What is the other half? What is it that we still don't know about this agreement, and why the USGenWeb Project needs to consider reorganization? Please note the copyright violation below. Yes, I stole it from board-l. David BOARD-L Archives From: Tim Stowell <tstowell@chattanooga.net> Subject: Re: [BOARD-L] VOTE - MOTION 03-11 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 20:26:05 -0400 <SNIP> An aside to the Tombstone Project and the other SP - Archives - these groups were not left out on purpose, they just weren't thought of in terms of day to day life of the Project. The private email list is the SC list - except I doubt all SCs/ASCs are subbed there for there has been no roll call there for at least 2 years. Other than looking at the Who's Who - and wondering how up to date it is - for if the SCs don't inform the webmaster of a change, she probably doesn't know of it. The SC list is archived and the membership can read it fairly soon after messages are posted there. Since the cat is already 1/2 out of the bag - with the contents of the Hosting Agreement known by most anyone that wants to know it - the only reason to have another motion would be to clarify why in tandem with the Hosting Agreement - the AB would even consider broaching the subject of Project reorganization. Tim David W. Morgan dmorgan@efn.org Honolulu Hawaii SC - TXGenWeb http://www.rootsweb.com/~txgenweb/ FM - http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/tx/txfiles.htm ** http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~dmorgan/

--Boundary_(ID_jmcOJor8tllCY7WGY5PslA) Content-type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-72974003; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Unfortunately, by "stealing" one post out of dozens, it's far too easy to give an incomplete and perhaps inaccurate picture of the situation. There's no context. If read properly, the "half out of the bag" does NOT refer to half of the hosting agreement being out of the bag. The entire hosting agreement is available to anyone that chooses to read it -- simply email Richard Harrison and ask for it. He's made that post publicly and on several lists. The agreement may not be posted publicly, but any USGWP member who wishes may have a copy. But if you've requested the agreement, and read it, then you know all there is to know about it. That's all there is -- one reason for having a written agreement, by the way. No question about what is expected, as opposed to the unwritten, oral understanding that had been in existence for so long. What isn't apparent without the rest of the discussion to give perspective is that the AB is discussing the disposition of the very motion that raised so much ruckus on this list -- whether to establish a separate private email list to discuss the future organization of the USGWP. Possibly reorganizing the USGWP *was* something that needed to be considered when the hosting agreement was up in the air -- what if Ancestry/MyFamily demanded control of the project? What if they demanded a spot on the AB for a representative of their own? What if they demanded veto rights over project elections, or AB decisions? What if, what if, what if? If Ancestry/MyFamily had made such demands, reorganizing the structure of the project might have been the only way to *keep* them from effectively "owning" it. With the hosting agreement signed, these "what ifs" have disappeared -- which, I imagine, is why Tim would comment that the only reason to have another motion would be to clarify why structural changes would be considered in the first place. The reasons why, and possible new structures of, the USGWP would be the items still "in the bag" (I don't care for that phrase, incidentally), and not made known or discussed with the organization at large as of yet. Admittedly, I haven't been on the board for very long, but I haven't seen any sinister conspiracy to take over the world and do some kind of harm to the CC's that are the backbone of this project. Maybe I just haven't been given the secret password yet <g>. But I don't think it's productive to take bits and pieces of long discussions and try to see plots and plans in them. Almost *anything* can be twisted a thousand ways to Sunday if it suits someone to do so. Angie Rayfield NCGenWeb Personnel Coordinator/ASC SE/MA CC Representative At 01:15 AM 5/15/2003 -1000, you wrote: >What is the other half? What is it that we still don't know >about this agreement, and why the USGenWeb Project needs to >consider reorganization? > >Please note the copyright violation below. Yes, I stole it from >board-l. > >David > > BOARD-L Archives > > From: Tim Stowell <tstowell@chattanooga.net> > Subject: Re: [BOARD-L] VOTE - MOTION 03-11 > Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 20:26:05 -0400 > ><SNIP> > >An aside to the Tombstone Project and the other SP - Archives - these >groups were not left out on purpose, they just weren't thought of in terms >of day to day life of the Project. > >The private email list is the SC list - except I doubt all SCs/ASCs are >subbed there for there has been no roll call there for at least 2 years. >Other than looking at the Who's Who - and wondering how up to date it is - >for if the SCs don't inform the webmaster of a change, she probably doesn't >know of it. > >The SC list is archived and the membership can read it fairly soon after >messages are posted there. > >Since the cat is already 1/2 out of the bag - with the contents of the Hosting >Agreement known by most anyone that wants to know it - the only reason to >have another motion would be to clarify why in tandem with the Hosting >Agreement - the AB would even consider broaching the subject of Project >reorganization. > >Tim --Boundary_(ID_jmcOJor8tllCY7WGY5PslA) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-avg=cert; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-72974003 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.481 / Virus Database: 277 - Release Date: 5/13/2003 --Boundary_(ID_jmcOJor8tllCY7WGY5PslA)--