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

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.