I can live with this, but in the end will it be a part of the bylaws or just a CC guideline, which in the end does not have the same effect? jan ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> > Sherri: > > The only other thing that I think should be added is the word "currently" > before the word "approved."? > > My thoughts behind that are that we have had prior logos that were > removed, i.e., the Millenium logo, and I'm not sure if there were any > others.? However, if we want each site to be "current" and logos changed > when, for whatever reason, they are removed, then I believe it would be > necessary to add the word "current" to "approved."? I think that helps in > circumventing a future issue before it arises.? > > The state of Colorado ran into that issue when a logo was requested by the > designer to be removed a few months ago.? Consequently, each and every CC > had to remove that logo and install a new logo.? If something happens in > the future, for USGW, that could be averted.? Granted, at the moment, the > current logos are probably "given" to the USGW (I don't know the history > of all of the logos as some otheres may), however, should another logo be > removed, we need to know that we have the ability to have that altered > without an uprising in the future.? > > Just my 2 cents. > > > Denise > SEMA CC Rep > SC New Jersey > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sherri <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sun, Oct 11, 2009 7:46 am > Subject: [STATE-COORD] Back to the Subject at Hand > > > > > > > > > > > We've drifted away from the original question that started this > discussion. > Can we focus back on the subject that started this discussion, please? I > realize that there are widely differing opinions on the subject of the > Election Committee procedures - the AB has on the agenda to take a good > look > at them, and make revisions. We need to finish the discussion on the two > items that started this string so that the AB can finish them and move on > to > the next items. We're really trying to catch up and clear the agenda so > we're not constantly carrying agenda items over from one month to the next > to the next... <g> > > Is there any more discussion on the clarification of two specific items in > the CC guidelines document - specifying that the logo on the sites must be > one of the member-approved logos and clarifying the title of the document > to > indicate that this applies to ALL project sites? > > > 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.9/2427 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00

Would some one be kind enough to lead me to the motion by the AB that authorized the EC not to register CC's that did not display the approved logo. Some how, I managed to miss that. Thanks, jic ----- Original Message ----- From: "MAK - Transcriber" <[email protected]> > One of the real problems is the struggle for power. > Having been on the EC during the time we were "directed" by AB not to > register CCs who did not display the approved logo - this was discussed > extensively - not all of us had the same philosophy - so I can only speak > for myself - while not having a logo is an administrative thing - it is my > understanding that the SC is the final authority of whether or not an > individual was an official CC within the state - by putting the EC in the > position of being the "logo police", IMHO, the EC was assigned > responsibilities outside of the scope of their position, having the > unfortunate affect of usurping the SCs authority. This was very > frustrating from all points of view - and needs to be thoroughly discussed > before the next election. Personally, I strongly feel this IS the SC's > job - and, they should be allowed to do their jobs without outside > interference - unless they ask for help.

Great idea, Denise. Sherri -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 8:35 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Back to the Subject at Hand Sherri: The only other thing that I think should be added is the word "currently" before the word "approved."? My thoughts behind that are that we have had prior logos that were removed, i.e., the Millenium logo, and I'm not sure if there were any others.? However, if we want each site to be "current" and logos changed when, for whatever reason, they are removed, then I believe it would be necessary to add the word "current" to "approved."? I think that helps in circumventing a future issue before it arises.? The state of Colorado ran into that issue when a logo was requested by the designer to be removed a few months ago.? Consequently, each and every CC had to remove that logo and install a new logo.? If something happens in the future, for USGW, that could be averted.? Granted, at the moment, the current logos are probably "given" to the USGW (I don't know the history of all of the logos as some otheres may), however, should another logo be removed, we need to know that we have the ability to have that altered without an uprising in the future.? Just my 2 cents. Denise SEMA CC Rep SC New Jersey -----Original Message----- From: Sherri <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sun, Oct 11, 2009 7:46 am Subject: [STATE-COORD] Back to the Subject at Hand We've drifted away from the original question that started this discussion. Can we focus back on the subject that started this discussion, please? I realize that there are widely differing opinions on the subject of the Election Committee procedures - the AB has on the agenda to take a good look at them, and make revisions. We need to finish the discussion on the two items that started this string so that the AB can finish them and move on to the next items. We're really trying to catch up and clear the agenda so we're not constantly carrying agenda items over from one month to the next to the next... <g> Is there any more discussion on the clarification of two specific items in the CC guidelines document - specifying that the logo on the sites must be one of the member-approved logos and clarifying the title of the document to indicate that this applies to ALL project sites? 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

Sherri: The only other thing that I think should be added is the word "currently" before the word "approved."? My thoughts behind that are that we have had prior logos that were removed, i.e., the Millenium logo, and I'm not sure if there were any others.? However, if we want each site to be "current" and logos changed when, for whatever reason, they are removed, then I believe it would be necessary to add the word "current" to "approved."? I think that helps in circumventing a future issue before it arises.? The state of Colorado ran into that issue when a logo was requested by the designer to be removed a few months ago.? Consequently, each and every CC had to remove that logo and install a new logo.? If something happens in the future, for USGW, that could be averted.? Granted, at the moment, the current logos are probably "given" to the USGW (I don't know the history of all of the logos as some otheres may), however, should another logo be removed, we need to know that we have the ability to have that altered without an uprising in the future.? Just my 2 cents. Denise SEMA CC Rep SC New Jersey -----Original Message----- From: Sherri <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sun, Oct 11, 2009 7:46 am Subject: [STATE-COORD] Back to the Subject at Hand We've drifted away from the original question that started this discussion. Can we focus back on the subject that started this discussion, please? I realize that there are widely differing opinions on the subject of the Election Committee procedures - the AB has on the agenda to take a good look at them, and make revisions. We need to finish the discussion on the two items that started this string so that the AB can finish them and move on to the next items. We're really trying to catch up and clear the agenda so we're not constantly carrying agenda items over from one month to the next to the next... <g> Is there any more discussion on the clarification of two specific items in the CC guidelines document - specifying that the logo on the sites must be one of the member-approved logos and clarifying the title of the document to indicate that this applies to ALL project sites? 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

Would any SCs that received a spreadsheet from the EC members for your regions that included any info other than the coordinator's name, email address and project affiliation please contact Christina Palmer? Her email address is [email protected] Thanks, Sherri Bradley National Coordinator USGenWeb Project Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php -----Original Message----- From: Sherri [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 9:30 PM To: '[email protected]' Subject: RE: [STATE-COORD] Sherri - EC Question regarding our passwords Deb, it's been looked into. Sherri Bradley National Coordinator USGenWeb Project Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Deb Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 8:49 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [STATE-COORD] Sherri - EC Question regarding our passwords Sherri, Why are the passwords of the registered members given out to the regional EC reps? I would think something as sensitive as our passwords would be retained by the EC Chair only. I requested a list of the ILGenWeb members to update and received a file containing all of NENC including all of the passwords for the registered members of NENC. I think the other NENC SC's need to be aware their passwords were also compromised this evening when I received that list (which was deleted from my email). Deb ------------------------------- 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

Hi everyone.  I'm new to this list so please forgive me if I'm posting to the wrong list.  Is there a link to the by-laws and requirements for state and county pages?  I think I have all the requirements, but I want to make sure that Alaska is in compliance from the git-go.    Thanks, Vikki Gray AKGenWeb

We've drifted away from the original question that started this discussion. Can we focus back on the subject that started this discussion, please? I realize that there are widely differing opinions on the subject of the Election Committee procedures - the AB has on the agenda to take a good look at them, and make revisions. We need to finish the discussion on the two items that started this string so that the AB can finish them and move on to the next items. We're really trying to catch up and clear the agenda so we're not constantly carrying agenda items over from one month to the next to the next... <g> Is there any more discussion on the clarification of two specific items in the CC guidelines document - specifying that the logo on the sites must be one of the member-approved logos and clarifying the title of the document to indicate that this applies to ALL project sites? Sherri Bradley National Coordinator USGenWeb Project Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php

Well, the logo issue can be solved by the word approved.  Indiana is in the middle of our website evaluations and the true problem is broken links, not logo's.  Also we are giving the cc's two weeks to fix, however, we have always been flexible, if the cc has a problem we work with it.  I don''t feel the EC has any business checking logos, that is up to the state. Sharon A. Craig Hamilton Co. InGenWeb Coordinator Assistant In GenWeb State Coordinator   --- On Sat, 10/10/09, Michael and Vivian Saffold <[email protected]> wrote: From: Michael and Vivian Saffold <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] The bylaw rule does exist To: [email protected] Date: Saturday, October 10, 2009, 6:18 PM Following is the entire section: >Section 5. The Advisory Board shall also have the responsibility to >remove links from the national website, as appropriate, to websites >which fail to meet the established guidelines/standards for The >USGenWeb Project or to websites which display inappropriate content. >Coordinators of any websites found to be in non-compliance shall be >notified of such and shall be given a period of two (2) weeks in >which to bring their website into compliance. The two-week time >limit shall be flexible based on justifiable reasons presented by >the website coordinator. Are there any county/local Web sites linked to the national site? Would not the Advisory Board have to require the state coordinators to de-link a non-complying/inappropriate site? In such case, it would seem that the compliance issue would fall to the state organization. The flexibility issue is addressed here, but the state organization seems to be completely out of the picture. This section appears to reserve the discretion for the Advisory Board. Perhaps this section should be clearer and more realistic. Vivian Price Saffold State Coordinator The GAGenWeb Project At 04:23 PM 10/10/2009, you wrote: >Playing devil's advocate here, if we're talking about replacing a logo or >adding the coordinator's name and contact info to at least the main page of >a Project site, why would two weeks not be sufficient in most cases? >Article VI, Section 5 of the bylaws already include this statement right >after the portion that David quoted: > >"The two-week time limit shall be flexible based on justifiable reasons >presented by the website coordinator." > >That would give the leeway needed, if additional time is required, to extend >the 2-week period if a coordinator is unavailable for whatever reason. > >Sherri > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [email protected] >[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Larry Flesher >Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 2:34 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] The bylaw rule does exist > >It's OK - I agree with you anyway <grin>. > >Two weeks is insufficient to mandate a correction - also not enough time. >(Four weeks/one month is better, in my opinion). > >Larry >SC MOGenWeb Project >SWSC SC Rep, USGenWeb Project AB > > >--- On Sat, 10/10/09, Nola Duffy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From: Nola Duffy <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] The bylaw rule does exist > > To: [email protected] > > Date: Saturday, October 10, 2009, 12:41 PM > > Excuse please, I was intending to > > respond to Katherine. > > > > Nola > > > > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version > > of virus signature database 4495 (20091010) __________ > > > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > > > http://www.eset.com > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > 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

I have been doing a lot of business work with bankruptcies in Arizona.? I just found that Maricopa County has recorded documents online at the clerk's website from 1871!? That is awesome!? http://recorder.maricopa.gov/ Denise

Deb, it's been looked into. Sherri Bradley National Coordinator USGenWeb Project Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Deb Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 8:49 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [STATE-COORD] Sherri - EC Question regarding our passwords Sherri, Why are the passwords of the registered members given out to the regional EC reps? I would think something as sensitive as our passwords would be retained by the EC Chair only. I requested a list of the ILGenWeb members to update and received a file containing all of NENC including all of the passwords for the registered members of NENC. I think the other NENC SC's need to be aware their passwords were also compromised this evening when I received that list (which was deleted from my email). Deb ------------------------------- 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, we did. They were selected by the members during the 2005 National election. Sherri -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lesley L Shockey Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 9:15 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Fw: [ABChat] Next Agenda Items Did we not vote on the USGenWeb logos a few years back to select the approved logos to use? Les Cheryl Rothwell wrote: > If specific logos are not mandated how can anyone be displaying the "wrong" > one? > ------------------------------- 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 have my thoughts on why the EC is short handed - but I shall not get into that on this board - but words that come to mind are Mutual Respect for Others (or lack thereof) and Communication. Thank you for the offer of help, but I do not have any personal issues with the EC or it's members, but if I did, as a CC and ASC, I would try to work it out with the NENC EC and having failed that, address it to my SC. But I do want to let you know that while assigned to the EC - I had some health issues but had became very ill (life threatening) - The powers to be knew at the time I had both health issues and a job that took me away for weeks at a time, plus I had a part-time job and ran my own business - They also knew that I could be counted on to do my job, as I always had my NENC region up-to-date and checked my email as often as possible. The EC Coordinator was well aware of my circumstances, and had my area covered for me when I was not available, but, In the meantime, many people resigned from the EC over communication issues, and when I did check in about 4 weeks later, there was an email saying that I had been removed from the EC Board, as I had not responded within 2 weeks to an email that was buried within my old email box - but was still getting emails etc - from EC Board, my NENC SCs and ASCs - so communication is important as no one, including me, knew that I had been removed from the EC Board - I think many people assumed I was one of those who resigned - while I am not upset at being removed, as it was done strictly by thebylaws - it did bother me that after being on the board for years - no one bothered to ask my SC what was up. I bring this up to point out that after TWO WEEKS, before delinking, or removing people from their position, how about talking to their SC. It is simple and effective - but it only works when we communicate with each other. I was removed for an "infraction" of not responding to an email - NOT for NOT doing my job. So, they would have had one more person, had I not been removed. Who lost out on that one? I think we should agree to disagree as I strongly feel it is NOT the ECs business to check the administrative issues - The six or more years I was on the EC - I communicated with each one of my SCs as issues came up - if a logo was missing - I let the SC know - if there was a question about qualifications, I let the SC know and usually it was resolved with a day or two - and in return, my SCs in the NENC region always had their quarterly updates in timely, or let me know when I could expect it. There must be some INTERFACE between the the AB, the SCs, the CCs, and the EC if you expect harmony within the organization. If an SC is not doing their job, that is for the NC and the AB to address, not the EC - I have sat on both sides of the fence - and while I can sympathize for the EC (it is a thankless job), however, how can we berate the SC for NOT doing their job, when clearly everyone else is trying to do it for them. To be an effective EC member, you must be able to communicate with your SCs, listen to them, and inform them of problems. And to be an effective SC, you have to be kept informed. Right now, the tail is waggin'g the dog - and the dog doesn't care anymore. CCs are responsible to their SC only - they are administratively responsible to keep their information to the EC updated - SCs are responsible to both the NC and their CCs - for proper administration of the State Gen Web pages they are assigned to. Administratively, they are responsible to the EC to provide an accurate quarterly update of their members, to include email updates, removals, and additions. AB have very specific NATIONAL duties - they should not be dealing directly with anyone unless the SC or a CC askes for help. It is very clear in the bylaws. EC members responsibilities are clearly defined in the bylaws - ARTICLE VII. ELECTION PROCEDURES Section 1. A subcommittee to oversee elections shall be appointed by the Advisory Board. The Elections Subcommittee shall consist of Advisory Board members and volunteers from the members of The USGenWeb Project. Section 2. It shall be the responsibility of the Elections Subcommittee to announce those positions for which nominations are needed. ---the most GLARING conflict is under Elections - it states: Section 6. All members of The USGenWeb Project, excluding Look-Up Volunteers and Transcribers, shall be eligible to vote. I do NOT see where it says the EC will not register them to vote if they don't have a logo on their site or other such "administrative" details. So, I went to the EC Manual - and this is what it says about Eligibility to Vote - C. Eligibility of voters All members of the Project (as defined in USGenWeb By-Laws ARTICLE IV. MEMBERSHIP) shall be eligible to register to vote and to vote in any election or poll in which they are a qualified voter. A requirement that one be a member for at least 30 days prior to the start of an election is acceptable purely on an administrative basis. State-level or Special Project-level voting restrictions shall not affect a member's right to register to vote, and as a registered voter to vote in any national level election or poll. Challenges to a member's eligibility to vote shall in no circumstances be addressed by the EC. The XXGenWeb State Coordinator or Project Coordinator shall address the challenge in a timely fashion so as to allow the person to vote in the current election. If they do not, the person shall be given the benefit of the doubt and allowed to vote. If a Local Coordinator continues to challenge the decision of the State Coordinator, then the matter shall be referred to the regional Advisory Board rep. If the Local Coordinator continues to challenge the decision made by the Regional Advisory Board Representative, then the matter shall be referred to the entire AB. The decision of the entire Advisory Board shall be final. However, should the matter fail to be decided before the end of any election or voting issue, the person shall be given the right to vote by default. Eligible registered voters may vote once for each region or special project position, for which they are eligible, once for national positions including NC and RAL, and once for any national issue that may be placed on a ballot, including but not limited to bylaws amendments. Changing a vote will not be permitted. So, thank you for sharing your opinions, and for respecting mine. Let's get back to genealogy. Take care, R/S MAK ..... MAKtranscriber WoodCoWI CC http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwood PortageCoWI CC http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiportag MonroeCoWI CC http://www.rootsweb.com/~wimonroe WIGenWeb ASC http://wigenweb.org/ .... ----- Original Message ---- From: AnnieG <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sat, October 10, 2009 6:04:07 PM Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Next Agenda Items I would also like to see that MAK. The problem of the EC checking for compliance would not have come about in the first place if all of the SC's had been doing their job. As Sherri said earlier, when Sherri, Denise and I helped to clean up the mess caused by the majority of the EC resigning after being attaced by several persons, we discovered 45 sites with logo errors and 15 with no logo at all. If we could see a list of which counties those were, we would know which SC's are not doing their job. The EC are not to be page police but to simply check the site and refer the errors back to the proper AB of the region. This practice was put into place during the pre-election emergency and we hope to keep it in place when we meet with the EC which is coming up soon on the Agenda. Also please keep in mind, the EC is extremely shorthanded-right now and no one seems to care to volunteer. The members they have left are almost all brand new. If you have a problem with them, you can contact me as AB rep to the EC or Sherri as NC. We are both subscribed to elections list and can contact any of them immediately. We have 3 volunteers to fill about 8 positions so if anyone wants to give us a year, let me, Sherri or Christina Palmer know! AnnieG Ann Allen Geoghegan NWPL-CC Rep

All we really need to do is add the word "approved" to the Guidelines. Anything else would have to be done by revising the bylaws, unless we want to define "prominent" in the rules. AnnieG ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sherri" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 8:29 PM Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Fw: [ABChat] Next Agenda Items > Yes, we did. They were selected by the members during the 2005 National > election. > > Sherri > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lesley L Shockey > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 9:15 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Fw: [ABChat] Next Agenda Items > > Did we not vote on the USGenWeb logos a few years back to select the > approved logos to use? > > Les > > Cheryl Rothwell wrote: >> If specific logos are not mandated how can anyone be displaying the > "wrong" >> one? >> > > ------------------------------- > 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

Did we not vote on the USGenWeb logos a few years back to select the approved logos to use? Les Cheryl Rothwell wrote: > If specific logos are not mandated how can anyone be displaying the "wrong" > one? >

I just checked out my USGW registration and the registration number is on the spread sheet that I have but not the actual pw. Jan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Deb" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 9:08 PM Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Sherri - EC Question regarding our passwords >I deleted the email with the spreadsheet so I cannot refer back to it. I >had > the registration numbers and passwords listed on the spreadsheet I > received. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jan Cortez > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 8:02 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Sherri - EC Question regarding our passwords > > Is that what all those numbers are down the *H* column? > > Jan > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Deb" <[email protected]> > > >> Sherri, >> >> Why are the passwords of the registered members given out to the regional >> EC >> reps? I would think something as sensitive as our passwords would be >> retained by the EC Chair only. >> >> I requested a list of the ILGenWeb members to update and received a file >> containing all of NENC including all of the passwords for the registered >> members of NENC. >> >> I think the other NENC SC's need to be aware their passwords were also >> compromised this evening when I received that list (which was deleted >> from >> my email). >> >> Deb >> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.9/2427 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00

Is that what all those numbers are down the *H* column? Jan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Deb" <[email protected]> > Sherri, > > Why are the passwords of the registered members given out to the regional > EC > reps? I would think something as sensitive as our passwords would be > retained by the EC Chair only. > > I requested a list of the ILGenWeb members to update and received a file > containing all of NENC including all of the passwords for the registered > members of NENC. > > I think the other NENC SC's need to be aware their passwords were also > compromised this evening when I received that list (which was deleted from > my email). > > Deb > > > > ------------------------------- > 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 deleted the email with the spreadsheet so I cannot refer back to it. I had the registration numbers and passwords listed on the spreadsheet I received. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jan Cortez Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 8:02 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Sherri - EC Question regarding our passwords Is that what all those numbers are down the *H* column? Jan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Deb" <[email protected]> > Sherri, > > Why are the passwords of the registered members given out to the regional > EC > reps? I would think something as sensitive as our passwords would be > retained by the EC Chair only. > > I requested a list of the ILGenWeb members to update and received a file > containing all of NENC including all of the passwords for the registered > members of NENC. > > I think the other NENC SC's need to be aware their passwords were also > compromised this evening when I received that list (which was deleted from > my email). > > Deb > > > > ------------------------------- > 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

This discussion is getting very interesting - as the SCs are working together - and articulating the real issues - - All this while I was busy composing my last email - grin One of the real problems is the struggle for power. And the never ending question - Who has authority over what? The way the AB was originally intended was to be a body where the SCs could go to for help and guidance - It has evolved over time - and not so sure always for the "good" of the organization. This is NOT a reflection on the individual AB members - but as our organization as a whole. Having been on the EC during the time we were "directed" by AB not to register CCs who did not display the approved logo - this was discussed extensively - not all of us had the same philosophy - so I can only speak for myself - while not having a logo is an administrative thing - it is my understanding that the SC is the final authority of whether or not an individual was an official CC within the state - by putting the EC in the position of being the "logo police", IMHO, the EC was assigned responsibilities outside of the scope of their position, having the unfortunate affect of usurping the SCs authority. This was very frustrating from all points of view - and needs to be thoroughly discussed before the next election. Personally, I strongly feel this IS the SC's job - and, they should be allowed to do their jobs without outside interference - unless they ask for help. The USGenWeb was originally started by individual genealogists who had local pages, they loved genealogy and they loved doing their pages - they worked independently long before the USGenWeb was a thought - eventually most of us became the CC's and there were a few states with a state page which linked all the counties - the CCs were the authority and the SC was only an administrator of the state page and often had a local website within the state - eventually SCs evolved to coordinate the CC's and then the AB was established to coordinate the SCs who were still coordinating the CCs. if the AB and other committees which they appoint (or are elected) continue to erode the SCs authority - then why have the (SCs/CCs)? Most of us just want to do genealogy - and to have say over our own pages - not to be dictated to - or "punished" for minor infractions. This is what I hear from SCs/ASCs/CCs - eventually our best researchers will get fed up with "rules" / "politics" and leave. That leaves us without solid researchers - this is becoming more and more evident, as you go to sites within the USGenWeb that haven't been updated for years and there is NO data - only links, of which many remain broken. Frustrating - Somedays I wonder when it stopped being all about the genealogy - I look forward to the day when we can JUST do genealogy - and not rehash old issues that no one really cares about - except the "enforcers". I am NOT saying rules aren't important - but our home page clearly states: Welcome to The USGenWeb Project! We are a group of volunteers working together to provide free genealogy websites for genealogical research in every county and every state of the United States. This Project is non-commercial and fully committed to free genealogy access for everyone. That is what we should be about - FREE Genealogy - the "details" are secondary to our volunteers who are dedicated to FREE Genealogy - they do what they do cause they love genealogy - I can overlook a lot, especially when they are busy uploading data. Sigh, sometimes nothing changes but the date - R/S MAK

I would also like to see that MAK. The problem of the EC checking for compliance would not have come about in the first place if all of the SC's had been doing their job. As Sherri said earlier, when Sherri, Denise and I helped to clean up the mess caused by the majority of the EC resigning after being attaced by several persons, we discovered 45 sites with logo errors and 15 with no logo at all. If we could see a list of which counties those were, we would know which SC's are not doing their job. The EC are not to be page police but to simply check the site and refer the errors back to the proper AB of the region. This practice was put into place during the pre-election emergency and we hope to keep it in place when we meet with the EC which is coming up soon on the Agenda. Also please keep in mind, the EC is extremely shorthanded-right now and no one seems to care to volunteer. The members they have left are almost all brand new. If you have a problem with them, you can contact me as AB rep to the EC or Sherri as NC. We are both subscribed to elections list and can contact any of them immediately. We have 3 volunteers to fill about 8 positions so if anyone wants to give us a year, let me, Sherri or Christina Palmer know! AnnieG Ann Allen Geoghegan NWPL-CC Rep ----- Original Message ----- From: "MAK - Transcriber" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 7:27 PM Subject: [STATE-COORD] Next Agenda Items > Sherry - I have read every ones comments - and seems like we have this > same conversation every time there is a new NC. So, here are my > thoughts - > > It would be interesting to know how many CC's do have logos as opposed > to how many do not and what percent is in the same state/region, before > expending all this time and energy to resolve an issue which might be a > regionally specific problem, and could be solved by educating that > group of individuals. What works for one state / region may not work for > another. > > Specific time restraints - If we were working for a company, 2 weeks > sounds very reasonable, but, with all volunteers, there are many valid > reasons in which the SC should be allowed to exercise their judgment - I > personally don't believe the time restraint should be national's concern - > instead, focus on what the SC's options are after they have exhausted > every means available to them and still can not get the individual to > respond. > > Townships. local projects, etc - This really needs to be clarified in the > by-laws - as some states have the TCs / LCCs as part of the state page, in > other states, they have links on their MAIN page to the TC's/ LCC's > stand-a-lone pages -and some states link them at the county level. It is > logical that the logo be on the main page for TCs/LCCs, as it is for CCs. > (Personally, for the researcher - it is wonderful if the logos are on each > page - to clearly identify it as the USGenWeb Project or StateGenWeb or > CountyGenWeb) > > As for having the correct Logo, there would be a lot LESS confusion, if > there was only ONE logo - However, it is also unreasonable to be expected > to redo all your pages, every time someone decides to "change" the logo - > Design one that will work with all color schemes and keep it - Branding is > a good thing - it easily identifies the organization - > > Personally, I would be delighted if it could be as easy as having a nicely > designed black/white graphic with just the words USGenWeb Project - (so > those CC's which want to put it at the top of all their pages, can do > so) -. If you check throughout the different states, many of them have > designed wonderful banners which work for their states - all national > should be doing is providing the national graphics for the SCs to > incorporate into their state and CC's pages. How they incorporate it, > should be the SC/state's decision. > > Guess what I am saying is, rather than change the by-laws, Let the SCs and > CCs handle it -the vast majority are doing a pretty great job!!! > Micro-management does not work - for competent people, it is > frustrating at best, as they will follow the rules to the best of > their ability, regardless, and communicate problems/solutions to the > State Admin list or SC/ASC. No matter what the "rule", there will > always be the 1% who will be problematic. > > Just my thoughts - R/S MAK > > "If you try to please all the people, all > the time, you will end up pleasing none of the people all of the time." > ..... > > > MAKtranscriber > WIGenWeb ASC http://wigenweb.org/ > WoodCoWI CC http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwood > PortageCoWI CC http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiportag > MonroeCoWI CC http://www.rootsweb.com/~wimonroe > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Sherri <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sat, October 10, 2009 8:12:27 AM > Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD] Fw: [ABChat] Next Agenda Items > > > > > ------------------------------- > 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, Why are the passwords of the registered members given out to the regional EC reps? I would think something as sensitive as our passwords would be retained by the EC Chair only. I requested a list of the ILGenWeb members to update and received a file containing all of NENC including all of the passwords for the registered members of NENC. I think the other NENC SC's need to be aware their passwords were also compromised this evening when I received that list (which was deleted from my email). Deb