you if you started it again, I would be watching and I am. I have every intention of trying to get a position as CC on Ohio and when I do, we will see how you like the truth!" --EC member Nola Duffy to Daryl Lytton

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

posted by merope at 10:35 AM 2 comments   
Thursday, November 17, 2005
Gardening At Night
Around in circles...its Your Daily Board Show!

FILL IN THE BLANK: On the formal list [and elsewhere], NC Linda announced that the Board is currently considering appointing Julie McGrew-Ayres to the vacant webmaster position and is also seeking a new assistant webmaster. Interested members can send their qualifications and samples of their work to Linda or to any regional representative. No time frame was given for this, and thus far no move to formally appoint Julie to the position has been made.

NIGGLING THE DETAILS: On the informal list, NC Linda tried to get the team focused and back on track in its discussions of the EC's proposed rule changes. First off, she faintly chastised them for "drifting off" into a discussion of who and who is not a member of the Project, and noted "The working premise for the past 8-10 years has been that a member must maintain a web site within the Project. For the purpose of finishing the EC's recommended procedural changes and the alias procedures we need to work under that premise." Then she indicated that she would be posting separate emails covering "the areas of the EC's proposed changes that have been discussed or questioned," to make it easier to address the various points that have been raised.

First up [and the only one at press time] is the issue of aliases. Linda [who is the only person we have heard use the term "clone" to describe what everyone else is calling an "alias"], summarized the various comments on this issue fairly succintly, from the fact that its not a crime to use aliases, members use them for valid reasons not related to making Tina Vickery's knickers bunch up, using aliases does not equal committing fraud, the small numbers of voters in some state and national elections makes it possible for well-placed aliases to affect the outcome of elections, and the members of the Project have a right to fair and honest elections. She then suggested that the Board may want to define alias, define an "alias" vs. a "clone", and decide whether or not these definitions should be enshrined in the EC's guidelines [where they will do no one any good] or formalized by a vote of the Board.

Thus far, only Jeff Scism has responded. He doesn't seem any more enamoured of using "clone" to describe fake people than we are, and noted, "...'Clone' is an incorrect term, a clone is an exact copy, an alias is a false name (AKA), but what we are calling clone in this piece are really "False identities, fictitious persons created to defraud." He helpfully posted a couple definitions of "alias" and "false identity" to clear things up, and somehow managed to imply that women who legally use their maiden and married names are somehow faciliting "identity crime."

OTHER SIDE OF THE TRACKS: The Grievance Procedure Committee is up and running. After a couple of introductory posts by the co-Chairs, the group started discussing Scott's set of suggestions. One item in particular, that the Grievance Committee should limit itself to violations of national or state level bylaws, guidelines, or established procedure, has been discussed widely over the last couple of days. Several members have pointed out that some states have their own grievance procedures and that these should take precedence over the national level processes. Any grievances subsequently brought to the GC for appeal should focus on whether or not those local processes were correctly applied and should not merely rehash the original complaint. The discussion, as well as some forwarded comments from Project members, is archived under USGW-GC; go read it.

OFF THE DEEP END: OHGenWeb SC Sandra Quinn has gone to the State Coordinators for help with a "problem CC", namely the one that recently filed a grievance against her with the Board over her handling of the OHGW talks on adopting state-wide policies. Here is the meat of her complaint: "I am abused privately and publicly...My state group wants to develop guidelines, I was abused for not starting this back in the summer...I was abused for how I wanted to form committees...now I am being abused for trying to follow...Paliamentary Authority and Sturgis. This person makes sure I am written about on the "Daily Board" by Theresa [sic] Lindquist...every positive thing I try to do this person twists...This CC who is harrassing me took over a county last November...after being fired in another state project for similar antics...and he was a competitor in the election with me. This CC has not worked on the county he took over and did not even list the previous CC's name on the county until...two weeks ago. This person filed a grievance with the AB and then withdrew it when support wasn't forthcoming."

[We have news for Sandy. The person she is referencing above is not among the OHGW members who ensure that she makes regular appearances in the DBS. There are actually quite a few OHGW project members who are alarmed by her on a regular enough basis that they keep us posted on OHGenWeb's various troubles.]

Sandy also attached a rather condescending but hardly hostile, abusive, or harrassing email from this "mystery" CC, in which he gave her apparently friendly advice on how to be a better SC. While we admit that we would find the advice quite patronizing if we received it in our inbox, unless he was sending us other mail of a more threatening nature we doubt we'd go crying off to our colleagues. Unfortunately, not all CCs are content to work on their pages; some also enjoy being in the thick of politics and more than a few are a bit dogged in their determination to "help" make USGenWeb a better place. This kind of CC goes with the territory and unless they are actually threatening you or others its probably best just to respond politely and move on. Getting rid of someone who disagrees with you in a less than genteel fashion is, well, rather tacky. [And no, distasteful as it is, being compared to Derick "The Mad" Hartshorn would not constitute immediate grounds for banishment.]

NC Linda's attempt to handle this issue in generic terms by posting a bland "what if" situation to the list backfired a bit. Most comments merely referenced existing guidelines in other states [which OHGW doesn't yet have] or talked about removing CCs who have already disappeared or abandoned their pages. [Although in one amusing response, Tina "Hammer of God" Vickery asked Linda how she handled rude or nitpicky list members, in an apparent attempt to make this issue a referendum on Linda's permissiveness list management. We guess Tina misses the old regime.]

We do note happily and entirely to give credit where credit is due that Sandy didn't just round file her mystery CC immediately like so many SCs [*cough* Tina *cough*] would have done. This would have been the easy way out and a tidy final solution, since the Board would never even consider supporting the mystery CC, regardless of the circumstances of his removal. Our girl is growing up.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Poking it with a stick since 1998

posted by merope at 6:20 PM 0 comments   
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
Apples And Oranges
Open the pod bay doors, Hal...its Your Daily Board Show!

CONTINUING BUSINESS: The Board continued to discuss the resignation of USGenWeb webmaster Mike Jarvis. Mike St. Clair suggested that the Board also recruit an assistant webmaster, and proposed the following: "Since the bylaws delegate the appointing of a webmaster to the AB, I suggest that we...announce on our national and regional lists that we are considering appointing our current assistant webmaster as the new webmaster, and that we are considering the appointment of an assistant webmster as well. Then ask project members who are interested...to notify a member of the Advisory Board...we should also ask for the submission of some details of their qualifications, and some examples of websites they have designed. Lastly I suggest we consider providing the names of members we consider qualified to our new webmaster...and let her recommend back to us the one she feels would make the best webmaster team with her." A couple of representatives felt this approach was a good idea, but it was not discussed further.

Also on the the formal list, Grievance Procedures Committee co-chairs Angie Rayfield and Scott Burow announced the public subscription information for the GPC's mailing list. The list is called USGW-GC and appears to have been named with the future Grievance Committee in mind. You may subscribe at USGW-GC-L-request@rootsweb.com. This list is publicly archived. Thus far, the committee has successfully introduced itself and elected its co-chairs, but there has been no business since the subscription instructions were announced.

A MIGHTY WIND: A brief discussion of a potential bylaws amendment on the alternate CC list led to this remarkable post by Jeff Scism [who as we recall runs off to poll his constituents for personal affirmation and reassurance whenever his mouth gets him in a jam]:

"I don't believe that every issue requires a poll of the region. If you do a poll on every vote, why not just have a General election on every vote?...If a elected representative is forced to always follow the polls then there is no direction and no goal attainment...if we are to have representative government, then there should be some effort extended to find out what the constituents want. What the constituents want isn't always the best answer either...The best and most clear decisions are made by one well informed person...we have to be able to decide based on our information, and our "abilities" - both how to make decisions, and how to compromise to reach accord, while balancing the best results for our constituents...in general No I don't always agree that what the people want is best for them."

BTW, the proposed bylaws amendment that got Jeff [who apparently considers himself to be that "one well-informed person"] up on that high horse would require the Board to announce upcoming votes seven days in advance in order to give the membership time to comment. This is an intriguing idea. It would slow down Board business considerably, [although there is no reason they can't work on other things in the seven day comment windows], but it would indeed give everyone who wanted to comment on Board business time to do so. It would also force a "cooling down" period on the Board prior to any vote, something they need with some regularity. We can't think of too many things that need to be rushed to a vote, and it would be possible to create an exemption for truly urgent business. We will note, however, that the requirement for 48 hours notification has been in the bylaws since 1998 and to our knowledge it has never been honored. There is no reason to believe that the Board would honor a seven day notification requirement any better.

MUDDLING THROUGH: The recent crisis in OHGenWeb has thankfully settled down again. Yesterday, SC Sandy Quinn forwarded a message from Board members Mike St. Clair, Jeff Scism, George Waller, and Jan Cortez which stated, "We applaud OHGenWeb in working toward a set of procedures that the majority of the CCs can approve of by vote. It is up to the members to decide on whether they accept what is proposed and what Parliamentary Authority they wish to use...As long as those procedures do not conflict with the National bylaws and they are voted upon by the members of OHGenWeb we feel that this _is_ the spirit of the USGenWeb." Unfortunately, Sandy posted this email message under the title: "Grievance dismised by members of the AB, withdrawn by Daryl Lytton," which apparently took more than a little creative license with the actual sequence of events. Daryl responded: "that wasn't a formal statement from the AB...It was a note from several members of the AB...that I had selected based on their fairmindness. The grievance was not dismissed...by the AB. I withdrew the grievance because the USGenWeb bylaws can't be interpreted based on fairness, or the spirit of the meaning, they can only be interpreted by the letter...Until we have our own rules in place...the SC does not have to abide by the wants of the majority of the CCs...something I suggest we change, so the SC represents the CCs instead of the SC." With this grievance behind them, the members of OHGenWeb have now returned to peaceable discussion of the development of state guidelines.

BONUS QUOTE: "He who blows with the wind, goes with the wind". --Jeff Scism

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Blowing in the wind since 1998

posted by merope at 6:00 AM 1 comments   
Monday, November 14, 2005
Slouching Toward Bethlehem
Assume the position...its Your Daily Board Show!

MOVIN' ON UP: On the formal list, NC Linda announced that USGenWeb webmaster Mike Jarvis has resigned, citing competing obligations. Mike recommended that his assistant Julie McGrew-Ayres take over for him, and Linda indicated that Julie is "willing to assume the position." Linda asked for discussion on this appointment and thus far none of the Board members have objected, although one noted that she was sorry to see Mike leave and another suggested that they thank Mike for his hard work.

Also on the formal list, Sundee Maynez informed the Board that she may be unavailable for an indeterminant length of time due to illness. [Which reminds us, we haven't seen hide nor hair of Bettie Wood for some time now.]

THE LONG WAY AROUND: Over on the informal list, Angie and Jeff continued to debate membership as defined in the bylaws. Angie noted that "even if you believe that eligibility for membership automatically confers that membership...there's nothing in Article IV's "application" that isn't as written...Elsewhere, the by-laws specifically list different "categories" of membership, and defines their duties. If someone doesn't fall into any of those categories of membership, why would they have a right to vote in our project?" Jeff pointed out, again, that "There is a distinct difference between membership and voting class," and noted, again, that "The argument isn't that the Article IV provision is too general, it is that the section in the EC Procedures makes requirements for membership that are not allowed by the bylaws." His recommended solution is to amend the bylaws and he provided some recommended text:

"Membership in the USGenWeb Project is determined by participation in a State Organization or a Special Project sanctioned by the USGenWeb Project, Requirements to be a member are defined by active association with a sanctioned website as a Coordinator, or Assistant Coordinator, and will be verified by the state or Project coordinator to the Elections sub-committee for Voting eligibility. A voting registration process is required to vote in the USGenWeb Project elections as determined by the Advisory Board. Process for voting and other voting issues amy be seen in the Elections Committee standards."

[While this isn't the least productive Board discussion we've ever seen, it really is going nowhere fast. The Board can't amend the bylaws by itself, and Jeff can recommend bylaws amendments until his face is blue and the cows come home and it will accomplish diddly. He needs to be taking his case to some state or other for sponsorship if he's serious about it. We will admit though, that we do like the idea of the Board telling the EC, "Sorry, we can't consider your latest power grab proposal until we get the bylaws amended. So we'll take this up again next year. See ya!"]

RANDOM QUOTE: "We have never known the EC to seek more power than necessary, and it is not happening today." --LindaEllenTina

That little gem was included in NC Linda's "damage control" post of a couple of days ago. We find it instructive for any number of reasons, not the least of which is its fairly bold admission that the EC is indeed seeking to expand its power. That they feel such power is "necessary" in these troubled times is more than a little scary. We have some little experience with how these people willfully abuse the power they already have; the idea of a few fake voters slipping through the cracks is somehow not nearly as depressing as the possibility of the usual suspects having ultimate power over who gets to vote, the option of cutting the SCs completely out of the voter verification loop, and the right to deny due process to any Project member they choose.

We have a little game we sometimes like to play whenever we think we might want to recommend a change in guidelines or bylaws to increase someone's power within the Project. No matter how expedient that change would be, or how much it might produce an immediately desireable outcome, we try to imagine that power in the hands of absolutely the scariest Project member we can think of. [Sadly, in our case that person usually already has the power.] It's often quite a sobering experience. So perhaps before they go on assuring us all that they need this expansive power only for our Greater Good and really, we can trust them, LindaEllenTina might want to consider an alternate universe where someone with few scruples, grudges to settle, and/or a great sense of both injury and entitlement [Tim Stowell, maybe, or Fred Smoot] has control of the Election Committee and imagine what a Project like that would look like. As for myself, I am imagining Shari "God IS On My Side" Handley in control of the EC with this power in her pocket, and its giving me the heebie-jeebies.

ONE HAND IN YOUR POCKET: Over on the State Coordinators' list the last few days, a few of our fearless leaders have been discussing a problem with a "disappeared" and incommunicado state coordinator. Its not an overly compelling conversation [although it did get amusing when David "Stalker" Samuelsen suggested that "some sucker in Michigan" drive to the SC's new house and call her out. She apparently dared to have an unlisted phone number.] Most of the SCs have recommended just calling an election if the SC can't be contacted after a decent interval and moving on, after, of course, moving the offending page to Root$web to prevent this sort of thing in the future. NC Linda did let drop a little bomb that she's "working with Rootsweb" to delineate circumstances in which the NC can have access to the passwords for the state pages. Now, it seems to us this would imply that the NC feels that the state pages belong to the Project and should there be some sort of "emergency" [like oh, say, they want to get rid of an SC, perhaps], the NC needs passwords to the state page. This is a bit of a departure from the SOP when a CC disappears. In those cases, the presumption is that their page belongs to them and its just delinked and a new account assigned. But apparently, if you are an SC, your page and your work are up for grabs if you aren't responsive enough or if some other "circumstance" develops that the NC believes warrants turning over your password.

In the case to hand, the offending SC didn't keep her pages on Root$web anyways, so a password grab wouldn't have solved the problem. "Fixing" the situation would have required actually stealing her work [from the Wayback Machine] and reposting it to Root$web [and yes, this was seriously discussed]. As of last night, however, the prodigal SC was finally contacted; she claimed her pages were "hijacked" [whatever that means], and she'd have them back online in a week or so. So all is well. Except that Linda is still conspiring with Root$web to get access to your passwords.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
A chicken in every pot since 1998

posted by merope at 7:30 AM 1 comments   
Sunday, November 13, 2005
Boil, Boil, Toil And Trouble
Something wicked this ways comes...its Your Daily Board Show!

BLESS THIS MESS: After a day or so of unnatural quiet, NC Linda published a "statement" from the "grass roots volunteer" FGS 2006 committee to the formal meeting list. The "statement" was unremarkable and noninformative, except for the lengths to which it went to stress that the FGS 2006 committee is not in any way affiliated with the Advisory Board of the USGenWeb Project, the Advisory Board of the USGenWeb Project has no authority over it, and any reports the FGS 2006 committee chooses to send to the Advisory Board of the USGenWeb Project are merely a courtesy.

Over on the informal list, NC Linda posted a statement from the Parliamentarian regarding "membership rights within USGenWeb." This was in response to Jeff "Terrier" Scism's insistence that the EC's guidelines violate the bylaws because they require the use of lists provided by the State Coordinators to confirm eligibility to vote. [Or something like that.] Josh said basically that although the only requirement for membership is a general desire to provide genealogical information, the bylaws set out various categories of member, along with their duties. Jeff continued to argue his point, noting "...the determination of voter eligibility based on a State Organization submitted list (and a Special Projects membership list) of those who are sanctioned and run websites is a violation of the referenced article...The referenced article quotes "the only requirement", and that isn't either state approval, nor is it the requirement to maintain a website sanctioned by the project." After George Waller commented that as "the individual who created the language regarding the qualifications for membership," he doesn't consider them invalid or a defect, Jeff continued to press his point that the bylaws should be amended to more specifically define membership in USGenWeb.

After that little to-do, Linda published a letter regarding the proposed EC guidelines. The letter was from herself [wearing not her "NC hat", but her "former Chair of the EC" hat], Ellen Pack, and Tina Vickery. The general tone of the letter can be summarized as "we know better than you and you shouldn't question our wisdom." [There's also a lot of self-stroking, but we suppose that's to be expected.] The letter goes on at length as to why the voter and membership lists should remain confidential, with LindaEllenTina claiming that the EC has never seriously considered posting a membership list. [Not exactly true. Back in 2002, when Linda was still EC Poobah, she did actually request that the EC be permitted to post a membership list by region, noting that "The EC is of the opinion that all volunteers must list their names on their web sites and the listing of their names on the EC website would not invade anyone's privacy." We recall a fair amount of disappointment when the Board declined to approve the EC's request to post a public membership list.] This is all well and good; we sure can't figure out any reason why a membership list should be published. It certainly wouldn't keep people from creating aliases. [A public membership list was not on the list of proposals from the EC; the suggestion came from a project member. So this several paragraphs of "we would never consider violating confidentiality" was basically an attempt to slap down a member for going off the reservation. After all, if it was a Good Idea, TinaLindaEllen would have thought of it first.]

EllenLindaTina then go on to unilaterally trash the SCs, apparently considering that notifying them of allegations that one or more of their local members may be fake is a waste of time, for various reasons. TinaEllenLinda do admit that their primary concern about notifying SCs is that it increases the probability that there will be "leakage." They prefer notifying only the Board and leaving it up to that body to determine whether or not the SCs should be involved. Oddly enough though, the Board members who have spoken on this issue thus far seem pretty united in involving the SCs from the outset. Former EC member David Morgan, for instance, noted "The SC or SCs should be notified when an alleged alias is in their state...It is the business of the SC who is registered to vote in their state. They should not be bypassed...I will not vote for the suggested proposals of the EC in this instance." Jan Cortez similarly noted "...before anything even comes to the SC they have accused them of malfeasance, misfeasance or nonfeasance. I'm wondering now why the EC even comes to the SC for a list of members. Maybe they would be better off to generate their own."

EllenTinaLinda's message doesn't touch at all on the issue of notifying the accused that they are under investigation or on the issue of removing both suspected aliases and the suspected perpetrator prior to any formal determination of guilt. Perhaps they couldn't come up with a way to justify it. [We doubt "we don't want suspects to know they are suspected because then they might be able to rationally explain away our evidence" will convince anyone of the EC's benelovence or nonpartinsanship. Or sanity, for that matter.] David, however, noted "The person that is believed to be creating the aliases should also be contacted. Why should it be kept secret from them? Maybe they could explain it."

We might advise LindaTinaEllen that instead of attempting to spoon-feed adults self-serving pablum that chastises and belittles Project members for daring to challenge their wisdom, they sit back on their ample butts and listen to us for a change. For nearly 10 years now, the members of this project have been given the "mushroom treatment" [kept in the dark, yadda yadda], and perhaps we are a bit tired of the paternalistic double-talk that occasionally passes for governance in this project. While we think most people would agree that serious allegations of election fraud should be handled in confidence until a hearing has been conducted, we have not yet seen anyone leaping about to champion just letting the EC have its way in these matters. Although the proposed rules aren't yet a hot topic on the regional lists and only a few members have commented on them, thus far all who have spoken up are insisting that the State Coordinators be involved, and that the accused be afforded due process before they are punished.

Oh, and not to worry. We didn't miss the little dig about those of us who worry about reports before we worry about voter fraud. Well, here's the deal with that. The EC has rules it is supposed to follow. The rules are generally pretty simple and straightforward. The failure to produce a quarterly report for the last three quarters is only one of its failures in regards to these clear and simple rules, and we fear that the inability to report on its activities to the Board and the Project is symptomatic of much deeper dysfunction and incompetence. Would you want people who can't write a simple report on time for nine months investigating you? Or do you think they might do a shoddy job on that sort of thing too?

ONCE IS AN ACCIDENT, THREE TIMES MAYBE NOT SO MUCH: Meanwhile over on the NE regional list, Jeff "Fumble Fingers" apparently forwarded yet another message from one of the Board's sooper Sekrit lists [this time EXEC] to a public arena. In this one, he appeared to be providing information on adoptable lists pertinent to the region. Why the Board is discussing homeless Root$web mailing lists in the Sekrit Sandbox is not explained.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Running with scissors since 1998

posted by merope at 8:20 AM 0 comments   
Thursday, November 10, 2005
Sticks And Stones
Go lightly on the ledge...its Your Daily Board Show!

NOT TERRIBLY NEWSY: On the formal Board list, Linda announced that Cyndi Enfinger won the special election for the new Special Projects Representative seat. The term is for two years.

OH CHITTER CHATTER: After a brief and pointless digression into the bylaws ephemera regarding the definition of a "member", a couple more Board members posted their thoughts on the EC's latest bid to expand its own power over the volunteers. Here are some excerpted comments:

Angie Rayfield: "Given that the EC has been unable to provide quarterly reports and has turned down requests to assist in several state elections lately, I don't think I want to see them devoting their time to "aliases" when they have duties more directly related to their mandate...Why is the state/special project being cut out of the loop? If the EC stumbles across what appears to be voter fraud, shouldn't it be turned over to the state/special project for investigation and resolution? If the EC has evidence that the SC or head of the special project is involved in the fraud, or if that person refuses to investigate the situation, then would be the time to request AB assistance...shouldn't we add something that confirms the EC's mandate -- to verify eligibility, not determine it?...I have a serious problem with the idea of the EC removing names first and then waiting for an investigation & resolution...this proposal not only would take away the vote of a suspected "alias" but also the vote of the suspect -- who hasn't been accorded any opportunity to defend themselves, and may not even know they're suspected of anything. This proposal also doesn't mention any requirement to notify any of these people of their removal and the reason, which hardly seems fair. If the EC is concerned that permitting suspected "aliases" to vote could/would affect the outcome of the election, maybe they should look into some sort of option for a provisional ballot...This proposal gives the EC far too much power with far too little oversight. I think that could be more unhealthy and threatening than "alias" voting."

Mike St. Clair: "The change in B 3 II e drops any involvement of state and special project leadership in addressing discrepancies directly with the EC, instead giving
the duty to the AB...I think I'd prefer that the EC first ask the SC/SPC as directed by the current procedure...Regarding the B 3 III c additions, I have several concerns. Talking first about c itself, and registering under "real" names rather than aliases, I support the concept but am already in violation of it personally!...I'm not sure exactly how to detect or enforce this...I'm afraid the current wording my collide with real world behavior of real world people, and may disenfranchise people who probably shouldn't be. I think B 3 III c (2) should be changed to read "IN the event the EC discovers a possible alias, the registering individual's state or special project coordinator and the AB shall be privately advised."...it's important that the individual who is most likely to be able to resolve the alias issue...be informed right at the start. I disagree with the removal pending a determination that is mandated in B 3 III c (3)...there should be rapid investigation and a determination made, which should never be done without consulting with the appropriate project leaders and with the registering individual...I'm not sure if this would be a good approach but found myself wondering whether a "suspected alias" shouldn't be handled in exactly the same fashion as are "Challenges to a member's eligibility" as described in C 3...Is there really any reason for the handling of these two situations to be different?"

Thus far, the few Board members that have shared comment on this issue have variously recommended 1) the State or Special Coordinators be involved from the outset; 2) that any person accused of registering aliases be involved from the outset; and 3) that no one be removed from the voter rolls without a hearing and a formal finding of guilt. All of this makes perfect sense and comes rather close to the current EC guidelines [as noted by Mike above], which were devised to put the rights of the project membership first and foremost in all cases. We imagine, however, that Tina and the other Weird Sisters are quietly chewing nails over these latest developments.

FROM THE VAULT: We happened to be cleaning up our hard drive a few days ago in preparation for our new wicked fast gaming computer, and came across an interesting file. The file was created in 2000 by Maggie "One Cat Over The Line" Stewart, head of the Archives Census Project and it includes a list of all the state-level Archives Census Project coordinators current at that time. It was sent to me by a little bird way back when as support for an accusation that Maggie was populating her failing census project with fake members. This was in the midst of the census wars and both of the census projects were more than a little paranoid about moles, spies, and provocateurs. Plus, a main feature of all the proposals for merging the two projects under consideration by the Board was a provision that Maggie's people would replace Ron's people in the case that there was a conflict over who got any one state. So, Maggie apparently just made up a few people to serve as coordinators, both to keep spies from getting in the door and to have ready-made people already managing the states if the two projects merged.

Contained within the file is a list of all the fake state coordinators. They are actually tagged as "fictitious" in the document. There are three fictitous people listed, covering 12 separate projects within the ACP. According to our little bird, Maggie used her AOL account to create fictitious email addresses for these people and at least one of them was included on the voter list submitted to the EC that year. When the sham coordinators were discovered in the midst of the 2001 national election, it turned out that one of them was running for national level office. [It was also the case in the ACP at that time that even though "real" people were listed as coordinators up to twenty of the state level projects were actually being covered by other members of the ACP; one of them was covering 11 separate projects that actually appeared as belonging to other people. The EC at the time allowed Maggie's census project members to vote even though it was not part of USGenWeb, but it is unknown if people listed as members but not actually doing the work gained extra votes. This by coincidence is the same election in which Sundee Maynez used two names and email addresses to vote; she's also listed on Maggie's ACP coord list as the coordinator for six projects.]

What makes this file interesting to current times is that current EC Chair Tina Vickery, who occasionally lectures other project members on ethics, is listed as covering for one of Maggie's fictious people in two of the ACP projects. Apparently her current passionate concern over aliases and vote fraud is a fairly recent development. Or perhaps its just OK when the Right People do it for the Right Reasons.

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

posted by merope at 6:15 AM 0 comments   
Wednesday, November 09, 2005
Your Papers, Please
Hardly worth mentioning...its Your Daily Board Show!

WATER UNDER THE BRIDGE: On the formal Board list, NC Linda blew off the Other Linda's complaint about the radical departure from accepted practice in giving the EC rep job to George Waller without allowing 48 hours to pass. Instead of apologizing and giving the remaining four board members a reasonable time to vote, NC Linda blandly thanked the Other Linda and said that, in the future, she'd certainly be sure to provide a time frame for voting. Jan Cortez then pointed out "...if this had been given the same time frame as motions, usually 48 hours, and only a simple majority - it is possible that the result could be different or a tie." [Well, yes, but we are pretty sure that preventing a change in the outcome was the whole point in cutting the vote prematurely short and declaring George the winner.]

Also on the Board list, Jeff Scism posted a cryptic message about the "Ohio complaint." [Apparently Jeff's fingers are still fumbling. This has to do with the business the Board is currently addressing in the Sekrit Sandbox, more about which is below.]

ABOUT THAT PROPOSAL: Only a handful of Board members have weighed in so far on the EC's proposal to turn itself into police, judge, jury, and executioner in order to stem the scourge of aliases sweeping through USGenWeb. Jeff Scism proposed a wordy alternative that goes well beyond changes to the EC's guidelines. We won't summarize it here, but he did point out repeatedly that the local project leadership should not be left out of the loop when suspected aliases are identified by the EC. He also apparently assumes that all cases of multiple identities constitute de facto evidence of intent to commit fraud, and does not object to the EC removing names from the voter rolls before a hearing is held and a decision made as to eligibility. Jeff also touched a bit on bylaws amendment to define the "voter class", suggested establishing a "fraud investigation committee" internal to the EC [yes, secrecy inside of secrecy], encouraged the requirement that members use only their "true" names to register, and proposed that the Accused actually be notified that they are under investigation. To ice the cake, he also proposed a set of sanctions to be imposed once someone [the EC? the Board? the "internal fraud investigation committee"?] finds a member guilty of registering aliases.

David Morgan also suggested amending the EC's proposed changes to its procedure to include notification of the accused's state leadership whenever voter fraud is being investigated, and later said he agreed with some aspects of Jeff's proposal [but, since he referred to them by numbered item, and several items are similarly numbered, its not clear which items he agrees with]. David also noted, "I do not believe the EC should remove any names from the voters list without a vote of the AB. If the AB...cannot come to a decision before voting registration ends, then the alleged aliases should be allowed to vote." Jan Cortez wondered why the Registered Voter List must be kept confidential, and also suggested including local leadership in the loop, noting, "I would think that the SC would have better investigative tools than the AB...is this because the SC is not trusted or you fear that they may be a party to it?"

The chattering class [with the exception of ourselves and Dandy Don Kelly] has also been surprisingly quiet on this proposal. We can't decide if that's stunned silence or just the usual apathy.

BACK IN THE NEWS: After Jeff's latest misdirected post we went over and took a gander at OHGenWeb. OHGW, after a rocky few months, has been pretty quiet of late, and its apparent that the freshman SC has backed off her rule about not allowing political discussion on the state list. Rather, the project has been quietly discussing developing guidelines and procedures for some months now. Apparently SC Sandy Quinn attempted to form a committee to work up some state-level bylaws and procedures but did not get sufficient volunteers for the task. So she appointed Scott Anderson, one of her more eloquent and level-headed adversaries when she was briefly insane, to head up an effort to draft some procedures. Near as we can tell, the process thus far has been quite openly conducted, with occasional updates and drafts posted to the CC list and polite discussion occurring more often than not. Early in October, Scott posted a set of draft rules that would "establish parliamentary authority for the OHGenWeb Project," and discussion on that particular item has proceeded for the last month, until the point it was a formal [and seconded] motion on the floor. Daryl Lytton, who had objected more or less to the entirety of the proposal throughout the discussion, then attempted to introduce his own motion, an effort that was quashed by Sandy because there was another active motion on the floor. And then it seems that Daryl filed a grievance with the Board in an attempt to keep a vote from proceeding on the motion. Daryl also requested that Sandy suspend the current process pending a ruling from the Board, but she has refused to do so. We are not sure of the grounds for the grievance, other than that Daryl seems to feel that his right to put options before the other state volunteers has been denied and that, since no parliamentary procedures have been formally adopted, Sandy is overstepping her bounds by attempting to manage the process using parliamentary rules of order and debate. It is not clear that any bylaws violations have been alleged.

Apparently at this time, all involved parties are "in communication" with the Board on the matter. We have a hard time seeing the Board interfering in what is so clearly a state matter [especially one that is actively encouraged in our guidelines], but then its sometimes hard to predict what they will do. In any case, the process to adopt project procedures in OHGW appears to be continuing apace, with or without the Board's official approval.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Piecing it together since 1998

posted by merope at 6:15 AM 0 comments   
Tuesday, November 08, 2005
An Accident Waiting To Happen
Differently abled...its Your Daily Board Show!

UNSEEMLY HASTE: After its several days of relative torpor, NC Linda kicked the Board into high gear Tuesday morning. First out of the gate was her appointment of George Waller to the position of Board representative to the EC. We think George will do a fine job, but we are indeed curious about the unseemly haste with which Linda rammed through the final vote count. She announced the results less than 24 hours after she opened the voting, and with four Board members yet to vote. With the final count at 6 votes for George and 4 votes for Bettie, those remaining four votes could have easily altered the outcome. You don't suppose our dear NC rushed this appointment through in order to prevent someone less acceptable to the EC from winning the vote, do you?

In any case, the Other Linda called her on the carpet over it, noting, "...it would be fairer to all persons involved in any future "preference polls" that the AB members be advised of a time limit for their preference to be posted and noted. This one lasted less than 24 hours...which is highly unusual...I don't believe this issue was all that pressing that it needed to be decided in less than 24 hours...If all AB members had responded within the 22 hours given, that would be great but I can't imagine that will happen very often given the manner in which we meet."

PROMISES, PROMISES: NC Linda announced that the EC is at last finalizing its quarterly report, and Mike St. Clair withdrew his objection to the October minutes.

TOLD YA: NC Linda also announced that "six members have posted favorable comments to ABChat," and therefore the Board will continue to use the dual meeting system.

A FINE HOWDY DO: Over on the informal chat list, Linda posted the EC's suggested procedures for handling aliases. They are about what you would expect. The full document is here:

http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/USGENWEB-ALL/2005-11/1131454725

In a nutshell, the EC in its Wisdom has decided that registering under more than one name is prima facie evidence of "intent to defraud," and they propose to make it a crime to register to vote under anything other than your "real" name [although how they will determine anyone's real name is pretty much anyone's guess]. They also reserve the right to screen all addresses submitted for registration for possible aliases, and to notify the Board privately when they suspect something is amiss. This is all well and good, although you'd think that perhaps the State Coordinator(s) should be involved, since they are supposed to be the ones verifying eligibility. However, the EC's proposal actually removes the State Coordinators from the verification process and replaces them with the Board.

Here's the kicker in all this: the EC also wants to grant itself the authority to remove both the suspected aliases and the "real" person prior to the determination of guilt or innocence. It is just enough that they suspect you. Now, this strikes us as being more than a little along the lines of "verdict first, trial afterwards." They have it exactly backward, and as Mike St. Clair noted aptly a few weeks ago, it would be preferable that the EC never remove voter names from the rolls without being specifically told to do so by either a State or Special Project Coordinator or the Advisory Board. We'd go even further and say that the EC shouldn't even be given the right or duty to investigate members who register to vote, until a challenge is made from outside the EC and they are directed to investigate by the Advisory Board.

We think perhaps the EC members have been watching a little too much CSI: USGW lately. People who look for fraud usually find it, even when it isn't there, and in our experience the people currently running the EC [and their various hangers-on, including our current NC] are already convinced that fraud is massive, rampant, and irreparably harming the Project. There is very little credible evidence that any of those things are true. Even if poor Captain Alias did everything they accuse her of doing, one person hardly constitutes massive or rampant fraud, and there has been no suggested or demonstrated harm to the Project because of it [although the EC sure looks a little peaked these days]. All challenges to the voter lists should originate from outside the EC. They can't even manage to get their damn quarterly reports in on time and now they want to spend even more time investigating their fellow volunteers. Their job is to run elections, pure and simple. Not to investigate people, not to deny people their right to vote because of a suspicion, and not to spend their limited time poking around in IP addresses trying to find some way to keep people from exercising the franchise. And most certainly not to decide who gets to vote and who doesn't.

Despite all the fiddle-faddle about its sacred mission to protect the integrity of USGenWeb elections, the EC has apparently lost sight of another part of its guidelines; the part that says the voter shall always be given the benefit of the doubt. You could look it up; it's in section C of their guidelines. We guess they don't make a habit of reading down that far.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Watching the lunatics run the asylum since 1998

posted by merope at 6:35 PM 0 comments   
Let's Do The Twist
In the swing of things...its Your Daily Board Show!

POPULARITY CONTEST: On the formal Board list yesterday, NC Linda asked the Board members to indicate their preference between George Waller, Bettie Wood, and Sundee Maynez for the position of the Board's representative to the Election Committee. At press time, 6 Board members had voted for George, and 4 had voted for Bettie Wood. In casting her vote for George, Sundee Maynez indicated that he was the EC's preferred candidate. [Interesting choice on their part.]

NC Linda also informed the Board that the October minutes were posted for their approval. [One thing we will give Ellen Pack props for, she does do nice minutes.] Mike St. Clair asked for clarification on the Election Committee quarterly report, which was promised a month ago and which is now three reports behind, before the minutes are approved. At press time, Linda had not responded to his inquiry.

Over on the informal list, Angie Rayfield carried on the discussion of the multi-list meeting system by noting, "...the same thing could be accomplished by adopting a standing procedure regarding the use of BOARD-L - but I can live with two lists." [At this point, it looks like the Board members either don't care enough to speak up about the multiple list system, are ambivalent about it but don't care if its continued, or like its flexibility and want it to continue. There has been no outright opposition to continuing the informal/formal meeting system and we imagine that NC Linda will in short order decide to continue it throughout the remainder of her term.]

THE QUEEN IS DEAD: Out in the hinterland, the unthinkable has apparently happened. Ellen "Why, yes, I am the best person for the job" Pack has finally decided to step down from her throne in MSGenWeb and call an election for a new State Coordinator. She is not running for the position herself. Thus far, two candidates have emerged: Lori Thornton [four counties in MSGW, others in Tina Vickery's WSGW and Joy Fisher's SDGW, the ASC in SDGW, an EC member, and allegedly the "Archives candidate" although we don't find much evidence of Archives involvement other than donations] and Denise Wells [counties in MSGW and COGW, long time member of the Bylaws Revision Committee, former candidate for the RAL appointment that Betsy Mills eventually got]. Current MSGW ASC Melissa McCoy-Bell declined the nomination.

Speculation as to why Ellen has decided to let someone else hold the reins for a bit has been interesting. Someone suggested it might be because of Jeff Scism's "accidental" post to DISCUSS that showed her in perhaps not the best light in the Captain Alias affair, but that is unlikely since "shame" is not apparently in Ellen's dictionary. Others have laid the abdication at the feet of perennial gadfly Keith Giddeon, who has to all appearances made it one of his life's missions to force elections in all states in which the SCs are covered by the grandfather clause in the bylaws. He has been paying particular attention to Ellen and MSGenWeb in past months, and has rarely missed a chance to point out that she has failed for years to let her CCs have a vote in their state leadership. As far as we know, however, Keith is not a member of MSGenWeb, so we find it hard to believe that Ellen would have paid any attention whatsoever to his buzzing around, but perhaps she did. Or just perhaps one of her CCs finally took her up on her oft-stated offer to hold an election if even just one CC asked her to. In any event, the MSGenWeb CC list is unarchived, so we imagine we'll hear about the results of the election when the news of the winner hits the State Coordinator list.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Grubbing about under rocks since 1998

posted by merope at 6:00 AM 0 comments   
Saturday, November 05, 2005
Bland Pleasantries
Is it safe to come out yet?...its Your Daily Board Show!

THE SHAPE OF THINGS: Its shaping up to be a lazy weekend over in Board-land. On the formal list, NC Linda announced that the minutes are done but not yet posted; she'll let all of us who are breathlessly awaiting them know just as soon as they are available.

NC Linda also posted a brief report from the Newsletter Committee. The editor plans to release the newsletter between the 10th and 15th of each month and a few new features are planned, including the "outstanding Project websites" feature noted in this space a couple of days ago. There will also be a redesign of the newsletter, and perhaps some new names on the masthead. [Still no sign of any report, quarterly or otherwise, from Election Committee chair Tina "Missing In Action" Vickery.]

Cyndi Enfinger posted a rosy job description of the Board's EC rep position, and shortly thereafter Sundee Maynez threw her hat into the ring for the job. This leaves us with Sundee, George Waller, and Bettie Wood volunteering for the position thus far. [This is sort of like getting your pick of ice cream and having only vanilla to choose from, but that's not a bad thing if you like vanilla. The EC won't tolerate for long anyone that isn't slavishly pro-EC, so there is absolutely no point in sending over anyone even remotely strong-willed or independently minded who might consider holding the EC and its delinquent Chair's feet to the fire on occasion. Any of our three volunteers so far, with the possible exception of George Waller, should make a suitable and already paper-trained lap dog.]

Last but not least, NC Linda finally allowed as to how the Board is indeed in the Sekrit Sandbox, discussing "a state issue that has been brought to our attention." [Now you don't suppose this has anything to do with the suspected "alias" that just got fired and complained about it, do you?]

Over on the informal list, a handful of Board members spoke in favor of retaining the formal/informal meeting arrangement. Most noted that now that they are used to them, they like the dual list system, prefer the openness of discussion, and appreciate not having to rigidly follow parliamentary procedure in informal discussion. Only Jeff Scism expressed ambivalence about the system, based on his little "mistake" of a couple of weeks ago. [Its interesting to note that Jeff now appears to blame his blunder on the dual list system, when a few weeks ago we were all treated to very convulted explanations of problems with his email program and Root$web and whatever else he could call up to explain how he managed to out Captain Alias on a public list. But his "accidental" post went to the DISCUSS list, and not to any of the Board's official lists, so its hard to see how this is relevant.]

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

posted by merope at 7:20 AM 0 comments   
Thursday, November 03, 2005
Busting A Move
You've been served...its Your Daily Board Show!

IN THROUGH THE OUT DOOR: On the informal list, the Board discussed the proposed November agenda for a bit. Prime among the suggestions were that the 60-day trial of using multiple lists be placed on the agenda and that someone be selected to replace Cyndie Enfinger as the Board's representative on the Election Committee. Some Board members, including the NC, seemed uncertain whether she had actually resigned that position or just removed herself temporarily from the EC while she ran for the Special Projects rep seat [which election still has a week to go]. According the the Other Linda, Cyndie did resign early this term and two members volunteered to take her place. [This must have happened in the Sekrit Sandbox; there are no public messages regarding this resignation that we could find.] Eventually, Cyndie herself popped in to confirm that she had resigned in order to give someone else the opportunity to serve in the position. George Waller then volunteered to be the Board's rep to the EC.

Mike's suggestion that the FGS 2006 committee be asked to provide a report to the Board on a regular basis got the following response from NC Linda: "The FGS 2006
committee isn't an AB committee. It's a grass roots committee. I'll...ask Josh & Ellen if they would like to submit reports to keep the project informed." Mike expressed some curiousity about who is on the committee, whether the NC is ex-officio, whether or the FGS 2006 Committee answers to the NC, and what is the meaning of "grass-roots." [It means its their show. Period.] At press time, these questions had not been answered.

Meanwhile over on the formal list, NC Linda adjourned the October meeting, opened the November, and posted the following agenda:

Announcement of Thanksgiving Recess Nov 23-26, 2005
Reading, correction, approval, or disposition of minutes
Reports of standing committees
Appointment of AB EC Rep
Update on Special Project Representative election
Discussion 60 day Trail period of using formal & informal
meetings
Unfinished business
..... Procedures for Aliases
..... "Job Descriptions" for appointed positions
(Parliamentarian, Secretary and Web Master)
..... "Job Description" for RAL
New business
..... Discussion Financial Procedures Committee
Announcements if there are any
Adjournment

In short order, Linda then noted that: 1) the Board will be taking a recess over the Thanksgiving holiday weekend; 2) that the various standing committees [of which USGenWeb currently has exactly two. And one of them is still very, very late with its quarterly reports.] have been asked for their reports; 3) she'll let them know when the minutes are ready; and 4) the volunteers for the EC rep seat are currently Bettie Wood, George Waller, and David Morgan [who in short order reminded Linda that he had withdrawn his name from consideration a while ago. Good thing too. The EC has a low tolerance for people who leak.]. She also asked that the discussion of the 60 day "trial" of the formal/informal approach to meetings take place on the informal list.

RANDOMLY GENERATED: We have to say that we had our doubts about the formal/informal meeting system. In the beginning it was a righteous mess and appeared deservedly doomed, but once the informal meeting moved onto a separate list the mess appeared to have sorted itself out and it now appears to be going rather well. Sadly, however, another hallmark of this administration, that of using the Sekrit Sandbox only at limited times, providing public notice of when the Board comes into and out of Executive Session, and informing the Project what they are discussing in Executive Session, appears to have been summarily abandoned.

In other news, the census project issue did not make the agenda this month, and let's hope they have the sense to keep it off the agenda for the rest of this term [or forever, for that matter].

Over on the State Coordinators' list, NC Linda noted that the publisher of the newsletter is looking for fabulous counties to highlight each month in the newsletter. If you have any to recommend, send them to Editor Sharon Rhodes at: sharon@marshallnet.com

The newsletter committee did actually manage to put out an October issue, and its pretty good [and thankfully doesn't exhort people to help Ancestry.con profit from disaster, like the last one did]. It has more information in it about the FGS 2005 and 2006 conferences than the Board has managed to put out in nine months. Of primary interest are the links to the FGS 2006 seminar list and its blog:

http://www.usgenweb.org/volunteers/FGS.shtml
http://www.fgsconference.blogspot.com/

[Blogs, heh. All the kids have them these days.]

Also, if you want a copy of the September FGS Delegate's Digest, you can write directly to Josh Taylor at: josh@djoshuataylor.com

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Brimming with the milk of human kindness since 1998

posted by merope at 6:25 AM 0 comments   
Wednesday, November 02, 2005
Keeping Secrets
Rules are for other people...its Your Daily Board Show!

INTERNAL AFFAIRS: Apparently missing the glow of the spotlight, Jeff Scism put forward a point of order that, based on wording in the original motion, "the replacement of of Committee members with additional members as under vote would be out of order." [No, we have no idea what he means by this]. He then tried to adjourn the October meeting and reconvene the November meeting with his point of order as the first agenda item. After NC Linda noted she'd address his point of order with her Parliamentarian, Jeff withdrew it. When Linda asked if there were any objections to adjournment, Mike reminded her that the Board still had one item of business on its calendar, and what an interesting one that turned out to be.

NC Linda's next message informed the Project that SW/SC rep David Morgan had unsubbed himself from both of the Board's current sekrit lists [Exec and the list for the alias discussion]. However, she noted, "David is moderated because he chose to break the agreement he made to respect the confidentiality of the AB lists...his breach of confidence was deliberate and not accidental...David has the right to appeal this decision. He has refused the opportunity to return to Exec and exercise his right to appeal. David was moderated from all private AB lists last term because he released confidential AB information. With the seating of the new board in Sep David was again subbed to Exec and...to a 2nd private list....David will be unable to participate in issues brought before the board that involves individuals that must be discussed privately, unable to serve on any committee that is not meeting openly or participate in any final decision of a grievance. David can continue to participate on Board-L and ABChat." [According to Linda, this casting out into the desert is "open ended" because David "refused to discuss the issue or to appeal." We note that the "permission to speak" guidelines limit moderation to a period of 7 days, but they also specifically refer to "disruptive" posts. And although he apparently twisted Linda's knickers, we doubt David was being disruptive in any way. More on this below.]

After she had succeeding in banishing an elected representative from the Sekrit Sandboxes, NC Linda asked for a motion to adjourn the October meeting. Both Jan and Jeff obliged.

MAKING WORK: Over on the chat list, NC Linda noted that the only item she had for the November agenda was to complete the discussion on how to address aliases and asked for suggestions of additional items. Mike suggested re-opening the Project's favorite can of worms, the Census Project issue. He noted, "it seems to me (somewhat
in ignorance) that we and they would be better able to serve the researchers if our relationship was official rather than the current somewhat ambiguous status." Sundee Maynez astutely responded, "those two census projects have gone on for years...to be honest I would like to see it left alone and leave the situation as it is." NC Linda suggested that they "handle some of the other loose ends" before they step into this particular steaming pile again.

Mike also suggested putting committee reports on the November agenda, specifically the EC's "quarterly report" [delinquent for 3 quarters now], the Grievance Procedures Committee, and the FGS 2006 Committee. Jeff suggested adding "the proposed Bylaws amendment on creating Standing Procedures and moving procedures from the Bylaws to their own section" to the agenda.

[We suggest that if they have nothing to talk about and need to fish around for topics, they don't reconvene. It would save us all a lot of trouble.]

SCAPEGOAT: This secrecy stuff is getting really silly. Yesterday, David Morgan posted this cryptic message to the SW/SC regional list:

"...before all the brickbats come my way, I just wanted you to know that I contacted the person that is alleged to have created multiple aliases for the purposes of voting/becoming a CC in various states. I...posted her reply, along with my letter to her, to board-exec. After being notified by another AB member that one SC was very upset with me, I contacted him."

At the time, no one knew that David was being banished from the playground, so the message was a bit disconcerting. After NC Linda's formal message, however, the situation became a bit clearer. David is essentially being punished for doing on his own what should have been done formally and a long time ago, contacting Captain Alias and getting her explanation, and also apparently for daring to discuss the issue with a constituent who had issues with him. We find it ludicrous that the Board would consider contacting the central figure in a major issue to be a violation of its silly gag rule, but we are told that the Board and the EC really did not want Captain Alias to know she was under scrutiny. Apparently their evidence is shaky enough that they were hoping for some kind of screw up on her part that would convincingly prove her guilt [of what crime is not clear] to the skeptics. So, the one person on the Board who actually did the right thing got smacked down for it, in the name of secrecy.

FAST FORWARD: In any case, we hear that the Captain Alias issue may be heating up again soon. It seems that an SC has recently fired one of the allegedly fake people and they have actually protested their removal. The "alias" is expected to make a formal complaint to the Board, if they have not already done so. This might get interesting. How would you like the Advisory Board to make a ruling on your very existence?

CHILDREN OF THE CORN: We've heard some interesting scuttlebutt on Sharyl Ferrall, one of the recently seated Grievance Procedures Committee members. If what people tell us is true [and we have it from more than one source], she's quite a piece of work and should perhaps be kept far away from the cutlery drawer. Sharyl is the Immediate Past SC in IAGenWeb. Now, IAGW has an interesting management structure. They have SC elections every year and each new SC is elected for a three year term, one year as ASC, one year as SC, and one year as IPSC. Along with a couple of non-voting Welcome Wagon positions, these three people constitute the "leadership team" of IAGW. Traditionally, once they leave office former SCs have joined an informal board that for five years served in advisory capacity to the leadership team. The purpose of this Board was described to us as providing non-binding advice based on their own experiences as SCs to the leadership team. Former SCs also can serve on the Board of Directors of the "Friends of IAGenWeb", which is the governing board of the money-generating arm of IAGW. When Sharyl was elected to the leadership team, Gail Meyer Kilgore was SC and Don Kelly was IPSC, and according to sources Sharyl moved immediately to usurp some of the authority of those positions. As a mere ASC, she was unsuccesful and Gail in particular had to remind her that she was not yet SC throughout the year. Sharyl apparently harbored some grudges against both Don and Gail because of this and when her turn as SC came around, she apparently took her revenge by immediately [on her first day in office] firing the entire advisory board and removing all mention of it from the IAGW website. She also tried to work around the IAGW bylaws by having her ASC [Greta Thompson, now the IAGW SC] serve when she was absent, rather than having Gail, whose job it was as IPSC, do it. Gail was also allegedly prevented from using her vote as a member of the leadership team after once casting a vote in opposition to Sharyl. Apparently Sharyl was spiteful enough that she actually removed the page at IAGW that recognizes and thanks former SCs for their contributions. To ice the cake, Sharyl also tried to have Don and Gail removed from the Board of Friends. Because that body is independent from IAGW, she was eventually forced to reinstate both of them, but the damage to IAGW was done. Don was moderated on the CC list and the leadership team list for the duration of Sharyl's tenure, and although Gail was never formally moderated, she was effectively prevented from fully performing her duties as IPSC. This didn't sit well with the IAGW CCs, at least 13 of whom of whom left the project as the controversy heated up. The page recognizing former SCs was eventually restored, but the advisory board has never been reconstituted, and as one source noted that was pretty much five years worth of work "down the drain."

We aren't exactly sure what the GPC found so compelling in Sharyl's resume, but its clear that someone who really doesn't play well with others is going to have a voting say whatever that group comes up with to handle grievances. As another of our correspondents succintly put it, "people need to know to watch their backs when it comes to Sharyl."

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Picking at the scab since 1998

posted by merope at 7:50 AM 0 comments   
Tuesday, November 01, 2005
Let's Do The Time Warp Again!
Just a jump to the left...its Your Daily Board Show!

OPEN FOR BUSINESS: In recent Board business, NC Linda declared Motion 05-23 passed with 13 YES votes and the Grievance Procedures Committee open for business. She noted that she would sub all the members to the GPC list and that as soon as the committee selected its Chair she would turn the list over to the committee to open for public subscription.

OUT OF TOWN: Linda Blum Barton announced to everyone that SW/SE rep Bettie Wood would be away from Board business while she tended to an emergency out of town.

TROUBLE IN PARADISE: As is usual in USGenWeb, once someone gets elected to a public position, the rumors start to swirl of all sorts of vile misdeeds that they've initiated and/or supported in their tenure. So far, we've heard all about the vile doings of Katy Hestand [continually on a ballot somewhere, has more counties than God, plays the Archives angle in everything]; Angie Rayfield [unquestioningly supported Derick "The Mad" Hartshorn in NCGenWeb when she was ASC there]; Jan Cortez [fired Pam Reitsch over nothing, one of the worst mediators USGenWeb has ever had, continually stomps off when she gets mad]; Scott Burow [pompous stuffed shirt who thinks no one but him knows anything]; Bill Utterback [unqualified to clean up after horses and shouldn't even be allowed near an important committee]; and Sharyl Ferrall [removed the entire IAGW leadership team her first day of office; managed to run off 15 CCs during her year as SC]. So far only Donna Allen seems to have flown under the radar, but we imagine that we'll get some snarky news about her in short order as well, unless she's one of those rare birds that actually has made no enemies in her years in USGenWeb. As for the others, well, none of the information slipped under our door is news to us [except for Sharyl Ferrall; we'd never heard of her before her name showed up on the committee list, and we are surprised that someone described as more ruthless than Genghis Khan could have no reputation outside the backwater that is IAGW]. This is USGenWeb after all. You don't get to the top without crushing a few expendable and replaceable CCs on the way up or without sucking up to the usual suspects. People who don't eat their own young have no hope in USGenWeb politics.

GIANT SUCKING SOUND: Over on the SEMA regional list, both Ellen Pack and Shari Handley made a point of leaving the list over some snarkiness directed at representative Suzanne Shephard [who has developed a habit of asking her constituents for input when its too late to matter]. Apparently, they don't like anyone but themselves being nasty on public lists. Fortunately for the SEMA regional list, their absence is no loss at all.

-Teresa Lindquist
Editor & Publisher, Daily Board Show
Driving them insane since 1998

posted by merope at 6:20 AM 0 comments