Hi Folks I am wearing my AB hat for this message!!!! OK, here is the first little tidbit of the procedures of how things will work as I understand it. I am copying this note to the NC and the parliamentarian so they can correct me if and when I try to tell you incorrectly!!! The procedure being used by the AB is located at http://www.usgenweb.org/official/standing-procedures.html#re, "Removal of an SC or ASC". Read this and you'll know as much as I do!!!! When the time comes, the EC will send you a password, and information on where to vote when they have things ready and you will vote much like you do for the annual elections. At this time I do not know the timeframe as to when that will be. There has been some question as to what the "present" vote means. The USGenWeb Bylaws requires for this vote to be valid that a quorum, or minimum of 75% of the CC's vote. The "present", is the same as abstain, it counts your vote towards the quorum, but will not count to the 2/3 (66%) "Yes" votes needed for passage. If you have any questions please feel to let me know. Thanks jimmy

Wearing my CC hat here. Consider this a formal complaint to you Jimmy Epperson my Representative and the members of the AB. This matter was brought before the AB and it was placed for a vote and you did not have a quorum. The Bylaws state that a failed attempt cannot be brought again for 6 months. Why is the board now rehearing the same complaints when it has been heard before? I know that the complaint was withdrawn but this was after the vote failed to have a quorum. Why are you using two different Bylaws to rule on the same complaint? The matter was withdrawn after a failed quorum and then immediately refiled. Even if the complaint was heard again which it cannot be since there is a 6 month rule it should not be heard under the new amendments. Is this a railroad job, it sure looks like it. The complaint was heard and failed. How can you not act like this never happened and the same people bring the same complaints again and this time under the new rules? Why are you not applying the same to the problems in North Carolina? Why are you choosing to beat Tim and Georgia down and not applying the same standards to North Carolina? They should not be able to bring this action for 6 months. I would also like to request that a copy of the bylaw that was passed after this complaint was brought to be posted on this list regarding the removal of the SC or ASC. I could not find it on the National board. I would like to know if there is any language that protects those falsely accused. I also would like to know why my complaints were refused by you stating that the AB refused them because they had not been exhausted locally when the complaints that we have before us were never brought to the State and are against the USGENWEB Bylaws and the GaGenWeb Bylaws. Each state that the matter has to be heard on the State level first. None of the complain taints have sought relief on the State Level. This in my opinion is an illegal action and violated Bylaws and Guidelines. I protest this entire matter stating that 1. The complainants did not bring the matter to the State level as required by both UsGenWeb and GaGenWeb. 2. The AB is in violation of the Bylaws that state the matter must be heard by the State first 3. The AB refused to hear the complaint of Margie Daniels citing that the matter had not been heard on the State Level but allowed these complain taints to bring a complaint when they had not sought relief at the State Level. Margie Daniels complaint was directly related to the Lisa Graham matter. 4. Due process was not followed in keeping with the USGENWEB Bylaws. The NC has stepped outside the Bylaws by allowing this action to be brought again within 6 months by the same complain taints. Am I outraged. Yes I am. This action shows in my opinion that some members of this Board and the NC are biased in their treatment of others. Depending on who they like and who they do not like. North Carolina VS. Georgia. Same complaints different actions on the part of the NC. I would also like to request the courtesy of a reply to all my complaints in an official letter since I have not heard a word on any of them. I do not want to hear it through the grapevine. I would like the NC to respond to my complaints with an explanation as to why I was denied and these complain taints were heard when they did not follow the Bylaws and the Guidelines. Section 5. State projects are empowered to develop/adopt any additional rules/bylaws and guidelines, as appropriate, for their state so long as they do not conflict with these bylaws. State projects shall be highly encouraged to develop and adopt rules/bylaws that cover grievance procedures within the state Margie Daniels CC Putham, Crawford and Macon Counties Member UsGenWeb since 1996 -----Original Message----- From: jimmy [mailto:eppy@ticnet.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 11:21 PM To: GAGEN-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [GAGEN] Procedures Hi Folks I am wearing my AB hat for this message!!!! OK, here is the first little tidbit of the procedures of how things will work as I understand it. I am copying this note to the NC and the parliamentarian so they can correct me if and when I try to tell you incorrectly!!! The procedure being used by the AB is located at http://www.usgenweb.org/official/standing-procedures.html#re, "Removal of an SC or ASC". Read this and you'll know as much as I do!!!! When the time comes, the EC will send you a password, and information on where to vote when they have things ready and you will vote much like you do for the annual elections. At this time I do not know the timeframe as to when that will be. There has been some question as to what the "present" vote means. The USGenWeb Bylaws requires for this vote to be valid that a quorum, or minimum of 75% of the CC's vote. The "present", is the same as abstain, it counts your vote towards the quorum, but will not count to the 2/3 (66%) "Yes" votes needed for passage. If you have any questions please feel to let me know. Thanks jimmy ==== GAGEN Mailing List ==== Have you added something signifigant to your website? Advertise it on this list! --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.463 / Virus Database: 262 - Release Date: 3/17/2003 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.463 / Virus Database: 262 - Release Date: 3/17/2003