I agree Jim. It has a lot of merit and makes good sense. BTW: If it hadn't been forwarded by morning I was planning to do it myself. <g> Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com -----Original Message----- From: Jim Powell Jr <jpowelljr@gru.net> To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com <BOARD-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Sunday, April 30, 2000 8:40 PM Subject: [BOARD-L] Second Proposal re Special Projects >I am forwarding this to Board-L although I have been warned not to >forward messages to that list. I will not be intimidated. I think >Ellen's proposal has merit. At the very least maybe it will start some >meaningful discussion. > >Jim >********** >TO: Jim Powell and Teri Pettit, SE/MA County Coordinator Representatives > Linda Mason, MS SC > > >As my SE/MA representatives, I am submitting this note in hopes that >either >or both will consider forwarding it to the Board-L. I would ask that, if >submitted, the note be posted in it's entirety. > >I am also requesting that Linda Mason, MS SC, forward a copy to the SC >List. > >Thank you for your consideration. > >Ellen Pack >Adams Co, MSGenWeb CC >Wilkinson Co, MSGenWeb CC >Early SW MS Territory, MSGenWeb CC >Greene Co, TNGenWeb ACC > >------------- > >To the USGW Advisory Board Members - > >Since the AB apparently chose not to consider or implement my earlier >proposal regarding placing the question of the Archives before a >committee, >and ultimately the USGW Members, and which received wide favorable >attention from the general membership (witness my mailbox), and since >the >situation has deteriorated further over the past few days, I beg your >indulgence in allowing me to submit a second proposal. > >I'm am still optimistic (though confidence is waning) that there are >enough >good people out there who will refrain from spending hours and hours >picking apart every word in an attempt to find an excuse as to why this >or >that can't be done. There are enough people who understand that they >are >not the only ones who can properly and effectively maintain the >Archives, >and who will sincerely TRY to do something right, and in the best >interests >of the project, so that this horrendous problem can be resolved once and >for all. > >--------- > >Proposal II > > >Please carefully read the entire proposal before forming an opinion. >This >proposal is not designed to end the Archives, but to salvage it, dust it >off, and give it fresh life. > >Simply put, it is time for the Archives to be completely dismantled on a >national level, and turned over to the individual states. > >One of the most potent arguments in favor of a breakup lies within the >history of individual state projects, as opposed to the history of the >Archives. > >There have been sporadic (and sometimes very serious) problems within >several states. However, those problems were predominately restricted >to >the states in question. They were eventually resolved within the states >themselves, and in accordance with USGW By-Laws. Residual problems are >few, and confined. Today, the states reside side-by-side, sometimes >disagreeing, but respectful of one another. The same thing can hardly >be >said of the Special Projects in this endless battle. > >The Special Projects must take a lesson from the States. I implore the >AB >to seriously consider drawing and placing before the membership an >emergency amendment consisting of the following points: > > 1. Removal of the Special Projects, USGW Archives, Census Project, >Census >Archives Project, Tombstone Project, et al, whatever the name, as >national >entities > > 2. Formation of State Archives Projects [XXGenWeb State Archives >Project] >that would fall under the direct auspices, responsibility, and control >of >each appropriate state, as opposed to any national level person(s) or >entity. Each State Archives Project would have the responsibility of >recruiting it's own transcribers and material, and of uploading and >maintaining all archived files pertinent to it's own state, and to none >other. > > 3. Formation of one USGW General Archives Project to procure, >transcribe, >upload and maintain general non state-specific files ONLY. Those files >would cover such things as general histories, migratory patterns and >trails, territorial information, etc. Material relative to individual >states would not be allowed to be placed in the General Archives, and >must >be referred to the appropriate state Archives. Whole scale maintenance >of >duplicate files should be deemed unnecessary and >inappropriate. Duplication of files should only be considered in the >instances of material covering major boundary changes, and the like. > > 4. Continuity and quality of files and uploads would be preserved via >clearly defined policy and procedure specifications re uploading and >copyright disclaimer/info, as outlined within the By-Laws amendment. > >[For the purposes of this note, consider the proposed USGW General >Archives >as simply another (though unnamed) state, unless otherwise specified.] > > 5. Each state would be granted the right to name it's State Archive >Coordinator, and indeed the number of coordinators and/or State Archive >File Managers as befits the individual needs and structure of that >state. State Archive Coordinators would be named via either a state >election or appointment by the SC, in accordance with individual state >procedure. Each State Archive Coordinator would have responsibility >and >authority to recruit individual State File Managers on an as-needed >basis. > > 6. In the case of the General USGW Archives, a General USGW Archives >Coordinator would be appointed by the AB, for a limited term - suggest >no >more than one year. Thereafter, the General USGW Archives Coordinator >would be elected by it's own File Managers for two-year terms. The >General >USGW Archives would come directly under the responsibility and control >of >the AB which, in turn, is answerable to the states and to the >electorate. > > 7. All files would be uploaded to and maintained on one USGW Archives >server > > 8. No person or persons, on any level, will be considered overall SP >or >Archives Coordinator, or overall coordinator of any fraction of the >Archives including census records, cemetery records, etc. > > 9. No person or persons other than the appropriate SC, State Archives >Coordinator and/or assigned State File Managers will upload, copy, >alter, >or remove any file. > > 10. Each state should have it's own password to the appropriate >directory. Each SC would have access to it's State Archives password, >or >in the case of the USGW General Archives, the AB Secretary would be >charged >with retaining the password which would be passed on to the AB or NC >only >after a motion to do so has been legally entered and passed by the AB, >and >not at the discretion or demand of any one individual. The General >Archives password, if used under an AB motion, will be changed, after >the >specific motion has been carried out, and once again retained by the >Board >Secretary. > > 11. No person or persons other than the appropriate SC, or the AB >acting >on a legally submitted and passed motion, will be authorized to fire a >State Archives Coordinator, change a password, alter "write" privileges, >directory structure, upload, delete, or alter any archived files. > > 12. An Archives server change would require a special proposition >presented by the AB, voted upon and passed by the general membership in >either a special or general election. > > 13. The AB would have the responsibility of maintaining a USGW >Archives >TOC as part of the National pages. Links should point to the USGW Index >page, each state Archives TOC, the Archives Search pages, and to a >GENERAL >information page that, among other things, refers potential volunteers >to >the appropriate state. The USGW Archives TOC, and any collateral pages, >must bear USGW official logo. > > 14. Each state would have the responsibility of maintaining it's >individual State Archives TOC, with a link to the USGW Archives TOC, the >Archives search page, and to the state index page. Layout and design of >that page would be determined by the State Archive Coordinator, but each >State Archives TOC must bear the USGW logo, and the state logo if >individual state regulations so require. > > 15. Each state would have the responsibility of insuring that no >Archives >copyright violations occurred, just like they do now relative to the >counties. Pre-existing copyright violation allegations should be >addressed >as soon as possible after acquisition of files currently residing in the >Archives or Census project (although I believe most of those allegations >would evaporate once the breakup occurred.) Copyright >allegations/infringements should be dealt with swiftly, firmly, and >appropriately on a case-to-case basis within each state responsible for >the >file(s) in question. > > 16. State participation in the State Archives Project would be >mandatory, >just as queries, and pertinent logo and links are mandatory, but would >*not* preclude a state from continuing with or putting in place it's own >state archives, if desired. > >I would also strongly urge the AB to submit a second emergency amendment >to >the effect that any national level action by the AB or the NC be allowed >ONLY upon a legally presented and passed AB motion, and not by arbitrary >decision by any one person, NC included. If a picture needs to be >drawn, >then draw it. >------------- > >I believe I have given the AB more than enough food for thought, as well >as >an outstanding foundation upon which an effective, fair, and permanent >resolution can be constructed. > >The States and CCs have a proven track record, and can handle things >quite >nicely. Let them. > >Permission is hereby granted to forward this note to any USGW member, >and >to post to any USGW List. > > >Respectfully, >Ellen Pack > >Adams Co, MSGenWeb CC >Wilkinson Co, MSGenWeb CC >Early SW MS Territory, MSGenWeb CC >Greene Co, TNGenWeb ACC > >