To add to the levity.....my family tree also gives me "fits" or it did UNTIL I realized that the men in the SAME FAMILY spelled the surname differently....What? How about twin brothers, one spelling the surname Lathrop....and the other twin spelling his surname as Lothrop. Really? And on the other side of the tree, other men spelled the surname (and this spelling goes WAY BACK) as EWING. Ok, so my great grandfather's generation spelled it 2 ways....some of the prominent men in the same family dropping the last G. Oh, me....Explain that to future generations! My maiden name was EWIN. (NO G) And on Mom's side....JENSEN married JENSEN.....not only once, but two sisters did the same thing. And no relation between the two JENSEN men to one another and neither of them related to the JENSEN sister until they married one of the sisters. <smile> No problem about the dates in that initial message from Pat. I agree, it does need to be corrected for the sake of correctness. But....mistakes are made.....no need to hang anyone out to dry for that! <smile again> You all are a great bunch to serve with on this project.......looking forward to being a part of this in the days and weeks, months ahead. Linda Ziemann, Rock CC On 2/14/15, 2:41 PM, "Timothy Stowell via" <[email protected]> wrote: > Blame it on the spell checker or the tiny keys one must type on these > days. When you find that time machine for going back would you please rent > out flights? I need some answers in my tree, that defy research. :) > > Like Jones marrying Jones and Smiths marrying Smiths that they weren't > related to or all siblings naming all their children the same... > > Tim > > On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Pat Asher via <[email protected]> wrote: > >> It has just been pointed out to me that my original message said the >> voting period was from 12/14 thru 12/21. Obviously, December is long >> gone and the dates should read from 2/14 thru 2/21. >> >> Anyone know what causes one part of the brain to decide to go AWOL? LOL >> >> Pat Asher >> >> >> At 03:19 PM 2/13/2015, you wrote: >>> Voting for MNGenWeb State Coordinator starts tonight, 12/14 at >>> 12:01am CST, and runs through Saturday, 12/21 at 11:59pm CST. >>> >>> To be counted, your vote must be time stamped during this period and >>> be copied to all three members of the election committee: >>> >>> Patrice Green - <[email protected]> >>> Mike Sweeney <[email protected]> >>> Pat Asher <[email protected]> >>> >>> >>> Your candidates are: >>> >>> Shirley Cullum >>> Martha Crosley Graham >>> Tim Stowell >>> Linda Zieman >>> >>> >>> The winner must receive a majority of the votes cast, i.e. 50% + 1 >>> >>> If no candidate achieves a majority, there will be a run-off election >>> between the two candidates receiving the most votes. >>> >>> It only takes a minute. Please vote! >>> >>> >>> Pat Asher >>> MN Election Committee >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes >> in the subject and the body of the message >> > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message

You are correct. Pat, Patrice, and Mike are all volunteers in handling the election for us. Shirley Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 14, 2015, at 2:39 PM, Timothy Stowell via <[email protected]> wrote: > > Am I correct in my memory that the national EC is not vetting this > election, that it is in fact a committee of volunteers who agreed upon > request of the NC and/or temp ASC to serve in such a capacity? > > If so, perhaps not using the term EC, which implies the national EC, should > not be used but rather some other term. That is for the accuracy folks. :) > > Tim > > On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Karen De Groote via <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Yes I know we know the dates and it is a typo but the EC needs to have all >> their Ts crossed and i's dotted which they have done. Typos have no place >> in official situations. >> Karen >> >> On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Linda Simpson via <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Karen, >>> >>> I think we all understand the voting period is 2/14 to 2/21 >>> It's just a typo, no biggie. :-) >>> - >>> Linda Simpson >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Karen De Groote via >>> Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 10:30 AM >>> To: Pat Asher ; List MNGenWeb >>> Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Time to Vote for SC >>> >>> You might want to re post the voting period. It is February, not >>> December. LOL >>> >>> Karen >>> Becker, Todd and Stearns >>> >>>> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Pat Asher via <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Voting for MNGenWeb State Coordinator starts tonight, 12/14 at >>>> 12:01am CST, and runs through Saturday, 12/21 at 11:59pm CST. >>>> >>>> To be counted, your vote must be time stamped during this period and >>>> be copied to all three members of the election committee: >>>> >>>> Patrice Green - <[email protected]> >>>> Mike Sweeney <[email protected]> >>>> Pat Asher <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> >>>> Your candidates are: >>>> >>>> Shirley Cullum >>>> Martha Crosley Graham >>>> Tim Stowell >>>> Linda Zieman >>>> >>>> >>>> The winner must receive a majority of the votes cast, i.e. 50% + 1 >>>> >>>> If no candidate achieves a majority, there will be a run-off election >>>> between the two candidates receiving the most votes. >>>> >>>> It only takes a minute. Please vote! >>>> >>>> >>>> Pat Asher >>>> MN Election Committee >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>>> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>> quotes >>>> in the subject and the body of the message >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes >>> in >>> the subject and the body of the message >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes >>> in the subject and the body of the message >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes >> in the subject and the body of the message > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Mike, I think you may be an excellent candidate for the National elections when they roll back around. Even though Parliamentary Procedures are not my personal cup of tea, I can certainly appreciate those skills and interests in someone else. I also appreciated your emails on 12/27 regarding, "I’m in favor of organized expediency.” :) Additionally, I have a deep appreciation for someone who sticks to the issue at hand and refrains from negativity about folks that may not fully agree with your point of view. All things considered, since you have some ideas about national rules, etc, I think you’d be a really great candidate for the National level. Kathy > On Feb 14, 2015, at 12:26 PM, Mike (Dino) Peterson via <[email protected]> wrote: > > Bryant makes some excellent points. Some of us might not like it and some of us think it is good but the national USGenWeb is under a Parliamentary Authority (a bylaw) and the Board has currently chosen “The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure by Alice Sturgis” (a special rule). The USGenWeb currently breaks down “rules” by (for the national) “Bylaws,” “Standard Rules,” and “Special Rules.” They’ve also generated a “Guidelines” which in my opinion is an excellent document that cuts through all the formal language and places many of the rules and recommendations into one document. > The intent of my question to the candidates was not to generate a big discussion on the value of state rules and how to proceed but to find out IF the candidates wanted to proceed (which would play a part on my vote), and if so, how high was their priority on getting some rules set. And I asked the question because I believe some minimal rules are required in the state. I do not believe the national rules cover all issues that arise in states. I do not believe that the state doesn’t need some sort of rules. It is apparent to me that if we had some minimal rules then discussions on this list would be greatly reduced. This list has been loaded with discussions on logos, voting, replacing SC’s, roll calls, state web site content, CC site requirements, ASC(s), and the list goes on. So, I think each of the candidates have made their positions very clear at least to me. How we go about it or if we go about it will depend on the SC voted in. > Mike > Clay Co >

Karen, Don't spend your time clarifying anything for me. I understand accuracy all too well whether you believe that or not is of no importance. I have no problem with how many e-mails this list generates. Discussions are an absolute must and a great way to get everyone's opinion on among other things, how this state should be run smoothly and efficiently. I hope discussion continues on this list for a good long time. My e-mail was to Kathy, I agreed with her sentiments. Period. End of discussion. - Linda Simpson -----Original Message----- From: Karen De Groote via Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 1:32 PM Cc: List MNGenWeb Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Time to Vote for SC Linda, I will try to clarify since it seems you are not understanding the importance of accuracy in this organization. This is an official vote for our new leader. It should be handled in the utmost accuracy. Having the month that vote ends incorrectly can conceivably give a disgruntled member the opportunity to invalidate the election and I am sure that none of us want that. Like Kathy pointed out, I mentioned loopholes. I also gave a little humor via a "LOL" when I called the typo to the attention of the EC. If I was the editing police I would not have chuckled when pointing this out. It was simply dealt with by Pat as was proper. None of us expect such accuracy in what we are doing and yes good humor makes everything much better. That is why I was confused at your statements, they were not humorous. Any of us who don't appreciate all the emails currently on this list need to think of two things. 1. If MNGenWeb had rules in place, all these emails would not be necessary. 2. If MNGenWeb had an SC and ASC and they were taking care of the state, then hundreds of emails in the past few months would have been unnecessary. Once the state gets a Leadership team in place and working rules for the project, there will be a lot less email on this list. Then we can relax and do what we do best. In the mean time discussions and decisions will be our way of life for a bit longer. Karen Becker, Todd and Stearns On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Linda Simpson <[email protected]> wrote: > Kathy, > > I agree with you whole-heartedly! When it gets to a point that if I forget > to dot an i people will be in jeopardy I think it's time to pack it in. > This is the USGenWeb, not national security. It should be run like a > business, yes, but let's remember why we are here in the first place, to > help researchers and enjoy the time spent. A little humor goes a long way > and is quite beneficial to all. > - > Linda Simpson > > > -----Original Message----- From: Kathy Hines > Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 11:45 AM > To: Linda Simpson ; [email protected] > Cc: Karen De Groote > > Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Time to Vote for SC > > Hear! Hear! ;) I also give the EC a little more credit than that. > > Maybe what Karen said is the crux of my little personal dilemma here. She > mentioned: > >> Typos have no place >> in official situations. >> > > > I think of “official situations” as the 911 system, where somebody lives… > or dies… if you don’t get it right. In my view, this project is supposed > to be my escape from my daily work and the trials of the current state of > world unrest. I want to have fun doing genealogy, help people in their > research, and putz around with my *volunteer* pages. I don’t want to get > sucked into rules and politics and lengthy discussions that I don’t enjoy. > > I’m an altruistic volunteer, with an interest in history & genealogy, and > I happen to have a few HTML skills. > > Happy Valentines Day! > Kathy > > On Feb 14, 2015, at 11:29 AM, Linda Simpson via <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> I give the EC a little more credit than that. >> Carry on. >> - >> Linda Simpson >> >> >> >> From: Karen De Groote >> Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 11:22 AM >> To: Linda Simpson ; List MNGenWeb >> Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Time to Vote for SC >> >> Yes I know we know the dates and it is a typo but the EC needs to have >> all their Ts crossed and i's dotted which they have done. Typos have no >> place in official situations. >> >> Karen >> >> >> On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Linda Simpson via <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Karen, >> >> I think we all understand the voting period is 2/14 to 2/21 >> It's just a typo, no biggie. :-) >> - >> Linda Simpson >> >> > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Pat, I don't know why but I do know that my brain does that frequently. LOL Shirley Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 14, 2015, at 10:56 AM, Pat Asher via <[email protected]> wrote: > > It has just been pointed out to me that my original message said the > voting period was from 12/14 thru 12/21. Obviously, December is long > gone and the dates should read from 2/14 thru 2/21. > > Anyone know what causes one part of the brain to decide to go AWOL? LOL > > Pat Asher > > > At 03:19 PM 2/13/2015, you wrote: >> Voting for MNGenWeb State Coordinator starts tonight, 12/14 at >> 12:01am CST, and runs through Saturday, 12/21 at 11:59pm CST. >> >> To be counted, your vote must be time stamped during this period and >> be copied to all three members of the election committee: >> >> Patrice Green - <[email protected]> >> Mike Sweeney <[email protected]> >> Pat Asher <[email protected]> >> >> >> Your candidates are: >> >> Shirley Cullum >> Martha Crosley Graham >> Tim Stowell >> Linda Zieman >> >> >> The winner must receive a majority of the votes cast, i.e. 50% + 1 >> >> If no candidate achieves a majority, there will be a run-off election >> between the two candidates receiving the most votes. >> >> It only takes a minute. Please vote! >> >> >> Pat Asher >> MN Election Committee >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I absolutely agree with you Tim that no candidate has said they would flat out refuse to go about it; however, that is not what I said. My last statement was not referring to any candidate’s plans or positions but to what the project will get after a candidate is elected. So, a voter must decide on voting for the best possible chance of getting what they think would be best for the project. For many of us, the decision can only come through the expressed attitudes as well as the words of the candidates. Mike From: Timothy Stowell via Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 12:32 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MNGEN] By-Laws Mike, While we had excellent participation on the logo vote, the same may not hold true for every subsequent matter. Then one is faced with the very real possibility of the few telling the majority what the rules are. As to your final statement, I don't believe any candidate has said they would flat out refuse to go about it. Tim On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Mike Peterson via <[email protected]> wrote: > Bryant makes some excellent points. Some of us might not like it and some > of us think it is good but the national USGenWeb is under a Parliamentary > Authority (a bylaw) and the Board has currently chosen “The Standard Code > of Parliamentary Procedure by Alice Sturgis” (a special rule). The USGenWeb > currently breaks down “rules” by (for the national) “Bylaws,” “Standard > Rules,” and “Special Rules.” They’ve also generated a “Guidelines” which in > my opinion is an excellent document that cuts through all the formal > language and places many of the rules and recommendations into one document. > The intent of my question to the candidates was not to generate a big > discussion on the value of state rules and how to proceed but to find out > IF the candidates wanted to proceed (which would play a part on my vote), > and if so, how high was their priority on getting some rules set. And I > asked the question because I believe some minimal rules are required in the > state. I do not believe the national rules cover all issues that arise in > states. I do not believe that the state doesn’t need some sort of rules. It > is apparent to me that if we had some minimal rules then discussions on > this list would be greatly reduced. This list has been loaded with > discussions on logos, voting, replacing SC’s, roll calls, state web site > content, CC site requirements, ASC(s), and the list goes on. So, I think > each of the candidates have made their positions very clear at least to me. > How we go about it or if we go about it will depend on the SC voted in. > Mike > Clay Co > > > From: Genealogy via > Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 9:04 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [MNGEN] By-Laws > > My 2 cents. > I am confused. By-Laws, Standing Rules and SOPs (Standing Operating > Procedures) are synonymous and apply specific requirements for the > objective. I would think that a set of By-Laws would be the target for > establishing requirements that we must follow. Standing Rules or SOPs > should be incorporated into the By-Laws under an appropriate section that > would apply to the objective of the rule or SOP. Then you would have only > one set of requirements that members could refer to in their need to meet > MNGenWeb requirements. > > Guidelines are a separate issue since they are not requirements, but only > suggestions that may enhance the process for various reasons. They should > be a separate document and not incorporated into the document of > requirements, i.e., By-Laws. > > As to establishing a By-Laws document, it may be best to establish a > committee (already proposed) to draft the document before open discussion > occurs. I base this on the many, many discussions that occur on this > list. This approach, which has been suggested by several people, should > reduce the amount of dissention and possibly speed up the process. After > the document has been drafted, each article or section should be discussed > one at a time (already proposed) to again reduce the overload on my daily > reading. > > That said, any By-Laws for the state should be designed to enhance the > USGenWeb By-Laws and not conflict with them. Granted, the USGenWeb By-Laws > could use a good cleaning, but they already establish basic requirements > for state and counties. Any By-Laws established for the state should only > cover issues that are not covered at the national level, making our > document a much shorter list of requirements. > > Bryant > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Laverne H. Tornow via > Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 1:30 AM > To: Timothy Stowell; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Marc Pennau Logo, > > There are 3 things many people are confused about: > > ByLaws > Standing Rules > Guidelines > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Linda, I will try to clarify since it seems you are not understanding the importance of accuracy in this organization. This is an official vote for our new leader. It should be handled in the utmost accuracy. Having the month that vote ends incorrectly can conceivably give a disgruntled member the opportunity to invalidate the election and I am sure that none of us want that. Like Kathy pointed out, I mentioned loopholes. I also gave a little humor via a "LOL" when I called the typo to the attention of the EC. If I was the editing police I would not have chuckled when pointing this out. It was simply dealt with by Pat as was proper. None of us expect such accuracy in what we are doing and yes good humor makes everything much better. That is why I was confused at your statements, they were not humorous. Any of us who don't appreciate all the emails currently on this list need to think of two things. 1. If MNGenWeb had rules in place, all these emails would not be necessary. 2. If MNGenWeb had an SC and ASC and they were taking care of the state, then hundreds of emails in the past few months would have been unnecessary. Once the state gets a Leadership team in place and working rules for the project, there will be a lot less email on this list. Then we can relax and do what we do best. In the mean time discussions and decisions will be our way of life for a bit longer. Karen Becker, Todd and Stearns On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Linda Simpson <[email protected]> wrote: > Kathy, > > I agree with you whole-heartedly! When it gets to a point that if I forget > to dot an i people will be in jeopardy I think it's time to pack it in. > This is the USGenWeb, not national security. It should be run like a > business, yes, but let's remember why we are here in the first place, to > help researchers and enjoy the time spent. A little humor goes a long way > and is quite beneficial to all. > - > Linda Simpson > > > -----Original Message----- From: Kathy Hines > Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 11:45 AM > To: Linda Simpson ; [email protected] > Cc: Karen De Groote > > Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Time to Vote for SC > > Hear! Hear! ;) I also give the EC a little more credit than that. > > Maybe what Karen said is the crux of my little personal dilemma here. She > mentioned: > >> Typos have no place >> in official situations. >> > > > I think of “official situations” as the 911 system, where somebody lives… > or dies… if you don’t get it right. In my view, this project is supposed > to be my escape from my daily work and the trials of the current state of > world unrest. I want to have fun doing genealogy, help people in their > research, and putz around with my *volunteer* pages. I don’t want to get > sucked into rules and politics and lengthy discussions that I don’t enjoy. > > I’m an altruistic volunteer, with an interest in history & genealogy, and > I happen to have a few HTML skills. > > Happy Valentines Day! > Kathy > > On Feb 14, 2015, at 11:29 AM, Linda Simpson via <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> I give the EC a little more credit than that. >> Carry on. >> - >> Linda Simpson >> >> >> >> From: Karen De Groote >> Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 11:22 AM >> To: Linda Simpson ; List MNGenWeb >> Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Time to Vote for SC >> >> Yes I know we know the dates and it is a typo but the EC needs to have >> all their Ts crossed and i's dotted which they have done. Typos have no >> place in official situations. >> >> Karen >> >> >> On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Linda Simpson via <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Karen, >> >> I think we all understand the voting period is 2/14 to 2/21 >> It's just a typo, no biggie. :-) >> - >> Linda Simpson >> >> >

Kathy, I agree with you whole-heartedly! When it gets to a point that if I forget to dot an i people will be in jeopardy I think it's time to pack it in. This is the USGenWeb, not national security. It should be run like a business, yes, but let's remember why we are here in the first place, to help researchers and enjoy the time spent. A little humor goes a long way and is quite beneficial to all. - Linda Simpson -----Original Message----- From: Kathy Hines Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 11:45 AM To: Linda Simpson ; [email protected] Cc: Karen De Groote Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Time to Vote for SC Hear! Hear! ;) I also give the EC a little more credit than that. Maybe what Karen said is the crux of my little personal dilemma here. She mentioned: > Typos have no place > in official situations. I think of “official situations” as the 911 system, where somebody lives… or dies… if you don’t get it right. In my view, this project is supposed to be my escape from my daily work and the trials of the current state of world unrest. I want to have fun doing genealogy, help people in their research, and putz around with my *volunteer* pages. I don’t want to get sucked into rules and politics and lengthy discussions that I don’t enjoy. I’m an altruistic volunteer, with an interest in history & genealogy, and I happen to have a few HTML skills. Happy Valentines Day! Kathy > On Feb 14, 2015, at 11:29 AM, Linda Simpson via <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I give the EC a little more credit than that. > Carry on. > - > Linda Simpson > > > > From: Karen De Groote > Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 11:22 AM > To: Linda Simpson ; List MNGenWeb > Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Time to Vote for SC > > Yes I know we know the dates and it is a typo but the EC needs to have all > their Ts crossed and i's dotted which they have done. Typos have no place > in official situations. > > Karen > > > On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Linda Simpson via <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Karen, > > I think we all understand the voting period is 2/14 to 2/21 > It's just a typo, no biggie. :-) > - > Linda Simpson >

My 2 cents. I am confused. By-Laws, Standing Rules and SOPs (Standing Operating Procedures) are synonymous and apply specific requirements for the objective. I would think that a set of By-Laws would be the target for establishing requirements that we must follow. Standing Rules or SOPs should be incorporated into the By-Laws under an appropriate section that would apply to the objective of the rule or SOP. Then you would have only one set of requirements that members could refer to in their need to meet MNGenWeb requirements. Guidelines are a separate issue since they are not requirements, but only suggestions that may enhance the process for various reasons. They should be a separate document and not incorporated into the document of requirements, i.e., By-Laws. As to establishing a By-Laws document, it may be best to establish a committee (already proposed) to draft the document before open discussion occurs. I base this on the many, many discussions that occur on this list. This approach, which has been suggested by several people, should reduce the amount of dissention and possibly speed up the process. After the document has been drafted, each article or section should be discussed one at a time (already proposed) to again reduce the overload on my daily reading. That said, any By-Laws for the state should be designed to enhance the USGenWeb By-Laws and not conflict with them. Granted, the USGenWeb By-Laws could use a good cleaning, but they already establish basic requirements for state and counties. Any By-Laws established for the state should only cover issues that are not covered at the national level, making our document a much shorter list of requirements. Bryant -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Laverne H. Tornow via Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 1:30 AM To: Timothy Stowell; [email protected] Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Marc Pennau Logo, There are 3 things many people are confused about: ByLaws Standing Rules Guidelines

It has just been pointed out to me that my original message said the voting period was from 12/14 thru 12/21. Obviously, December is long gone and the dates should read from 2/14 thru 2/21. Anyone know what causes one part of the brain to decide to go AWOL? LOL Pat Asher At 03:19 PM 2/13/2015, you wrote: >Voting for MNGenWeb State Coordinator starts tonight, 12/14 at >12:01am CST, and runs through Saturday, 12/21 at 11:59pm CST. > >To be counted, your vote must be time stamped during this period and >be copied to all three members of the election committee: > >Patrice Green - <[email protected]> >Mike Sweeney <[email protected]> >Pat Asher <[email protected]> > > >Your candidates are: > >Shirley Cullum >Martha Crosley Graham >Tim Stowell >Linda Zieman > > >The winner must receive a majority of the votes cast, i.e. 50% + 1 > >If no candidate achieves a majority, there will be a run-off election >between the two candidates receiving the most votes. > >It only takes a minute. Please vote! > > >Pat Asher >MN Election Committee > > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hear! Hear! ;) I also give the EC a little more credit than that. Maybe what Karen said is the crux of my little personal dilemma here. She mentioned: > Typos have no place > in official situations. I think of “official situations” as the 911 system, where somebody lives… or dies… if you don’t get it right. In my view, this project is supposed to be my escape from my daily work and the trials of the current state of world unrest. I want to have fun doing genealogy, help people in their research, and putz around with my *volunteer* pages. I don’t want to get sucked into rules and politics and lengthy discussions that I don’t enjoy. I’m an altruistic volunteer, with an interest in history & genealogy, and I happen to have a few HTML skills. Happy Valentines Day! Kathy > On Feb 14, 2015, at 11:29 AM, Linda Simpson via <[email protected]> wrote: > > I give the EC a little more credit than that. > Carry on. > - > Linda Simpson > > > > From: Karen De Groote > Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 11:22 AM > To: Linda Simpson ; List MNGenWeb > Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Time to Vote for SC > > Yes I know we know the dates and it is a typo but the EC needs to have all their Ts crossed and i's dotted which they have done. Typos have no place in official situations. > > Karen > > > On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Linda Simpson via <[email protected]> wrote: > > Karen, > > I think we all understand the voting period is 2/14 to 2/21 > It's just a typo, no biggie. :-) > - > Linda Simpson >

If my calculations are correct this would be basically an 8 day voting period from midnight Friday, 2/13 to midnight Saturday, 2/21? Tim On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Karen De Groote via <[email protected]> wrote: > You might want to re post the voting period. It is February, not > December. LOL > > Karen > Becker, Todd and Stearns > > On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Pat Asher via <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Voting for MNGenWeb State Coordinator starts tonight, 12/14 at > > 12:01am CST, and runs through Saturday, 12/21 at 11:59pm CST. > > > > To be counted, your vote must be time stamped during this period and > > be copied to all three members of the election committee: > > > > Patrice Green - <[email protected]> > > Mike Sweeney <[email protected]> > > Pat Asher <[email protected]> > > > > > > Your candidates are: > > > > Shirley Cullum > > Martha Crosley Graham > > Tim Stowell > > Linda Zieman > > > > > > The winner must receive a majority of the votes cast, i.e. 50% + 1 > > > > If no candidate achieves a majority, there will be a run-off election > > between the two candidates receiving the most votes. > > > > It only takes a minute. Please vote! > > > > > > Pat Asher > > MN Election Committee > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes > > in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message >

Linda, Actually I am not in favor of creating more rules for coordinators to follow. The national bylaws are sufficient and have been for the nearly 19 years of our existence. Some would say, what would we do if the leadership disappears again? We could do just as was done this time, ask national for assistance. Perhaps more regular roll calls than our previous yearly roll call would alert the members to a problem sooner - ie a roll call instituted by the SC/ASC team rather than everyone posting on list 'here' or 'present'. Since it seems most coordinators are adults, saying to them, that our state logo needs to be at the top of the main page of a county site and if linked, linked to the state page - there is really no reason to make a rule that says do this or else. Most people are pleasant to work with, so why complicate their lives with more rules unless those who want the rules seek to control other people's creativity? That said, I would not stand in the way of those who like to have more rules, to serve some purpose that eludes me. Tim On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Linda Ziemann via <[email protected]> wrote: > Good morning. Without restating everything regarding this, I agree with > what > Martha has stated in her response. (In fact, based on what I have read, > the candidates for SC are in favor of establishing MN state bylaws, with > accompanying rules.) Any bylaws approved by the members, should "enhance" > the Project-not detract from it (to quote Martha.) YES! Right on! > > My approach would be to ask for volunteers from the members, establishing a > "committee" to put together a group of bylaws. These in turn would be > presented to the membership for discussion and a vote. The rules also would > be formulated and presented in much the same manner. "Together" the MEMBERS > would establish & vote to set the bylaws and the rules. > > Most importantly it is essential that the CCs be proactive in finding & > transcribing data, recruiting others to help, uploading the free data to > the > county, presenting the ancestor data for the MN visiting researchers to > find. > > Everyone have a great weekend! Happy Hearts Day! > Linda Ziemann > Candidate for SC > Rock County Coordinator > > > > On 2/13/15, 10:21 PM, "Kermit Kittleson via" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I just want to "second" what Martha just said. > > > > Kermit Kittleson > > > > On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Martha A Crosley Graham via < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Shirley, > >> Thank you for the concise information on the difference between > >> Guidelines and By-Laws. > >> One of the things that is bothersome to me is the tendency to re-invent > >> some of the basic [and common sense] items that have been spelled out > >> over time in the USGW. > >> > >> I am not a 'micro-manager' type of SC here in CA. Blatant disregard for > >> the By-laws set up by the USGW are obvious items of concern and should > >> be addressed as they come up or are found. By-laws at the local [State] > >> level should enhance the Project, not detract from it. > >> > >> As an entity that promotes 'Free Genealogical and Historical Data', the > >> whole idea is to make resources available to visiting Researchers. If we > >> are so caught up in compliance issues, we are not giving ourselves time > >> to get the data located, formatted and uploaded. > >> > >> Martha > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> MNGEN-requ[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes > >> in the subject and the body of the message > >> > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in > > the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message >

It has nothing to do with the EC or not giving the benefit of the doubt but everything to do with proper record keeping and no loop holes. Pat fixed it so there should be no need to take me to task for pointing out the typo. All is well Karen On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Linda Simpson <[email protected]> wrote: > I give the EC a little more credit than that. > Carry on. > - > Linda Simpson > > > > *From:* Karen De Groote <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Saturday, February 14, 2015 11:22 AM > *To:* Linda Simpson <[email protected]> ; List MNGenWeb > <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [MNGEN] Time to Vote for SC > > Yes I know we know the dates and it is a typo but the EC needs to have > all their Ts crossed and i's dotted which they have done. Typos have no > place in official situations. > Karen > > On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Linda Simpson via <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Karen, >> >> I think we all understand the voting period is 2/14 to 2/21 >> It's just a typo, no biggie. :-) >> - >> Linda Simpson >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Karen De Groote via >> Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 10:30 AM >> To: Pat Asher ; List MNGenWeb >> Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Time to Vote for SC >> >> You might want to re post the voting period. It is February, not >> December. LOL >> >> Karen >> Becker, Todd and Stearns >> >> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Pat Asher via <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > Voting for MNGenWeb State Coordinator starts tonight, 12/14 at >> > 12:01am CST, and runs through Saturday, 12/21 at 11:59pm CST. >> > >> > To be counted, your vote must be time stamped during this period and >> > be copied to all three members of the election committee: >> > >> > Patrice Green - <[email protected]> >> > Mike Sweeney <[email protected]> >> > Pat Asher <[email protected]> >> > >> > >> > Your candidates are: >> > >> > Shirley Cullum >> > Martha Crosley Graham >> > Tim Stowell >> > Linda Zieman >> > >> > >> > The winner must receive a majority of the votes cast, i.e. 50% + 1 >> > >> > If no candidate achieves a majority, there will be a run-off election >> > between the two candidates receiving the most votes. >> > >> > It only takes a minute. Please vote! >> > >> > >> > Pat Asher >> > MN Election Committee >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes >> > in the subject and the body of the message >> > >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in >> the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > >

Bryant is right that the state rules/bylaws should be a short list and should cover only issues not addressed in the USGenWeb By-laws. Shirley On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Genealogy via <[email protected]> wrote: > My 2 cents. > I am confused. By-Laws, Standing Rules and SOPs (Standing Operating > Procedures) are synonymous and apply specific requirements for the > objective. I would think that a set of By-Laws would be the target for > establishing requirements that we must follow. Standing Rules or SOPs > should be incorporated into the By-Laws under an appropriate section that > would apply to the objective of the rule or SOP. Then you would have only > one set of requirements that members could refer to in their need to meet > MNGenWeb requirements. > > Guidelines are a separate issue since they are not requirements, but only > suggestions that may enhance the process for various reasons. They should > be a separate document and not incorporated into the document of > requirements, i.e., By-Laws. > > As to establishing a By-Laws document, it may be best to establish a > committee (already proposed) to draft the document before open discussion > occurs. I base this on the many, many discussions that occur on this > list. This approach, which has been suggested by several people, should > reduce the amount of dissention and possibly speed up the process. After > the document has been drafted, each article or section should be discussed > one at a time (already proposed) to again reduce the overload on my daily > reading. > > That said, any By-Laws for the state should be designed to enhance the > USGenWeb By-Laws and not conflict with them. Granted, the USGenWeb By-Laws > could use a good cleaning, but they already establish basic requirements > for state and counties. Any By-Laws established for the state should only > cover issues that are not covered at the national level, making our > document a much shorter list of requirements. > > Bryant > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Laverne H. Tornow via > Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 1:30 AM > To: Timothy Stowell; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Marc Pennau Logo, > > There are 3 things many people are confused about: > > ByLaws > Standing Rules > Guidelines > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message >

I’m with Tim, in that I would strongly prefer not to have more by-laws or rules. I’d rather that all stayed at the national level. But the discussion about moving MN to some hosting provider was of interest to me. I admire KY and IA for moving off of rootsweb.ancestry.com and I would like to see MN take that route as well. Kathy > On Feb 14, 2015, at 11:03 AM, Karen De Groote via <[email protected]> wrote: > > As far as this project as a whole (USGenWeb); things have changed over time > and will continue to change. That is the nature of the beast. We used to have Rootsweb to contribute to but when > it was bought by Ancestry, we all saw the writing on the wall. Each of us > is a champion of keeping genealogical data free for researchers, we are a > very important part of their lives or should be. I don't know how many > researchers can afford an Ancestry subscription, I know I can't and as > people drop off they need good quality genealogy for free. That is where > we have always been. > > Karen > Becker, Todd and Stearns >

I give the EC a little more credit than that. Carry on. - Linda Simpson From: Karen De Groote Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 11:22 AM To: Linda Simpson ; List MNGenWeb Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Time to Vote for SC Yes I know we know the dates and it is a typo but the EC needs to have all their Ts crossed and i's dotted which they have done. Typos have no place in official situations. Karen On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Linda Simpson via <[email protected]> wrote: Karen, I think we all understand the voting period is 2/14 to 2/21 It's just a typo, no biggie. :-) - Linda Simpson -----Original Message----- From: Karen De Groote via Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 10:30 AM To: Pat Asher ; List MNGenWeb Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Time to Vote for SC You might want to re post the voting period. It is February, not December. LOL Karen Becker, Todd and Stearns On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Pat Asher via <[email protected]> wrote: > Voting for MNGenWeb State Coordinator starts tonight, 12/14 at > 12:01am CST, and runs through Saturday, 12/21 at 11:59pm CST. > > To be counted, your vote must be time stamped during this period and > be copied to all three members of the election committee: > > Patrice Green - <[email protected]> > Mike Sweeney <[email protected]> > Pat Asher <[email protected]> > > > Your candidates are: > > Shirley Cullum > Martha Crosley Graham > Tim Stowell > Linda Zieman > > > The winner must receive a majority of the votes cast, i.e. 50% + 1 > > If no candidate achieves a majority, there will be a run-off election > between the two candidates receiving the most votes. > > It only takes a minute. Please vote! > > > Pat Asher > MN Election Committee > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Yes I know we know the dates and it is a typo but the EC needs to have all their Ts crossed and i's dotted which they have done. Typos have no place in official situations. Karen On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Linda Simpson via <[email protected]> wrote: > Karen, > > I think we all understand the voting period is 2/14 to 2/21 > It's just a typo, no biggie. :-) > - > Linda Simpson > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Karen De Groote via > Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 10:30 AM > To: Pat Asher ; List MNGenWeb > Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Time to Vote for SC > > You might want to re post the voting period. It is February, not > December. LOL > > Karen > Becker, Todd and Stearns > > On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Pat Asher via <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Voting for MNGenWeb State Coordinator starts tonight, 12/14 at > > 12:01am CST, and runs through Saturday, 12/21 at 11:59pm CST. > > > > To be counted, your vote must be time stamped during this period and > > be copied to all three members of the election committee: > > > > Patrice Green - <[email protected]> > > Mike Sweeney <[email protected]> > > Pat Asher <[email protected]> > > > > > > Your candidates are: > > > > Shirley Cullum > > Martha Crosley Graham > > Tim Stowell > > Linda Zieman > > > > > > The winner must receive a majority of the votes cast, i.e. 50% + 1 > > > > If no candidate achieves a majority, there will be a run-off election > > between the two candidates receiving the most votes. > > > > It only takes a minute. Please vote! > > > > > > Pat Asher > > MN Election Committee > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes > > in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in > the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message >

Karen, I think we all understand the voting period is 2/14 to 2/21 It's just a typo, no biggie. :-) - Linda Simpson -----Original Message----- From: Karen De Groote via Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 10:30 AM To: Pat Asher ; List MNGenWeb Subject: Re: [MNGEN] Time to Vote for SC You might want to re post the voting period. It is February, not December. LOL Karen Becker, Todd and Stearns On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Pat Asher via <[email protected]> wrote: > Voting for MNGenWeb State Coordinator starts tonight, 12/14 at > 12:01am CST, and runs through Saturday, 12/21 at 11:59pm CST. > > To be counted, your vote must be time stamped during this period and > be copied to all three members of the election committee: > > Patrice Green - <[email protected]> > Mike Sweeney <[email protected]> > Pat Asher <[email protected]> > > > Your candidates are: > > Shirley Cullum > Martha Crosley Graham > Tim Stowell > Linda Zieman > > > The winner must receive a majority of the votes cast, i.e. 50% + 1 > > If no candidate achieves a majority, there will be a run-off election > between the two candidates receiving the most votes. > > It only takes a minute. Please vote! > > > Pat Asher > MN Election Committee > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

My opinion on this subject is that we don't necessarily need bylaws if we have rules. Bylaws are meant to be a framework of an organization, not rules about every day tasks. We do need a set of "rules" aka something to adhere to including the consequences of not adhering to the rules. I don't see where having the rules takes away from our jobs. I think they bring like minded people together for a cohesive purpose. Having a set of rules for the project that we vote on is ideal in my book. Guidelines are worthless if they are not a necessary component, if they are just suggestions. We can see how well that works in the national project, it doesn't. CCs that just want to do what they want to do are not team players, how is that a benefit to the project? As far as this project as a whole (USGenWeb); things have changed over time and will continue to change. That is the nature of the beast. Old CCs clinging to the "collection of links" on their counties no longer fit the purpose of the project. We used to have Rootsweb to contribute to but when it was bought by Ancestry, we all saw the writing on the wall. Each of us is a champion of keeping genealogical data free for researchers, we are a very important part of their lives or should be. I don't know how many researchers can afford an Ancestry subscription, I know I can't and as people drop off they need good quality genealogy for free. That is where we have always been. I would like to see 1. Bylaws as a framework (short) for MNGenWeb 2. Rules for the project including leadership and coordinator requirements. 3. Guidelines can be suggestions for improving our sites, things we should add if we get the time. MNGenWeb will grow with good rules in place and be a shining start in the USGenWeb project. Karen Becker, Todd and Stearns On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Timothy Stowell via <[email protected]> wrote: > Linda, > > Actually I am not in favor of creating more rules for coordinators to > follow. The national bylaws are sufficient and have been for the nearly 19 > years of our existence. Some would say, what would we do if the leadership > disappears again? We could do just as was done this time, ask national for > assistance. > > Perhaps more regular roll calls than our previous yearly roll call would > alert the members to a problem sooner - ie a roll call instituted by the > SC/ASC team rather than everyone posting on list 'here' or 'present'. > > Since it seems most coordinators are adults, saying to them, that our state > logo needs to be at the top of the main page of a county site and if > linked, linked to the state page - there is really no reason to make a rule > that says do this or else. > > Most people are pleasant to work with, so why complicate their lives with > more rules unless those who want the rules seek to control other people's > creativity? > > That said, I would not stand in the way of those who like to have more > rules, to serve some purpose that eludes me. > > Tim > > On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Linda Ziemann via <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Good morning. Without restating everything regarding this, I agree with > > what > > Martha has stated in her response. (In fact, based on what I have read, > > the candidates for SC are in favor of establishing MN state bylaws, with > > accompanying rules.) Any bylaws approved by the members, should "enhance" > > the Project-not detract from it (to quote Martha.) YES! Right on! > > > > My approach would be to ask for volunteers from the members, > establishing a > > "committee" to put together a group of bylaws. These in turn would be > > presented to the membership for discussion and a vote. The rules also > would > > be formulated and presented in much the same manner. "Together" the > MEMBERS > > would establish & vote to set the bylaws and the rules. > > > > Most importantly it is essential that the CCs be proactive in finding & > > transcribing data, recruiting others to help, uploading the free data to > > the > > county, presenting the ancestor data for the MN visiting researchers to > > find. > > > > Everyone have a great weekend! Happy Hearts Day! > > Linda Ziemann > > Candidate for SC > > Rock County Coordinator > > > > > > > > On 2/13/15, 10:21 PM, "Kermit Kittleson via" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I just want to "second" what Martha just said. > > > > > > Kermit Kittleson > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Martha A Crosley Graham via < > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> Shirley, > > >> Thank you for the concise information on the difference between > > >> Guidelines and By-Laws. > > >> One of the things that is bothersome to me is the tendency to > re-invent > > >> some of the basic [and common sense] items that have been spelled out > > >> over time in the USGW. > > >> > > >> I am not a 'micro-manager' type of SC here in CA. Blatant disregard > for > > >> the By-laws set up by the USGW are obvious items of concern and should > > >> be addressed as they come up or are found. By-laws at the local > [State] > > >> level should enhance the Project, not detract from it. > > >> > > >> As an entity that promotes 'Free Genealogical and Historical Data', > the > > >> whole idea is to make resources available to visiting Researchers. If > we > > >> are so caught up in compliance issues, we are not giving ourselves > time > > >> to get the data located, formatted and uploaded. > > >> > > >> Martha > > >> > > >> > > >> ------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes > > >> in the subject and the body of the message > > >> > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in > > > the subject and the body of the message > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes > > in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message >