Whenever a poll, or vote, is required there is a usually a "scurrying around" (nothing bad, or sarcastic meant) by the EC to ascertain if it has up-to-date voters lists. In some cases, this requires a great deal of delay and begging for the lists. Plus, perhaps an inordinate amount of time on the part of the SC and EC correcting lists. IF I understand it correctly, there are members on the EC who are responsible for the obtaining/maintaining of voters lists on a regional basis. IF that is correct, how about this? Whenever there is a change in the voter list of XXGenWeb, the SC has to know that there is a change and emails are the way the SC has of knowing. Therefore, it seems to me that it would be much simpler for the SC to send the change to the EC at that particular time. (Subsitute whatever letters stand for the one who maintains the voter rolls in XXGenWeb, if it isn't the SC.) Example: I notify my SC that I am no longer going to do my MO county site. At that time, he does whatever he normally does PLUS he forwards my email (maybe with expletives deleted if I'm quitting because I'm mad) to whomever the regional EC representative is. That person goes to the EC's MO list and removes my name and addy. Whenever the county is adopted and that person is notified by the SC, the same notification is cc'd to the regional EC representative and the name and addy is placed on the MO voter list. This is no way excuses the SC from maintaing XXGenWeb's voter list because of possible in-State need.....if a State wants to conduct its own vote or poll. But, it does "spread out" the changes and doesn't require them to all be sent in a lump.....or begged for. Plus, it keeps the confidentiality of voter lists intact, whereas a national registry (proposed at one time) might not. Is this workable? Phyllis Rippee SW/SC CC Representative

> Whenever there is a change in the voter > list of XXGenWeb, the SC has to know that there is a change and emails are > the way the SC has of knowing. Therefore, it seems to me that it would be > much simpler for the SC to send the change to the EC at that particular time. There are many SCs, & ASCs in my region (SEMA) that already do just that, plus they send in their quarterly reports too. I also know of states outside my SEMA region that are doing this. Sometimes they miss the first call when we write asking for those quarterly reports, but hardly ever the second request. Then Ellen Pack, our EC Chair, reminds everyone on this list too. I will either verify their lists or they can verify mine. I do whatever is easiest for them or what they have time for. Bettie Wood <><

At 10:38 AM 4/2/03 -0600, Bosque Lover wrote: > > Whenever there is a change in the voter > > list of XXGenWeb, the SC has to know that there is a change and emails are > > the way the SC has of knowing. Therefore, it seems to me that it would be > > much simpler for the SC to send the change to the EC at that particular > time. > >There are many SCs, & ASCs in my region (SEMA) that already do just that, >plus they send in their quarterly reports too. I also know of states >outside my > >SEMA region that are doing this. Sometimes they miss the first call >when we write asking for those quarterly reports, but hardly ever the second >request. Then Ellen Pack, our EC Chair, reminds everyone on this list too. > >I will either verify their lists or they can verify mine. I do whatever is >easiest >for them or what they have time for. >Bettie Wood <>< Y'all, Wouldn't it be great if we could have a password-protected up-load page????? That way we could submit timely changes, without regard to a time-line. Why should we NOT be working towards real-time reports???? And, for goodness sake, PLEASE settle on a standard format!!! Derick S. Hartshorn State Coordinator, NCGenWeb Project nc@usgenweb.org