Abstain Maggie ----- Original Message ----- From: Tim Stowell <tstowell@chattanooga.net> To: <BOARD-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2000 8:06 PM Subject: [BOARD-L] Motion 00-9 vote Please cast your vote on Motion 00-9 as originally written: "'the board ratify the National Coordinator's delinking of the Census Project.'" by saying Yes, No, Abstain - without further comment. Votes with other comments will not be counted. You can of course send along your comments in another message. 2/3 vote required to pass. Tim

Apparently this got lost somewhere in cyberspace, so I am sending it again. Please forgive if you get two of them. Yes Betsy At 08:06 PM 4/24/00 -0400, you wrote: >Please cast your vote on Motion 00-9 as originally written: > >"'the board ratify the National Coordinator's delinking of the Census >Project.'" > >by saying Yes, No, Abstain - without further comment. Votes with other >comments will not be counted. You can of course send along your comments >in another message. 2/3 vote required to pass. > >Tim >

>Please cast your vote on Motion 00-9 as originally written: > >"'the board ratify the National Coordinator's delinking of the Census >Project.'" NO Virginia (Ginger) Cisewski NW-Plains CC Rep

At 5:06 PM -0700 4/24/00, Tim Stowell wrote: >Please cast your vote on Motion 00-9 as originally written: > >"'the board ratify the National Coordinator's delinking of the Census >Project.'" No.

No Joe Tim Stowell wrote: > > Please cast your vote on Motion 00-9 as originally written: > > "'the board ratify the National Coordinator's delinking of the Census > Project.'" > > by saying Yes, No, Abstain - without further comment. Votes with other > comments will not be counted. You can of course send along your comments > in another message. 2/3 vote required to pass. > > Tim -- Zsedeny Genealogy - http://www.rootsweb.com/~jzed/home.htm NDGenWeb Archives - http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/nd/ndfiles.htm Pembina County, ND - http://www.rootsweb.com/~ndpembin/pembina.htm Ramsey County, ND - http://www.rootsweb.com/~ndramsey/ramsey.htm

yes At 08:06 PM 4/24/00 -0400, you wrote: >Please cast your vote on Motion 00-9 as originally written: > >"'the board ratify the National Coordinator's delinking of the Census >Project.'" > >by saying Yes, No, Abstain - without further comment. Votes with other >comments will not be counted. You can of course send along your comments >in another message. 2/3 vote required to pass. > >Tim

no Shari Handley shari@armada.net ----- Original Message ----- From: Tim Stowell <tstowell@chattanooga.net> To: <BOARD-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2000 8:06 PM Subject: [BOARD-L] Motion 00-9 vote : Please cast your vote on Motion 00-9 as originally written: : : "'the board ratify the National Coordinator's delinking of the Census : Project.'" : : by saying Yes, No, Abstain - without further comment. Votes with other : comments will not be counted. You can of course send along your comments : in another message. 2/3 vote required to pass. : : Tim : :

Yes. Tina Vickery

I vote Yes. Richard... Tim Stowell wrote: > > Please cast your vote on Motion 00-9 as originally written: > > "'the board ratify the National Coordinator's delinking of the Census > Project.'" > > by saying Yes, No, Abstain - without further comment. Votes with other > comments will not be counted. You can of course send along your comments > in another message. 2/3 vote required to pass. > > Tim -- Richard M. Howland Mailto:RichPump@wf.net ICQ # 898319 NE/NCR CC Representative HOWLAND-L List Co-ordinator WOODWORKING-L list Co-ordinator VARNER-L List Co-ordinator FISHING-L list Co-ordinator ILPIATT-L List Co-ordinator HEDGEHOGS-L List Co-ordinator TXYOUNG-L List Co-ordinator http://www.rootsweb.com/~ilpiatt/piatt.htm http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~richpump/YoungCountyCemPage.htm http://www.pets.rootsweb.com/~hedgehogs/index.html http://www.crafts.rootsweb.com/~woodworking/index.html http://www.wf.net/~richpump/HowlandOnLine.html

At 07:23 AM 4/23/00 -0400, you wrote: >Tim, > >You didn't even give the Census Project any type of notice before your had >our pages delinked and redirected. We had no notice it was going to happen >at all. Even 72 hours notice would have been nice. Well when you've been asked over and over for months on end to make the changes to your pages that would stop the copyright violation... >The notice is generous. They have known all along that we have been here >and yet have still refused to talk about anything. >Tim, please answer this question to me. How come everything is handled >differently by you in regards to the ACP than it is for us. The ACP is the Original Census Project. The CP is incorrectly named in the Bylaws. While the CP has some new files in it - it does have files pirated from the Archives. >You and the Board have treated the CP as public enemy #1, yet we are the >real, original Census Project. And the ACP has had carte blanche of your >affection for the longest time. >Why is that? They have plainly shown that it has been they that will not >deal, yet we have been at every talk. They do not give on issues, none, yet >we are expected to give on everything asked of us. Excuse me? In the December talks the ACP agreed to the name CHANGE, and to separate directories for census transcriptions apart from the Archives staff's control. >We have been asked to give up our identity, our sovereignty, our elected >officials, move to new locations and give up the way we process and upload. >What is left? When I turned that around and asked that this be given up by >them, I was vilified and chastised as not being the one who wanted to deal >or make concessions. >If the people on this list can't see plainly what has been going on, then it >is plain to see that they simply have their heads in the sand when it comes >to the ACP. >Linda has said spoken publicly and now privately to at least one person in >our Project. >Her opinions have not changed and she does not intend to give on any of the >items we think are necessary. I'd asked for a list of what you want to be posted here, but was only given a URL - perhaps you can post them here? Could you also post a list of what you have given up as a concession? >You and the Board have made her feel that she is justified and within her >rights to have things exactly the way she wants them. >Stacey is correct, whether any of you like it or not. The By-Laws are all >too clear and need no RE-interpretation by anyone when it comes to the >identity and the legality of The Census Project. The ACP was started after >we moved and all new people recruited to try and do the job. The ACP - rebuilt the files after they were pirated by Kay Mason. You see the Special Projects are not like State Projects. Texas isn't responsible for Idaho records nor is Idaho responsible for Delaware records. Each state is responsible for it's own records. The Special Projects named in the Bylaws being National in scope are handled in a different way. <snip> WANTing the Census Project to move backward and be back under the Archives >Control, Backward? Either the files from census transcriptions at a national level will go into the Archives - or it won't be a national effort - it will be some other effort. The census transcriptions were started so that ALL such transcriptions would go into our national digital library. >which is exactly what it would amount to, since the ACP Coordinator >is appointed by Linda and her allegiance is to the Archives, is not in the >best interest of the Project and not what the Census Project wants. You mean what Ron wants? > If the USGW Project wants there to be one Census Project then there needs to be >efforts made to get the ACP to understand that the By-Laws allow for our >Project and not their and that there needs to be concessions made by the ACP >to get them under our wing. > You have allienated many and >hurt many more by your unwarranted and illegal action against our Project. Delinking for copyright violation is not unwarranted. Why did you not just fix the copyright violations, give credit where credit is due, and ask to be relinked? Tim

Please cast your vote on Motion 00-9 as originally written: "'the board ratify the National Coordinator's delinking of the Census Project.'" by saying Yes, No, Abstain - without further comment. Votes with other comments will not be counted. You can of course send along your comments in another message. 2/3 vote required to pass. Tim

I agree, Pam. Might it be best for a motion to be made to immediately hold a vote to fill the seat with one of the candidates whose names have already been put forth? (I think there were 3 so far). Shari Handley shari@armada.net ----- Original Message ----- From: Pam Reid <pamreid@home.com> To: <BOARD-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2000 1:48 PM Subject: [BOARD-L] Seating of Census II Project Rep : Isn't it time we moved along on this so that we can get to Motion 00-6? : : Pam : :

Here I am, replying to myself. Is Motion 00-6 a dead issue now? Did Tim's Exec. action kill 00-6? If so, I guess we have to discuss and vote on 00-9 and then move on. But, the Archives issue MUST be resolved, IMO. And, we need to make this an immediate priority, whatever it takes. The situation, again IMO, is getting worse every day. Pam Reid wrote: > > Isn't it time we moved along on this so that we can get to Motion 00-6? > > Pam

Isn't it time we moved along on this so that we can get to Motion 00-6? Pam

I will repeat part of what I wrote the other day. Let the two projects do what they have been doing with two conditions, no duel transcriptions and timely response to transcribers or others. We will get more done this way and it will end this senseless conflict. In my discussions I have noted no will or desire on the part of the managers of either project to co-chair or work more closely than they have in the past. Delinking eliminates a large group of volunteers who can be more gainfully employed in meeting the goal of getting the censuses online. A surprising amount of cooperation can exist below the management level. Joe Tim Stowell wrote: > > This evening I received the following proposal from one of the State > Coordinators with the emphasis theirs: > > Have the Board appoint Ron & Maggie as co-chair of "THE census project" > Combine all volunteers into a single team > This team would recruit volunteers for transcribing and proofing > Transcriptions WILL go into the archives > They can also put them anywhere ELSE that they can get server space > with/without the USGW logo > > ------------- > > Tim -- Zsedeny Genealogy - http://www.rootsweb.com/~jzed/home.htm NDGenWeb Archives - http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/nd/ndfiles.htm Pembina County, ND - http://www.rootsweb.com/~ndpembin/pembina.htm Ramsey County, ND - http://www.rootsweb.com/~ndramsey/ramsey.htm

This evening I received the following proposal from one of the State Coordinators with the emphasis theirs: Have the Board appoint Ron & Maggie as co-chair of "THE census project" Combine all volunteers into a single team This team would recruit volunteers for transcribing and proofing Transcriptions WILL go into the archives They can also put them anywhere ELSE that they can get server space with/without the USGW logo ------------- Tim

Results of the voting on the Amendment to Motion 00-9 which stated - "Recognizing that the bylaws give the board final authority over any delinking action, I move that the board ratify the NC's delinking of Census II, and that any similar actions by the NC will need to be ratified by a majority vote of the board in the future." A first! Yes - 0; No - 0; Abstain - 0; Not Voting - 15 No quorum, no votes. The Amendment to Motion 00-9 fails. The discussion thus begins on Motion 00-9 as originally written: "'the board ratify the National Coordinator's delinking of the Census Project.'" Tim

At 11:24 PM -0700 4/18/00, Tim Stowell wrote: >>Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 01:10:37 -0400 >>To: "Ron & Kathy" <rkeason@tir.com> >>From: Tim Stowell <tstowell@chattanooga.net> >>Subject: removing redirect >> >>Ron, >> >>If you wish to remove the redirect - you can do so yourself by supposedly >adding - the following line of code to your index page: >> >><meta name="refresh" content="0; url=http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgwcens/"> Tim, I don't understand how that would work. If someone has a link, either on a web page or a bookmark, that has this syntax: http://www.usgenweb.org/census/states/alabama/alabama.htm and which was previously directed to: http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgw/census/states/alabama/alabama.htm but which now gets directed to: http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/census/states/alabama/alabama.htm due to "www.usgenweb.org/census/" being redefined, then how would Ron putting the meta fragment you suggest on the main index page for the Census Project have any effect on that redirection? The main index page for the Census Project isn't even accessed in this situation. I'm sure that's what Ron means by "removing the redirect". Fixing one top index page is fairly easy no matter how it is done, but changing the links on hundreds of lower-level CP web pages is much harder, and it's editing all of those lower-level pages that both Connie and Ron have been saying has caused hardship for their volunteers. Furthermore, some state pages (regular USGenWeb state project pages) contain links to both census projects' index pages for their state. If they used the respective rootsweb.com addresses for both projects, then the links still go to two separate census pages. But if their two links are: USGenWeb Census Project for Alabama http://www.usgenweb.org/census/states/alabama/alabama.htm USGenWeb Archives Census Project for Alabama http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/census/states/alabama/alabama.htm then what previously went to two separate pages now both go to the same page. Some county pages have similar direct links. And Ron can't go changing the html on state project or county project pages. If you want to respond that making all bookmarks and links that start with http://www.usgenweb.org/census/ revert to accessing the blue Census Project pages would be tantamount to relinking the Census Project, and that you haven't agreed to do that, then that response would at least be consistent, albeit unwelcome. But it is disingenuous to respond as if that weren't what Ron obviously means by "remove the redirect." -- Teri

Sent to Mr Eason - 4/17 - if you have questions as to why the redirect is still in place, please refer your questions to him. >Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 01:10:37 -0400 >To: "Ron & Kathy" <rkeason@tir.com> >From: Tim Stowell <tstowell@chattanooga.net> >Subject: removing redirect > >Ron, > >If you wish to remove the redirect - you can do so yourself by supposedly adding - the following line of code to your index page: > > ><meta name="refresh" content="0; url=http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgwcens/"> > >Tim

At 07:09 PM 4/14/00 -0400, you wrote: >I move to amend Betsy's motion to read as follows: > >Recognizing that the bylaws give the board final authority over any >delinking action, I move that the board ratify the NC's delinking of Census >II, and that any similar actions by the NC will need to be ratified by a >majority vote of the board in the future. > >Shari Handley >shari@armada.net > Please vote on whether or not to amend Motion 00-9 as stated above. Tim