We are talking about the entire usgenweb project, not Oklahoma. There have been many across the U.S. that went into a tail spin and just deleted their entire archive or moved submitted data from other people without permission from the submitter. That is what I'm talking about - the entire U.S. Dennis ----- Original Message ----- From: "David W. Morgan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 6:46 PM Subject: Re: [OK-Coordinators] #14 > > Dennis, how long were you an archivist? > > It is hard to figure out what you are talking about, and what > specific incident you are talking about. I don't know of any > archivist going off the deep end. > > People get mad and quit, but that is not the same thing as going > crazy or going off the deep end. > > As for changing the password for the archives, I request a > password change whenever it is necessary, for the TXGenWeb Archives. > Since we only have one password for 254 counties, sometimes we have > to ask for a password change more than we'd like. Most of the people > that work in the archives are not going to delete everything when they > leave. If that is what you are working on with the bylaws committee, > to tell the USGenWeb Archives how to protect the files, you are just > wasting your time. Find something more productive to argue about. We > are going to ignore you, anyway. (I speak for myself) > > As for the county web site, I have my data in the archives, plus I > have it in the the search engine on the county web side, plus I have > Google blocked from archiving my site. Just in case I get mad and > leave, nobody is going to harvest it, except for the queries, which > were there before I was (1997) and the others which are on the > GenConnect/Ancestry boards. I also got a password change for my > Rootsweb site, so it would no longer have one of those easy to > guess passwords. It is my web space, and I plan to keep it. > > I haven't done all this for my county web space in TXGenWeb. I > am under no pressure there, and we let the SC in Texas know that > we want NO NEW RULES loud and clear! LOL What is more, he listened > to us! > > David > > On Sat, 11 May 2002, Dennis Muncrief wrote: > > > Things are a little different now that the internet has exploded on the > > scene. There is a new definition of "copyrightable" data. Facts, names, > > dates are "facts" and are not copyrightable. If a volunteer submits a > > cemetery registry, for example, the "facts" of the registry are "up for > > grabs", it is that simple. However if there are any photos, narration, > > "unique" organization of material, that is copyrightable. The trouble with > > "rogue" archivist is that they can go "off the deep end" any moment. > > > > It is my thought that any submitter MUST make sure that their data is > > correctly posted at the time of submission. It is their responsibility as > > well as the archivist to give credit where credit is due. There is no way > > to "idiot proof" the world. It is the responsibility of the State > > Coordinator or Archivist to police these people on the "fringes of reality" > > who begin to believe the data is theirs personally. The SC or SA could go > > in and change the password or something to prevent the rogue archivist from > > deleting or moving the data. > > > > It is my understanding that the submitter will be contacted if the material > > is to be REMOVED. Any submitted data belongs to the website (archive) and > > not the individual archivist. > > > > Dennis > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Ron" <[email protected]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 5:03 PM > > Subject: [OK-Coordinators] #14 > > > > > > > I have a real problem with amendment #14. As it is now, when a cc leaves > > all > > > material not supplied by that cc stays with the site. Under the proposed > > > amendment, all contributors/submitters have to be contacted before their > > > material can continue to be used. The problems I have are: (1) That's > > going > > > to be a nightmare to implement, and (2) All a cc has to do is not indicate > > > and/or remove the submitter's contact information and all the material > > will > > > be forever lost as it can't transfer without being able to contact the > > > submitter. > > > > > > Dennis, if you see this, what is the rationale for this proposed > > amendment? > > > > > > -------------------- > > > Ron Henson > > > Choctaw Co. Coordinator Oklahoma GenWeb > > > http://www.rootsweb.com/~okchocta > > > Yahoo IM okchocta > > > > > > > > > [email protected] David W. Morgan Honolulu Hawaii > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~dmorgan/ > http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/tx/txfiles.htm > >