RootsWeb.com Mailing Lists
Total: 1/1
    1. Re: [BOARD-L] Amendment Proposal re Funding By-Law
    2. Joy Fisher
    3. If we do not allow CCs to accept cash, how can we allow them to accept merchandise, such as the SK Census materials?? At 05:11 PM 9/2/99 -0700, you wrote: >At 7:21 AM -0700 9/2/99, Shari Handley wrote: >>So, the immediate problem has been taken care of. We need, though, to think >>of how we, as a Project, should handle similar situations in the future. >>Here are my thoughts: >> >>When you're getting into asking for cash money, in any way, shape, or >>form, you're starting down a very slippery slope. The potential would exist >>for abuse and dishonesty, and once those problems started, we'd have one >>heck of a mess. So, my personal opinion is that I'd rather see *less* data >>and maintain the pristine, commercial and money-free nature of the project. >>This is not any reflection of the CC mentioned above, or her site. I am >>confident that what she was doing was perfectly above-board. But, the next >>person may *not* be, and where do we draw the line? The best place is >>usually at the beginning. >> >>The recent discussions on the SC list seem to indicate that the State >>Coordinators generally feel this way, as well. > >Shari, > >Good summary, and it does seem to be the majority sentiment on the SC list. > >I think I will submit, on STATE-COORD-L, the following amendment proposal: > >(Since Rootsweb lists do not allow the inclusion of formatting codes such as >underlines, strikeouts or colors, additions or changes are indicated in >all-caps. Numbers in parens refer to the reasons, listed after the revised >By-Law.) > >-------------------- >Article IX, Section 2 of the By-Laws shall be amended to read: > >Solicitation of funds for personal gain OR FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF PERSONAL >COSTS INCURRED IN MAINTAINING A USGENWEB SITE(1) is inappropriate. This is >defined as the direct appeal on the [deleted: home page] PAGES (2) of any >of the websites comprising The USGenWeb Project for funding to [deleted: do >research,](3) pay for server space, to do look-ups, TO COVER COSTS OF >PHOTOCOPYING, MICROFILM RENTAL, OBTAINING MATERIALS FOR TRANSCRIPTION, OR >OTHER EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SITE. [delete: etc.](4) > >A website may, however, acknowledge any entities who may host their website >(i.e., provide server space at no cost.) [moved to here: The >acknowledgement may include a link to the hosting entity's website.](5) A >website may also include a link to a coordinator's personal page on which >they offer research services for reimbursement. IF SUCH A LINK IS INCLUDED, >A CLEAR DISTINCTION MUST BE MADE BETWEEN THE USGENWEB PAGES AND THE >COORDINATOR'S PERSONAL PAGES, SO THAT A TYPICAL VISITOR WOULD NOT MISTAKE >THE PERSONAL HOME PAGE FOR PART OF THE USGENWEB SITE.(6) A website may list >research materials and/or services which may be for sale/hire, either by >the coordinator, a genealogy society, or others. Such a listing shall not >be on the main web page for the site, but may be linked from the main web >page. It may be appropriate to include a disclaimer that the coordinator >and The USGenWeb Project do not guarantee the contents of such research >materials and/or the expertise of any professional researchers. > >-------------------- > >Reasons for changes: > > (1) The specific examples given in the original By-Law, and the specific > problem cases which arose, were not what most people would think of > as "personal gain". Adding the phrase about reimbursement of expenses > here makes the definition which follows fit the term it is defining. > > (2) The potential problems with funding appeals are very similar whether > the request is on the home page or a secondary page. The original > wording was too much of a loophole. (The Michigan CC's who resigned > in protest did so three days AFTER the Kent Co Funding FAQ was moved > from the home page to a secondary page to comply with the original > wording, so the issue was plainly not which page it was on.) > > (3) Once we take out the "home page" wording, prohibiting "to do research" > on every page would contradict the research services specifically allowed > to be listed on a secondary page in the "allowed activities" part of > this section. Since the second part specifically restricts listing > research services to secondary pages, there is no need to prohibit it > it the definition sentence. > > (4) This list is to be specific about the type of activities that some CC's > thought were allowed, and other CC's thought were forbidden. To say >"etc." > after such a short list of examples as originally appeared did not give > enough information to predict what the "etc." was meant to cover. > > (5) Minor reordering to move the two clauses about hosts together, and the > sentences about offering personal research services together. The >original > order was HOSTS - RESEARCH - HOSTS - RESEARCH, which was harder to >follow. > > (6) This change is the lowest priority, but I thought it might help stem > controversies where a CC says "but that's my personal page", and a > critic says "it looks just like all your county pages to me". > >The overall goal is to prevent the kind of problem where a CC innocently thinks >they are following the rules, and another CC thinks they are disobeying them, >by being much more specific (and inclusive) about what is prohibited. > >Anybody have any suggestions to make before I post this to the STATE-COORD-L >list? Do we need special wording to allow crediting donations of materials, >such as the Census books provided by S-K Publications? > >// Teri >

    09/02/1999 06:30:55