David- I do not think it is necessary for you to repeat the details of an objection received on BOARD - merely state that you have received an objection.  Remember "innocent until proven guilty"? I believe you owe this individual an apology for publicizing second hand "hearsay" information. Larry Flesher SWSC SC Rep ----- Original Message ---- From: W David Samuelsen <[email protected]> To: [email protected]; Sherri <[email protected]> Sent: Mon, May 17, 2010 8:40:43 PM Subject: Re: [BOARD] one objection noted - another objection received Make it 2 now. - David 2nd objection received - stated: 1. She has already resigned from the GC once this year, due to an inability to work with other members of the GC. 2. She has well-known and established personal grudges against several members of the USGenWeb. David Samuelsen On 5/17/2010 10:41 AM, W David Samuelsen wrote: > I received an objection to appointment of Jo Branch to the GC today. > > David Samuelsen > USGenWeb Advisory Board Agenda: http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.shtml USGenWeb Advisory Board Agenda: http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.shtml ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

'siyo, Though I prefer "open" discussions on Board and very minimal use of Board-Exec, I do wish we could be careful as to not jump back and forth on the two lists when it involves discussions and/or "hints" about individuals. It gets confusing and will in the long run cause folks to say things on the "public" list that should remain on the Exec list. A report of responses to the AB from CCs is appropriate on Board while any details contained in those post are appropriate on Exec due to involvement of individuals. The basis of any "proof" of allegations should be on Exec and if the person doing the accusing is not mentioned on Board any detail of an allegation should be left off that list. Sgi, Bill -=- >