Karen Mitchell, The string below has become to confusing to add another layer of response. Instead, I'll answer here: KAREN said: ***Then I fail to see the point of having an "Official" logo, if no one needs to use it. As I said, it represents the unity of the CC's in the NM project, and personally, I like that, I have no problem with it at all. (end) Answer: The logo identifies the NMGenWeb project just as the USGenWeb logos identify USGenWeb. It does not represent unity. Karen said: ***Do you have some written proof of this? Did you save the conversations so that you can present them? If so, please share it with us because that's not how I remember it at all. (end) Answer: I have no written proof. Do you? The failure of knowing what was said one year ago or ten years ago is the very reason we need a web page of guidelines approved by the County Coordinators of NMGenWeb which will apply from one year to the next. Karen said: ***When you become State Coordinator, I'm sure you will implement this. But unless I have the majority of CC's ask me to do this, I don't think I will. We have always been low key and I did pledge to keep it that way. The New Mexico CC's are very unique in that they don't need a bunch of written rules and laws in order to build great web sites and offer help for researchers. I see no reason to change that. (end) Answer: First: I have no desire to be the SC of NMGenWeb. Secondly: How do you know if the CCs do not want written guidelines if you do not ask them on this list? Your tone so far has not been contra-conductive for two-way communication. As a CC of NMGenWeb and a member in good standing in USGenWeb, I will continue to make REQUESTS to Advisory Board Members and voice my opinions on this and other forums. Lastly, welcome to the new CC. Charles Barnum Please see *** below. Karen Mitchell New Mexico State Coordinator km1109@ghvalley.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "jcnreno" <jcnreno@sbcglobal.net> To: <NMGENWEB-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 9:59 AM Subject: Re: [NMGENWEB] please correct Karen and All, The logo was approved as the official logo. It was not required to be displayed, however. ***Then I fail to see the point of having an "Official" logo, if no one needs to use it. As I said, it represents the unity of the CC's in the NM project, and personally, I like that, I have no problem with it at all. That subject was specifically discussed by Mr. Moya at the time that the logo colors might clash with some web page colors. It was up to the CCs to display or not. ***Do you have some written proof of this? Did you save the conversations so that you can present them? If so, please share it with us because that's not how I remember it at all. Since NMGenWeb does not have a County Coordinators guide page on the state web site like most of the other states of USGenWeb, we can never know for sure what is policy and what is not. *** How about if we just "discuss" what we'd like, like we've always done? I request that NMGenWeb establish a CC's page that specifically covers these subjects including the proper conduct of elections, voting, logos, updating web sites, and so on and that said requirements be approved by majority vote of the CCs.***When you become State Coordinator, I'm sure you will implement this. But unless I have the majority of CC's ask me to do this, I don't think I will. We have always been low key and I did pledge to keep it that way. The New Mexico CC's are very unique in that they don't need a bunch of written rules and laws in order to build great web sites and offer help for researchers. I see no reason to change that. (I have always displayed the logo, but that is my decision.) Charles Barnum Karen Mitchell <km1109@ghvalley.net> wrote: Thank you Susan for your comments and for your support. I do appreciate it. At the time the logo was designed, it was with the intent that it would be included on the web pages that are part of the project, that's why it says "Official". Many times some of us re-design our pages simply because we want something new, and the logo may have been missed in the re-design. I don't think it's an issue, it just shows unity of the members in the NM project. Karen Mitchell New Mexico State Coordinator km1109@ghvalley.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "Susan Bellomo" To: Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 6:58 PM Subject: Re: [NMGENWEB] please correct It was my understanding that the NMGenWeb logo was expected to be included on the home page of our Web sites. No one made an issue of it because supporting free genealogy resources on the Web seemed more important. The USGenWeb logo is required. The NMGenWeb logo is beautiful, but it is difficult to find any kind of color scheme to accommode it plus the red/white/blue USGenWebLogo in terms of design. Whatever Karen decides works for me. BTW, I do have both logos on the home pages of the counties I host. Susan

Mr. Barnum, Below are your responses to my email: Answer: The logo identifies the NMGenWeb project just as the USGenWeb logos identify USGenWeb. It does not represent unity. Answer: I have no written proof. Do you? The failure of knowing what was said one year ago or ten years ago is the very reason we need a web page of guidelines approved by the County Coordinators of NMGenWeb which will apply from one year to the next. Answer: First: I have no desire to be the SC of NMGenWeb. Secondly: How do you know if the CCs do not want written guidelines if you do not ask them on this list? Your tone so far has not been contra-conductive for two-way communication. As a CC of NMGenWeb and a member in good standing in USGenWeb, I will continue to make REQUESTS to Advisory Board Members and voice my opinions on this and other forums. Your message to Pat: Leon, a true founder of NMGenWeb believed in a hands-off policy for CCs. He did not require very much of any CC except to follow the National Bylaws. That is all I want. I want fair and uniform elections, term to term, regardless of who is running. NMGenWeb has not had a single professional election that I can recall. Making it up as we go along is just not right. We need a uniforn set of standards. Not restrictions, not marching orders. The logo is a nice piece of art. I like it, but it was never made mandatory. If it is to be mandatory, we need to vote on it, and it needs to be stated in our guidelines. Since I do not keep emails, I'd appreciate having a copy of Leon's message regarding this topic. ***1. Whether the logo represents unity or not is an individual perspective. I think it does. Just my opinion. 2. I do not have any proof that the logo is mandatory or not, I didn't think I needed any beings I have never stated that it IS mandatory. I simply made the comment "Also, I noticed some pages without the official NM logo. I think we all decided when it was made that we would use it on our sites, but if I'm wrong please correct me. There's several pages out there without it. If you are not using it please let me know why so I can make a notation of it on my list." No where in that statement does it say that anything is "mandatory". I have never used that term, although you have. In fact, I only asked for the courtesy of any of the CC's to let me know if they are not using the logo and why so I could note that, and not ask them about it again 6 months from now. There could be numerous reasons why a CC is not using the logo, to numerous to mention here. 3. Mr. Barnum, you are contradicting yourself and quite frankly I'm confused. First you say you want a "guidelines" page with everything written out, and then you say you want a "hands-off" policy. Which is it? Please help me understand this. 4. No, I don't know that the CC's do want a guidelines page, but then I don't know that they don't either. I respect the CC's as adults and feel if they want something changed they will speak up. I assume if they want one, they are going to tell me they do. Right from the beginning I expressed an open door policy, if anyone has any suggestions or comments, to please bring them to my attention. So far no one has said a word about a guidelines page, except you. If the majority of the CC's don't express that desire, I'm certainly not going to force it on them. Matter of fact, I haven't heard ANY complaints from anyone else. 5. As for my "tone", I have tried to answer your questions to the best of my ability. Whatever you are reading into that is up to you. 6. As a member of the project you are welcome to contact the Advisory Board members whenever you feel the need. I'm sure they love to hear from you. As for stating your opinions on this List, as long as it's not disruptive, you're welcome to do that too. All the CC's of NM have that same privilege. No one has said otherwise. 7. I do not know what you consider a "professional election", but I haven't seen any of the NM CC's complain about the way anything has been handled, so I would guess they appreciate not having the rules and regulations you are suggesting. Quite the contrary, it appears everyone is quite satisfied, except you. Your comments about "restrictions and marching orders" also confuse me. When did any of the New Mexico State Coordinators ever do this? I haven't seen any of them place "restrictions" upon the CC's, nor have I seen any of them give "marching orders". I do note that you have praised the preceding two SC's (Leon and Susan), giving them great accolades, even though you opposed them while they held the position, and yet now you say they didn't handle the elections correctly. Please explain this. There must be something I'm missing there and maybe something I could learn from, although I don't think so because in my opinion I think they both did a great job of being our SC. I, as well as many of the CC's, have truly appreciated the way Leon and Susan both stayed focused on the goal of the overall project, which is adding data to our websites for our researchers. Karen Mitchell New Mexico State Coordinator km1109@ghvalley.net