the motion does NOT apply to the state coordinators. You're confusing the motion with the state coordinators. The motion is very clear about the lists: usgenweb-discuss, usgenweb-se, usgenweb-sw, usgenweb-nw, usgenweb-ne and any other lists controlled or maintained under direction of the AB. David Samuelsen On 6/3/2010 10:55 AM, Vickery, Tina wrote: > David, > > The State Coordinators are the moderators of the state's administrative > list(s). The Standard Rules (Section V, subsection A) require that > there MUST be a state coordinator on the committee (it doesn't state SC > *or* ASC, it states SC). The wording of this motion causes a conflict > with that Standard Rule. > > http://usgenweb.org/volunteers/standard-rules.shtml > > Tina > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "W David Samuelsen"<[email protected]> > To:<[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 10:49 PM > Subject: Re: [BOARD] Motion 2009/10-27 Removal of List Moderators That Serve > on the Grievance Committee > > >> Tina, >> >> I made no motion applying to any other committees. >> >> The motion is very clear specifically applied to the Grievance Committee >> and NO other committees. >> >> I said nothing about regional lists (no mention of it in the motion) >> since the region lists are administered by the AB members. >> >> Currently there are no standing rules who may be admins/moderators of >> lists. >> >> David >> >> On 6/2/2010 7:40 PM, Vickery, Tina wrote: >>> David, >>> >>> I assume your *global* concern is that USGenWeb list administrators >>> cannot >>> serve in any capacity on Standing Committee or Special Committees? >>> >>> Regional mail lists are historically maintained by Advisory Board members >>> of >>> the applicable Region. SC's administer their XXGenWeb Project lists. The >>> NC >>> administers National lists and -Discuss administrators are appointed >>> historically with a general consent motion of the Advisory Board at the >>> beginning of each term. >>> >>> If your premise and intent with this motion is indeed that no list >>> administrators can serve on a Standing or Special Committees in any >>> capacity >>> within the USGenWeb Project, I will surely have, as I am sure the Project >>> will have discussion, as you have eliminated many, many USGenWeb Project >>> volunteers from ever serving on a Standing or Special Committee with this >>> motion. >>> >>> I still don't understand, and I don't want to assume. Can you explain >>> further? >>> >>> Tina >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "W David Samuelsen"<[email protected]> >>> To:<[email protected]> >>> Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 4:04 PM >>> Subject: Re: [BOARD] Motion 2009/10-27 Removal of List Moderators That >>> Serve >>> onthe Grievance Committee >>> >>> >>>> All of you have a copy of the message now which prompted the motion to >>>> preempt any chance of tainting the Grievance Committee now and in the >>>> future. >>>> >>>> David Samuelsen >>>> >>>> On 6/2/2010 8:45 AM, Pauli Smith wrote: >>>>> I'm having trouble understanding the need for this motion. Did >>>>> something >>>>> happen? David, can you explain to me what is behind it and why you feel >>>>> a >>>>> need for it? I'm willing to look at both sides on this, I just need to >>>>> understand the why. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Pauli >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: Sherri<mailto:[email protected]> >>>>> To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 5:30 AM >>>>> Subject: [BOARD] Motion 2009/10-27 Removal of List Moderators That >>>>> Serve onthe Grievance Committee >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Moved by W. David Samuelsen and seconded by Linda Lewis, motion >>>>> 2009/10-27 >>>>> reads: >>>> >>>>> "I move all moderators of any usgenweb lists including >>>>> usgenweb-discuss be >>>>> dismissed from such positions if they are currently serving in the >>>>> Grievance >>>>> Committee as member or as mediator or arbitrator effectively >>>>> immediately. >>>> >>>>> That this rule be incorporated into the standing rules for the GC." >>>> >>>>> Discussion is open. If you have no discussion, please reply with >>>>> "No >>>>> discussion". >>>> 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 >>> >>> 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 >>> >>> >> 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 > > 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 > >

David, No, the motion is not clear about that **at all**. Your motion stated: "I move all moderators of any usgenweb lists including usgenweb-discuss be dismissed from such positions if they are currently serving in the Grievance Committee as member or as mediator or arbitrator effectively immediately." Your intent may have been to include ONLY lists that are administered by the AB or their appointed representatives (which are approved each year at the beginning of the term by the entire AB). That's not what the motion says, however. The way the motion is worded, as Tina stated earlier, is in violation of Section V, Subsection A of the Standard Rules, which requires a member of the GC that is a State Coordinator. Since SCs are the administrators of the state lists, your motion would not allow a SC to be named to the committee. I am still unclear why you feel that anyone that administers a mail list, including the usgenweb-discuss mail list, should not be allowed to be seated on the GC. No one GC member has control of any grievance to the point that they will "taint" the process. A GC member is assigned to the team of the moderators and arbitrators and is there to assist with procedural questions and to try to keep everyone on task. They don't personally participate in the mediation and/or arbitration. If a mediated settlement is reached, that's good and fine. Nothing further to do. The entire GC votes to accept or reject the arbitrated settlement if required. Again, no one member has enough "power" to change the outcome of the vote. As for the requirement that mediators and arbitrators can't be list administrators, no one but the Grievance Committee (and maybe not all of them) know who is a mediator and/or arbitrator. That information is not provided to the AB at any point, unless the outcome of a grievance is appealed. It would appear that this motion is specifically aimed at one person and intent is to have them removed from either the Grievance Committee or as Discuss list administrator. While the intent may not have been what is written, a motion's interpretation must stand on what's actually written and presented to the AB for a vote. Sherri Bradley National Coordinator USGenWeb Project Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of W David Samuelsen Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 1:06 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [BOARD] Motion 2009/10-27 Removal of List Moderators That Serve on the Grievance Committee the motion does NOT apply to the state coordinators. You're confusing the motion with the state coordinators. The motion is very clear about the lists: usgenweb-discuss, usgenweb-se, usgenweb-sw, usgenweb-nw, usgenweb-ne and any other lists controlled or maintained under direction of the AB. David Samuelsen