-----Original Message----- From: LaDarlaK@aol.com <LaDarlaK@aol.com> To: USGW-CC-L@usgennet.org <USGW-CC-L@usgennet.org> Date: Friday, June 11, 1999 3:48 PM Subject: USGW-CC-L: Re: Dr B. tells it like it is! >In a message dated 6/11/99 4:37:06 PM Central Daylight Time, dogtrot@well.com >writes: > >> RootsWeb would have stayed completely bannerless, completely >> noncommercial, and completely supported just by voluntary >> contributions if we could have made a go of it. >> >> But most of us didn't actively support that model (THANKS! to the >> folks who did), and RootsWeb was going to die with only 2% of our >> Websurfing users and only 7% of our list subscribers as >> contributors. Beenies and weenies are OK, but no food at all isn't >> sustainable even for crazy hippie system administrators. >> >> We collectively didn't support the voluntary contribution model and >> it failed. Now we get to live with the consequences. > >Not much fun to hear! "But if the shoe fits....." Those are pretty lousy >percentages for a group of "supporters". > >La Darla

-----Original Message----- From: Dr. Brian Leverich <leverich@rootsweb.com> To: STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com <STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Friday, June 11, 1999 1:34 PM Subject: [STATE-COORD-L] Re: A question for incumbent officers. > > >> From: Fred Smoot <dogtrot@well.com> >> >> Do the advertising features of the new RW cluster pages, >> GenConnect, etc, fly in the face of the principles of >> non-commercialism followed by our Project? > > >Hi Fred - > >This isn't at all aimed at you personally, though I am using your >post to make a point. > >There are a million wonderful things about USGenWeb, but there are >a couple of things that are terrifically less than wonderful. > >One of those things is the way USGW has always treated RootsWeb >less well than any other server. That kinda stings. > > ### > >USGW allows pages to be on GeoCities with *popups*. TNGenWeb says >"Support Our Sponsor U.S. Internet -- Visit USIT for special >offers" right next to the TNGenWeb logo on its homepage. >Coordinators have links that earn them money, like Ancestry's >Search Partners, right on their pages. > >And on and on. > >The Project is shot through with commercialism. Wake up and smell >the coffee. > >FWIW, I personally think it was a terrible mistake to let this >happen. But what is, is. > > ### > >We all had precisely one shot at being truly noncommercial. There >were a bunch of crazy hippie system administrators who were willing >to do RootsWeb for beans and weenies. (Crazy and hippie doesn't >mean stupid, though: we could wallpaper a room with the staff's >degrees from Harvard, Stanford, and MIT, and regardless of paper >every member of the staff here is best of breed.) > >RootsWeb would have stayed completely bannerless, completely >noncommercial, and completely supported just by voluntary >contributions if we could have made a go of it. > >But most of us didn't actively support that model (THANKS! to the >folks who did), and RootsWeb was going to die with only 2% of our >Websurfing users and only 7% of our list subscribers as >contributors. Beenies and weenies are OK, but no food at all isn't >sustainable even for crazy hippie system administrators. > >We collectively didn't support the voluntary contribution model and >it failed. Now we get to live with the consequences. > > ### > >RootsWeb is going to stay absolutely as noncommercial as we can. >But there will be advertising on some parts of the site and we will >be hosting some ecommerce activities. > >USGW already tolerates that elsewhere. [ I'm not going to add "so >park the hypocrisy at the door", but perhaps should have. ] > >RootsWeb has had *precisely* the same goals on our homepage for >three and a half years: > > 1.To make large volumes of data available to the online > genealogical community at minimal cost. > 2.To provide support services to online genealogical > activities such as USENET newsgroup moderation, mailing > list maintenance, surname list generation, etc. > >It's not written in those lines because USGenWeb is younger than >RootsWeb, but RW is totally committed to providing USGW with the >best possible tools for serving the online genealogical community. > >Those commitments haven't changed. We're just doing what we have >to do to deliver on those commitments. Please be kind enough to >treat us at least as well as any other host as we do our damnedest >to serve USGW. -B > > >-- >Dr. Brian Leverich Co-moderator, soc.genealogy.methods/GENMTD-L >RootsWeb Genealogical Data Cooperative http://www.rootsweb.com/ >P.O. Box 6798, Frazier Park, CA 93222-6798 leverich@rootsweb.com >

Would you like to join us tonight at 7:00 for a chat? Thanks to Tom Agan we have a chatroom for coordinator's at : http://www.twobees.com/chat/ingen_chat.htm All you have to do is going to the above url - and sign in... Betty aka Kyseeker of In and Ky

-----Original Message----- From: Janet E. Crowley <kyblue@micron.net> To: KYGEN-L@rootsweb.com <KYGEN-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Friday, June 11, 1999 7:10 AM Subject: RE: [KYGEN-L] RootsWeb Competing? >I agree totally with John. I have never put pages on Rootsweb, because I >feared that those "free" pages would end up with too many caveats to deal >with. And, I prefer to use CCHelper to do my queries rather than >GenConnect -- yes, it takes more time and effort, but I think the result is >more usable for the researchers to my site. I'm paying a bundle each month >for my site because of the downloads, but I've always felt that that was the >best contribution I could make to genealogy at this time because I have >limited time to do my own research and try to pay back all the people who >have helped me. > >If Rootsweb is soliciting people to create counties on Rootsweb for those >USGenWeb sites that are not located on Rootsweb, then I feel this is >inappropriate. It seems to me that if Rootsweb really wants to benefit >genealogy, their best bet would be to support and enhance what already >exists on USGenWeb vs starting up some kind of "competition". > >Janet Elam Crowley >kyblue@micron.net >KyGenWeb Bath County: http://www.webpak.net/~kyblue/bath/index.htm > > >-----Original Message----- >From: John G. West [mailto:mylines@evansville.net] >Sent: Thursday, June 10, 1999 6:17 PM >To: KYGEN-L@rootsweb.com >Subject: [KYGEN-L] RootsWeb Competing? > > >The only problem I see with what RootsWeb has put up is that when you have >a USGW County on Rootsweb it has a link to your page (which is what you are >saying, Nancy and that is fine), however if you have yours on say >Evansville Online because it has a great system for editing your website - >RootsWeb says this county does not yet have a web page on RootsWeb, which >is a true statement, but further states that you can contact RootsWeb for a >web page - suggesting that the visitor could create a county site on >RootsWeb for one of the counties I host for USGW on another server. Now, >it does not matter if there is 20 pages up for my county, but there seems >to be something inappropriate for RootsWeb to solicit competition for USGW >counties hosted on other servers. I have three counties on RootsWeb and >two on Evansville Online, if I decide to move any of them it will be the >RootsWeb counties. JGW > >At 03:52 PM 6/10/99 -0500, Nancy Trice wrote: >>At 09:49 AM 6/10/99 -0700, Patrick Hays wrote: >>>We didn't vote on this. Rootsweb just decided to take over. See message >>>below. This is what we get from electing a weak board, implementing >>>worthless bylaws and being too connected to Rootsweb. >>> >> >> >>Rootsweb hasn't taken over anything. They have put up a series of pages on >>their server pointing to information found on their server, exactly like >>every other server does. Go take a look at GenForum or GenExchange or any >>of the other genealogy servers out there. Do they have a prominent link to >>your page... or to the page they have on their server for your county or >>your surname? >> >>If your county page is on RW it is now easier than ever for folks to find >>you if they visit the main RW page. If your county page is not on RW what >>difference does it make? Your county is still linked to from the XXGenWeb >>page and the XXGenWeb page is still linked to from the USGenWeb page which >>is still linked to from the main RootsWeb page. If you are using any of the >>GenConnect boards there is a prominent link to your page whatever server it >>happens to be on. >> >>If your complaint is that you don't have your pages on RootsWeb and you >>don't use GenConnect and you don't have a county mail list so your pages >>are not prominently linked on the RW pages, whose fault is that? RootsWeb >>offered everyone free space and free mail lists for their counties for over >>3 years. When GenConnect started a year and a half ago, it was offered to >>everyone to use for their queries and later for their data. If anyone has >>chosen not to use the RootsWeb space, list or GenConnect, they have no >>reason to complain about not being listed on the RW page. >> >>The bylaws and the board has nothing to do with any of this. Even if the >>bylaws were perfect they wouldn't say that the counties have to have their >>pages on this server or that server... folks wouldn't stand for it. >>Everyone wants their choice of where to put their pages, whether that is >>GeoCities like you have done or RootsWeb like many of us have, or their own >>server or domain like I tried last year. The bylaws and the board can't >>dictate that regardless of how strong or weak they are. >> >>nt >> >> >>==== KYGEN Mailing List ==== >>GenConnect Query System >>http://cgi.rootsweb.com/~genbbs/index.html >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > >==== KYGEN Mailing List ==== >GenConnect Query System >http://cgi.rootsweb.com/~genbbs/index.html > > > > > >==== KYGEN Mailing List ==== >GenConnect Query System >http://cgi.rootsweb.com/~genbbs/index.html > >

Hi Mark - No your statement is to the point - However you need to remember - your site is on Rootsweb... I'd suggest with those mixed feelings you move it or have a mirror - as I imagine it will be removed... by BL. I thought the site was very unfriendly and hidden in the back was the link to the Huntington site. I sitll think by this time next year there will be no UsGenWeb - it will all be Rootsweb. -----Original Message----- From: Mark Mann <brave@ourfamilies.net> To: INGEN-L@rootsweb.com <INGEN-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Thursday, June 10, 1999 11:20 PM Subject: resource page >I just visited the resounce page for Huntington County. Not too warm and >friendly. I use as many of their features as my visitors ask for. My >only question is: who will be there for the visitors? I don't believe >anyone will be there (except someone who probably doesn't know where >Indiana is let alone Huntington). Just stop by, give a little >information, take a little information. Nothing else. I added a blurb >about the resource page on my main page stressing that I would be there >for my visitors. I might not have the answers, but I'll certainly try to >provide guidance from the regular visitors that stay in touch. Maybe I'm >out of line and should have left the statement off. I'd appreciate >feedback either way from anyone willing to take a minute to take a look. >Thanks. > >Mark >Huntington County >http://www.rootsweb.com/~inhuntin/ > >

-----Original Message----- From: Dr. Brian Leverich <leverich@rootsweb.com> To: STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com <STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Thursday, June 10, 1999 7:32 PM Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD-L] Improving Our Ability to Serve the Public > > >-- Your message was: (from "Bobby Edwards") > >> I'm really glad RW went ahead and set these up for us...on their own >> time, yet. >> >> I'll def. be linking my state, parish, and new county to their approp. >> pages.. >> >> bob >> LAGWU > > ------------------ > > >Hi Bob - > >You don't even need to link to the Resource pages. Just copy the HTML >for whichever tools you want onto your own pages and otherwise ignore >the Resource pages. > >The point of the mechanically-generated Resource pages was just to make >sure the resources were created and available to the CCs. It's fine >with us if those resources are used on existing pages with no link at >all to the robot pages. Cheers, B. > > >-- >Dr. Brian Leverich Co-moderator, soc.genealogy.methods/GENMTD-L >RootsWeb Genealogical Data Cooperative http://www.rootsweb.com/ >P.O. Box 6798, Frazier Park, CA 93222-6798 leverich@rootsweb.com >

-----Original Message----- From: Dr. Brian Leverich <leverich@rootsweb.com> To: STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com <STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Thursday, June 10, 1999 7:14 PM Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD-L] Improving Our Ability to Serve the Public > > >Good questions. Here are my best answers, though things may change as >we work out the obvious bugs. > > >-- Your message was: (from "Tim Stowell") > >> 1. If a CC doesn't use or choose to use the tools what happens to them? > >They continue to exist, initially tended by RootsWeb staff. > > ### > >> Does anyone else get to use them? > >We don't know yet -- among other things, it depends on what USGW does. > > ### > >> 2. If the CC's site is not on RW - can they use any of the tools? > >All of them. > > ### > >> 3. If the CC decides to use the GenConnect feature will it work like it >> does now with the password and monitoring duties? > >Yes, I believe so. > > ### > >> 4. Is GC live now on the pages if someone decided to or does use them? > >Yes, it is live now. > > ------------------ > > >-- >Dr. Brian Leverich Co-moderator, soc.genealogy.methods/GENMTD-L >RootsWeb Genealogical Data Cooperative http://www.rootsweb.com/ >P.O. Box 6798, Frazier Park, CA 93222-6798 leverich@rootsweb.com >

I just visited the resounce page for Huntington County. Not too warm and friendly. I use as many of their features as my visitors ask for. My only question is: who will be there for the visitors? I don't believe anyone will be there (except someone who probably doesn't know where Indiana is let alone Huntington). Just stop by, give a little information, take a little information. Nothing else. I added a blurb about the resource page on my main page stressing that I would be there for my visitors. I might not have the answers, but I'll certainly try to provide guidance from the regular visitors that stay in touch. Maybe I'm out of line and should have left the statement off. I'd appreciate feedback either way from anyone willing to take a minute to take a look. Thanks. Mark Huntington County http://www.rootsweb.com/~inhuntin/

-----Original Message----- From: Betty Sellers <kyseeker@Dynasty.Net> To: KYGEN-L@rootsweb.com <KYGEN-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Thursday, June 10, 1999 3:06 PM Subject: Re: [KYGEN-L] Re: help please. etc. > >> >>If your complaint is that you don't have your pages on RootsWeb and you >>don't use GenConnect and you don't have a county mail list so your pages >>are not prominently linked on the RW pages, whose fault is that? RootsWeb >>offered everyone free space and free mail lists for their counties for over >>3 years. > > >Nancy I hardly ever disagree with you - I had the free space at RW for both >Trigg and Christian counties. I was also subbed to some mailing list -. >"Continually" it was brought out on these mailing list that we were >freeloaders. "Continually" I had to put up with such statements from BL - >that if you didn't support RW you were like a freeloader at a basket dinner >that didn't bring anything to contribute. > >I 'pulled' my counties from Rootweb and also 'pulled' Indiana - for that >reason. A few nicer letter written to me by RW supporters - said 'if we >didn't like it to get out'.... Everyone really got down on me last year when >I got mad and pulled my counties and transferred one of my biggest >GenConnect Boards to my sister in law. I still do have some for my queries. >However - I had sent a very hard earned contribution to RW as I wanted >Surname boards badly and just couldn't give any more. I'm sick of the word >FREE - there were attachments to that free - and one was guilt of being a >county coordinator with a mere income with a sick and dying husband. > >I for one understand what they are trying to pull - if we don't have >counties listed at RW they will give RW counties to other's and we will be >out... and as you say -- Whose fault is it? > >God only knows... God only knows... but please don't put that blame on me.. >I've got enough to handle. > > When GenConnect started a year and a half ago, it was offered to >>everyone to use for their queries and later for their data. If anyone has >>chosen not to use the RootsWeb space, list or GenConnect, they have no >>reason to complain about not being listed on the RW page. >> >>The bylaws and the board has nothing to do with any of this. Even if the >>bylaws were perfect they wouldn't say that the counties have to have their >>pages on this server or that server... folks wouldn't stand for it. >>Everyone wants their choice of where to put their pages, whether that is >>GeoCities like you have done or RootsWeb like many of us have, or their own >>server or domain like I tried last year. The bylaws and the board can't >>dictate that regardless of how strong or weak they are. >> >>nt >> >> >>==== KYGEN Mailing List ==== >>GenConnect Query System >>http://cgi.rootsweb.com/~genbbs/index.html >> >> >> >> >> > > >==== KYGEN Mailing List ==== >GenConnect Query System >http://cgi.rootsweb.com/~genbbs/index.html > >

-----Original Message----- From: Sandy <teylu@home.com> To: USGENWEB-ALL-L@rootsweb.com <USGENWEB-ALL-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Thursday, June 10, 1999 2:22 PM Subject: Re: [USGENWEB-ALL-L] Improving Our Ability to Serve the Public > > >Leigh, > >I am sorry my message made you angry. >That genuinely was not my intent. > >I readily admit I am distressed by RW's creation of it's own county >cluster pages. > >I also confess you accurately interpreted a certain level of "righteous >indignation" in the tone of my message, which frankly, I should have >done a better job of masking. > >This *is* a controversial issue, and opinions are varied. I am a firm >beliver it is entirely possible to have diametrically opposed opinions, >both of which are equally valid. > >My reaction to Brian's letter was very much the result of my view that >he has made some sweeping assumptions (which I believe are false) as to >the goals of USGenWeb, as opposed to the goals of RootsWeb. > >I believe he has mixed them up! > >I want to sort them out! > >I am absolutely willing to continue as I have in the past, to examine >the ways in which the goals of USGW may be compatible with the goals of RootsWeb. > >I am quite willing to listen and give careful consideration to the ways >in which others, including yourself, view RootsWeb's county cluster >pages as compatible with - or even helpful to, the efforts of USGW. > >I make no pretense about my current feelings regarding RW's cluster >pages. I view them as splintering the project. I do not think their >creation is in the best interests of USGW. > >I do believe these pages are a good business move for RootsWeb. >I have nothing against that. > >I believe the discussions will be far more productive if we first >separate the entities and acknowledge the separate goals of each. >As part of that process, I think USGW should develop an official >*statement* of the projects goal(s). > >Then we can examine the extent to which USGW goals may or may not be >compatible with the goals of RootsWeb. > >I think this is fair. > >I do not believe it is fair for Brian or anyone to assume all goals of >these two very different entities are necessarily the same, nor to imply >that what's "good for RootsWeb is always good for USGW." > >The tone of my email which angered you reflected my own reaction to such >an implication or assumption. I believe the assumption is false. > >Again, I apologize that I angered you. >It was a byproduct, not an intent. > >Sandy >----------- > >Leigh Compton wrote: >> >> Sandy: >> >> It makes me ANGRY to see such a hostile response to Brian's announcement of >> new RootsWeb resources. Maybe you misunderstood the facilities that >> RootsWeb has put into place. >> >> Here's the note I am sending to all the County Coordinators in ALGenWeb. I >> see RootsWeb's enhancements as helping us as USGenWeb volunteers to do a >> better job. >> >> >Folks: >> > >> >The following letter is from Brian Leverich, founder of RootsWeb. It >> >announces new facilities at RootsWeb to complement the USGenWeb county home >> >pages. Many of us have been using resources at RootsWeb: county pages >> >located on the RootsWeb servers, GenConnect boards to gather queries or as >> >supplements to another query system. Mailing lists for over 1/2 the Alabama >> >counties have been created and have been active at RootsWeb -- some for >> >several years. >> > >> >Now -- RootsWeb will be creating a mailing list and GenConnect boards for >> >every county. You, as County Coordinator, will be given the first >> >opportunity to adminster any new RootsWeb resources. If, however, there >> >was already a county mailing list, the adminstration will remain as before. >> >(You may or may not be the mailing list manager for an existing mailing >> list. >> >I am for 2 of my counties, but the mailing list for Calhoun County has >> >another list manager, for example.) There will also be a web page for >> >every county which points to *** ROOTSWEB-only *** resources for the county. >> >So, this web page will point to mailing lists and GenConnect boards for the >> >county. It will also point to the USGenWeb site for the county -- IF THAT >> >PAGE IS ON ROOTSWEB. (If a county site exists on RootsWeb for another >> >genealogical project such as ALHN, the RootsWeb page will (also?) point to >> >that location.) It will have search boxes to search the most common >> >databases on RootsWeb such as Surname Helper, GenSeeker, RootsLink, mailing >> >list archives, etc. >> > >> >These "county cluster" resources are not a replacement for the USGenWeb >> >county pages. There is no intention to provide the type of information >> >that USGenWeb provides such as addresses of libraries, addresses of court >> >houses, locations of cemeteries, etc. It will not provide assistance in >> >locating reference material for the county. It will simply provide a single >> >point of entry to ROOTSWEB resources. >> > >> >Even if your county page is hosted on another server, it would be helpful >> >to researchers visiting your page if you were to add a link to the cluster >> >page for your county. If you want to administer the mailing lists and >> >GenConnect boards for your county, you need to speak up now. >> >> Regards, >> Leigh >> >> ==== USGENWEB-ALL Mailing List ==== >> The USGenWeb Project is not a commercial project. > > >==== USGENWEB-ALL Mailing List ==== >The USGenWeb Project is not a commercial project. >

-----Original Message----- From: Don Tharp <det@fn.net> To: USGENWEB-ALL-L@rootsweb.com <USGENWEB-ALL-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Thursday, June 10, 1999 2:17 PM Subject: Re: [USGENWEB-ALL-L] Improving Our Ability to Serve the Public >At 02:22 PM 06/10/99 -0500, you wrote: > ><BIG SNIP> > > >>>These "county cluster" resources are not a replacement for the USGenWeb >>>county pages. There is no intention to provide the type of information >>>that USGenWeb provides such as addresses of libraries, addresses of court >>>houses, locations of cemeteries, etc. It will not provide assistance in >>>locating reference material for the county. It will simply provide a single >>>point of entry to ROOTSWEB resources. > >The above paragraph says it all. Your county web site has been reduced to >providing addresses and locations. Every bit of the information mentioned >above can be put on one state home page and save the researcher a great deal >of time. Your web site will no longer be needed except as a link to rootsweb >and a plea for money. > >If the present trend continues, i.e., taking material off the county web >sites and putting them on national pages, why would a researcher visit your >page, maybe once, but not twice. Do you really want to waste your time >maintaining a web site just for that? Or, do you wish to take back your >counties importance to USGW and the researchers? How, by putting surnames, >queries, raw material on your web sites. Yes, more work for you, but we >didn't join this organization for convenience. > >We developed our web sites so that researchers seeking information could >find the information on our county pages. I was never told that links to >rootsweb were all that would be needed on our web sites. > >Don >det@fn.net > >> > > >==== USGENWEB-ALL Mailing List ==== >The USGenWeb Project is not a commercial project. >

-----Original Message----- From: Lynn <cestus3@inetnebr.com> To: STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com <STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Thursday, June 10, 1999 1:19 PM Subject: [STATE-COORD-L] RW Improvements >I have a couple of questions also. >Are these pages that RW has put up, our new county pages? or are they just >tools that we implement where and when we wish on our existing pages? >If the CC for that county does not implement them, adopt them, or what ever >it is we are supposed to do with them, what happens with it? Do they just >sit there? are they adopted out to someone not connected to USGW? if they >are adopted out, then how can the person that adopts them use them? >Lynn > >

-----Original Message----- From: Pat Hamp <hamp@voyager.net> To: Hamp, Pat <hamp@voyager.net> Date: Thursday, June 10, 1999 10:37 AM Subject: USGW-CC-L: Rootsweb "and" USGenWeb >We have all had the option of using Rootsweb for our pages or going to >another server to put our pages up. The statement that the queries >belong to the poster is correct, whether they are on the county page or >on GenConnect. We have also had a choice in that. > >My reasoning behind my county sites has been to make them accessible to >the people who will be using them, and make them as user friendly as >possible. Thus I have stayed with Rootsweb and used GenConnect for the >counties I "coordinate" or "manage" (not own) due to the search >possibilities that Rootsweb offers vs. other sites that offer, little if >any at all. > >My problem with this situation is the lack of communication between >Rootsweb and USGenWeb and I think there may be some valid reasons for >this. Mainly, that everytime Rootsweb tries to implement a new resource >on "their" servers, many USGenWeb people have slammed them with >negativity and "conspiracy theories". Thus it is the USGenWeb board's >responsiblity to keep communication lines open since the USGenWeb >project is generating the negativity and also getting "free" space to do >it. > >There has been an announcement that some of the links are not in place >yet on the cluster pages, etc. and are being worked on. > >Advertising on our sites, the archive pages, and cluster pages: There >are none on the county sites unless a coordinator has "chosen" to place >the HTML coding to get them. The archive pages: There is one banner >which is not blasting "buy me." They are mainly to the sponsored pages >on rootsweb and are not blatant ads. In order for USGenWeb to have space >on any server I am we will have to pay a price and as far as I've seen >on the free servers Rootsebs is the least intrusive and their links all >have to do with genealogy and many of the ads point to a free resource. >The cluster pages are only pages leading to sources on Rootsweb with >county resources. They are also asking people to submit resources to >USGenWebs archives on those pages. > >If all the negativity that is being blasted at Rootsweb right now was >channelled into making USGenWeb better we would have the best of the >best resources to do genealogy by geographical areas. > >Now excuse me while I unsub from a few lists that are tearing down >instead of building up, as I don't have time to delete everything and >make my sites more user friendly. > >Pat Hamp ><hamp@voyager.net> >-- AOL Messenger: "downbound2" -- to chat >Houghton Co., MI USGenWeb <http://www.rootsweb.com/~mihought> >Keweenaw Co., Mi USGenWeb <http://www.rootsweb.com/~mikeween> >Gratiot Co., MI USGenWeb <http://www.rootsweb.com/~migratio/index1.html> > >G.L. Shipping Genealogy-Downward Bound ><http://www.rootsweb.com/~migls/index.html> >AUGER Family Surname Assoc. <http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~augerfsa/> >BURNHAM Surname <http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~hamp/index.html> > >

-----Original Message----- From: MKelly456@aol.com <MKelly456@aol.com> To: USGENWEB-ALL-L@rootsweb.com <USGENWEB-ALL-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Thursday, June 10, 1999 9:31 AM Subject: Re: [USGENWEB-ALL-L] Improving Our Ability to Serve the Public >Maybe by saying that no web pages on Rootsweb for your county, they are >hoping that someone come forward asking for one, thus, duplicating your >county for Rootsweb and pushing out or smothering USGENWEB counties. > >Rootsweb doesn't need us cc's anymore! They just set up these GenConnect >Boards, this County Resource center, and only link to counties that are ON >Rootsweb. The heck with all the rest of us. > >Marie > >In a message dated 6/10/99 11:16:53 AM Eastern Daylight Time, >psabin@bellsouth.net writes: > >> But, my biggest and most immediate concern is that my county and at >> least one other county in Connecticut (Hartford), both housed with >> RootsWeb and offering a full suite of GenConnect boards, are listed on >> the resources page as: >> >> "There are no web pages on RootsWeb for New London CT at this time." >> >> Excuse us? How many other counties housed with RootsWeb are missing? >> Brian, did this resource page go public a little too soon? >> >> Pat Sabin >> New London County CTGenWeb >> http://www.rootsweb.com/~ctnewlon/ > > >==== USGENWEB-ALL Mailing List ==== >The USGenWeb Project is not a commercial project. >

-----Original Message----- From: Tim Stowell <tstowell@mccallie.org> To: STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com <STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Thursday, June 10, 1999 6:50 AM Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD-L] Improving Our Ability to Serve the Public >At 09:14 PM 6/9/99 -0700, Dr. Brian Leverich wrote: >>While we're still working out the details, RootsWeb's intent is to >>put each County Resource page and all the resources on them at the >>disposal of the appropriate USGenWeb County Coordinator. CCs can >>link to the pages, or they can borrow the HTML from the pages and >>incorporate the tools directly into their own pages. How (or even >>if) you administer those resources is largely your own choice. > >>That's your own choice. The tools are there if you want them. And >>there will be more and better tools available to you as time goes on. > >A few questions, if I may? > >1. If a CC doesn't use or choose to use the tools what happens to them? >Does anyone else get to use them? >2. If the CC's site is not on RW - can they use any of the tools? >3. If the CC decides to use the GenConnect feature will it work like it >does now with the password and monitoring duties? >4. Is GC live now on the pages if someone decided to or does use them? > >Thanks, > >Tim Stowell > >>Speaking personally, I hope most folks choose to use the tools. >>USGenWeb is one of the two most impressive projects I've ever seen >>unfold on the Internet (the development of Linux is the other ... ), >>and I would very much like to see USGenWeb stay on the cutting edge >>of technology and provide better services to genealogists than any >>of its imitators. Cheers, B. > >

-----Original Message----- From: Dr. Brian Leverich <leverich@rootsweb.com> To: STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com <STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Wednesday, June 09, 1999 8:52 PM Subject: [STATE-COORD-L] Improving Our Ability to Serve the Public > > >One of the things about life is you either keep improving or you >become a corpse standing on your feet. > >That's true for RootsWeb, and it's equally true for USGenWeb. Since >USGenWeb was founded, many other organizations have sprung up that >partially or wholly attempt to clone USGenWeb's content: ALHN, >GenExchange, Broderbund's GenForum, Ancestry, Randall Haight's >genweb.net, ... > >If USGenWeb is going to stay the premier geographically-oriented >genealogy project, one of the things it's going to need to do is >continuously improve the range and quality of services it provides >to the genealogical community. > >In tonight's RootsWeb Review, RootsWeb is announcing "County >Resource" pages for every county in America. The pages include or >will include links to USGenWeb sites on RootsWeb, a mailing list, a >GenConnect suite, a link registry, search engines for the USGenWeb >Archives and the RSL, an event calendar, a guestbook, and various >other tools. > >You can see the County Resources at: > http://resources.rootsweb.com/USA/ > >We expect to be adding tools to the Resource pages as rapidly as we >can. There will surely be a Social Security Death Index search and >some other nice features coming on line in the not-to-distant future. > > ### > >So isn't this just another competitor for USGenWeb? > > ==> Not at all. <== > >While we're still working out the details, RootsWeb's intent is to >put each County Resource page and all the resources on them at the >disposal of the appropriate USGenWeb County Coordinator. CCs can >link to the pages, or they can borrow the HTML from the pages and >incorporate the tools directly into their own pages. How (or even >if) you administer those resources is largely your own choice. > >That's your own choice. The tools are there if you want them. And >there will be more and better tools available to you as time goes on. > >Speaking personally, I hope most folks choose to use the tools. >USGenWeb is one of the two most impressive projects I've ever seen >unfold on the Internet (the development of Linux is the other ... ), >and I would very much like to see USGenWeb stay on the cutting edge >of technology and provide better services to genealogists than any >of its imitators. Cheers, B. > > >-- >Dr. Brian Leverich Co-moderator, soc.genealogy.methods/GENMTD-L >RootsWeb Genealogical Data Cooperative http://www.rootsweb.com/ >P.O. Box 6798, Frazier Park, CA 93222-6798 leverich@rootsweb.com >

Although I'm new around here, I look at the new county resource pages as just another way of helping researchers find what they're looking for, which is what we're all here to do. I do hope that we'll get some way of adding links, etc. to these pages ourselves because we're the ones who would best know of sites relating to our own areas. This is my personal opinion, anyhow. As to RW putting ads on pages, I don't mind and think it's a good idea for generating more income. But, I think they'd do well to stick with ads for genealogy-related products, services, etc., rather than some of those overbearing ads like I've seen on so many other sites. They get pretty annoying sometimes. Diane Greene Co. CC ddrogich@viaduct.custom.net http://www.rootsweb.com/~ingreene/greenegw.htm http://viaduct.custom.net/ddrogich

Terry Engel is now hosting Jennings County and Collin will be taking Carroll County.... Thanks for a good job to both - Appreciate each of ya! Betty aka Kyseeker of In and Ky

Please make welcome Mindee Gleason as the new coordinator of Steuben County.... A big thank you to Kathleen Hamman the outgoing coordinator who has done a great job! Thank you Kathleen and welcome Mindee! Betty aka Kyseeker of In and Ky

-----Original Message----- From: Bill Oliver <wnoliver@worldnet.att.net> To: USGenWeb-SE-L@rootsweb.com <USGenWeb-SE-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 6:18 PM Subject: [USGenWeb-SE-L] Fwd: [USGW-Nominate-L] Current State of Nominations >This is a multi-part message in MIME format. >--------------57A354B5BE717DB3DD48AD12 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >Please circulate through the official distribution lists. > >Thanks! > >Ginger Cisewski >Chairman, USGenWeb Elections Committee > >===============================> > > Subject: > [USGW-Nominate-L] Current State of > Nominations > Date: > Tue, 8 Jun 1999 19:58:47 -0500 (CDT) > From: > "Celia G. Snyder" <cgsnyder@uiuc.edu> > To: > FEATHER2s@aol.com > > > >Please remind your CC's to check the nominations >web page: > > >http://www.rootsweb.com/~tnroane/nominate.htm > >and get their nominations in. There's only a >week left in the nomination >period (June 1-15) and we have one position for >which there has been no >nominee: > > NW/Plains CC Rep > >a position for which the only nominee has not >accepted: > > At Large CC Rep > >and the following positions are currently >unopposed: > > Archives Rep > NW/Plains SC Rep > SE/MA SC Rep > SE/MA CC Rep > SW/SC CC Reps > > >Celia G. Snyder >cgsnyder@uiuc.edu >Member, The USGenWeb Project Nominations >Subcommittee >ILGenWeb Coordinator for Champaign County >Coordinator, ILGenWeb Civil War Photos and >Scrapbook Projects >--------------57A354B5BE717DB3DD48AD12 >Content-Type: message/rfc822; > name="nsmailHA.TMP" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Content-Disposition: inline; > filename="nsmailHA.TMP" > >Return-Path: <cgsnyder@uiuc.edu> >Received: from rly-zc01.mx.aol.com (rly-zc01.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.1]) by > air-zc04.mail.aol.com (v59.34) with SMTP; Tue, 08 Jun 1999 20:58:49 > -0400 >Received: from staff1.cso.uiuc.edu (staff1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) > by rly-zc01.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0) > with ESMTP id UAA27725 for <FEATHER2s@aol.com>; > Tue, 8 Jun 1999 20:58:47 -0400 (EDT) >Received: from [130.126.26.50] (murphysboro-6.slip.uiuc.edu [130.126.26.50]) > by staff1.cso.uiuc.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id TAA02174 > for <FEATHER2s@aol.com>; Tue, 8 Jun 1999 19:58:47 -0500 (CDT) >Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 19:58:47 -0500 (CDT) >X-Sender: cgsnyder@staff.uiuc.edu >Message-Id: <v04003a06b38326d80cd4@[130.126.26.50]> >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >To: FEATHER2s@aol.com >From: "Celia G. Snyder" <cgsnyder@uiuc.edu> >Subject: [USGW-Nominate-L] Current State of Nominations >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >Please remind your CC's to check the nominations web page: > > http://www.rootsweb.com/~tnroane/nominate.htm > >and get their nominations in. There's only a week left in the nomination >period (June 1-15) and we have one position for which there has been no >nominee: > > NW/Plains CC Rep > >a position for which the only nominee has not accepted: > > At Large CC Rep > >and the following positions are currently unopposed: > > Archives Rep > NW/Plains SC Rep > SE/MA SC Rep > SE/MA CC Rep > SW/SC CC Reps > > >Celia G. Snyder >cgsnyder@uiuc.edu >Member, The USGenWeb Project Nominations Subcommittee >ILGenWeb Coordinator for Champaign County >Coordinator, ILGenWeb Civil War Photos and Scrapbook Projects > > > > > >--------------57A354B5BE717DB3DD48AD12-- > > >==== USGenWeb-SE Mailing List ==== >Announcements - official project announcements/business >http://www.usgenweb.org/official/official.html >