Martha exactly, why all the fuss the USGenWeb logo should link to www.usgenweb.org only. However it has been discovered that some member/members have used the logo to link to sites other than www.usgenweb.org . So the amendment addresses this issue. Jeff Kemp SEMA CC Rep ----- Original Message ----- From: "Martha A Crosley Graham" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 5:32 PM Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Proposed Bylaws Amendment > Cheryl makes good sense. > A USGW logo / link should only go to the main USGW Site / page. > A County [with the State logo] should link back to it's main State page > > How hard can this be? Why the fuss? Who [a CC with a modicum of expertise] > would do otherwise? > > 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 >

This would most likely guarantee that the motion would not pass. There are too many who do not want to ruin the beauty of their creation by having the USGenWeb logo visible when the page opens. This is sad but true. Les Sharon Craig wrote: > How about removing second sentence re state logo and instead of prominent, put in the sentence. It will be located at the top of the home/main page . It can be left , right or in the center. > > > Sharon A. Craig > Hamilton Co. InGenWeb Coordinator > Assistant In GenWeb State Coordinator > > > --- On Fri, 1/15/10, Sherri <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From: Sherri <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Proposed Bylaws Amendment > To: [email protected] > Date: Friday, January 15, 2010, 5:43 PM > > > I also understand what you're saying, Jan. My fear (and it's held by many) > is that if we try to include the definition of "prominent" in the proposed > amendment, it will never pass and we'll be stuck right where we are again, > and with folks that are arguing that we can't require the USGenWeb National > logo to be linked ONLY to the USGenWeb site, not to some site(s) that do > nothing more than try to damage the Project and/or its image. > > If you want to write a proposal and can get MIGenWeb CCs to agree to be the > "owner" of the proposal, by all means, go for it. Submit it to your Reps to > be published on the notices page and have it put out for other states to > co-sponsor it. Get the 4 other states to agree to co-sponsor and we can > have them both on the ballot in July (assuming that this first proposed > amendment gets the 4 other states to agree to co-sponsor it.) > > In my eyes, it's like building blocks. We can take the pieces and make them > work together over time or we can plan the castle and never get it built > because no single source can supply the required materials. Do we take what > we can get from one and find the remainder of the materials somewhere else, > or keep looking forever for a single source for the materials, and when/if > we ever find that source, deal with the fact that the materials' price has > doubled and the budget won't stretch far enough to build it? > > Sherri > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jan Cortez > Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 4:39 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Proposed Bylaws Amendment > > Sherri, > > I understand what you are saying here, but, don't you think that one of the > biggest problems we have within this project is bylaws that are not clear > and concise? They can be interpreted several different ways. > > In this instance - why do we need the second sentence: > > "A state project logo may be required depending on the guidelines/standards > in effect for that state. If linked, a state project logo may only be > linked to the appropriate state site." > > I believe that National is stepping on states rights, by including this > sentence. > > I also believe that where the National Logo is linked is not the only > problem faced here. How about a definition of "Prominent". That has > surfaced over and over again as to its meaning. > > The way I look at it is, if we are going to amend, why not fix the whole > problem and be all inclusive. Remove the second sentence on state logos > and define prominent, otherwise all we are doing is putting a small bandage > on a very large sore. > > Just my three and a half cents worth. > > Jan Cortez > MIGenWeb > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sherri" <[email protected]> > > >> I know there's been a lot of discussion about the state logo in this >> proposal. I think too much is being read into it. >> >> The statement is "If linked, a state project logo may only be linked to >> the >> appropriate state site." That says that the KYGenWeb state logo shouldn't >> be linked to the ALGenWeb state site. Make sense to me - why would a KY >> CC >> be using the KYGenWeb logo to link to anything other than the KYGenWeb >> state >> site? >> >> If a state has bylaws, rules or requirements in place that say that the >> state logo should be linked to the county selection page (or any other >> page) >> on the respective state site, that's what the CC is responsible for >> complying with. >> >> Sherri >> _____________________________________________ >> From: Sherri [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 7:43 PM >> To: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; >> '[email protected]' >> Subject: Proposed Bylaws Amendment >> >> >> As per Article XVI. B of the USGenWeb Project bylaws, the WVGenWeb >> Project, >> with the support of the majority of the WVGenWeb CCs, sponsors the >> following >> amendment to the USGenWeb Bylaws: >> >> Currently ARTICLE IX. A. reads: >> >> IX. GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS >> >> A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project >> logo >> on the home page. A state project logo may be required depending on the >> guidelines/standards in effect for that state. >> >> The corrected proposed change to read: >> >> IX. GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS >> >> A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project >> logo >> on the home page. If linked, this logo may only be linked to the USGenWeb >> National site. A state project logo may be required depending on the >> guidelines/standards in effect for that state. If linked, a state project >> logo may only be linked to the appropriate state site. >> >> Please post this in the proper locations so that other states will have a >> chance to cosponsor this bylaws change. >> >> Les Shockey >> SC WVGenWeb >> >> Article XVI. B. states that for a bylaws amendment to be placed on the >> ballot during the annual election there must be 5 co-sponsors (of which WV >> counts as one) of the proposed change. >> >> You will find the proposed amendment at >> http://usgenweb.org/volunteers/notice.shtml Any state that wants to join >> WVGenWeb in co-sponsoring this amendment, please notify your regional AB >> representatives, Tina Vickery as RAL or myself as NC and we'll get your >> state listed as co-sponsor. >> >> >> Sherri Bradley >> National Coordinator >> USGenWeb Project >> Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org >> Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> 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 > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 270.14.142/2623 - Release Date: 01/15/10 > 07:35:00 > > > ------------------------------- > 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 >

Thanks Les, I could not have said it better. Jeff Kemp SEMA CC Rep ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lesley L Shockey" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 6:06 PM Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Proposed Bylaws Amendment > There are many states that do not have their own sets of bylaws. > > There are people in the USGenWeb Project that seems to make it a > career to either take over, destroy or see how much havoc they can > create to the USGenWeb Project. > > There are a few SCs who will not take action against those who misuse > the USGenWeb Project logo. > The reasons: > 1. There is no bylaw prohibiting it. > 2. Fear of violating a persons freed to express themselves as they see > fit. > 3. They do not care what the CCs do. > > Now if you state rules say where to put the logos, then I fail to see > what could be objected to. The state rules are applied first. The > bylaws will only cover those that are not protected. > > Les > > Cheryl Rothwell wrote: >> No, I'm not reading it to say something different. I'm wondering why we >> need >> it, particularly since it distresses some members. Our state rules say >> where >> to put the logos. Why do we need US to tell us? I'm thinking unnecessary. >> >> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 5:34 PM, Lesley L Shockey >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Cheryl, are you reading the proposed bylaw change to say something >>> other than this? >>> >>> Les >>> >>> Cheryl Rothwell wrote: >>> >>>> It seems logical to me that the USGenWeb logo should only link to the >>> main >>>> USGenWeb page and the state logo should only link to the main state >>>> page. >>>> Who thinks otherwise? >>>> >>>> Cheryl Rothwell >>>> ASC, ILGenWeb >> >> ------------------------------- >> 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 >

At 05:57 PM 1/15/2010, you wrote: >There are those CCs out there right now linking the USGenWeb logo to sites >that are not even a part of the USGenWeb and don't reflect well on the >USGenWeb. With nothing in the bylaws about what the logo can be linked to, >there's not really anything that we can do if the State Coordinator won't >deal with the situation even when it's reported to them. And what are you going to do when it is part of the bylaws and the State Coordinator STILL won't do anything? Quoting one of the AR CCs who said it much better than I can: Bylaws structure an organization and provide the broad rules under which the organization will operate. They are meant to be permanent and not change over time. Standard rules and guidelines are for day-to-day operational needs, which often do change over time. As a functional directive, instructions on how the logo may be linked belong in the Guidelines, NOT the Bylaws. Betsy

No, I'm not reading it to say something different. I'm wondering why we need it, particularly since it distresses some members. Our state rules say where to put the logos. Why do we need US to tell us? I'm thinking unnecessary. On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 5:34 PM, Lesley L Shockey <[email protected]>wrote: > Cheryl, are you reading the proposed bylaw change to say something > other than this? > > Les > > Cheryl Rothwell wrote: > > > It seems logical to me that the USGenWeb logo should only link to the > main > > USGenWeb page and the state logo should only link to the main state page. > > Who thinks otherwise? > > > > Cheryl Rothwell > > ASC, ILGenWeb >

I also understand what you're saying, Jan. My fear (and it's held by many) is that if we try to include the definition of "prominent" in the proposed amendment, it will never pass and we'll be stuck right where we are again, and with folks that are arguing that we can't require the USGenWeb National logo to be linked ONLY to the USGenWeb site, not to some site(s) that do nothing more than try to damage the Project and/or its image. If you want to write a proposal and can get MIGenWeb CCs to agree to be the "owner" of the proposal, by all means, go for it. Submit it to your Reps to be published on the notices page and have it put out for other states to co-sponsor it. Get the 4 other states to agree to co-sponsor and we can have them both on the ballot in July (assuming that this first proposed amendment gets the 4 other states to agree to co-sponsor it.) In my eyes, it's like building blocks. We can take the pieces and make them work together over time or we can plan the castle and never get it built because no single source can supply the required materials. Do we take what we can get from one and find the remainder of the materials somewhere else, or keep looking forever for a single source for the materials, and when/if we ever find that source, deal with the fact that the materials' price has doubled and the budget won't stretch far enough to build it? Sherri -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jan Cortez Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 4:39 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Proposed Bylaws Amendment Sherri, I understand what you are saying here, but, don't you think that one of the biggest problems we have within this project is bylaws that are not clear and concise? They can be interpreted several different ways. In this instance - why do we need the second sentence: "A state project logo may be required depending on the guidelines/standards in effect for that state. If linked, a state project logo may only be linked to the appropriate state site." I believe that National is stepping on states rights, by including this sentence. I also believe that where the National Logo is linked is not the only problem faced here. How about a definition of "Prominent". That has surfaced over and over again as to its meaning. The way I look at it is, if we are going to amend, why not fix the whole problem and be all inclusive. Remove the second sentence on state logos and define prominent, otherwise all we are doing is putting a small bandage on a very large sore. Just my three and a half cents worth. Jan Cortez MIGenWeb ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sherri" <[email protected]> >I know there's been a lot of discussion about the state logo in this > proposal. I think too much is being read into it. > > The statement is "If linked, a state project logo may only be linked to > the > appropriate state site." That says that the KYGenWeb state logo shouldn't > be linked to the ALGenWeb state site. Make sense to me - why would a KY > CC > be using the KYGenWeb logo to link to anything other than the KYGenWeb > state > site? > > If a state has bylaws, rules or requirements in place that say that the > state logo should be linked to the county selection page (or any other > page) > on the respective state site, that's what the CC is responsible for > complying with. > > Sherri > _____________________________________________ > From: Sherri [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 7:43 PM > To: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; > '[email protected]' > Subject: Proposed Bylaws Amendment > > > As per Article XVI. B of the USGenWeb Project bylaws, the WVGenWeb > Project, > with the support of the majority of the WVGenWeb CCs, sponsors the > following > amendment to the USGenWeb Bylaws: > > Currently ARTICLE IX. A. reads: > > IX. GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS > > A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project > logo > on the home page. A state project logo may be required depending on the > guidelines/standards in effect for that state. > > The corrected proposed change to read: > > IX. GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS > > A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project > logo > on the home page. If linked, this logo may only be linked to the USGenWeb > National site. A state project logo may be required depending on the > guidelines/standards in effect for that state. If linked, a state project > logo may only be linked to the appropriate state site. > > Please post this in the proper locations so that other states will have a > chance to cosponsor this bylaws change. > > Les Shockey > SC WVGenWeb > > Article XVI. B. states that for a bylaws amendment to be placed on the > ballot during the annual election there must be 5 co-sponsors (of which WV > counts as one) of the proposed change. > > You will find the proposed amendment at > http://usgenweb.org/volunteers/notice.shtml Any state that wants to join > WVGenWeb in co-sponsoring this amendment, please notify your regional AB > representatives, Tina Vickery as RAL or myself as NC and we'll get your > state listed as co-sponsor. > > > Sherri Bradley > National Coordinator > USGenWeb Project > Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org > Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php > > > > > > ------------------------------- > 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 270.14.142/2623 - Release Date: 01/15/10 07:35:00 ------------------------------- 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

and the pages was last updated...   This page was last updated on 02/14/2007 lots going on -      Nancy Janyszeski Bucks County  &  Northampton History and Genealogy http://www.BucksCountyHistory.com http://www.pa-roots.com/~northampton/ http://www.nockamixon.us http://www.pagenweb.org/~bucks/ Spruance Library Bucks County Historical Society --- On Fri, 1/15/10, Jan Cortez <[email protected]> wrote: From: Jan Cortez <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Example To: "Jeff Kemp" <[email protected]>, [email protected] Date: Friday, January 15, 2010, 8:25 PM Sheesh - this is old, old news.  And if you pass a bylaw amendment and the SC still refuses to do anything about it, what do you plan to do?  Delink the whole State? Jan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Kemp" <[email protected]> > http://skyways.lib.ks.us/genweb/anderson/index.html > > > Jeff Kemp > SEMA CC Rep > > ------------------------------- > 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 270.14.142/2623 - Release Date: 01/15/10 07:35:00 ------------------------------- 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

We have had some feedback that USGenWeb is overstepping its bounds, messing in things that should be left to the state projects. I think that will translate to a "no" vote. It seems logical to me that the USGenWeb logo should only link to the main USGenWeb page and the state logo should only link to the main state page. Who thinks otherwise? Cheryl Rothwell ASC, ILGenWeb On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Sharon Craig <[email protected]>wrote: > How about removing second sentence re state logo and instead of prominent, > put in the sentence. It will be located at the top of the home/main page . > It can be left , right or in the center. > > > Sharon A. Craig > Hamilton Co. InGenWeb Coordinator > Assistant In GenWeb State Coordinator > > > --- On Fri, 1/15/10, Sherri <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From: Sherri <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Proposed Bylaws Amendment > To: [email protected] > Date: Friday, January 15, 2010, 5:43 PM > > > I also understand what you're saying, Jan. My fear (and it's held by many) > is that if we try to include the definition of "prominent" in the proposed > amendment, it will never pass and we'll be stuck right where we are again, > and with folks that are arguing that we can't require the USGenWeb National > logo to be linked ONLY to the USGenWeb site, not to some site(s) that do > nothing more than try to damage the Project and/or its image. > > If you want to write a proposal and can get MIGenWeb CCs to agree to be the > "owner" of the proposal, by all means, go for it. Submit it to your Reps > to > be published on the notices page and have it put out for other states to > co-sponsor it. Get the 4 other states to agree to co-sponsor and we can > have them both on the ballot in July (assuming that this first proposed > amendment gets the 4 other states to agree to co-sponsor it.) > > In my eyes, it's like building blocks. We can take the pieces and make > them > work together over time or we can plan the castle and never get it built > because no single source can supply the required materials. Do we take > what > we can get from one and find the remainder of the materials somewhere else, > or keep looking forever for a single source for the materials, and when/if > we ever find that source, deal with the fact that the materials' price has > doubled and the budget won't stretch far enough to build it? > > Sherri > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jan Cortez > Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 4:39 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Proposed Bylaws Amendment > > Sherri, > > I understand what you are saying here, but, don't you think that one of the > biggest problems we have within this project is bylaws that are not clear > and concise? They can be interpreted several different ways. > > In this instance - why do we need the second sentence: > > "A state project logo may be required depending on the guidelines/standards > in effect for that state. If linked, a state project logo may only be > linked to the appropriate state site." > > I believe that National is stepping on states rights, by including this > sentence. > > I also believe that where the National Logo is linked is not the only > problem faced here. How about a definition of "Prominent". That has > surfaced over and over again as to its meaning. > > The way I look at it is, if we are going to amend, why not fix the whole > problem and be all inclusive. Remove the second sentence on state logos > and define prominent, otherwise all we are doing is putting a small bandage > on a very large sore. > > Just my three and a half cents worth. > > Jan Cortez > MIGenWeb > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sherri" <[email protected]> > > > >I know there's been a lot of discussion about the state logo in this > > proposal. I think too much is being read into it. > > > > The statement is "If linked, a state project logo may only be linked to > > the > > appropriate state site." That says that the KYGenWeb state logo > shouldn't > > be linked to the ALGenWeb state site. Make sense to me - why would a KY > > CC > > be using the KYGenWeb logo to link to anything other than the KYGenWeb > > state > > site? > > > > If a state has bylaws, rules or requirements in place that say that the > > state logo should be linked to the county selection page (or any other > > page) > > on the respective state site, that's what the CC is responsible for > > complying with. > > > > Sherri > > _____________________________________________ > > From: Sherri [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 7:43 PM > > To: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; > > '[email protected]' > > Subject: Proposed Bylaws Amendment > > > > > > As per Article XVI. B of the USGenWeb Project bylaws, the WVGenWeb > > Project, > > with the support of the majority of the WVGenWeb CCs, sponsors the > > following > > amendment to the USGenWeb Bylaws: > > > > Currently ARTICLE IX. A. reads: > > > > IX. GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS > > > > A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project > > logo > > on the home page. A state project logo may be required depending on the > > guidelines/standards in effect for that state. > > > > The corrected proposed change to read: > > > > IX. GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS > > > > A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project > > logo > > on the home page. If linked, this logo may only be linked to the > USGenWeb > > National site. A state project logo may be required depending on the > > guidelines/standards in effect for that state. If linked, a state > project > > logo may only be linked to the appropriate state site. > > > > Please post this in the proper locations so that other states will have a > > chance to cosponsor this bylaws change. > > > > Les Shockey > > SC WVGenWeb > > > > Article XVI. B. states that for a bylaws amendment to be placed on the > > ballot during the annual election there must be 5 co-sponsors (of which > WV > > counts as one) of the proposed change. > > > > You will find the proposed amendment at > > http://usgenweb.org/volunteers/notice.shtml Any state that wants to join > > WVGenWeb in co-sponsoring this amendment, please notify your regional AB > > representatives, Tina Vickery as RAL or myself as NC and we'll get your > > state listed as co-sponsor. > > > > > > Sherri Bradley > > National Coordinator > > USGenWeb Project > > Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org > > Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > 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 > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 270.14.142/2623 - Release Date: 01/15/10 > 07:35:00 > > > ------------------------------- > 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 >

Sherri, I understand what you are saying here, but, don't you think that one of the biggest problems we have within this project is bylaws that are not clear and concise? They can be interpreted several different ways. In this instance - why do we need the second sentence: "A state project logo may be required depending on the guidelines/standards in effect for that state. If linked, a state project logo may only be linked to the appropriate state site." I believe that National is stepping on states rights, by including this sentence. I also believe that where the National Logo is linked is not the only problem faced here. How about a definition of "Prominent". That has surfaced over and over again as to its meaning. The way I look at it is, if we are going to amend, why not fix the whole problem and be all inclusive. Remove the second sentence on state logos and define prominent, otherwise all we are doing is putting a small bandage on a very large sore. Just my three and a half cents worth. Jan Cortez MIGenWeb ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sherri" <[email protected]> >I know there's been a lot of discussion about the state logo in this > proposal. I think too much is being read into it. > > The statement is "If linked, a state project logo may only be linked to > the > appropriate state site." That says that the KYGenWeb state logo shouldn't > be linked to the ALGenWeb state site. Make sense to me - why would a KY > CC > be using the KYGenWeb logo to link to anything other than the KYGenWeb > state > site? > > If a state has bylaws, rules or requirements in place that say that the > state logo should be linked to the county selection page (or any other > page) > on the respective state site, that's what the CC is responsible for > complying with. > > Sherri > _____________________________________________ > From: Sherri [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 7:43 PM > To: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; > '[email protected]' > Subject: Proposed Bylaws Amendment > > > As per Article XVI. B of the USGenWeb Project bylaws, the WVGenWeb > Project, > with the support of the majority of the WVGenWeb CCs, sponsors the > following > amendment to the USGenWeb Bylaws: > > Currently ARTICLE IX. A. reads: > > IX. GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS > > A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project > logo > on the home page. A state project logo may be required depending on the > guidelines/standards in effect for that state. > > The corrected proposed change to read: > > IX. GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS > > A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project > logo > on the home page. If linked, this logo may only be linked to the USGenWeb > National site. A state project logo may be required depending on the > guidelines/standards in effect for that state. If linked, a state project > logo may only be linked to the appropriate state site. > > Please post this in the proper locations so that other states will have a > chance to cosponsor this bylaws change. > > Les Shockey > SC WVGenWeb > > Article XVI. B. states that for a bylaws amendment to be placed on the > ballot during the annual election there must be 5 co-sponsors (of which WV > counts as one) of the proposed change. > > You will find the proposed amendment at > http://usgenweb.org/volunteers/notice.shtml Any state that wants to join > WVGenWeb in co-sponsoring this amendment, please notify your regional AB > representatives, Tina Vickery as RAL or myself as NC and we'll get your > state listed as co-sponsor. > > > Sherri Bradley > National Coordinator > USGenWeb Project > Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org > Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php > > > > > > ------------------------------- > 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 270.14.142/2623 - Release Date: 01/15/10 07:35:00

I know there's been a lot of discussion about the state logo in this proposal. I think too much is being read into it. The statement is "If linked, a state project logo may only be linked to the appropriate state site." That says that the KYGenWeb state logo shouldn't be linked to the ALGenWeb state site. Make sense to me - why would a KY CC be using the KYGenWeb logo to link to anything other than the KYGenWeb state site? If a state has bylaws, rules or requirements in place that say that the state logo should be linked to the county selection page (or any other page) on the respective state site, that's what the CC is responsible for complying with. Sherri _____________________________________________ From: Sherri [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 7:43 PM To: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]' Subject: Proposed Bylaws Amendment As per Article XVI. B of the USGenWeb Project bylaws, the WVGenWeb Project, with the support of the majority of the WVGenWeb CCs, sponsors the following amendment to the USGenWeb Bylaws: Currently ARTICLE IX. A. reads: IX. GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project logo on the home page. A state project logo may be required depending on the guidelines/standards in effect for that state. The corrected proposed change to read: IX. GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project logo on the home page. If linked, this logo may only be linked to the USGenWeb National site. A state project logo may be required depending on the guidelines/standards in effect for that state. If linked, a state project logo may only be linked to the appropriate state site. Please post this in the proper locations so that other states will have a chance to cosponsor this bylaws change. Les Shockey SC WVGenWeb Article XVI. B. states that for a bylaws amendment to be placed on the ballot during the annual election there must be 5 co-sponsors (of which WV counts as one) of the proposed change. You will find the proposed amendment at http://usgenweb.org/volunteers/notice.shtml Any state that wants to join WVGenWeb in co-sponsoring this amendment, please notify your regional AB representatives, Tina Vickery as RAL or myself as NC and we'll get your state listed as co-sponsor. Sherri Bradley National Coordinator USGenWeb Project Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php

Cheryl makes good sense. A USGW logo / link should only go to the main USGW Site / page. A County [with the State logo] should link back to it's main State page How hard can this be? Why the fuss? Who [a CC with a modicum of expertise] would do otherwise? Martha

How about removing second sentence re state logo and instead of prominent, put in the sentence.  It will be located at the top of the home/main page . It can be left , right or in the center. Sharon A. Craig Hamilton Co. InGenWeb Coordinator Assistant In GenWeb State Coordinator   --- On Fri, 1/15/10, Sherri <[email protected]> wrote: From: Sherri <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Proposed Bylaws Amendment To: [email protected] Date: Friday, January 15, 2010, 5:43 PM I also understand what you're saying, Jan.  My fear (and it's held by many) is that if we try to include the definition of "prominent" in the proposed amendment, it will never pass and we'll be stuck right where we are again, and with folks that are arguing that we can't require the USGenWeb National logo to be linked ONLY to the USGenWeb site, not to some site(s) that do nothing more than try to damage the Project and/or its image. If you want to write a proposal and can get MIGenWeb CCs to agree to be the "owner" of the proposal, by all means, go for it.  Submit it to your Reps to be published on the notices page and have it put out for other states to co-sponsor it.  Get the 4 other states to agree to co-sponsor and we can have them both on the ballot in July (assuming that this first proposed amendment gets the 4 other states to agree to co-sponsor it.) In my eyes, it's like building blocks.  We can take the pieces and make them work together over time or we can plan the castle and never get it built because no single source can supply the required materials.  Do we take what we can get from one and find the remainder of the materials somewhere else, or keep looking forever for a single source for the materials, and when/if we ever find that source, deal with the fact that the materials' price has doubled and the budget won't stretch far enough to build it? Sherri -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jan Cortez Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 4:39 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Proposed Bylaws Amendment Sherri, I understand what you are saying here, but, don't you think that one of the biggest problems we have within this project is bylaws that are not clear and concise?  They can be interpreted several different ways. In this instance - why do we need the second sentence: "A state project logo may be required depending on the guidelines/standards in effect for that state.  If linked, a state project  logo may only be linked to the appropriate state site." I believe that National is stepping on states rights, by including this sentence. I also believe that where the National Logo is linked is not the only problem faced here.  How about a definition of "Prominent".  That has surfaced over and over again as to its meaning. The way I look at it is, if we are going to amend, why not fix the whole problem and be all inclusive.    Remove the second sentence on state logos and define prominent, otherwise all we are doing is putting a small bandage on a very large sore. Just my three and a half cents worth. Jan Cortez MIGenWeb ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sherri" <[email protected]> >I know there's been a lot of discussion about the state logo in this > proposal.  I think too much is being read into it. > > The statement is "If linked, a state project logo may only be linked to > the > appropriate state site."  That says that the KYGenWeb state logo shouldn't > be linked to the ALGenWeb state site.  Make sense to me - why would a KY > CC > be using the KYGenWeb logo to link to anything other than the KYGenWeb > state > site? > > If a state has bylaws, rules or requirements in place that say that the > state logo should be linked to the county selection page (or any other > page) > on the respective state site, that's what the CC is responsible for > complying with. > > Sherri > _____________________________________________ > From: Sherri [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 7:43 PM > To: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; > '[email protected]' > Subject: Proposed Bylaws Amendment > > > As per Article XVI. B of the USGenWeb Project bylaws, the WVGenWeb > Project, > with the support of the majority of the WVGenWeb CCs, sponsors the > following > amendment to the USGenWeb Bylaws: > > Currently ARTICLE IX. A. reads: > > IX.  GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS > > A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project > logo > on the home page. A state project logo may be required depending on the > guidelines/standards in effect for that state. > > The corrected proposed change to read: > > IX.  GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS > > A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project > logo > on the home page.  If linked, this logo may only be linked to the USGenWeb > National site.  A state project logo may be required depending on the > guidelines/standards in effect for that state.  If linked, a state project > logo may only be linked to the appropriate state site. > > Please post this in the proper locations so that other states will have a > chance to cosponsor this bylaws change. > > Les Shockey > SC WVGenWeb > > Article XVI. B. states that for a bylaws amendment to be placed on the > ballot during the annual election there must be 5 co-sponsors (of which WV > counts as one) of the proposed change. > > You will find the proposed amendment at > http://usgenweb.org/volunteers/notice.shtml Any state that wants to join > WVGenWeb in co-sponsoring this amendment, please notify your regional AB > representatives,  Tina Vickery as RAL or myself as NC and we'll get your > state listed as co-sponsor. > > > Sherri Bradley > National Coordinator > USGenWeb Project > Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org > Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php > > > > > > ------------------------------- > 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 270.14.142/2623 - Release Date: 01/15/10 07:35:00 ------------------------------- 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

Good Afternoon, Jan makes a good point. What does prominent mean? My 'half-penny' thought - For position of the USGW Logo... "Prominent" could mean the top third of the entry site. That is what comes up when a Web page is accessed. Martha SC CAGenWeb

In a message dated 1/15/2010 10:40:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, [email protected] writes: The proper form of the term website is Web site, but I'm not going to argue that point. Web is a proper noun and a modifier of the word, site. Oh, nevermind... :-) -------------------- Vivian: I do agree with this. You are very correct and we should, since we are a major national project, have our documents as professional completed as possible. I believe this should be changed in this document and any others that we have as national documents. I watched this as closely as possible when I was managing the newsletter. Denise

Sherri, Thank you for handling this as a bylaw amendment. It would seem appropriate to cover all the bases with this proposal (except, of course, the dreaded "prominent" issue). The current proposed language does not say specifically *which* logo. The term, homepage, can be confusing. Suggested change: >All websites shall include prominent display of an official logo of >The USGenWeb Project >on the entry page. The proper form of the term website is Web site, but I'm not going to argue that point. Web is a proper noun and a modifier of the word, site. Oh, nevermind... :-) Vivian Price Saffold State Coordinator The GAGenWeb Project At 07:42 PM 1/14/2010, you wrote: >As per Article XVI. B of the USGenWeb Project bylaws, the WVGenWeb Project, >with the support of the majority of the WVGenWeb CCs, sponsors the following >amendment to the USGenWeb Bylaws: > >Currently ARTICLE IX. A. reads: > >IX. GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS > >A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project logo >on the home page. A state project logo may be required depending on the >guidelines/standards in effect for that state. > >The corrected proposed change to read: > >IX. GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS > >A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project logo >on the home page. If linked, this logo may only be linked to the USGenWeb >National site. A state project logo may be required depending on the >guidelines/standards in effect for that state. If linked, a state project >logo may only be linked to the appropriate state site. > >Please post this in the proper locations so that other states will have a >chance to cosponsor this bylaws change. > >Les Shockey >SC WVGenWeb > >Article XVI. B. states that for a bylaws amendment to be placed on the >ballot during the annual election there must be 5 co-sponsors (of which WV >counts as one) of the proposed change. > >You will find the proposed amendment at >http://usgenweb.org/volunteers/notice.shtml Any state that wants to join >WVGenWeb in co-sponsoring this amendment, please notify your regional AB >representatives, Tina Vickery as RAL or myself as NC and we'll get your >state listed as co-sponsor. > > >Sherri Bradley >National Coordinator >USGenWeb Project >Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org >Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php > > > > > >------------------------------- >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 so sorry to hear of the repeated hacking. I have several sites (both volunteer and commercial) on powweb.com. Not only are they cheap, they have excellent 24/7 service and in the five years I've been there, I've never had a security problem. I'm feeling blessed, lucky or a bit of both. I hope your host fixes the vulnerability, soon. Maureen Mead SC CTGenWeb: ctgenweb.org CC Fairfield Co. CT: ctgenweb.org/county/cofairfield [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Sent: Thu, Jan 14, 2010 12:58 pm Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Hacker Attacks Sherri, I need new access info for Washington Co., RI and Whatcom Co., WA Computer has been scanned with McAfee for which I have had a subscription for years and also Malwarebytes. My I.P is 207.200.116.70 Susan Nahas ********************** PLEASE FORWARD TO ALL APPLICABLE PROJECT LISTS ********************* Over the past few days sites that are hosted on theusgenweb.org (including the state projects for WIGenWeb, MEGenWeb, MTGenWeb, DCGenWeb) were once again visited by hackers. The bottom line of what they did was to go in and overwrite the index pages that belonged to the USGenWeb sites with a generic page that indicated that the sites were never set up. For the most part, only the index pages of the sites were involved. The immediate action that I took was to disable all ftp access yesterday (that's how the hackers got in to make their changes) until we could get a hold on things. All sites have been cleaned and the original index pages uploaded from backup copies. Passwords once again will be changed for all accounts. In order to receive the new passwords to the accounts, the CCs/SCs need to do a complete virus scan and malware scan of their computers. We'll need an email documenting that this has been done. In addition, everyone will need to send me their IP address (please send to [email protected]). To find the IP address, go to http://whatismyip.com. The page will open up and the IP address will be shown in large numbers at the top of the page. If you know whether you have a static IP address, please also include that info. (For those not familiar with this, a static IP address is one that never changes, even when you turn off your computer and restart it. Should you discover any continuing (or other) problems with any involved sites, please be sure to report them. Sherri Bradley National Coordinator USGenWeb Project Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php ------------------------------- 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

As per Article XVI. B of the USGenWeb Project bylaws, the WVGenWeb Project, with the support of the majority of the WVGenWeb CCs, sponsors the following amendment to the USGenWeb Bylaws: Currently ARTICLE IX. A. reads: IX. GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project logo on the home page. A state project logo may be required depending on the guidelines/standards in effect for that state. The corrected proposed change to read: IX. GUIDELINES/STANDARDS FOR WEBSITES/MEMBERS A. All websites shall include prominent display of The USGenWeb Project logo on the home page. If linked, this logo may only be linked to the USGenWeb National site. A state project logo may be required depending on the guidelines/standards in effect for that state. If linked, a state project logo may only be linked to the appropriate state site. Please post this in the proper locations so that other states will have a chance to cosponsor this bylaws change. Les Shockey SC WVGenWeb Article XVI. B. states that for a bylaws amendment to be placed on the ballot during the annual election there must be 5 co-sponsors (of which WV counts as one) of the proposed change. You will find the proposed amendment at http://usgenweb.org/volunteers/notice.shtml Any state that wants to join WVGenWeb in co-sponsoring this amendment, please notify your regional AB representatives, Tina Vickery as RAL or myself as NC and we'll get your state listed as co-sponsor. Sherri Bradley National Coordinator USGenWeb Project Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php

Sherri, I need new access info for Washington Co., RI and Whatcom Co., WA Computer has been scanned with McAfee for which I have had a subscription for years and also Malwarebytes. My I.P is 207.200.116.70 Susan Nahas ********************** PLEASE FORWARD TO ALL APPLICABLE PROJECT LISTS ********************* Over the past few days sites that are hosted on theusgenweb.org (including the state projects for WIGenWeb, MEGenWeb, MTGenWeb, DCGenWeb) were once again visited by hackers. The bottom line of what they did was to go in and overwrite the index pages that belonged to the USGenWeb sites with a generic page that indicated that the sites were never set up. For the most part, only the index pages of the sites were involved. The immediate action that I took was to disable all ftp access yesterday (that's how the hackers got in to make their changes) until we could get a hold on things. All sites have been cleaned and the original index pages uploaded from backup copies. Passwords once again will be changed for all accounts. In order to receive the new passwords to the accounts, the CCs/SCs need to do a complete virus scan and malware scan of their computers. We'll need an email documenting that this has been done. In addition, everyone will need to send me their IP address (please send to [email protected]). To find the IP address, go to http://whatismyip.com. The page will open up and the IP address will be shown in large numbers at the top of the page. If you know whether you have a static IP address, please also include that info. (For those not familiar with this, a static IP address is one that never changes, even when you turn off your computer and restart it. Should you discover any continuing (or other) problems with any involved sites, please be sure to report them. Sherri Bradley National Coordinator USGenWeb Project Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php ------------------------------- 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

Forwarding in case anyone would be interested in viewing. I have no direct connection to this project - just passing on the info that I received today. Sherri From: Mary Wollenzien [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 3:55 PM Subject: A New Genealogy TV Series I thought you might be interested in a new Genealogy TV series. The Generations Project premieres tonight at 8pm Mtn Time on BYU Television. http://www.byub.org/thegenerationsproject/ If you don't have the channel, you can watch in online at http://www.byu.tv/ The show will continue to run every Monday night at the same time. I hope you're able to check it out. ~ Mary

Can you please resend then? The cyber hijackers must have latched on to it and decided they needed it more than me. <g> Sherri -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of JLA Sent: Sunday, January 03, 2010 6:51 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Update on usgenweb sites please? Hi, I sent the information you required immediately after I received your notice to this list -- I guess you didn't get it. Joan On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Sherri <[email protected]> wrote: > Joan, > > All passwords were changed, as I indicated in my last message.  The new ones > will be sent when I get the required information - that a virus scan and > spyware/malware scan were completed and the IP address of the CC.  You can > find out your IP address by going to http://whatismyip.com.  The IP address > will be presented in very large type at the top of the page. > > I realize that some Project members have dynamic IP addresses.  We can deal > with that, but you DO have to send the IP address or you won't get ftp > access back.  This is being done as enhanced security of ALL of the sites. > > Sherri > ------------------------------- 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