In a message dated 4/8/03 1:38:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time, john2936@comcast.net writes: > Had the problems been taken to the council we would not be > having this problem now. The way I read the guidelines, if a CC is being warned, they are sent a letter and the council is copied. The CCs involved were Georgia CCs. They all appeared on the County Selection Table as of 3 Jan 2003 Good, bad or indifferent CCs, they were entitled to due process. Did any of council members question the time period between the warning letters and the delinking? Donna Parrish

Vivian, You have correctly cited the section that creates the right of appeal to the Council. Many of you may remember a similar grievance having been filed last year. I can not go into details about the deliberations. What I can say is that, while we did uphold the decisions of the RC and the SC, it was very close. We almost did not. In fact, we almost issued admonitiions to people. However, in order for the grievance to go to the NC and the AB, the state remedies must be exhausted. The state remedies were not exhausted. I challenge anyone to give me any date on which a grievance against the SC was taken to the Council in the matters currently before the AB. Someone give me a concrete DATE on which these grievances were brought to the Council. Richard On Tue, 08 Apr 2003 12:12:46 -0400, Michael Saffold wrote > Richard, > > Please correct me if I am wrong, but I do not believe there is a > procedure in the guidelines for arbitration when a county > coordinator has a grievance against the state coordinator (as was > the case with the petitioners) or member of the Georgia council. > > Quoting from the guidelines: > >11. Settlement of Grievances. > >In the event of a disagreement involving a GAGenWeb site, or a > >disagreement over genealogical data stored on, or proposed for... > > As I understand this provision of the guidelines, the only criteria > for a grievance is a dispute concerning site and site content. > > Again quoting from the guidelines: > >The decision of the State Coordinator may be appealed to the GAGenWeb Council. > > If the dispute involves the SC, and the council serves strictly at > the pleasure of the SC, there would be no point in an appeal. It > would seem that the only remaining course of action would be to > petition the national Advisory Board for redress of grievances. > > Respectfully, > Vivian Price Saffold > Meriwether County > > At 10:11 AM 4/8/2003 -0500, you wrote: > >Donna, > > > >At no time was a grievance brought to the GaGenWeb Council. Had there been a > >grievance brought before the Council (which the guidelines require), then we > >might have a different outcome today. > > > >Thanks for letting me know that I had neglected to fix a page. I can always > >depend on you for help. > > > >Richard > > > > > > > >On Tue, 8 Apr 2003 10:44:49 EDT, MFLP wrote > > > In a message dated 4/8/03 9:50:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > > > mannannan@maclyr.com writes: > > > > What I can say is this: Our State Coordinator, Tim Stowell, is being > > > > railroaded through this. At *no time* has the process been fair. > > > > > > Then maybe he now knows how some of the CCs and former CCs feel. > > > If the Georgia Genweb Board were actually utilized, it might have > > > been able to settle it internally. > > > > > > Richard, you might want to update the RCs names on this page. > > > http://www.rootsweb.com/~gagenweb/coastal.html > > > You still have Keith and Carla and Laurs listed. > > > > > > Donna Parrish > > > > > > ==== GAGEN Mailing List ==== > > > Did your county's courthouse ever meet with a disaster?? > > > Check out GAGenWeb's List and Research Tips at: > > > http://www.rootsweb.com/~gagenweb/cchelp/courthouses.htm > > > > > > > > > > > >==== GAGEN Mailing List ==== > >This list is for volunteers of the GAGenWeb Project. If you wish to > >address only the GAGenWeb Board, send your email to: > > <GAGENWEB-L@rootsweb.com> > > 3570 Hildon Circle > Chamblee, GA 30341 > > ==== GAGEN Mailing List ==== > Did your county's courthouse ever meet with a disaster?? > Check out GAGenWeb's List and Research Tips at: > http://www.rootsweb.com/~gagenweb/cchelp/courthouses.htm

Wyndell, As I recall, your recollection is correct. We have attempted to form several committees, with only ONE volunteer from all of the CC's. It is my firm hope that we can get through this storm, re-establish ourselves as a project, and then get on with business. We will seek volunteers from which to form a committee to review and revise the Guidelines. It is our sincere hope that, given the current situation and with all of the parties ready to speak, there will be some who are ready to be part of the solution, and stop fueling the fire. So, rather than being divicise, I would appreciate it if everyone would start thinking of ways to make the project better and let's start a dialogue on this issue. Richard On Tue, 08 Apr 2003 12:00:16 -0400, Wyndell Taylor wrote > At 10:17 AM 4/8/03 -0500, you wrote: > >In response to question 1, yes, the current SC is interested in revising the > >guidelines to allow more input from the members of the Project - the County > >Coordinators. In fact, prior to the complaints being filed, we had been > >discussing the formation of a committee to revise those guidelines. > > Richard, as a member of the council who worked hard and long on the > guidelines, I would like to ask the question..... How does the council > propose to get the CC's involved in any discussion (not rant and > rave) about the guidelines. > > If my memory serves me correctly, everytime the council asked for > volunteers to help with anything, everyone would place their hands under > their bottoms and sit on them. <g> > > Seems a lot of folks are letting their voices be heard now, but no > one seemed to want to help with things. The Georgia Project has had > some great people in it. However, there has always been a shortage > of people who wanted to do anything more than gripe. > > I am not taking sides in this recall. I will vote, if given the > opportunity, just so that I am heard. The actions to bring this > matter to this point may or may not been warranted. It may have > been handled in a manner no approved of by some (many?) No matter > what that case is, we now have to decide on the issue. If a person > is not satisfied with Tim's way of doing things, they should vote > that way. If they are happy and want him to continue to be the > leader of the project, then let that be known also. > > However, once this business is finished, let's move forward to find > a way to better the project. Don't just sit back and let it all > slide. Open up and let your thoughts be known. > > ==== GAGEN Mailing List ==== > Got a problem? Contact your RC or ASC at GAGENWEB-L@rootsweb.com

>What I can say is this: Our State Coordinator, Tim Stowell, is being >railroaded through this. At *no time* has the process been fair. At *no >time* has the NC acted in any fashion that was not underhanded and completely >and totally unfair. And it was 100% fair to those whom Tim Removed? >What are the complaints against Tim? They are bogus and ridiculous. They >are nonjusticiable and are completely lacking in any form of merit >whatsoever. They are complaintsa regarding the dismissal of an ASC who broke >protocol and effectively attempted to start a mutiny (noting that the ASC and >RC's serve at the pleasure of the SC and are subject to removal at any time >without cause). They are complaints regarding the dismissal of a CC who >could not create a document in html format if she wanted to, let alone ftp >the document. They are complaints by a CC who came forward in defense of her >cousin with such vulgar language that a sailor would be embarassed (but not a >Marine - sorry, I remain true to my NAVY roots - Go Jolly Rogers!). But it was okay for that CC to serve this Project and host a page for some time. Then it's discovered she can't do the job and is removed with no regard to the work that she has done, or managed to get done. Although I despise swearing, and occasionally slip myself, it isn't against the law to swear. Should someone be reprimanded for swearing to a fellow Volunteer in this Project, yes. Should it mean their dismissal, no. There needs to be some middle ground. The point is every issue can be seen from 2 sides. Did some things need to be corrected, certainly. Did they call for dismissal, well I guess that is what we are voting on. I contend that the dismissals were unfair and too harsh a punishment for volunteers and that they did not meet the allotted warning times within our ByLaws. Why were these people removed before they had their day in 'court' >In closing, I urge you to vote your conscience. My conscience tells me that >the charges against Tim are trumped, brought by malcontents (such as a former >ASC who could not wait any longer to become SC, so he started a mutiny). >Because my conscience tells me these things, voting my conscience means to >not even go to the polls on this issue and to send a message to the NC that >his dirty pool and dastardly acts are not welcome here. If you agree with >me, then I urge you to vote your conscience by not voting. I am NOT a malcontent. I am opposed to abuse of power and removal of volunteers before they have an opportunity themselves to this process of defense, that you claim is denied to Tim. Hypocrisy is the greatest crime, you want afforded to Tim, what he did not give to the CCs he removed. Removal, like you and others claim for him, should be the last resort, you have not proven that it was the last resort afforded those Dismissed from GA. That's why I signed the Petition. I am NOT a malcontent, nor do I appreciate being name-called. Derek Nichols Echols County, GA

The bottom line in this fiasco is whether or not the leadership is fair, just and efficacious. The question of capability has never come up. It is about nurturing volunteers to exceed (our) expectations. Georgia is such a vital State in the realm of genealogical and history. Our enthusiasm should be high and our projects challenging. Someone (today) wrote that few volunteer for projects - perhaps if all of us felt we are vital members of this group, more would participate. But when one knows that one slip can be used against her/him - why put oneself on the line? The most productive people feel safe and valued - for their work and their opinions. We are volunteers - working for the same cause. Period. There is no room for ego. Personality is for our pages. And respect should be a given. About the accusation of this being because one or all of us who signed the petition having aspirations of being the SC or an RC - I haven't heard anyone express interest in taking over. That theory is hooey. As far as the email Tim shared with all of us - the one full of marked out (assumed) curse words. Well, I curse like a sailor.... and I found it offensive, immature and tacky. On the other hand - it was full of passion. Perhaps we all could be more passionate about this project...... or life..... There are at least two sides to every story - and then there is the truth. MK Harrison <A HREF="http://mkharrison.com">mkharrison.com</A> <A HREF="http://www.rootsweb.com/~gabarrow/">Barrow County, GA</A> <A HREF="http://www.ancestry.com/landing/homelandsweeps2/landing2.html?SourceCode=3913&iid=3913%3A+Sweepstakes+1">Ancestry.com</A> I don't know what kind of weapons will be used in the third world war, assuming there will be a third world war. But I can tell you what the fourth world war will be fought with - stone clubs. -Albert Einstein Copyright © 2003

>In closing, I urge you to vote your conscience. My conscience tells me that > >the charges against Tim are trumped, brought by malcontents (such as a >former > >ASC who could not wait any longer to become SC, so he started a mutiny). > >Because my conscience tells me these things, voting my conscience means >to > >not even go to the polls on this issue and to send a message to the NC >that > >his dirty pool and dastardly acts are not welcome here. If you agree >with > >me, then I urge you to vote your conscience by not voting. > >I am NOT a malcontent. > >I am opposed to abuse of power and removal of volunteers before they have >an >opportunity themselves to this process of defense, that you claim is denied >to Tim. Hypocrisy is the greatest crime, you want afforded to Tim, what he >did not give to the CCs he removed. Removal, like you and others claim for >him, should be the last resort, you have not proven that it was the last >resort afforded those Dismissed from GA. > >That's why I signed the Petition. I am NOT a malcontent, nor do I >appreciate being name-called. > >Derek Nichols >Echols County, GA > > For those of you who might not know what malcontent means... someone who is discontented, esp. with the government, and ready to make trouble. I am shocked at the use of this word towards those of us CC's who signed the petition from our so called leaders. This alone should tell those of you who are unsure of voting because you don't know enough about the situation that you indeed should vote. We need leaders that will treat us like the humans we are and not like we are some kind of puppets under their power hungry control. We are NOT ready to make trouble, we just want all CC's to be treated fairly. We MUST stand up and stand together. Kim Gordon Clayton & Habersham CC _________________________________________________________________ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

Richard, Please correct me if I am wrong, but I do not believe there is a procedure in the guidelines for arbitration when a county coordinator has a grievance against the state coordinator (as was the case with the petitioners) or member of the Georgia council. Quoting from the guidelines: >11. Settlement of Grievances. >In the event of a disagreement involving a GAGenWeb site, or a >disagreement over genealogical data stored on, or proposed for... As I understand this provision of the guidelines, the only criteria for a grievance is a dispute concerning site and site content. Again quoting from the guidelines: >The decision of the State Coordinator may be appealed to the GAGenWeb Council. If the dispute involves the SC, and the council serves strictly at the pleasure of the SC, there would be no point in an appeal. It would seem that the only remaining course of action would be to petition the national Advisory Board for redress of grievances. Respectfully, Vivian Price Saffold Meriwether County At 10:11 AM 4/8/2003 -0500, you wrote: >Donna, > >At no time was a grievance brought to the GaGenWeb Council. Had there been a >grievance brought before the Council (which the guidelines require), then we >might have a different outcome today. > >Thanks for letting me know that I had neglected to fix a page. I can always >depend on you for help. > >Richard > > > >On Tue, 8 Apr 2003 10:44:49 EDT, MFLP wrote > > In a message dated 4/8/03 9:50:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > > mannannan@maclyr.com writes: > > > What I can say is this: Our State Coordinator, Tim Stowell, is being > > > railroaded through this. At *no time* has the process been fair. > > > > Then maybe he now knows how some of the CCs and former CCs feel. > > If the Georgia Genweb Board were actually utilized, it might have > > been able to settle it internally. > > > > Richard, you might want to update the RCs names on this page. > > http://www.rootsweb.com/~gagenweb/coastal.html > > You still have Keith and Carla and Laurs listed. > > > > Donna Parrish > > > > ==== GAGEN Mailing List ==== > > Did your county's courthouse ever meet with a disaster?? > > Check out GAGenWeb's List and Research Tips at: > > http://www.rootsweb.com/~gagenweb/cchelp/courthouses.htm > > > > > >==== GAGEN Mailing List ==== >This list is for volunteers of the GAGenWeb Project. If you wish to >address only the GAGenWeb Board, send your email to: > <GAGENWEB-L@rootsweb.com> 3570 Hildon Circle Chamblee, GA 30341

At 10:17 AM 4/8/03 -0500, you wrote: >In response to question 1, yes, the current SC is interested in revising the >guidelines to allow more input from the members of the Project - the County >Coordinators. In fact, prior to the complaints being filed, we had been >discussing the formation of a committee to revise those guidelines. Richard, as a member of the council who worked hard and long on the guidelines, I would like to ask the question..... How does the council propose to get the CC's involved in any discussion (not rant and rave) about the guidelines. If my memory serves me correctly, everytime the council asked for volunteers to help with anything, everyone would place their hands under their bottoms and sit on them. <g> Seems a lot of folks are letting their voices be heard now, but no one seemed to want to help with things. The Georgia Project has had some great people in it. However, there has always been a shortage of people who wanted to do anything more than gripe. I am not taking sides in this recall. I will vote, if given the opportunity, just so that I am heard. The actions to bring this matter to this point may or may not been warranted. It may have been handled in a manner no approved of by some (many?) No matter what that case is, we now have to decide on the issue. If a person is not satisfied with Tim's way of doing things, they should vote that way. If they are happy and want him to continue to be the leader of the project, then let that be known also. However, once this business is finished, let's move forward to find a way to better the project. Don't just sit back and let it all slide. Open up and let your thoughts be known.

In a message dated 4/8/03 11:12:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time, mannannan@maclyr.com writes: > At no time was a grievance brought to the GaGenWeb Council. Had there been a > grievance brought before the Council (which the guidelines require), then we > might have a different outcome today. Now you have me wondering why the Board didn't get them. Donna

In a message dated 4/8/03 9:50:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, mannannan@maclyr.com writes: > What I can say is this: Our State Coordinator, Tim Stowell, is being > railroaded through this. At *no time* has the process been fair. Then maybe he now knows how some of the CCs and former CCs feel. If the Georgia Genweb Board were actually utilized, it might have been able to settle it internally. Richard, you might want to update the RCs names on this page. http://www.rootsweb.com/~gagenweb/coastal.html You still have Keith and Carla and Laurs listed. Donna Parrish

In response to the questions posed by Vivian, I would like the opportunity to respond. In response to question 1, yes, the current SC is interested in revising the guidelines to allow more input from the members of the Project - the County Coordinators. In fact, prior to the complaints being filed, we had been discussing the formation of a committee to revise those guidelines. In response to question 2, I believe that Tim Stowell is the most qualified person to lead the Project out of chaos and into the openly-governed Project that we all desire. There will always be SOME issues which require some form of confidentiality and discussion among the Council before presentation to the members of the Project. I do not think that there is anyone in this Project who realizes how important the CC's are to this Project more than Tim. Richard On Tue, 08 Apr 2003 10:15:36 -0400, Vivian Price Saffold wrote > Fellow GAGenWeb Coordinators, > > The upcoming vote was precipitated by a petition from some GAGenWeb > county coordinators who allege specific transgressions on the part > of the state coordinator. However, I believe there are much broader > issues involved and much more at stake. > > Our Georgia guidelines have proven to be seriously flawed, placing > all control over the project in the hands of the state coordinator > and the council, with no mandate for the governing body to accept > any suggestion or proposal from the membership (county coordinators). > > Thus, the upcoming vote also addresses two questions: > > 1. Is the current state coordinator willing to allow *meaningful* > reform of the guidelines to include (but not limited to) regular > elections, terms and term limits for all council members (including > the state coordinator), as well as a mechanism for member-initiated amendments? > > 2. Given the turmoil of the past few months, can the current state > coordinator lead this project toward a more productive future, in > which it is governed in an open manner conducive to complete member participation? > > As to voting, I take my citizenship in this project seriously. It is > my right, my responsibility and my privilege to vote. Not voting > simply is not an option. > > Respectfully, > Vivian Price Saffold > Meriwether County Coordinator > 3570 Hildon Circle > Chamblee, GA 30341 > > ==== GAGEN Mailing List ==== > Genealogy research usually begins with our great-grandparents to preserve > the privacy of 'living persons'. If you encounter a person searching > their birth parents, the need to go to the area on the web that deals > with just this type of research. Please refer them to: > http://www.adoption.org

Fellow GAGenWeb Coordinators, The upcoming vote was precipitated by a petition from some GAGenWeb county coordinators who allege specific transgressions on the part of the state coordinator. However, I believe there are much broader issues involved and much more at stake. Our Georgia guidelines have proven to be seriously flawed, placing all control over the project in the hands of the state coordinator and the council, with no mandate for the governing body to accept any suggestion or proposal from the membership (county coordinators). Thus, the upcoming vote also addresses two questions: 1. Is the current state coordinator willing to allow *meaningful* reform of the guidelines to include (but not limited to) regular elections, terms and term limits for all council members (including the state coordinator), as well as a mechanism for member-initiated amendments? 2. Given the turmoil of the past few months, can the current state coordinator lead this project toward a more productive future, in which it is governed in an open manner conducive to complete member participation? As to voting, I take my citizenship in this project seriously. It is my right, my responsibility and my privilege to vote. Not voting simply is not an option. Respectfully, Vivian Price Saffold Meriwether County Coordinator 3570 Hildon Circle Chamblee, GA 30341

Donna, At no time was a grievance brought to the GaGenWeb Council. Had there been a grievance brought before the Council (which the guidelines require), then we might have a different outcome today. Thanks for letting me know that I had neglected to fix a page. I can always depend on you for help. Richard On Tue, 8 Apr 2003 10:44:49 EDT, MFLP wrote > In a message dated 4/8/03 9:50:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > mannannan@maclyr.com writes: > > What I can say is this: Our State Coordinator, Tim Stowell, is being > > railroaded through this. At *no time* has the process been fair. > > Then maybe he now knows how some of the CCs and former CCs feel. > If the Georgia Genweb Board were actually utilized, it might have > been able to settle it internally. > > Richard, you might want to update the RCs names on this page. > http://www.rootsweb.com/~gagenweb/coastal.html > You still have Keith and Carla and Laurs listed. > > Donna Parrish > > ==== GAGEN Mailing List ==== > Did your county's courthouse ever meet with a disaster?? > Check out GAGenWeb's List and Research Tips at: > http://www.rootsweb.com/~gagenweb/cchelp/courthouses.htm

Gentlefolk, I had initially chosen to stay out of the fray on this one. However, I now feel that I must step up to the plate on this one. I know more about the goings on with respect to this situation than I care to recite. I can not even divulge much of what I know due to confidentiality. What I can say is this: Our State Coordinator, Tim Stowell, is being railroaded through this. At *no time* has the process been fair. At *no time* has the NC acted in any fashion that was not underhanded and completely and totally unfair. The wording on the ballot will be confusing to many, because that is the way that the NC desires it to be. He wants to confuse us as to what we are voting on. Moreover, the choices of yes, no, and present are unprecedented and have been chosen solely for the purpose of attempting to have a quorum, which is one further example of the dastardly nature with which the NC has acted in trying to remove Tim as SC of Georgia. What are the complaints against Tim? They are bogus and ridiculous. They are nonjusticiable and are completely lacking in any form of merit whatsoever. They are complaintsa regarding the dismissal of an ASC who broke protocol and effectively attempted to start a mutiny (noting that the ASC and RC's serve at the pleasure of the SC and are subject to removal at any time without cause). They are complaints regarding the dismissal of a CC who could not create a document in html format if she wanted to, let alone ftp the document. They are complaints by a CC who came forward in defense of her cousin with such vulgar language that a sailor would be embarassed (but not a Marine - sorry, I remain true to my NAVY roots - Go Jolly Rogers!). In the process, the NC denied Tim every form of relief and even declined to respond to email messages or other requests. In short, Tim was denied his rights to due process - a basic human right that is so basic and so important that it appears TWICE in the Constitution of the United States of America. Moreover, despite the lack of a quorum before the AB, and the lack of passage with respect to the complaints against Tim, we have nonetheless been forced to have a vote on the issue. Why? Because the NC is on a political witch hunt. The NC has decided that his rival, Tim Stowell, a former NC of the Project, and the current SC of North Dakota, is a bad person. If Tim is removed here, don't be surprised to see him removed in North Dakota, too. In closing, I urge you to vote your conscience. My conscience tells me that the charges against Tim are trumped, brought by malcontents (such as a former ASC who could not wait any longer to become SC, so he started a mutiny). Because my conscience tells me these things, voting my conscience means to not even go to the polls on this issue and to send a message to the NC that his dirty pool and dastardly acts are not welcome here. If you agree with me, then I urge you to vote your conscience by not voting. Thank you for listening to my diatribe. Richard Pettys, Jr. On Mon, 07 Apr 2003 18:57:34 -0500, jimmy wrote > The ballots have NOT been sent as of yet. A message will be posted > to this list when they are sent out. > > The three choices on the ballot will be explained in the letter from > the EC (or someone in authority). > > It is my understanding the "PRESENT" is essentially the same as > Abstain. You choose not to vote yes or no, but do want to be > included in the quorum. > > I STRONGLY urge everyone to vote their conscience. > > Thanks > jimmy > > Margie wrote: > > > I have not seen the ballot, but saw the instruction from Mr. Harrison on the > > Board-L list that instructed the > > Yes, No and present to be on it. > > > > Margie > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Linda Barton [mailto:lab@boone.net] > > Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 6:07 PM > > To: GAGEN-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: RE: [GAGEN] Yes, no, present > > > > Does this mean the ballots are already being sent out to people? Should we > > be responding to Richard's request if we haven't received ours yet? > > > > Linda Barton > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Margie [mailto:margie@majorinternet.net] > > Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 4:26 PM > > To: GAGEN-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: [GAGEN] Yes, no, present > > > > Tim, > > > > I have seen the ballot and wonder why they chose to have > > > > Yes, No and present > > > > Why the present? > > > > The other polls/votes did not have the present is this to make sure we have > > a quorum? > > > > Margie > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tim Stowell [mailto:tstowell@chattanooga.net] > > Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 1:22 PM > > To: GAGEN-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: [GAGEN] voting - meet and greet > > > > Dear Volunteers for GAGenWeb, > > > > Yesterday the National Board approved the list that will be used for the > > vote. This list is composed of those who were CCs as of March 20th. At > > some time in the next few days an announcement will be made that voting > > will commence. It is my understanding that the vote will take place over a > > 10 day period after which time the results will be announced. > > > > As such, it is imperative that we know that you have received your ballot. > > I have asked Richard to set up two email addresses - one to be used if you > > receive your ballot and one to be used if you do not receive your ballot. > > > > With 128 eligible voters, myself excluded, the Guidelines require that 96 > > people vote to have a quorum or legal vote. I remind you that you have the > > absolute right to speak your mind by NOT voting. If we do not have a > > quorum, it will send a message to the AB that you believe they have handled > > this situation improperly. > > > > With all the issues that have been plaguing us since January, I have been > > remiss in introducing some of our new CC's, and I apologize for that. In > > an effort to bring us back together as one group dedicated to making free > > resources available to everyone, I invite everyone to send a short note to > > the list, telling us a little bit about yourself - your name, your hobbies, > > where you live and the current brickwall you are seeking, for one never > > knows when another listener has what you are looking for. > > > > Hopefully, in this way, we can return to our tasks and move ahead. > > > > Tim > > > > ==== GAGEN Mailing List ==== > > Genealogy research usually begins with our great-grandparents to preserve > > the privacy of 'living persons'. If you encounter a person searching > > their birth parents, the need to go to the area on the web that deals > > with just this type of research. Please refer them to: > > http://www.adoption.org > > > > --- > > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.467 / Virus Database: 266 - Release Date: 4/1/2003 > > > > --- > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.467 / Virus Database: 266 - Release Date: 4/1/2003 > > > > ==== GAGEN Mailing List ==== > > Have you added something signifigant to your website? Advertise it on this > > list! > > > > ==== GAGEN Mailing List ==== > > Do you have a suggestion to include in our taglines? If so, please write > > GAGENWEB-L@rootsweb.com > > > > --- > > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.467 / Virus Database: 266 - Release Date: 4/1/2003 > > > > --- > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.467 / Virus Database: 266 - Release Date: 4/1/2003 > > > > ==== GAGEN Mailing List ==== > > Did your county's courthouse ever meet with a disaster?? > > Check out GAGenWeb's List and Research Tips at: > > http://www.rootsweb.com/~gagenweb/cchelp/courthouses.htm > > ==== GAGEN Mailing List ==== > Regional Coordinators are there to help County Coordinators. Don't > hesitate to contact them should you have any, any question. To find > info on your region visit http://www.rootsweb.com/~gagenweb/regional.html

Hello My name is Gaila Merrington and I look after the Houston County Web page and list, with my cousin Sandra Riner. Sandra lives in Tennesee and I live in Sydney Australia, but we both grew up in Houston County <me part time>. Our ancestors settled in Houston County, as well as nearby Bibb and Crawford County in the 1820's, shortly after these counties were opened up to settlers from Indian Lands. We have (Sandra's) sister, cousins and aunts still living there today, so we still go to visit and research the area. When you can remember growing up with Georgia's red clay under your feet, picking pecans in the fall and making peach ice cream with a ice laden maker on the front porch, an emotional attachment takes place. We feel most people coming to look for Houston County ancestors are very likely to be our long lost cousins. We are always looking for information on our Georgia families, which go back to the Carolina's: Busby, Cherry,Corley, Foreman, Hatfield, Heard, Howard, Schofield, Sotroe, Winn, Watson, Wilder and the real brick wall, John Johnson born c 1800 married Lillian Busby probably born in North Carolina, but haven't yet connected him to the right Johnson family. So y'all come by and visit our web page, send in data for us to share with other cousins and kin. Gaila

Hope Bettie is ok, which state is she in? Please send her a note to say we hope she is on air again soon. Gaila ----- Original Message ----- From: "Debra Crosby" <poohbos@poohbos.com> To: <GAGEN-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 11:15 PM Subject: [GAGEN] Fw: weather trouble > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Bosque Lover > Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 3:27 AM > Subject: weather trouble > > > Just a quick note--we had awful weather here today. Hail, heavy rain, > then a tornado. We're ok, but our daughter got thrown around & broke > her nose, & got a concussion. We're just in from the emergency room. > Our house is fine, but her boyfriend's home is in terrible shape. More > storms coming, but hopefully can begin clean up tomorrow...writemore > when I can. Please let anyone know that needs to. > Bettie <>< > -- > Never take away anyone's hope. That may be all they have. > -- > All outgoing mail virus free, scanned by Norton 2002, > http://www.symantec.com/ > > > > > > > ==== GAGEN Mailing List ==== > Got a problem? Contact your RC or ASC at GAGENWEB-L@rootsweb.com >

Derek said: >I ask people to please vote. I don't care how you vote, but let's >not let this issue continue to burn in the background because there >was no resolution due to a lack of quorom. In order to move forward >and get over this, GA needs a yes or a no vote, and not lingering >doubts of which way the vote may have gone and who was and wasn't >right. I agree completely. Jacki Colquitt County GenWeb Coordinator http://www.rootsweb.com/~gacolqu2/ Administrator, RootsWeb Message Board for Colquitt County GA

Hi y'all ;-) I took on Colquitt County in April of 2000 because my grandfather and his siblings were born there. I was born and raised in Florida (5th generation Floridian on several lines). I graduated from USC (that's the University of South Carolina, the first USC!!) and was a college professor for several years. Currently I'm a mathematical statistician for the Census Bureau. Brick walls? I've got quite a few: 1) Joseph Pitts, born in GA in 1858 or 1860. He's listed in the 1860 Brooks County census, but is he the brother or son of Sarah Pitts listed with him? 2) Franklin Harvey Harris, born 1876, Columbia County, FL. Is he the son of Thompson C.B. Harris? Is the Harvey R. Harris buried in Bradford County FL the same man? 3) Sarah Johnson, born 1849, married Joseph Pitts. Who were her parents? (I have a pretty good idea, but do you know how many Sarah and James Johnsons there are in GA?!) And those are just a few on the paternal lines! Jacki Colquitt County GenWeb Coordinator http://www.rootsweb.com/~gacolqu2/ Administrator, RootsWeb Message Board for Colquitt County GA

At 08:03 PM 4/7/03 -0300, you wrote: >There are a number of things that I believe need to be corrected in >this post. I'd actually like to see Leadership do it, but I'll step >up to the plate incase they don't/won't. > >Margie said: > >> Had they looked at the complaints independently or at all they would >> have thrown them all out. Instead we have some AB members that desire >> to work around the bylaws. > >There are no requirements within the USGenWeb Bylaws that say one >must go through a Grievance Process. The Right to Recall is in our >ByLaws with no stipulations on previously met conditions. Ah but there are requirements within the Georgia Guidelines - which all incoming CCs have to agree to abide by. >> I WILL NOT VOTE IN THIS KANGAROO COURT called an election. > >This Vote is NOT an Election. It's a vote to determine if a Majority >of 2/3 wishes to Recall the SC. An election for a new SC, which the >current SC could run in should he choose so, would follow should the >Recall succeed. That is true. It is a vote to determine if 50% of the CCs in Georgia wish to recall the SC. 75% must participate in the vote for it to be a valid vote and 2/3 of those (which would equal 50% of the CCs) would have to say yes. >> That is my right. I will not be a part to the injustice that is being >> done here. > >You have the right not to vote and to state such. > >I think it's improper and a conflict of interest for the person being >Recalled to be stating that if people don't vote the Recall will fail >for a lack of quorom. I believe it is important that voters have the facts. Do you not feel that voters should be informed of the consequences of their actions? <snip> >I ask people to please vote. I don't care how you vote, but let's >not let this issue continue to burn in the background because there >was no resolution due to a lack of quorom. In order to move forward >and get over this, GA needs a yes or a no vote, and not lingering >doubts of which way the vote may have gone and who was and wasn't >right. > >Derek Nichols >Echols County, GA Actually after the vote there won't be any lingering doubts - it will be up or down. Whichever way it goes, I'll accept the results and move on from there. Tim

There are a number of things that I believe need to be corrected in this post. I'd actually like to see Leadership do it, but I'll step up to the plate incase they don't/won't. Margie said: > Had they looked at the complaints independently or at all they would > have thrown them all out. Instead we have some AB members that desire > to work around the bylaws. There are no requirements within the USGenWeb Bylaws that say one must go through a Grievance Process. The Right to Recall is in our ByLaws with no stipulations on previously met conditions. > I WILL NOT VOTE IN THIS KANGAROO COURT called an election. This Vote is NOT an Election. It's a vote to determine if a Majority of 2/3 wishes to Recall the SC. An election for a new SC, which the current SC could run in should he choose so, would follow should the Recall succeed. > That is my right. I will not be a part to the injustice that is being > done here. You have the right not to vote and to state such. I think it's improper and a conflict of interest for the person being Recalled to be stating that if people don't vote the Recall will fail for a lack of quorom. > This matter was placed before the AB and it failed to meet a quorum. > The Bylaws state that this action could not be brought again for 6 > months. The complaints were withdrawn and immediately filed again. > This time the AB decided that since the vote failed to meet a quorum > that it never happened. Well it did happen. The AB then tried to not > use the current voters list but use the one from last fall, a motion > was even placed to change the rules altogether. The Bylaws make no such statement of 6 months wait. That 6 months wait was in a Board Motion passed AFTER the petition was filed. Should motions be forced retroactively? I'm quite sure none of us approve of that. I ask people to please vote. I don't care how you vote, but let's not let this issue continue to burn in the background because there was no resolution due to a lack of quorom. In order to move forward and get over this, GA needs a yes or a no vote, and not lingering doubts of which way the vote may have gone and who was and wasn't right. Derek Nichols Echols County, GA