Note: The Rootsweb Mailing Lists will be shut down on April 6, 2023. (More info)
RootsWeb.com Mailing Lists
Total: 2/2
    1. [STATE-COORD] Fw: [ABChat] Next Agenda Items
    2. Tina S. Vickery
    3. This agenda item is now under discussion on AB-CHAT by the Advisory Board and is shared here with permission. I would be very interested in input from Project members as the Board addresses this item. I look forward to your input. Tina Vickery Representative at Large [email protected] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sherri" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:06 PM Subject: [ABChat] Next Agenda Items > The next two items on the agenda both deal with the CC Guidelines document > so I'm going to put them together for discussion as I was the one > responsible for adding them to the agenda. > > Item #1 - Discussion of the requirement that the USGenWeb logo on Project > sites be one of the approved logos posted at > http://usgenweb.org/volunteers/logos.shtml. > > Item #2 - Reviewing the CC Guidelines document to indicate that those > items > listed apply Project-wide, not just to county sites. > > Both of these items were identified as issues after last year's > clarifications were enacted - either before or during the recent election. > > While visiting sites across the Project, I noticed that although there are > only four recognized logos (those posted at the link above), some of our > Project members have either never replaced logos that were in use prior to > these logos being created and voted on by the members, or have taken > "creative license" with them, modifying the colors, sizes, etc. > > The other thing that I've heard on more than one occasion is in regards to > the document entitled "CC Guidelines". During the last term's > clarification > of the CC guidelines document, we generalized the wording of the "Contact > Information" section to include ALL project coordinators, but didn't > change > the title of the document. Because the document is still titled "CC > Guidelines", there are those Coordinators that do not feel the document > should apply to their sites if they're not county sites. Specifically, > Town > and/or Local Project sites are the ones that I heard this from most often. > > One other thing to consider, along with item #2 is whether the document > should be separated into requirements vs. suggested items to include on/in > a > Project site. Requirements might include display of the USGenWeb Project > logo, contact information for the site coordinator, a link to the state > project, a link to the USGenWeb National project, a query page, lookups > page > (lookups volunteers, etc. Suggestions might include a link to the > USGenWeb > Archives Project, a link to the county mail list, a link to the > WorldGenWeb > Project, etc. > > Having provided this background info, I'll turn it over to the rest of you > for discussion. > > > Sherri Bradley > National Coordinator > USGenWeb Project > Information about the USGenWeb Project at http://usgenweb.org > Advisory Board Agenda http://usgenweb.org/agenda2.php

    10/09/2009 11:39:01
    1. Re: [STATE-COORD] Fw: [ABChat] Next Agenda Items
    2. joe patterson
    3. The local coordinator should be required to show a logo IF the town/ city is not part of a county/parish. ONE way to require this is to include independent cities/towns in the definition of CC. On Oct 9, 2009, at 5:39 PM, Tina S. Vickery wrote: >> Because the document is still titled "CC >> Guidelines", there are those Coordinators that do not feel the >> document >> should apply to their sites if they're not county sites. >> Specifically, >> Town and/or Local Project sites are the ones that I heard this from >> most often. Don't we have larger problems than this?? Like a dwindling number of volunteers?? The red white and blue ONLY logos may not fit well with some decors.....?? sizes?? possibly a MINIMUM display size..... but nothing else...... > While visiting sites across the Project, I noticed that although > there are > only four recognized logos (those posted at the link above), some of > our > Project members have either never replaced logos that were in use > prior to > these logos being created and voted on by the members, or have taken > "creative license" with them, modifying the colors, sizes, etc.

    10/09/2009 05:14:02