Good morning, all! I know you've been wondering why big mouth here hasn't spoken yet -- haven't had a chance to read through the posts with the attention they deserve until this morning. So, ta-da! Here I am! Basically, I think this is a good plan. I do have a couple of comments, though, and questions. I'm not sure I've correctly followed the Special Projects stuff all the way to the end, so I'm going to say what I think y'all are meaning by the various posts, and y'all can either affirm my conclusions, or fall sobbing on the floor at the thought you've got such a ninny for a CC and probably co-host for special project. OK. Here's the way it looks to me. For Special Projects Coordinator, since there is interaction with the USGenWeb on a level not seen at the county level over all, the people who fill these positions will need to be able to communicate effectively with the national coordinators for these projects, and should therefore be chosen by us (TNGenNet ---- yea!!!) with those capabilities, attitudes, etc., in mind as well as the ability to handle the internal workings of same. Right? While I don't think that the national folks should have the final say in appointing an internal coordinator, if that internal coordinator is to also be the liaison, it only makes sense that the people appointed don't go apoplectic or reach for shoulder mount missile launchers at the mention of "national board" and at whose name the national coordinator doesn't begin to mutter about arsenic or make the "back you vile vampire" finger cross doohickey. These positions, while hardly unimportant, aren't to be (as currently) proposed, voting members of the Board, but involved with the Board, since the special projects perspective needs to be kept in mind when the Board makes decisions. Have I got that? Assuming so, I'd like to ask why the SPCs *aren't* voting members. Not disagreeing -- just want a clear understanding of the reasoning behind it. SC -- Though I absolutely despise the viciousness and back-stabbing underhanded politics that have gone on at the national level with the current election, I cannot help but think the SC should be elected by the CCs. If the nominee cannot muster enough support to carry an election, how would he/she muster the support to *do* anything? That said, there is some virtue to having at least the *first* SC appointed by the Board, and possibly *from* the Board, simply because that might be simpler. It could even be an interim position or pro tem. I'm thinking of the need for transitioning from the current structure to the new one and the need for carry-over. Or perhaps the elected first SC could take office slightly before or after the Board? Hmmmmmm. Yup, you're right, I'm thinking at the end of my fingers here. (Well, it's hardly "out loud" when I'm typing it all, is it?) I'll hush. I'm probably adding to confusion, or creating it out of thin air. ASC -- I think a compromise is in order on this one. I can see the need for appointment by the SC -- it would be a real bummer to have to work that closely with someone who continually smacked his or her virtual gum -- but I also see the need for input from the CCs. How about we do something similar to the process by which federal appointees are made? A person could be appointed by the SC, with a yea or nay vote by the CCs, no long drawn out process, just a simple yea/nay to confirm. Yes? No? Maybe? K, that's it. I've *got* to get Marshall County finished and uploaded! Let me know whether or not I'm a total idiot, please. Su Wilson County Coordinator, Chester County SC USGenWeb Project http://www.rootsweb.com/~scchest2/scchester.htm County Coordinator, Marshall County TN USGenWeb Project awaiting account set up at Rootsweb I'd rather be looking for dead people than have them looking for me!