First let me apologize to David Morgan, I was not "picking" on David in my earlier message. "There" should have been spelled out where there was, (if one had read my previous email which did not go astray, "there" was broken out more appropriately), but nonetheless the award was popularity .... MY POINT was...... not who or where, or what, but it should be "FAIR" to all, no matter what the situations are. Fair and equitable. The next item that I mistook, and again my apologies to Scott, and not to hurt anyone's feelings, Scott's site was Cherokee where he won county of the month (1997 National Genealogist Society Conference, Valley Forge, PA The GAGenWeb's Cherokee County Georgia Page was named as one of the 8 best counties in the USGenWeb Project & Georgia GenWeb's Spotlight County of the Month for April 1997) It was pointed out to me that he was nominated by me for for the last county of the month contest for Polk and Don McHugh's Morgan site, but one of the persons that reminded me, that he "blasted it down", .... and apparently we did not have a county of the month from that point on?? That is at least 2 other people's versions, so with the three of us telling this I am sure we will get to the facts eventually. <I would laugh, but at this point I can't>. But I guess this actually proves at least one of my points I was trying to make ... that at least one person would not vote for a site with frames. Fair? Equitable? So again, my point to all of this was not to pick on anyone, not to mistell something but to be FAIR and EQUITABLE and have a level playing field for all. I am also sorry that I rained on the parade, I would hope ithis could be something that would help put GA back together again. As it has been pointed out to me nothing can be perfect from the get-go, and should be a work in progress. So my apologies to all, but moreover to David and to Scott. It was not my intention to make either of them feel badly, Brenda

Brenda, I realize that your "Site Compliance & Review" message was meant for the RC list, but since it did come to all, I hope you don't mind me throwing in my two cents. <g> I didn't take your message as raining on the parade. You made some very good points (some I had wondered about myself). It would be a shame for something that was meant to be a fun, postive activity to end up causing hard feelings. It seems that the main point behind the "Surfers" is to acknowledge some of the great work that's being done in GAGenWeb. If having a "County of the Month" proves to be too complicated (in the area of fairness), perhaps there is an alternative? Maybe the surfers could present the GAGEN mail list with a monthly "Spotlight" message, highlighting noteworthy aspects of various counties. For example, one county might have a great collection of historical photos; one county might have every cemetery online & indexed; another county might have a really creative, professional looking layout. That way, it wouldn't be necessary to judge or vote on any particular county as a whole... and nobody would be at a disadvantage, because no matter what our limitations, we all have the ability to do *something* great for our counties. This would be a neat way for CCs to get new ideas for their own counties. Perhaps a portion of the "Help for CCs" page could include links to the spotlighted items, so new CCs would have some great examples to look at. This isn't to say that I'm against having a County of the Month... just offering another suggestion. :) Jeanne

At 11:49 AM 3/27/03 -0500, you wrote: >The next item that I mistook, and again my apologies to Scott, and not to >hurt anyone's feelings, Scott's site was Cherokee where he won county of the >month (1997 National Genealogist Society Conference, Valley Forge, PA >The GAGenWeb's Cherokee County Georgia Page was named as one of the 8 best >counties in the USGenWeb Project > & > Georgia GenWeb's Spotlight >County of the Month for April 1997) > Oh me... now my feelings are hurt. <Gbg> wjile <rofl> Brenda..... Cherokee was under my watchful eye when the site won that award in 1997. Not that it matters at all who gets the credit, just as long as the data is presented to our vistors. But, I will tell you that it almost "popped my buttons" when I received word that they had chosen the Cherokee site as one of the 8 best, out of all that were online. >It was pointed out to me that he was nominated by me for for the last county >of the month contest for Polk and Don McHugh's Morgan site, but one of the >persons that reminded me, that he "blasted it down", .... and apparently we >did not have a county of the month from that point on?? That is at least 2 >other people's versions, so with the three of us telling this I am sure we >will get to the facts eventually. <I would laugh, but at this point I >can't>. But I guess this actually proves at least one of my points I was >trying to make ... that at least one person would not vote for a site with >frames. Fair? Equitable? Frames are not real good for some folks. I for one thought it was great at first, but realized it was not. > >So again, my point to all of this was not to pick on anyone, not to mistell >something but to be FAIR and EQUITABLE and have a level playing field for >all. I am also sorry that I rained on the parade, I would hope ithis could >be something that would help put GA back together again. As it has been >pointed out to me nothing can be perfect from the get-go, and should be a >work in progress. So my apologies to all, but moreover to David and to >Scott. It was not my intention to make either of them feel badly, Seems a lot of misconceptions have been developed about the project and the guidelines. As one who worked with the council on the guidelines, I know that they were meant to only better the project. Not tear it up. Most of the CC's do a wonderful job. They work hard getting data and other information on their sites. However; there were/are (and I am not sure if they are still with the project) some who seemed to just want their 'names in lights', so to speak. They had a site, and that was it. No data to amount to anything. And they would not work with anyone to get data placed on their sites. Several tried, all were turned down. There were some that were not much more than commerical sites. Think most of those are now gone. I know there are lots of personalities within the project. That is good. At least it ain't all plain vanilla. <g> There is still a need for some sites to be upgrade. Most are probably within the guidelines. But some are still in need of data to go on the sites. All sites can't have page after page of data, because a lot of counties just don't have the records to put online. Speaking only for myself, when I was CC of Cherokee, my desire was to put as much data online as I could. And I 'think' I did a fair job. Not as much as I wanted, but due to limitations, I did the best I could. Time is a big constraint for a lot of people. They have more on their plates than they can say grace over. But each person needs to work at getting what they can do online. I know the hardships of trying to get someone to help do any of the work. I tried to get help with the 1870 census of Cherokee County transcription. One member of the mailing list could not help, but purchased the roll of film for me to work with. That was wonderful. Not to mention helpful. I scanned the images, put them online where they could be accessed, and asked for volunteers to take a page, a district, a 'whatever', and help abstract the data and I would put it on line. I could count on my fingers the number of people who 'said' they would help. Then I can count on one hand 'those' who actually did any work. Some did more that otheres. The sad thing is, the abstract is still not done. Getting help is not the easiest thing in the world, at least not in the world of GAGenWeb. If a site does not have as much as someone elses, then we need to stop and think about why that could be. Is it because the CC does not want to do? If so, then they need to be asked to step down. Is it because they do not have the resourses? Then we need to look at helping locate resourses for them. Is it because they do not have time to do it? Well...... I got some ideas here, but maybe I should not speak to those. <gbg> I have been here in the project almost from day one. I have worked with two SC's. One real close. There have been times in this project that you could not get an answer from the leadership. There were times when folks needed answers and the SC was no where to be found, or if they were found, would respond. when Tim came into the position, he made a change to the RC system. If has worked well to a point. This system allows some relief to Tim. The system is not perfect. Don't think it ever will. The RC's have to walk a fine line in their dealings. It is so easy to upset the cc's. <gbg> When I am doing what I feel is my best, along comes the RC and just nit-picks me to death. <g> They just don't realize what I go thought. <all said with tongue in check> The project is in the worst case of tail-spin I have seen. We are trying to pull in seperate directions, instead of trying to find a common ground, and make this once again the best project in the entire USGenWeb Project. I know that Tim has his problems, as we all do. But the project is being torn from all sides. Lets step back, and take a few days to let the dust settle. If the vote is coming, then let it come. Make your decision as to how you feel and vote that conviction. Once the votes are counted and we see what we see..... then each of us must make a decision as to what we as individuals want to do. If Tim is confirmed, then lets try to find a common ground to work to and from. I have always said that the CC's have some of the best ideas, and to let them speak. But there needs to be order about it. I don't think we have much order at the moment. That said, and I think it is maybe more than I intended to say.... I remain hopeful for the return of the great GAGenWeb Project. Wyndell Taylor