From ???@??? Thu Mar 07 06:03:36 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA01928 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 00:02:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g2752cAp015667 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 00:02:39 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g27507A30145; Wed, 6 Mar 2002 22:00:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 22:00:07 -0700 X-Original-Sender: kheidel@tri.net Wed Mar 6 22:00:07 2002 Message-ID: <01b501c1c595$16035280$93f499cd@sasnak.net> From: "Kathy Heidel" Old-To: References: Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Corrected statement Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 23:00:57 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1767 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: cda5c2e69dedc74eca917cb264e6de0d Jana, You and I could keep this up all night, our backgrounds being Central Plains, the first thought that came to my mind: "Do unto others", the bottom line is the fact that what Teresa is doing is absolutely wrong and according to P/P illegal to report out of committee in any fashion. I am not smacking anyone, I stating she should not be treated differently from you or me. I am certain that the people who elected any or all of us would not approve of her behaviour and I meant what I said, either it stops or I will start. I have had enough, I do happen to like Alice and I see no reason to hurt her, or any of the others who applied. Kathy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana Black" To: Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 7:27 PM Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Corrected statement > Anhh, don't worry about it - have you noted that USGW comes out as USAGE > with the help of the spell checker??? My only comment here is what my mommy > told me - "two wrongs do not make a right...." I would hate to see you > injure anyone else just to smack Teresa. I do fully agree that it is time > for the NC to use her authority to take care of Teresa's leaks for the > remaining time we have. > > Jana > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kathy Heidel [mailto:kheidel@tri.net] > Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 8:28 PM > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: [Board-Exec] Corrected statement > > > Sorry about spellchecker and reintegrate and reiterate. > > Jana, > I am still struggling to catch up with email after being gone for 3 > days. I just want to reiterate that if *ANYTHING* leaves Board Exec and > is posted on Board or ALL or DBS without the approval of each of us, I will > be posting every message that pertains to the "conversation" on the open > lists myself. If one of us can do this without reprisal then in my > estimation any of us should be allowed the same privilege! I am sick of this > double standard, Teresa is no different than I am and I am no longer willing > to make an exception for her, it just reinforces her lack of respect for us > and her office. > Kathy > > "The world is full of stories, and from time to time they permit themselves > to be told." > Old Cherokee Saying > > > From ???@??? Thu Mar 07 06:03:36 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA10072 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 02:07:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g2777oAp026918 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 02:07:50 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g2777Ku05538; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 00:07:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 00:07:20 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Thu Mar 7 00:07:19 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Corrected statement Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 19:44:09 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <01b501c1c595$16035280$93f499cd@sasnak.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <6jGpYC.A.VWB.oGxh8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1768 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 8617892c662910aea3cd74ecaaac2e67 oboy are you correct that we could throw those phrases..... I can hear all my So. Baptist relatives in chorus and singing in parts Nevertheless, I will accede... you are correct, "what Teresa is doing is absolutely wrong and according to P/P illegal to report out of committee in any fashion." And, I agree, the point is to make sure we do not make it worse - I feel horrid about Alice right now.... The problem is that instead of preaching to the choir, we need to get the NC to set the important limits.... you can lead a horse to water.... Jana -----Original Message----- From: Kathy Heidel [mailto:kheidel@tri.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 9:01 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Corrected statement Jana, You and I could keep this up all night, our backgrounds being Central Plains, the first thought that came to my mind: "Do unto others", the bottom line is the fact that what Teresa is doing is absolutely wrong and according to P/P illegal to report out of committee in any fashion. I am not smacking anyone, I stating she should not be treated differently from you or me. I am certain that the people who elected any or all of us would not approve of her behaviour and I meant what I said, either it stops or I will start. I have had enough, I do happen to like Alice and I see no reason to hurt her, or any of the others who applied. Kathy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana Black" To: Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 7:27 PM Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Corrected statement > Anhh, don't worry about it - have you noted that USGW comes out as USAGE > with the help of the spell checker??? My only comment here is what my mommy > told me - "two wrongs do not make a right...." I would hate to see you > injure anyone else just to smack Teresa. I do fully agree that it is time > for the NC to use her authority to take care of Teresa's leaks for the > remaining time we have. > > Jana > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kathy Heidel [mailto:kheidel@tri.net] > Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 8:28 PM > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: [Board-Exec] Corrected statement > > > Sorry about spellchecker and reintegrate and reiterate. > > Jana, > I am still struggling to catch up with email after being gone for 3 > days. I just want to reiterate that if *ANYTHING* leaves Board Exec and > is posted on Board or ALL or DBS without the approval of each of us, I will > be posting every message that pertains to the "conversation" on the open > lists myself. If one of us can do this without reprisal then in my > estimation any of us should be allowed the same privilege! I am sick of this > double standard, Teresa is no different than I am and I am no longer willing > to make an exception for her, it just reinforces her lack of respect for us > and her office. > Kathy > > "The world is full of stories, and from time to time they permit themselves > to be told." > Old Cherokee Saying > > > From ???@??? Thu Mar 07 17:34:24 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA02659 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 12:27:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g27HRQAp004638 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 12:27:26 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g27HQEf11392; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 10:26:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 10:26:14 -0700 X-Original-Sender: wchs@getgoin.net Thu Mar 7 10:26:14 2002 Message-ID: <00ab01c1c5fc$cb78b300$c9967a3f@wchs> From: "Phyllis Rippee" Old-To: Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 11:22:52 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. Subject: [Board-Exec] What Did You Expect? Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1772 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 4ad0777fc838494212e04fab30adc485 Colleagues, Any of you who paid attention to -ALL and/or the DBS knew prior to Sept. 1, 2001 that Teresa intended to vote her conscience. You also knew that she intended to continue with the DBS and should have been very aware of the "editorializing" that occurs there. So, while I agree that she is in violation of Parliamentary Authority and should either stop such "reporting/commenting" on confidential discussions, or resign her position, her actions were to be expected. What I did NOT expect was for the NC to create a double standard. One Example: When Tim asked me to cast a proxy vote for him.....Teresa immediately objected and the NC backed her up. No proxy voting. Sturgis did not allow it. Then, enters the double standard.....Teresa doesn't want to vote on the Exec-L because it is against her conscience......yet, Holly casts her proxy vote and has indicated that she will continue to do so. Holly's not going to do anything about Teresa, but.............. Kathy, when you start "dumping" stuff on -ALL, I've got stuff from the Bylaws Formation Committee to add to the stack :>) Phyllis From ???@??? Thu Mar 07 17:34:24 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA05505 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 17:24:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g27MOYAp015346 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 17:24:34 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g27MMEu22647; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 15:22:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 15:22:14 -0700 X-Original-Sender: wchs@getgoin.net Thu Mar 7 15:22:14 2002 Message-ID: <000701c1c626$2675dd40$1c967a3f@wchs> From: "Phyllis Rippee" Old-To: Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 16:19:28 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. Subject: [Board-Exec] Please Read Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1773 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 68486b5344ac4e36fb501ba4ae1ad4f6 I do not know how many times I have asked for the NC to acknowledge receipt of motions. But, you all know that I have done so more than an couple of times. I have asked that, not to criticize Holly, but to point out that we have no way of knowing if the electronics have worked. The electronic road runs both ways. Because some AB members did not receive the full report on the people who volunteered for the Board Secretary's position, some literally voted "blind." Yes, you could stretch this to mean that those who voted "no" because of lack of information, indicated no trust in the judgement of the NC. You should not! You should interpret it as we say in the Ozarks....not going to fall for a pig in a poke. (In other words, you want to see the pig in the sack before you buy it.) That is why I seconded Kathy's motion. We have now all acknowledged receipt of the same information that Holly had. I, for one, will not stand in Alice Gayley's way if she will allow us to consider her again. Phyllis From ???@??? Thu Mar 07 21:42:38 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19711 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 19:46:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g280kCAp003736 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 19:46:13 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g280jfJ00695; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 17:45:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 17:45:41 -0700 X-Original-Sender: hollyft@bright.net Thu Mar 7 17:45:41 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020307194117.04602240@mail.bright.net> X-Sender: hollyft@mail.bright.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 19:48:34 -0500 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Please Read In-Reply-To: <000701c1c626$2675dd40$1c967a3f@wchs> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <6p5fIB.A.mK.1mAi8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1774 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 1e1a197a93ed013cda89c2910ca2ebc6 At 04:19 PM 3/7/02 -0600, Phyllis Rippee wrote: >The electronic road runs both ways. Because some AB members did not receive >the full report on the people who volunteered for the Board Secretary's >position, some literally voted "blind." One can only assume that if it appears on the list it has been received by most if not all. >I, for one, will not stand in Alice Gayley's way if she will allow us to >consider her again. Alice has withdrawn. I have asked her to reconsider but do not have much hope. Holly From ???@??? Thu Mar 07 21:42:38 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA03947 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 21:07:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g2827jAp013605 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 21:07:45 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g2825rp09534; Thu, 7 Mar 2002 19:05:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 19:05:53 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Thu Mar 7 19:05:52 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Please Read Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 13:59:52 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20020307194117.04602240@mail.bright.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <8UWMa.A.zUC.ByBi8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1775 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: bcb36ed8108d5940cebf48ffb726d40d Sorry folks gonna beat my bush again - this situation *exactly* makes the point I was trying to make. Instead of "assuming," we need to be personally proactive.... we are definitely having problems with this list.... I did not get May Ann's votes, nor did I get a couple of other posts that have been referred to as if we had all gotten them. Now we have lost an excellent volunteer due to "assumptions" and we have no idea whether you have seen the motion and second as you have not spoken .... (quoting my mother again: "Crimenently!") Holly, there is a difference between "assuming" and acknowledging receipt. It is a formality but allows us to know that something has at least been added to the hopper so we can keep track sans secretary. (Hold you ears) THIS IS NOT WORKING !!!!! Why in the world would you say "it has been received by most if not all." *If* it posts, we should all definitely be getting it, why would there be any question???? What I still do not get is why no one commented before we made such a mess of the secretary situation... Meanwhile we owe Alice an apology.... this sucks. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Holly Timm [mailto:hollyft@bright.net] Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 4:49 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Please Read At 04:19 PM 3/7/02 -0600, Phyllis Rippee wrote: >The electronic road runs both ways. Because some AB members did not receive >the full report on the people who volunteered for the Board Secretary's >position, some literally voted "blind." One can only assume that if it appears on the list it has been received by most if not all. >I, for one, will not stand in Alice Gayley's way if she will allow us to >consider her again. Alice has withdrawn. I have asked her to reconsider but do not have much hope. Holly From ???@??? Fri Mar 08 07:14:54 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA16463 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 07:04:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g28C4hAp011088 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 07:04:43 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g28C4Nh31307; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 05:04:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 05:04:23 -0700 X-Original-Sender: hollyft@bright.net Fri Mar 8 05:04:23 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020308065952.03b8c380@mail.bright.net> X-Sender: hollyft@mail.bright.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 07:07:13 -0500 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Fw: [BOARD-L] Motion 02-06 - Board Secretary - VOTE In-Reply-To: <009001c1c5dc$b8f00820$88f499cd@sasnak.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1777 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 9259b9b9acd4317f6a46632f692099a7 At 07:33 AM 3/7/02 -0600, Kathy Heidel wrote: >This msg really upset me Holly because Mary Ann rarely ventures an opinion, >and because of Teresa she just got a come-upins from you. This is why Teresa >needs to either participate on the Board Exec list for these matters or not >at all, it is too easy to hit reply and then be needlessly embarrassed. I am >not being hateful or disrespectful, I just do not understand why Teresa is >allowed privileges that potentially harm us or the membership. If this board wishes any action taken against Teresa in regards to her refusal to participate directly and her actions to attempt to participate indirectly only on this list then say so. Holly From ???@??? Fri Mar 08 09:37:14 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA27653 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 09:27:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g28ERLAp026415 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 09:27:21 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g28EQw729616; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 07:26:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 07:26:58 -0700 X-Original-Sender: betsym@1starnet.com Fri Mar 8 07:26:58 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020308082254.048fa400@mail.1starnet.com> X-Sender: betsym@mail.1starnet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 08:27:37 -0600 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Betsy Mills Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Fw: [BOARD-L] Motion 02-06 - Board Secretary - VOTE In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20020308065952.03b8c380@mail.bright.net> References: <009001c1c5dc$b8f00820$88f499cd@sasnak.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1779 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 505212f12c52c7c60cd5f662abaae79f Is this a request for a vote? If so, yes, I would like to see action taken against Teresa in regards to her refusal to participate directly while at the same time taking anything she wants to off this list and twisting it to her own purposes. Just as she stated on the ALL list that the only objection by the board members who voted "No" to Alice was that she was your choice -- funny, I must have missed some emails again as I never saw that objection voiced here. She must be speaking for herself when she made that statement. Because the others of us respect the "secrecy" of this list, we are not able to refute that statement. Betsy At 06:07 AM 3/8/2002, you wrote: >At 07:33 AM 3/7/02 -0600, Kathy Heidel wrote: >>This msg really upset me Holly because Mary Ann rarely ventures an opinion, >>and because of Teresa she just got a come-upins from you. This is why Teresa >>needs to either participate on the Board Exec list for these matters or not >>at all, it is too easy to hit reply and then be needlessly embarrassed. I am >>not being hateful or disrespectful, I just do not understand why Teresa is >>allowed privileges that potentially harm us or the membership. > >If this board wishes any action taken against Teresa in regards to her >refusal to participate directly and her actions to attempt to participate >indirectly only on this list then say so. > >Holly > > > > From ???@??? Fri Mar 08 17:16:28 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03262 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 12:04:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g28H49Ap016950 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 12:04:10 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g28H2lI26601; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:02:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:02:47 -0700 X-Original-Sender: ky.quest@gte.net Fri Mar 8 10:02:45 2002 Message-ID: <013901c1c6c3$0d4d32d0$6401a8c0@Diane> From: "Diane M. Parsons" Old-To: , References: <200203080957.AA1297023256@1starnet.com> Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 12:02:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Subject: [Board-Exec] I am REALLY concerned now Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1784 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 4c51ffba256a505a7d4dcd872e326006 I totally agree. Why does Teresa send her votes to Holly to post ??? I find that a very strange situation. Why can't Teresa post her own votes? Diane ----- Original Message ----- From: "Betsy Mills" To: Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 10:57 AM Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Fw: [BOARD-L] Motion 02-06 - Board Secretary - VOTE > Well, I am REALLY concerned now. Teresa states that she doesn't > ask Holly to send her votes to this list, Holly CHOOSES to???? If > something isn't done to rectify this situation (and yes, it IS > different from those who choose to remain silent on this list as > they don't send their votes SECRETLY to the NC), then I will > unsubscribe from this list. > > Betsy > From ???@??? Fri Mar 08 17:16:28 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03286 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 12:04:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g28H4MAp016969 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 12:04:23 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g28H3t506828; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:03:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:03:55 -0700 X-Original-Sender: ky.quest@gte.net Fri Mar 8 10:03:55 2002 Message-ID: <014601c1c6c3$37f72270$6401a8c0@Diane> From: "Diane M. Parsons" Old-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020308065952.03b8c380@mail.bright.net> <009501c1c6b9$0008a320$06967a3f@wchs> Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 12:03:49 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Subject: [Board-Exec] Say so? SO! Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1785 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: ffa7a45d54a686deb618ad0253ac0dad I herby echo that " SO!" Diane ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phyllis Rippee" To: Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 10:50 AM Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Fw: [BOARD-L] Motion 02-06 - Board Secretary - VOTE > Say so? SO! > > Phyllis > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Holly Timm > To: > Sent: 08 March, 2002 6:07 AM > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Fw: [BOARD-L] Motion 02-06 - Board Secretary - > VOTE > > > > At 07:33 AM 3/7/02 -0600, Kathy Heidel wrote: > > >This msg really upset me Holly because Mary Ann rarely ventures an > opinion, > > >and because of Teresa she just got a come-upins from you. This is why > Teresa > > >needs to either participate on the Board Exec list for these matters or > not > > >at all, it is too easy to hit reply and then be needlessly embarrassed. I > am > > >not being hateful or disrespectful, I just do not understand why Teresa > is > > >allowed privileges that potentially harm us or the membership. > > > > If this board wishes any action taken against Teresa in regards to her > > refusal to participate directly and her actions to attempt to participate > > indirectly only on this list then say so. > > > > Holly > > > > > > > > > > > > From ???@??? Fri Mar 08 17:16:28 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA03999 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 12:09:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g28H9nAp017669 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 12:09:50 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g28H9Fi15716; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:09:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:09:15 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Fri Mar 8 10:09:14 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Say so? SO! Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 09:03:15 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <014601c1c6c3$37f72270$6401a8c0@Diane> Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1786 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: df85d747453ec14597bc8a4fe8301ef1 Count me in as well. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Diane M. Parsons [mailto:ky.quest@gte.net] Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 9:04 AM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [Board-Exec] Say so? SO! I herby echo that " SO!" Diane ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phyllis Rippee" To: Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 10:50 AM Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Fw: [BOARD-L] Motion 02-06 - Board Secretary - VOTE > Say so? SO! > > Phyllis > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Holly Timm > To: > Sent: 08 March, 2002 6:07 AM > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Fw: [BOARD-L] Motion 02-06 - Board Secretary - > VOTE > > > > At 07:33 AM 3/7/02 -0600, Kathy Heidel wrote: > > >This msg really upset me Holly because Mary Ann rarely ventures an > opinion, > > >and because of Teresa she just got a come-upins from you. This is why > Teresa > > >needs to either participate on the Board Exec list for these matters or > not > > >at all, it is too easy to hit reply and then be needlessly embarrassed. I > am > > >not being hateful or disrespectful, I just do not understand why Teresa > is > > >allowed privileges that potentially harm us or the membership. > > > > If this board wishes any action taken against Teresa in regards to her > > refusal to participate directly and her actions to attempt to participate > > indirectly only on this list then say so. > > > > Holly > > > > > > > > > > > > From ???@??? Fri Mar 08 17:16:28 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA01315 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 12:37:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g28HblAp021315 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 12:37:48 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g28HbJI10216; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:37:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:37:19 -0700 X-Original-Sender: wchs@getgoin.net Fri Mar 8 10:37:18 2002 Message-ID: <014101c1c6c7$65344340$06967a3f@wchs> From: "Phyllis Rippee" Old-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020307194117.04602240@mail.bright.net> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Please Read Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 11:33:35 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1787 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 3d00e6f97bdc3e49167e407c98f9ac5a And, if only your "crystalized hindsight" had led you into delaying the vote long enough to have ascertained why Teresa was asking for the qualifications......instead of ordering us to continue the voting. You do know how "assume" breaks down, don't you? And, as a MO Mule....it doesn't bother me to be one. Phyllis ----- Original Message ----- From: Holly Timm To: Sent: 07 March, 2002 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Please Read > At 04:19 PM 3/7/02 -0600, Phyllis Rippee wrote: > >The electronic road runs both ways. Because some AB members did not receive > >the full report on the people who volunteered for the Board Secretary's > >position, some literally voted "blind." > > One can only assume that if it appears on the list it has been received by > most if not all. > > >I, for one, will not stand in Alice Gayley's way if she will allow us to > >consider her again. > > Alice has withdrawn. I have asked her to reconsider but do not have much hope. > > Holly > > > From ???@??? Fri Mar 08 17:16:28 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA08761 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 15:50:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g28Ko9Ap017070 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 15:50:10 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g28KndD13990; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 13:49:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 13:49:39 -0700 X-Original-Sender: ky.quest@gte.net Fri Mar 8 13:49:38 2002 Message-ID: <005401c1c6e2$c0e6e330$6401a8c0@Diane> From: "Diane M. Parsons" Old-To: References: <1B2C0B18.0B162659.AE82A481@cs.com> Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 15:49:33 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Subject: [Board-Exec] Adult Board Members ? Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1792 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 26f2ccd123346e439c3f50b58b367f1b I would like to see some action taken in this matter myself. Special treatment for Teresa does have to stop. I know I am one of the members that never say much. I read the emails, all the questions I could ever think to ask, does get asked and argued about, over and over again. So, just by reading I get more than enough info! I get very discouraged by the chaos and fighting that goes on.I thought I was elected to serve on the board, not point fingers and trash & slash each other. We seem to be run by a select few, put through hoops & paces like a trained pony.Double-standards apply and if we do speak up we find our words twisted on the DBS ( Double Bull Shit ) trash & slash rag. That was no reason whatsoever that Alice Gayle was not elected board secretary. I read her qualifications ( along with the other two) when Holly first posted them. I did some research on these three myself and was satisfied that Alice was the best choice.This "mess" that followed was a disgrace against us all. It now appears that this was all done to maybe put Kelly Blizzard in this position? Kind looks this way to me. And I believe I know why. Kelly Blizzard is a know troublemaker and instigator. AND, this is who you all want ?? Why ?? I have received my share of hate mail from sweet Kelly.. a very "professional" lady, should be a real asset to the board. Oh..this IS on the EXEC list..the famous secret one. I do not want to see my opinions repeated on other trash & slash rags or on ALL-L Disgusted Diane Parsons > > > > I would like to see action taken against Teresa AND I would like to see her removed from this list until she agrees to abide by the rules. I would like to see any special treatment discontinued. > > -Isaiah > > From ???@??? Fri Mar 08 17:16:28 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA10972 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 16:10:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g28LAlAp019817 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 16:10:48 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g28LAGo01745; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 14:10:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 14:10:16 -0700 X-Original-Sender: wchs@getgoin.net Fri Mar 8 14:10:16 2002 Message-ID: <000b01c1c6e5$407367c0$d4967a3f@wchs> From: "Phyllis Rippee" Old-To: Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 15:07:26 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. Subject: [Board-Exec] Adult Board Members Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1793 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 73089c5de18bade9fae929e83707477a Diane.....I did not vote for Alice because I thought that someone without any political baggage, who had worked as a professional secretary would bring skills and a refreshment to the AB that we really need. I forwarded Kelly's information because it seems that we did not have the whole story.....because of more glitches on the electronic super highway? Phyllis From ???@??? Fri Mar 08 17:16:28 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA14104 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 16:38:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g28LcpAp023650 for ; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 16:38:51 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g28LcNa10090; Fri, 8 Mar 2002 14:38:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 14:38:23 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Fri Mar 8 14:38:22 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Adult Board Members Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 13:31:41 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <000b01c1c6e5$407367c0$d4967a3f@wchs> Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1794 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: ebfd07293c0e056e88c1d6118aed07b1 If we do not want political baggage, we should choose Caroline House and help her with html along the way...... but for html, her skills as offered beat the pants off of what Kelly submitted.... Caroline House "I might be able to handle this. I worked several years as a secretary in academic departments. Since then I've been otherwise employed but I am an experienced genealogist. My volunteer job at the moment is director of the LDS Family History Center in Woodland, California and teaching Word for Windows at the Woodland Senior Center. "E-mail, word processing and spread sheets I can do. If there is a lot of more involved computer work, I would have to see what it was. I can put in a new CD-ROM drive, but for web pages and things like PowerPoint I am still at the beginning stage." If she is good enough to teach Word, she is good enough to format webpages for html using Word.... Jana -----Original Message----- From: Phyllis Rippee [mailto:wchs@getgoin.net] Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 1:07 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [Board-Exec] Adult Board Members Diane.....I did not vote for Alice because I thought that someone without any political baggage, who had worked as a professional secretary would bring skills and a refreshment to the AB that we really need. I forwarded Kelly's information because it seems that we did not have the whole story.....because of more glitches on the electronic super highway? Phyllis From ???@??? Mon Mar 11 06:09:24 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01924 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 2002 23:26:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g2B4Qvgi026117 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 2002 23:26:57 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g2B4QSb12530; Sun, 10 Mar 2002 21:26:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2002 21:26:28 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Sun Mar 10 21:26:28 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] I am REALLY concerned now Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2002 20:20:50 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <013901c1c6c3$0d4d32d0$6401a8c0@Diane> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1795 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: faba0b516d5a8e793759d02e05bb04f1 OK, having honored the 48 hours, here is what I was ready to send, and not a word or an opinion has changed. Obviously, Teresa can post her own votes, but instead chooses to obfuscate matters, play power games, use delay tactics and we all have let her get away with it. Read the latest DBS for the latest misrepresentations. The NC, in a heartbeat has the authority to stop all of this and make "rules" for the list to prevent such behavior. If Teresa chooses not to use the list, she can be unsubbed. If Teresa chooses not to honor the confidentiality of Executive Session, she can be unsubbed. How Teresa chooses to function as the RAL is up to her. It is entirely inappropriate for the NC to act as a "go between." Jana -----Original Message----- From: Diane M. Parsons [mailto:ky.quest@gte.net] Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 9:03 AM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [Board-Exec] I am REALLY concerned now I totally agree. Why does Teresa send her votes to Holly to post ??? I find that a very strange situation. Why can't Teresa post her own votes? Diane ----- Original Message ----- From: "Betsy Mills" To: Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 10:57 AM Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Fw: [BOARD-L] Motion 02-06 - Board Secretary - VOTE > Well, I am REALLY concerned now. Teresa states that she doesn't > ask Holly to send her votes to this list, Holly CHOOSES to???? If > something isn't done to rectify this situation (and yes, it IS > different from those who choose to remain silent on this list as > they don't send their votes SECRETLY to the NC), then I will > unsubscribe from this list. > > Betsy > From ???@??? Thu Mar 14 18:56:14 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15425 for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 18:47:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g2ENl7Cl012690 for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 18:47:07 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g2ED4ID29479; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 06:04:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 06:04:18 -0700 X-Original-Sender: bremerr@oclc.org Thu Mar 14 06:04:17 2002 Message-ID: <90D12689EF7A0543AB11426D75D6ABC51A9494@oa4-server.oa.oclc.org> From: "Bremer,Robert" Old-To: "'BOARD-L@rootsweb.com'" Subject: RE: [BOARD-L] Motion 02-07 Call the question Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 08:03:06 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Resent-Message-ID: <46GT_C.A.SMH.S_Jk8@lists5.rootsweb.com> To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/8561 X-Loop: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: BOARD-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 6c566912362726b3ed0a72219e079ff6 Yes. Robert Bremer bremerr@oclc.org -----Original Message----- From: Holly Timm [mailto:hollyft@bright.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 7:42 PM To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [BOARD-L] Motion 02-07 Call the question A motion has been made by Mary Ann Hetrick and seconded by Kathy Heidel to call for the vote on the following motion made by Teresa Lindquist and seconded by Robert Bremer. Please vote on the Call for the vote, yes to proceed to vote, no to return to discussion. >The following motion made by Teresa Lindquist and seconded by Robert Bremer >is numbered 02-07 and is open for discussion. > >At 06:51 AM 3/8/02 -0500, merope wrote: > >>I move that the Board appoint Ginger Hayes to the vacant NE/NC State >>Coordinator representative seat. >> >>-Teresa Lindquist >>merope@radix.net > > > _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com From ???@??? Sun Mar 17 19:30:43 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA17012 for ; Sun, 17 Mar 2002 19:16:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g2I0GBCl012042 for ; Sun, 17 Mar 2002 19:16:12 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g2I0FOu31236; Sun, 17 Mar 2002 17:15:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 17:15:24 -0700 X-Original-Sender: hollyft@bright.net Sun Mar 17 17:15:23 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020317191735.00d637a0@mail.bright.net> X-Sender: hollyft@mail.bright.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 19:18:30 -0500 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [Board-Exec] Fwd: Official request to NC and Advisory Board Resent-Message-ID: <848HjB.A.5nH.cGTl8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1796 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: a07046a9332155718ede363bafcd1e9a I think most if not all of you received this individually but it is presented here seeking comment. >From: Tnlist@wmconnect.com >Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 12:46:50 EST >Subject: Official request to NC and Advisory Board >To: tnsc@tngenweb.org, hollyft@bright.net, tngibson@att.net, > pamreid@comcast.net, merope@radix.net, gingerh@shawneelink.com, > bremerr@oclc.org, TVick65536@aol.com, ky.quest@gte.net, > rkeason@tir.com >X-Mailer: WalMart 6.0 for Windows US sub 12 >X-postini-filters: (S:0.3480439 ) > >Re: Ms Cole TNSC of Tennessee USGenWeb > >Dear UsGenWeb Board and NC, >As I expected Ms. Cole (SC of Tennessee) has decided to brick wall my >complaints and instead defend Mr. Smoot and his actions, who last night >filed a complaint against me with Rootsweb for not allowing him on my >Rootsweb list. (Further evidence of his harrassment) > >Here you will find my response to Ms Cole, who's e-mail has been snipped. >The full length e-mail is added at the end of this note. I ask your help >in reminding Ms. Cole of her duties as SC of Tennessee, in controlling the >actions of her CC's that become detremental to the reputation of the >UsGenWeb. I am a private citizen in no way associated with your group. I >am being threatened by Mr Smoot with repercussions of reporting me to >other folks (which he did). I ask as a person that has no affiliation with >your group, being harrassed by a member of your group, that you take such >action to cause Ms. Cole to act to stop her employee of TnGenWeb aka >TnGenNet from further contact with me, my list or my message board. I >remind everyone I have had no contact with Ms Cole or the TnGenWeb since >my resignation until Mr. Smoot's actions. > >I will expect a reply from the UsGenWeb on any action if any they intend >to take within the next three days. >(Below find my reply to Ms Cole) - Chip Brown > > >>Dear Chip, >> >>I am not aware of any harrassment or threats made by Fred....I did see >>that in your rules, uploaded on March 16, 2002 at: >> >>http://www.rootsweb.com/~tnunion/Mail_List/mailing_list_Rules.htm >>you ban all mention of TNGenWeb...I find that interesting, > > >Ms Cole, >I think I have provided enough evidence of Fred Smoot's antics to satisfy >anyone. Considering you yourself have banned him from your mail lists on >two occasssions, I find it highly odd that you would even question my >claims of his harrassment. However, he is representing himself as a member >of the TnenWeb as such a member of the UsGenWeb. Therefore since you >decide not to act or even ask him to stop I will have no choice but to >hold your corporation and possibly also the UsGenWeb responsible. I am not >a member of your organization and as such expect the consideration of any >individual who files a complaint against your membership. > >As for my mail list rules: >The upload on March 16 is in question. If you spent as much time >researching your evidence as you do defending Fred, you would have noticed >I am no longer the webmaster of that site. Whatever upload may have been >done that day was not by me. > >The line you reference to find interesting shouldn't be. It was added the >day after I resigned your corporation. Many on my list were quite upset at >my treatment at your organization's hands. To avoid the chaos that ensued >after the "Giles County" mail list fiasco I instituted that policy to keep >those supporting me from making rude comments about your organization. > >Chip > >Her complete e-mails to me: > >(Item 1) >Date: 3/16/02 11:20:39 PM Pacific Standard Time >From: ncole@coffey.com (Nancy Cole) >To: Tnlist@wmconnect.com > > > > >Dear Chip, > >I am not aware of any harrassment or threats made by Fred. If you have >proof of this claim, you may bring it to my attention. As far as I am >aware, all he did was attempt to join your TNUnion mailing list and >possibly post a message to the Rootsweb Union County, Tennessee message >board. I say possibly because no such message is posted there now. > >I did see that in your rules, uploaded on March 16, 2002 at: > >http://www.rootsweb.com/~tnunion/Mail_List/mailing_list_Rules.htm > >you ban all mention of TNGenWeb...I find that interesting, but as I have >stated before, the administration of the TNUnion mailing list is your >responsibility as list administrator. As you are not the host of a >TNGenWeb County nor are affiliated with the project in any way, I do not >understand why you expect I should intervene in this issue. > >I cannot run a search of the TN-all list at the moment because Yahoo is >down, but I do not believe there was ANY mention of you after your >resignation. I received a few private e-mails asking "Is he really >gone?" but that was it. > >I did search your message board to check your reference to Clara Smoot, >which by the way, is not Fred's wife's name. clarasmoot@aol.com has been >posting to the board since at least August 2001. You might want to >know that you have apparently blocked an innocent researcher from your >list. > >Nancy >---------------------------------- >(Item 2) > >Date: 3/16/02 10:38:49 PM Pacific Standard Time >From: ncole@coffey.com (Nancy Cole) >To: Tnlist@wmconnect.com > > > > >Dear Chip, > > From time to time conflicts have arisen on RW county lists. Although I >sometimes give advice to the list admin as to how they might resolve the >conflict amicably, it is my policy not to intervene. > >The individual mailing lists are the responsibility of the list >administrator. It is your responsibility to set reasonable guidelines and >monitor your list. > >Under RW rules you may moderate, ban or block any person you with >whom you have been unable to affect conflict resolution. If you are >unable to resolve a situation, you are encouraged to seek help at >helpdesk@rootsweb.com > >Please see: > >http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com/listadmins/conflictsadmin.html > >Please do not expect me to become embroiled in the long standing feud >between you and Fred. > >Nancy Cole >ncole@coffey.com >State Coordinator, TNGenWeb From ???@??? Mon Mar 18 06:47:24 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA26209 for ; Sun, 17 Mar 2002 21:24:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g2I2ObCl024502 for ; Sun, 17 Mar 2002 21:24:37 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g2I2Nf107489; Sun, 17 Mar 2002 19:23:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 19:23:41 -0700 X-Original-Sender: maplecreek_99@yahoo.com Sun Mar 17 19:23:40 2002 Message-ID: <007c01c1ce23$c0b13260$d5a028d8@hppav> From: "Ron Eason" Old-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020317191735.00d637a0@mail.bright.net> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Fwd: Official request to NC and Advisory Board Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 21:22:03 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1797 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 8fdd940d347cc03a8e629ff5920b1d25 Holly, As you already know, I responded to him and Fred, and I think that I was correct in telling them that in my opinion, it is none of our business. Since Chip is not a member of USGW and therefore controls no information or pages that represent us, I don't think we can have anything to do with it, except to tell them both what I already told them. Mr. Smoot understand that but I am not sure that Chip Brown does. Ron ----- Original Message ----- From: "Holly Timm" To: Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2002 7:18 PM Subject: [Board-Exec] Fwd: Official request to NC and Advisory Board > > I think most if not all of you received this individually but it is > presented here seeking comment. > > >From: Tnlist@wmconnect.com > >Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 12:46:50 EST > >Subject: Official request to NC and Advisory Board > >To: tnsc@tngenweb.org, hollyft@bright.net, tngibson@att.net, > > pamreid@comcast.net, merope@radix.net, gingerh@shawneelink.com, > > bremerr@oclc.org, TVick65536@aol.com, ky.quest@gte.net, > > rkeason@tir.com > >X-Mailer: WalMart 6.0 for Windows US sub 12 > >X-postini-filters: (S:0.3480439 ) > > > >Re: Ms Cole TNSC of Tennessee USGenWeb > > > >Dear UsGenWeb Board and NC, > >As I expected Ms. Cole (SC of Tennessee) has decided to brick wall my > >complaints and instead defend Mr. Smoot and his actions, who last night > >filed a complaint against me with Rootsweb for not allowing him on my > >Rootsweb list. (Further evidence of his harrassment) > > > >Here you will find my response to Ms Cole, who's e-mail has been snipped. > >The full length e-mail is added at the end of this note. I ask your help > >in reminding Ms. Cole of her duties as SC of Tennessee, in controlling the > >actions of her CC's that become detremental to the reputation of the > >UsGenWeb. I am a private citizen in no way associated with your group. I > >am being threatened by Mr Smoot with repercussions of reporting me to > >other folks (which he did). I ask as a person that has no affiliation with > >your group, being harrassed by a member of your group, that you take such > >action to cause Ms. Cole to act to stop her employee of TnGenWeb aka > >TnGenNet from further contact with me, my list or my message board. I > >remind everyone I have had no contact with Ms Cole or the TnGenWeb since > >my resignation until Mr. Smoot's actions. > > > >I will expect a reply from the UsGenWeb on any action if any they intend > >to take within the next three days. > >(Below find my reply to Ms Cole) - Chip Brown > > > > > >>Dear Chip, > >> > >>I am not aware of any harrassment or threats made by Fred....I did see > >>that in your rules, uploaded on March 16, 2002 at: > >> > >>http://www.rootsweb.com/~tnunion/Mail_List/mailing_list_Rules.htm > >>you ban all mention of TNGenWeb...I find that interesting, > > > > > >Ms Cole, > >I think I have provided enough evidence of Fred Smoot's antics to satisfy > >anyone. Considering you yourself have banned him from your mail lists on > >two occasssions, I find it highly odd that you would even question my > >claims of his harrassment. However, he is representing himself as a member > >of the TnenWeb as such a member of the UsGenWeb. Therefore since you > >decide not to act or even ask him to stop I will have no choice but to > >hold your corporation and possibly also the UsGenWeb responsible. I am not > >a member of your organization and as such expect the consideration of any > >individual who files a complaint against your membership. > > > >As for my mail list rules: > >The upload on March 16 is in question. If you spent as much time > >researching your evidence as you do defending Fred, you would have noticed > >I am no longer the webmaster of that site. Whatever upload may have been > >done that day was not by me. > > > >The line you reference to find interesting shouldn't be. It was added the > >day after I resigned your corporation. Many on my list were quite upset at > >my treatment at your organization's hands. To avoid the chaos that ensued > >after the "Giles County" mail list fiasco I instituted that policy to keep > >those supporting me from making rude comments about your organization. > > > >Chip > > > >Her complete e-mails to me: > > > >(Item 1) > >Date: 3/16/02 11:20:39 PM Pacific Standard Time > >From: ncole@coffey.com (Nancy Cole) > >To: Tnlist@wmconnect.com > > > > > > > > > >Dear Chip, > > > >I am not aware of any harrassment or threats made by Fred. If you have > >proof of this claim, you may bring it to my attention. As far as I am > >aware, all he did was attempt to join your TNUnion mailing list and > >possibly post a message to the Rootsweb Union County, Tennessee message > >board. I say possibly because no such message is posted there now. > > > >I did see that in your rules, uploaded on March 16, 2002 at: > > > >http://www.rootsweb.com/~tnunion/Mail_List/mailing_list_Rules.htm > > > >you ban all mention of TNGenWeb...I find that interesting, but as I have > >stated before, the administration of the TNUnion mailing list is your > >responsibility as list administrator. As you are not the host of a > >TNGenWeb County nor are affiliated with the project in any way, I do not > >understand why you expect I should intervene in this issue. > > > >I cannot run a search of the TN-all list at the moment because Yahoo is > >down, but I do not believe there was ANY mention of you after your > >resignation. I received a few private e-mails asking "Is he really > >gone?" but that was it. > > > >I did search your message board to check your reference to Clara Smoot, > >which by the way, is not Fred's wife's name. clarasmoot@aol.com has been > >posting to the board since at least August 2001. You might want to > >know that you have apparently blocked an innocent researcher from your > >list. > > > >Nancy > >---------------------------------- > >(Item 2) > > > >Date: 3/16/02 10:38:49 PM Pacific Standard Time > >From: ncole@coffey.com (Nancy Cole) > >To: Tnlist@wmconnect.com > > > > > > > > > >Dear Chip, > > > > From time to time conflicts have arisen on RW county lists. Although I > >sometimes give advice to the list admin as to how they might resolve the > >conflict amicably, it is my policy not to intervene. > > > >The individual mailing lists are the responsibility of the list > >administrator. It is your responsibility to set reasonable guidelines and > >monitor your list. > > > >Under RW rules you may moderate, ban or block any person you with > >whom you have been unable to affect conflict resolution. If you are > >unable to resolve a situation, you are encouraged to seek help at > >helpdesk@rootsweb.com > > > >Please see: > > > >http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com/listadmins/conflictsadmin.html > > > >Please do not expect me to become embroiled in the long standing feud > >between you and Fred. > > > >Nancy Cole > >ncole@coffey.com > >State Coordinator, TNGenWeb > > _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From ???@??? Wed Mar 20 16:46:46 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA27462 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2002 07:19:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g2KCJCCl009869 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2002 07:19:12 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g2KCD9T12164; Wed, 20 Mar 2002 05:13:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 05:13:09 -0700 X-Original-Sender: hollyft@bright.net Wed Mar 20 05:13:06 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020320071414.00d4f350@mail.bright.net> X-Sender: hollyft@mail.bright.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 07:16:15 -0500 Old-To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [BOARD-L] Fwd: Request from the EC Resent-Message-ID: <6_v0Q.A.09C.UzHm8@lists5.rootsweb.com> To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/8665 X-Loop: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: BOARD-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 43ca1c14cdbb885539db1e8b538f5ef3 The EC has sent us several questions they would like addressed. I suggest that we break them up into separate discussion items. Is that acceptable? >From: "Linda Haas Davenport" >To: "Holly" >Subject: Request from the EC > >To: The USGenWeb Project Advisory Board >From; The USGenWeb Election Committee >Subject: Issues requiring clarification or directives > >During the 2001 nomination period and annual election several things came up >that caused the EC delays and/or problems. To forestall a repeat of last >year the EC is requesting the AB to review the following items and issue a >clear directive (or clarification if that is all that is required) to the EC >on each of these items. It will be very helpful if these issues can be >resolved before nominations open Jun 1st, 2002 so that the information on >the EC's web site may be updated and working procedures finalized. > >Thank you for your consideration. The EC is prepared to address any >questions you may have. > >The USGenWeb Project Election Committee >********** > >(1) Just prior to the close of nominations 2001, Tim Stowell, submitted a >nomination for "none of the above". Since "none of the above" did not appear >to qualify as a volunteer under the USGenWeb By-Laws the Election Committee >declined the nomination. However, after the election the EC hosted an >opinion poll and the majority of those responding were in favor of either >"none of the above" or "abstain" appearing on the ballot of all races. > >QUESTIONS: >(a) Should either of these items appear on the ballot? >(b) If either is included must the "vote" cast for "none of the above" or >"abstain" be included in the vote count to determine the 51% majority that a >candidate must have to win? > > >(2) Tim Stowell has brought up several times that volunteers were not >allowed to change their vote during the election. At the time of the >election >the software was returning unreliable results when multiple votes were cast >. Larry Stephens thinks he can fix the software to handled multiple votes >but before he spends the time doing this the EC would like clarification >from the AB. The consensus of the EC is that volunteers only be allowed to >vote once. > >QUESTION: >Should volunteers be able to return to the poll and change their vote? > > >(3) The By-Laws include a seat for a representative of the Census >Project. Prior to and during the nomination period the EC asked the AB what >to do about the nominations for this seat. The EC's questions did not get >answered. After the election there was a lot of discussion about the fact >that "Maggie's" CP volunteer's got to vote and "Ron's" CP volunteer's >didn't. These two issues need to be resolved. > >QUESTIONS: >(a) What is the AB going to do about the open, unfilled CP Representative >seat? >(b) Which Census Project Volunteers are allowed to vote? Both? Neither? > > >(4) During this election there were several two seat races. The EC was told >that the candidate with the highest vote got the 2 year seat and the runner >up got the 1 year seat. There were a lot of complaints about this and it was >pointed out that the By-Laws require a majority decision. After the Election >was completed the EC discussed this and the consensus was that in the future >each seat should be treated separately. > >QUESTION: >How should races with 2 seats be handled / determined? > >(5) The By-Laws state that every volunteer (excluding those who do only >look-ups or who only transcribe material) are eligible to vote. During this >past election the EC included all volunteers of the Special Projects who met >this criteria. However, we were told to exclude the KS Archive volunteers >because they did not submit their material to "Linda Lewis'" Archive >Project. > >QUESTION: >What group of volunteers, if any, are to be excluded from voting? > > >(6) Larry Stephens has requested the EC to post a list of volunteers >(name only) by Region to the EC website. This will eliminate the majority of >e-mails he received from volunteers during the last election. A similar >suggestion was made by a member of the ESC and was voted down. The reason >given was it would be an invasion of privacy of the volunteer to have their >name listed. The EC is of the opinion that all volunteers must list their >names on their web sites and the listing of their names on the EC website >would not invade anyone's privacy. The EC would appreciate permission from >the AB to post a membership list. > >QUESTION: >Will the AB allow the EC to post Regional membership lists (name only) on >the EC website? > >(7) This Election Committee is a standing committee and as such maintains >a year around web site. The EC has the means for a volunteer to Register to >Vote. The EC spends an unbelievable amount of time and effort trying to get >membership lists verified, e-mails corrected and dealing with SCs who won't >send us lists. After every Announce Only mailing the EC ends up with >hundreds of e-mail addresses that bounce and receives several dozen e-mails >from members who demand that their name be removed from the membership >mailing list. The opinion of the EC is that only volunteers who Register to >vote may vote. > >QUESTION: >Shall only those who register to vote be allowed to vote? > > >Thank you for your time and consideration > >The USGenWeb Project Election Committee From ???@??? Wed Mar 20 16:46:46 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA27812 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2002 07:26:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g2KCQ2Cl010611 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2002 07:26:02 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g2KCKBI23504; Wed, 20 Mar 2002 05:20:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 05:20:11 -0700 X-Original-Sender: ky.quest@gte.net Wed Mar 20 05:20:08 2002 Message-ID: <000f01c1d009$909966a0$6501a8c0@Diane> From: "Diane M. Parsons" Old-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020320071414.00d4f350@mail.bright.net> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 07:20:03 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Subject: [BOARD-L] Re: Fwd: Request from the EC Resent-Message-ID: <5IewmB.A.puF.65Hm8@lists5.rootsweb.com> To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/8666 X-Loop: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: BOARD-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: d5d448509ecbcbe4980d817c5dd2009a It is acceptable for me Diane ----- Original Message ----- From: "Holly Timm" To: Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 7:16 AM Subject: [BOARD-L] Fwd: Request from the EC > The EC has sent us several questions they would like addressed. I suggest > that we break them up into separate discussion items. Is that acceptable? > > > >From: "Linda Haas Davenport" > >To: "Holly" > >Subject: Request from the EC > > > >To: The USGenWeb Project Advisory Board > >From; The USGenWeb Election Committee > >Subject: Issues requiring clarification or directives > > > >During the 2001 nomination period and annual election several things came up > >that caused the EC delays and/or problems. To forestall a repeat of last > >year the EC is requesting the AB to review the following items and issue a > >clear directive (or clarification if that is all that is required) to the EC > >on each of these items. It will be very helpful if these issues can be > >resolved before nominations open Jun 1st, 2002 so that the information on > >the EC's web site may be updated and working procedures finalized. > > > >Thank you for your consideration. The EC is prepared to address any > >questions you may have. > > > >The USGenWeb Project Election Committee > >********** > > > >(1) Just prior to the close of nominations 2001, Tim Stowell, submitted a > >nomination for "none of the above". Since "none of the above" did not appear > >to qualify as a volunteer under the USGenWeb By-Laws the Election Committee > >declined the nomination. However, after the election the EC hosted an > >opinion poll and the majority of those responding were in favor of either > >"none of the above" or "abstain" appearing on the ballot of all races. > > > >QUESTIONS: > >(a) Should either of these items appear on the ballot? > >(b) If either is included must the "vote" cast for "none of the above" or > >"abstain" be included in the vote count to determine the 51% majority that a > >candidate must have to win? > > > > > >(2) Tim Stowell has brought up several times that volunteers were not > >allowed to change their vote during the election. At the time of the > >election > >the software was returning unreliable results when multiple votes were cast > >. Larry Stephens thinks he can fix the software to handled multiple votes > >but before he spends the time doing this the EC would like clarification > >from the AB. The consensus of the EC is that volunteers only be allowed to > >vote once. > > > >QUESTION: > >Should volunteers be able to return to the poll and change their vote? > > > > > >(3) The By-Laws include a seat for a representative of the Census > >Project. Prior to and during the nomination period the EC asked the AB what > >to do about the nominations for this seat. The EC's questions did not get > >answered. After the election there was a lot of discussion about the fact > >that "Maggie's" CP volunteer's got to vote and "Ron's" CP volunteer's > >didn't. These two issues need to be resolved. > > > >QUESTIONS: > >(a) What is the AB going to do about the open, unfilled CP Representative > >seat? > >(b) Which Census Project Volunteers are allowed to vote? Both? Neither? > > > > > >(4) During this election there were several two seat races. The EC was told > >that the candidate with the highest vote got the 2 year seat and the runner > >up got the 1 year seat. There were a lot of complaints about this and it was > >pointed out that the By-Laws require a majority decision. After the Election > >was completed the EC discussed this and the consensus was that in the future > >each seat should be treated separately. > > > >QUESTION: > >How should races with 2 seats be handled / determined? > > > >(5) The By-Laws state that every volunteer (excluding those who do only > >look-ups or who only transcribe material) are eligible to vote. During this > >past election the EC included all volunteers of the Special Projects who met > >this criteria. However, we were told to exclude the KS Archive volunteers > >because they did not submit their material to "Linda Lewis'" Archive > >Project. > > > >QUESTION: > >What group of volunteers, if any, are to be excluded from voting? > > > > > >(6) Larry Stephens has requested the EC to post a list of volunteers > >(name only) by Region to the EC website. This will eliminate the majority of > >e-mails he received from volunteers during the last election. A similar > >suggestion was made by a member of the ESC and was voted down. The reason > >given was it would be an invasion of privacy of the volunteer to have their > >name listed. The EC is of the opinion that all volunteers must list their > >names on their web sites and the listing of their names on the EC website > >would not invade anyone's privacy. The EC would appreciate permission from > >the AB to post a membership list. > > > >QUESTION: > >Will the AB allow the EC to post Regional membership lists (name only) on > >the EC website? > > > >(7) This Election Committee is a standing committee and as such maintains > >a year around web site. The EC has the means for a volunteer to Register to > >Vote. The EC spends an unbelievable amount of time and effort trying to get > >membership lists verified, e-mails corrected and dealing with SCs who won't > >send us lists. After every Announce Only mailing the EC ends up with > >hundreds of e-mail addresses that bounce and receives several dozen e-mails > >from members who demand that their name be removed from the membership > >mailing list. The opinion of the EC is that only volunteers who Register to > >vote may vote. > > > >QUESTION: > >Shall only those who register to vote be allowed to vote? > > > > > >Thank you for your time and consideration > > > >The USGenWeb Project Election Committee > > > From ???@??? Sat Mar 30 07:34:37 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA20099 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 2002 00:01:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g2U51iCl012737 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 2002 00:01:45 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g2U51Jj32585; Fri, 29 Mar 2002 22:01:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 22:01:19 -0700 X-Original-Sender: kheidel@tri.net Fri Mar 29 22:01:18 2002 Message-ID: <013301c1d7a8$251fc080$8df499cd@sasnak.net> From: "Kathy Heidel" Old-To: "Board-Exec" Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 23:02:49 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Subject: [Board-Exec] Time out Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1798 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: f0c16e652bc8d1727b67c66bc79d220e I have decided to take the weekend off. I want to spend Easter Weekend with my family. My dau's. B-Day is Sunday also and I need to get ready for that. Plus my employer's B-Day is Monday and I am doing a Flag quilt for him. And on Tues. we are hosting a designer from South Africa at our shop. She is bringing a Trunk Show in and I am really excited to be able to exchange ideas with her. I will check in, but I feel a recess is needed for me to get thoughts back in order, and line up my priorities. Kathy "The world is full of stories, and from time to time they permit themselves to be told." Old Cherokee Saying From ???@??? Sat Mar 30 07:34:37 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA24169 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 2002 00:59:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g2U5xrCl017877 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 2002 00:59:54 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g2U5xLg14103; Fri, 29 Mar 2002 22:59:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 22:59:21 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Fri Mar 29 22:59:20 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Time out Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 21:53:14 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <013301c1d7a8$251fc080$8df499cd@sasnak.net> Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1799 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 109c918b3d637a74e59af68c6eb65960 I too will be mostly "out" and will check mail as is convenient only. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Kathy Heidel [mailto:kheidel@tri.net] Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 9:03 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [Board-Exec] Time out I have decided to take the weekend off. I want to spend Easter Weekend with my family. My dau's. B-Day is Sunday also and I need to get ready for that. Plus my employer's B-Day is Monday and I am doing a Flag quilt for him. And on Tues. we are hosting a designer from South Africa at our shop. She is bringing a Trunk Show in and I am really excited to be able to exchange ideas with her. I will check in, but I feel a recess is needed for me to get thoughts back in order, and line up my priorities. Kathy "The world is full of stories, and from time to time they permit themselves to be told." Old Cherokee Saying From ???@??? Mon Apr 01 06:40:53 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA28582 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 03:06:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3186dCl011845 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 03:06:40 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g31869J12758; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 01:06:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 01:06:09 -0700 X-Original-Sender: tstowell@chattanooga.net Mon Apr 1 01:06:09 2002 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20020401021723.009f6e10@mail.chattanooga.net> X-Sender: foghorn@mail.chattanooga.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 02:17:23 -0500 Old-To: board-exec-l@rootsweb.com From: Tim Stowell Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.2 required=10.0 tests=AWL version=2.11 Subject: [Board-Exec] re: Formal complaint against Teresa Lindquist Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1800 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 6bd864a545f5afc964e1dad5d6d562c6 I don't know about the rest of you but I see no basis for this complaint. >From reading the long post of Mr. Samuelson I read it as follows: - x person donated some files to the Archives in someone else's name, without their knowledge or permission - Mr. Samuelson reported the uploads as he says he regularly does - a complaint was made - an investigation ensued - the files were removed - Mr. Samuelson told the person that at some subsequent time someone else might transcribe the very same records and donate them to the Archives or elsewhere as these were public domain records - Teresa reported the same If I missed something in this scenario would someone be so kind as to point this out? Tim From ???@??? Mon Apr 01 07:25:48 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA13824 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 07:02:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g31C2vCl001330 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 07:02:58 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g31C2Xm10514; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 05:02:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 05:02:33 -0700 X-Original-Sender: usgenweb@cox.net Mon Apr 1 05:02:32 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020401065802.00b507a0@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: usgenweb@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 07:05:55 -0500 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] re: Formal complaint against Teresa Lindquist In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20020401021723.009f6e10@mail.chattanooga.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1801 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 568ef049800c059b03d659edcd771da9 At 02:17 AM 4/1/02 -0500, Tim Stowell wrote: >I don't know about the rest of you but I see no basis for this complaint. I agree there is none. >- Mr. Samuelson told the person that at some subsequent time someone else >might transcribe the very same records and donate them to the Archives or >elsewhere as these were public domain records Actually what he said appears not to have been at all that clear. He apparently wrote something along the lines of 'because she typed from an expired copyright that she was on thin ice'. Janine took that to mean her name could be removed and it could still be placed in the archives. The only real question I have in this regards Archives procedure in that files were submitted to the Archives by this Julie Botts that had Janine Bork's name on them (not the submitter, Julie Botts) but no one checked beforehand to see if Janine had given any permission. Holly From ???@??? Mon Apr 01 18:11:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA24627 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 09:20:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g31EKICl015610 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 09:20:19 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g31EJrS19841; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 07:19:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 07:19:53 -0700 X-Original-Sender: ky.quest@gte.net Mon Apr 1 07:19:52 2002 Message-ID: <002801c1d988$4a4ceea0$6501a8c0@Diane> From: "Diane M. Parsons" Old-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020401065802.00b507a0@pop.east.cox.net> Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 09:19:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Subject: [Board-Exec] re: Formal complaint against Teresa Lindquist Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1802 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 509c3e9d72b8849b04a37226a809ec87 I agree with Holly & Tim, for the most part. What I am having trouble with is the WORDING of this "reporting" in the D.B.S. And I think that this is also what has upset Mr. Samuelson. Archives Escapades Corner: You know that long > periods of silence from the > Archives usually bode no good. We heard today about > a transcriber who > found out that approximately 75 of her > transcriptions regarding > biographies, obits, and newspaper extractions from > Wallowa county, OR had > been "donated" to the USGenWeb Archives (tm) when it DP.. "donated" ?? that quote un-quote could suggest to a gullible reader that Samuelson, or the Archives, may have stolen this info. > was announced by W. > David Samuelsen on an AHGP mailing list. When we > first heard about this > yesterday morning, all items were online and clearly > showed the > transcriber's name and a current copyright. By > yesterday afternoon they > were all removed. As it turns out, someone else > "donated" the records to > the Archives (tm) in the transcriber's name. DP.. again, what would that same gullible reader think here? Looks to me that the writer is suggesting that Samuelson and an Archives person worked together, first to "steal" this info, then to cover their tracks by removing it when this "thief" was uncovered. > Apparently David Samuelsen > told the transcriber that her work was fair game > because the sources from > which she transcribed were in the public domain. DP, Again, read this in our gullible reader's eyes.."Apparently David Samuelsen told the transcriber that her work was fair game" "GEEZE ! ," thinks gullible,"this David Samuelsen starts to sound like a pretty underhanded scoundrel!! Oh My ! But it HAS to be true, because it was printed in this D.B.S. !" > After some casual mention of legal action against USGenWeb, Root$web and Ancestry.con the > misappropriated transcriptions were removed quietly > and without apology by > an Archives staff member. > DP..Again, what is our gullible reader thinking at this point?? " misappropriated transcriptions were removed quietly and without apology by an Archives staff member" The D.B.S. has uncovered another sinster plot and crooked people ! Let me stay away from this David Samuelsen ,Root$web and Ancestry.con and all Archives staff members! Thanks to the diligent reportng of the D.B.S., truth and freedom reigns again ! Is there an apology due here? I know the answer to that, do you? Of course, my thoughts are not for print elsewhere Diane > At 02:17 AM 4/1/02 -0500, Tim Stowell wrote: > >I don't know about the rest of you but I see no basis for this complaint. > > I agree there is none. > > >- Mr. Samuelson told the person that at some subsequent time someone else > >might transcribe the very same records and donate them to the Archives or > >elsewhere as these were public domain records > > Actually what he said appears not to have been at all that clear. He > apparently wrote something along the lines of 'because she typed from an > expired copyright that she was on thin ice'. Janine took that to mean her > name could be removed and it could still be placed in the archives. > > The only real question I have in this regards Archives procedure in that > files were submitted to the Archives by this Julie Botts that had Janine > Bork's name on them (not the submitter, Julie Botts) but no one checked > beforehand to see if Janine had given any permission. > > Holly > > From ???@??? Mon Apr 01 18:11:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA26075 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 14:07:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g31J7vCl024113 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 14:07:58 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g31J7RX27262; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 12:07:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 12:07:27 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Mon Apr 1 12:07:27 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] re: Formal complaint against Teresa Lindquist Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 10:54:31 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.20020401021723.009f6e10@mail.chattanooga.net> Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1803 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: f4d536290b3ef8bc382afb2440230e5a I agree with Tim's assessment up to where he says "- Teresa reported the same" - she did not "report same" she turned something that was black and white into a full colored image that omitted the *whole* truth. I do think Mr. Samuelsen has a basis for his complaint! 1) did Ms. Lindquist use ethical journalism standards when she "heard about a transcriber" and contact Mr. Samuelsen to tell him what information she had and to ask for his side of the story before she reported? NO 2) did Ms. Lindquist preface what she wrote saying that "it was reported to her but unconfirmed"? NO 3) did Ms. Lindquist also report that once the error was found, it was quickly corrected? NO A journalist has an obligation to check out the facts before a report is made.... did Ms. Lindquist do so? NO Did Ms. Lindquist say she had no input from the accused? NO. Instead, Ms. Lindquist, who is also RAL in this Project added innuendo in the WAY she wrote her report that cast aspersion on Mr. Samuelsen's good name. This is irresponsible journalism and certainly not in the best interests of the USGW Project!!! Using quotation marks around the word "donated" suggests a lie. In fact, the files *were* donated and Ms. Lindquist *should* clarify that she has since learned that the truth of what transpired was a misunderstanding and a technical mistake in which Mr. Samuelsen was an innocent party. Ms. Lindquist should clarify the truth by including the *facts* regarding what Penny has said was done as soon as the error was discovered. Good grief, how much damage was done in the short time those files were online compared to the damage done to Mr. Samuelsen's reputation???? Now. Mr. Samuelsen will have the dubious honor of having his name forever in the archives of the DBS for anyone to use to look to from here on out. He has every reason to be upset!!! Lastly, where is the back-up for the suggestion that "legal action" was raised? Ms. Lindquist needs to provide it or retract it. From what I read, there was no such thing. Add to this the fact that Ms. Lindquist also wears the hat of Project RAL and now, the AB *is* involved! It is not appropriate for the AB to allow one of its elected members to use such unethical techniques on reporting what goes on in the Project. You can argue that Lewis' Archives stand on their own, however, we have still aligned ourselves with them. Until such time comes when we sever that tie, the AB is involved in anything involving same. I do think, at the very least, if Ms. Lindquist has an ethical bone in her journalistic body that she must at least offer a correction and an apology to Mr. Samuelsen in her next DBS. And, what I say here is explicitly NOT to be recorded in any way in the DBS, including mentioning that I even made a post to EXEC. Jana Black From ???@??? Mon Apr 01 18:11:12 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11945 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 16:25:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g31LPqCl012544 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 16:25:53 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g31LP7M19722; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 14:25:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 14:25:07 -0700 X-Original-Sender: pamreid@comcast.net Mon Apr 1 14:25:06 2002 Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 16:24:00 -0500 From: Pam Reid Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] re: Formal complaint against Teresa Lindquist In-reply-to: <002801c1d988$4a4ceea0$6501a8c0@Diane> Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1804 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 58658d0e3de1332fdfba62accee3da7f I agree with Diane. Reporting facts isn't the issue. Editorial comments like the ones under the heading of "Archives Excapades" are offensive, IMO. Those kinds of comments put the rest of the report in a negative light and that is uncalled for. Pam -----Original Message----- From: Diane M. Parsons [mailto:ky.quest@gte.net] Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 9:20 AM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [Board-Exec] re: Formal complaint against Teresa Lindquist I agree with Holly & Tim, for the most part. What I am having trouble with is the WORDING of this "reporting" in the D.B.S. And I think that this is also what has upset Mr. Samuelson. Archives Escapades Corner: You know that long > periods of silence from the > Archives usually bode no good. We heard today about > a transcriber who > found out that approximately 75 of her > transcriptions regarding > biographies, obits, and newspaper extractions from > Wallowa county, OR had > been "donated" to the USGenWeb Archives (tm) when it DP.. "donated" ?? that quote un-quote could suggest to a gullible reader that Samuelson, or the Archives, may have stolen this info. > was announced by W. > David Samuelsen on an AHGP mailing list. When we > first heard about this > yesterday morning, all items were online and clearly > showed the > transcriber's name and a current copyright. By > yesterday afternoon they > were all removed. As it turns out, someone else > "donated" the records to > the Archives (tm) in the transcriber's name. DP.. again, what would that same gullible reader think here? Looks to me that the writer is suggesting that Samuelson and an Archives person worked together, first to "steal" this info, then to cover their tracks by removing it when this "thief" was uncovered. > Apparently David Samuelsen > told the transcriber that her work was fair game > because the sources from > which she transcribed were in the public domain. DP, Again, read this in our gullible reader's eyes.."Apparently David Samuelsen told the transcriber that her work was fair game" "GEEZE ! ," thinks gullible,"this David Samuelsen starts to sound like a pretty underhanded scoundrel!! Oh My ! But it HAS to be true, because it was printed in this D.B.S. !" > After some casual mention of legal action against USGenWeb, Root$web and Ancestry.con the > misappropriated transcriptions were removed quietly > and without apology by > an Archives staff member. > DP..Again, what is our gullible reader thinking at this point?? " misappropriated transcriptions were removed quietly and without apology by an Archives staff member" The D.B.S. has uncovered another sinster plot and crooked people ! Let me stay away from this David Samuelsen ,Root$web and Ancestry.con and all Archives staff members! Thanks to the diligent reportng of the D.B.S., truth and freedom reigns again ! Is there an apology due here? I know the answer to that, do you? Of course, my thoughts are not for print elsewhere Diane > At 02:17 AM 4/1/02 -0500, Tim Stowell wrote: > >I don't know about the rest of you but I see no basis for this complaint. > > I agree there is none. > > >- Mr. Samuelson told the person that at some subsequent time someone else > >might transcribe the very same records and donate them to the Archives or > >elsewhere as these were public domain records > > Actually what he said appears not to have been at all that clear. He > apparently wrote something along the lines of 'because she typed from an > expired copyright that she was on thin ice'. Janine took that to mean her > name could be removed and it could still be placed in the archives. > > The only real question I have in this regards Archives procedure in that > files were submitted to the Archives by this Julie Botts that had Janine > Bork's name on them (not the submitter, Julie Botts) but no one checked > beforehand to see if Janine had given any permission. > > Holly > > From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 05:59:02 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10308 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 21:05:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g32253Cl019175 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 21:05:04 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3224MG13093; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 19:04:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 19:04:22 -0700 X-Original-Sender: TVick65536@aol.com Mon Apr 1 19:04:22 2002 From: TVick65536@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 21:03:50 EST Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] re: Formal complaint against Teresa Lindquist Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1805 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: f06d7f32de6ca512fa2cb933ab7471e1 Teresa, you summarize well, you present project business well. My malfunction with you has always been your tone. You do yourself, and the project, a great disservice with the DBS as it is presented. I have personally witnessed your contribution to the project. Your articulation of issues is appreciated and extraordinary. Talking out of both sides of your pen, playing both sides and in the middle, is what most of us (I dare say), have an issue with in regard to the DBS. I am not sure at this point in your tenure with USGenWeb, if you can make the distinction of productive Vs nonproductive, but I'll bet my bottom dollar that you know exactly what you are doing, and I would encourage productive. Much more engaging to all of us, and much more beneficial to the project. IMHO. Tina From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 05:59:02 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA10873 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 21:12:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g322CSCl020223 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 21:12:29 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g322BqT20572; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 19:11:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 19:11:52 -0700 X-Original-Sender: kheidel@tri.net Mon Apr 1 19:11:52 2002 Message-ID: <000b01c1d9eb$f4b30740$87f499cd@sasnak.net> From: "Kathy Heidel" Old-To: "Board-Exec" Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 20:13:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Subject: [Board-Exec] Teresa Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1806 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 2c9e4d7723c1cee8e22667895c96ad43 Teresa, I have repeatedly asked you to refrain from using my name on your DBS, and you ignore me. I have seen you repeatedly in the DBS describe that I am unable to understand situations and meanings. I take that to mean that I am stupid. I am not. And I am not the only person to ask you to not write about me or what I have said. You do not care about how you are hurting others and these "Newsletters" of yours remain in the Yahoo Archives for many, many people to read whether they receive your DBS or not. The object of your DBS for you is to distort, and twist what we say, and to disrupt. Your columns tiptoe on and frequently cross the line by inferring that the members of the AB, but excluding you, are violating trust and other ethics of the membership. I believe that after reading the Yahoo TOS where your DBS Newsletter resides that Yahoo Customer Care should and will be contacted. I am tired of begging and posturing myself for your benefit. W. David Samuelson deserves better and he spends hours working for our Project and for him to be treated like you have is disgraceful. If you continue to use my name or anything written about or by me on your DBS I will contact Yahoo or whatever server you use and see to it that you stop. If anyone else is interested in the Terms of Service on Yahoo you are free to follow this link: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Scroll down to # 6. Member Content. No one has permission to use this email in any way, shape, or form. Sincerely, Kathy Heidel "The world is full of stories, and from time to time they permit themselves to be told." Old Cherokee Saying From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 18:57:38 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15388 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 10:53:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g32FrSCl018933 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 10:53:28 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g32FqeG08398; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 08:52:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 08:52:40 -0700 X-Original-Sender: wchs@getgoin.net Tue Apr 2 08:52:39 2002 Message-ID: <005101c1da5d$d45a83c0$4a28c141@wchs> From: "Phyllis Rippee" Old-To: Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 09:48:26 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Declude-Spoolname: Dd32957f6005a750b.SMD Subject: [Board-Exec] Teresa Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1807 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: cdf382b364520cae756330e9f1151d74 Since Teresa refuses to use this list, just how much attention is she going to pay to any of our requests. But, for the record: Teresa, do not ever use anything that I say in your DBS. Do not speculate on my motives for saying what I do and you do not have permission to use this. Phyllis From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 18:57:38 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03826 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 13:37:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g32IbXCl012635 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 13:37:34 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g32Iax731262; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 11:36:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 11:36:59 -0700 X-Original-Sender: IsaiahHarrison@cs.com Tue Apr 2 11:36:58 2002 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020402095246.00a01840@imap.cs.com> X-Sender: IsaiahHarrison@imap.cs.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 10:29:53 -0800 Old-To: board-exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Richard Harrison Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Apparently-From: IsaiahHarrison@cs.com Subject: [Board-Exec] The DBS Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1808 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 01242b95e9fd67bae64d81c3b04c34c9 The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied. It is well and good to express our displeasure at the excesses of Teresa Lindquist and the Daily Board Show, but what is anyone willing to do about it? It is highly inappropriate for one member of an organization, especially an elected Board member, to treat other members with the degree of discourtesy, disrespect, dirision, contempt that Ms. Lindquist has shown toward Mr. Samuelson and toward many other members of this organization. It is unlikely she will respond to our disapproval and withdraw and apologize. Similar matters regarding Ms. Lindquist have been discussed on this list in the past. The conclusion has been "She thrives on attention. Ignore her and she will go away." She hasn't. Are we will in to take action at this time? Are her actions so serious and have they been repeated enough times that we are willing to officially reprimand her and then to suspend/expel her from the Board and from the organization if she will not withdraw her statements and apologize. -Isaiah The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied. From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 18:57:38 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA13477 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 15:09:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g32K9UCl025609 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 15:09:31 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g32K94A21720; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 13:09:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 13:09:04 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Tue Apr 2 13:09:04 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 11:32:07 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020402095246.00a01840@imap.cs.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1809 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 71f4959d1eb4c0d5ae19fa855ec8b844 ***The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied including mention of it in a count of how many posts were made by whom.*** Fellow AB Members, I agree with Isaiah. One would think that by expressing our opinions on this subject repeatedly and consistently as so many of us have over the term of this AB year, that we were moving towards *doing* something to change the way our own RAL published responsibly in the DBS. One would think that by having access to what she has called the "secret lists" the RAL would have learned that what we post here is reputable and honest in intent and does not include any manipulation to subvert the Project as she has suggested in the past. One could even dream that the RAL might offer positive comment in the DBS.... one might dream.... However, it has been quite evident that our NC sees little merit in what so many of us have said but and chooses to instead "protect" the RAL *from* us. Therefore, the RAL apparently has a unique license to do say whatever she wants to say and do whatever she wants to do whenever she wants to do it, without any consequences, all because the RAL says she "reserves the right." It does not matter what the RAL says or that she baits people, nor does it matter when what she does turns people away from the Project in disgust. Naturally, the (heaven forbid) *feelings* of earnest hard working well intended fellow board members are unimportant as well. And, this behavior is not limited to AB members... anyone in the Project is fair game. In the present instance a relatively simple error was reported as an attempt to "grab or steal" data. Immediate responsiveness to complaint regarding the error or immediate correction/resolution of the error goes unreported. Teresa *gets* to take what Project members say out of context, twist it and tweak it until it looks pretty rotten and then *gets* to publish the results in in a way that offers no recourse for victims nor any accountability or correction from her. It all but guarantees negative impressions will be cast. No wonder we have so few stepping forward to volunteer. Of 9 AB members who have responded with comments on Mr. Samuelsen's complaint, 7 have taken issue with the *way* Ms. Lindquist operates and called for retraction, correction, clarification and/or apology. But once again, the NC is silent, apparently ignoring the voices of her board or treating their opinions as unimportant. Gee, do you wonder why many feel frustrated and get nothing done?? Do you wonder why we are seeing progressively less and less participation from AB members???? One would hope that the NC *has* listened to those of us who have spoken up before and will not allow herself to be used as an intermediary for the RAL to post messages. One would hope the NC will demonstrate leadership and insist that the RAL take personal responsibility and post on EXEC if she has anything to say in her own defense or go unheard. One would hope that *if* the RAL in_any_way_ makes mention of any discussion taking place here this week in the DBS especially without addressing us herself here in this forum, that the NC would bump the RAL off the EXEC list (including the RAL posting a count of posts and who made them). Do I think the NC will do any of this or take action? NO. I would say it is not the egregiousness of any one transgression that is our issue but rather the baseless unproved repetitions of disrespect, etc. shown over and over by an AB member that should earn the RAL suspension/expulsion. I can agree to give the RAL "one more chance" to demonstrate a change in her attitude by waiting to see if she prints retraction, correction, clarification and/or apology in this week's DBS. Otherwise, I will certainly be willing to add my name to the list of AB members who determine we have no alternative other than to suspend/expel the RAL from the Board and from the organization. And I will state my reasons for choosing to do so publicly on my own. As I have said many times, it is not my preference to suspend or expel Teresa Lindquist. I have stated before and will state again that I believe the RAL has an excellent mind and can be a *huge* asset to this Project when she decides to work *for* the Project rather than to undermine it with irresponsible techniques. Many times I have agreed with the RAL and I would like the chance to work with her. But the choice is up to Teresa Lindquist. I completely agree with Tina that the RAL knows exactly what she is doing. At this point, it is my opinion the RAL needs to decide what is more important to her, productive work within the Project or playing non-productive games with people's reputations in the DBS. But I am just one of nine (so far) and if things go as usual, I will be either lambasted or ignored - shrug. Jana Black -----Original Message----- From: Richard Harrison [mailto:IsaiahHarrison@cs.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 10:30 AM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [Board-Exec] The DBS It is well and good to express our displeasure at the excesses of Teresa Lindquist and the Daily Board Show, but what is anyone willing to do about it? It is highly inappropriate for one member of an organization, especially an elected Board member, to treat other members with the degree of discourtesy, disrespect, dirision, contempt that Ms. Lindquist has shown toward Mr. Samuelson and toward many other members of this organization. It is unlikely she will respond to our disapproval and withdraw and apologize. Similar matters regarding Ms. Lindquist have been discussed on this list in the past. The conclusion has been "She thrives on attention. Ignore her and she will go away." She hasn't. Are we will in to take action at this time? Are her actions so serious and have they been repeated enough times that we are willing to officially reprimand her and then to suspend/expel her from the Board and from the organization if she will not withdraw her statements and apologize. -Isaiah The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied. From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 18:57:39 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18086 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 15:51:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g32KphCl001740 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 15:51:43 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g32Koxw12680; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 13:50:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 13:50:59 -0700 X-Original-Sender: wchs@getgoin.net Tue Apr 2 13:50:59 2002 Message-ID: <002701c1da87$82ed1460$d3967a3f@wchs> From: "Phyllis Rippee" Old-To: Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 14:46:13 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Declude-Spoolname: D19170e6a025c9edb.SMD Subject: [Board-Exec] The DBS Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1810 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 4af017daf6f1bd8a60af3d594f45795a This, in total, or in part, may not be quoted anywhere else. Not even that I posted to this list. Dirty Back Stabber There is no other term that "fits". However, I will state that what you CAN expect from the National Coordinator is not the hoped for results of reprimanding the R.A.L. in any way. What you can expect is to be placed on "moderated" and your posts, even to this list, will be made known to other Advisory Board members ONLY if you cease and desist in making critical remarks about the "pet." It is sad that in this organization, only one member is entitled to absolute freedom of speech. Even when that speech misrepresents the truth and not only casts the Advisory Board members, but the whole Project in the worst possible light. Teresa does it because "It's fun!" It is a game to her. She scores points in her game, when someone chooses to reply to her. Well, she must be the all time champion based on the number of "points" that she has scored from our responses today. If anyone can get anything done about her, I'll back you up 100%. Phyllis From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 18:57:39 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA14522 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:19:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g32NJFCl022352 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:19:16 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g32NIio06412; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:18:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:18:44 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Tue Apr 2 16:18:44 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 14:35:03 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <002b01c1da99$8f0f98a0$0101a8c0@pavilion> Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1813 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: fffe79b855e81da7965f6f16b096309d No Ginger, I am not going to get into this kind of conversation with you. To do so would be to disclose information you have no right to as it occurred before you were on the AB. Take as proof that several of us are saying the same thing. As "new kid" you are going to have to trust. Jana -----Original Message----- From: GingerH [mailto:gingerh@shawneelink.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 2:56 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS ****The use of this message in any count of posts in the DBS or elsewhere is solely at the discretion of whoever reads it. When I reach the point where I am so afraid someone will quotem, or summarize, what I say elsewhere then I will stop posting. If I am misquoted or or my words twisted beyone what I said then I either did not express myself clearly, or the person misusing my words has a problem ..... and that is exactly what it is,....their problem***** Please explain how the NC is protecting the RAL, thereby giving the RAL a "unique license" to do whatever she wants. Please be specific. You are making a serious charge against the NC and I would hope you have some proof of this "protection". Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana Black" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 1:32 PM Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > ***The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied > including mention of it in a count of how many posts were made by whom.*** > > Fellow AB Members, > > I agree with Isaiah. One would think that by expressing our opinions on this > subject repeatedly and consistently as so many of us have over the term of > this AB year, that we were moving towards *doing* something to change the > way our own RAL published responsibly in the DBS. One would think that by > having access to what she has called the "secret lists" the RAL would have > learned that what we post here is reputable and honest in intent and does > not include any manipulation to subvert the Project as she has suggested in > the past. One could even dream that the RAL might offer positive comment in > the DBS.... one might dream.... > > However, it has been quite evident that our NC sees little merit in what so > many of us have said but and chooses to instead "protect" the RAL *from* us. > Therefore, the RAL apparently has a unique license to do say whatever she > wants to say and do whatever she wants to do whenever she wants to do it, > without any consequences, all because the RAL says she "reserves the right." > It does not matter what the RAL says or that she baits people, nor does it > matter when what she does turns people away from the Project in disgust. > Naturally, the (heaven forbid) *feelings* of earnest hard working well > intended fellow board members are unimportant as well. And, this behavior is > not limited to AB members... anyone in the Project is fair game. In the > present instance a relatively simple error was reported as an attempt to > "grab or steal" data. Immediate responsiveness to complaint regarding the > error or immediate correction/resolution of the error goes unreported. > Teresa *gets* to take what Project members say out of context, twist it and > tweak it until it looks pretty rotten and then *gets* to publish the results > in in a way that offers no recourse for victims nor any accountability or > correction from her. It all but guarantees negative impressions will be > cast. No wonder we have so few stepping forward to volunteer. > > Of 9 AB members who have responded with comments on Mr. Samuelsen's > complaint, 7 have taken issue with the *way* Ms. Lindquist operates and > called for retraction, correction, clarification and/or apology. But once > again, the NC is silent, apparently ignoring the voices of her board or > treating their opinions as unimportant. Gee, do you wonder why many feel > frustrated and get nothing done?? Do you wonder why we are seeing > progressively less and less participation from AB members???? > > One would hope that the NC *has* listened to those of us who have spoken up > before and will not allow herself to be used as an intermediary for the RAL > to post messages. One would hope the NC will demonstrate leadership and > insist that the RAL take personal responsibility and post on EXEC if she has > anything to say in her own defense or go unheard. One would hope that *if* > the RAL in_any_way_ makes mention of any discussion taking place here this > week in the DBS especially without addressing us herself here in this forum, > that the NC would bump the RAL off the EXEC list (including the RAL posting > a count of posts and who made them). Do I think the NC will do any of this > or take action? NO. > > I would say it is not the egregiousness of any one transgression that is our > issue but rather the baseless unproved repetitions of disrespect, etc. shown > over and over by an AB member that should earn the RAL suspension/expulsion. > I can agree to give the RAL "one more chance" to demonstrate a change in her > attitude by waiting to see if she prints retraction, correction, > clarification and/or apology in this week's DBS. Otherwise, I will certainly > be willing to add my name to the list of AB members who determine we have no > alternative other than to suspend/expel the RAL from the Board and from the > organization. And I will state my reasons for choosing to do so publicly on > my own. > > As I have said many times, it is not my preference to suspend or expel > Teresa Lindquist. I have stated before and will state again that I believe > the RAL has an excellent mind and can be a *huge* asset to this Project when > she decides to work *for* the Project rather than to undermine it with > irresponsible techniques. Many times I have agreed with the RAL and I would > like the chance to work with her. But the choice is up to Teresa Lindquist. > I completely agree with Tina that the RAL knows exactly what she is doing. > At this point, it is my opinion the RAL needs to decide what is more > important to her, productive work within the Project or playing > non-productive games with people's reputations in the DBS. > > But I am just one of nine (so far) and if things go as usual, I will be > either lambasted or ignored - shrug. > > Jana Black > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Harrison [mailto:IsaiahHarrison@cs.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 10:30 AM > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > > It is well and good to express our displeasure at the excesses of Teresa > Lindquist and the Daily Board Show, but what is anyone willing to do about > it? > > It is highly inappropriate for one member of an organization, especially an > elected Board member, to treat other members with the degree of > discourtesy, disrespect, dirision, contempt that Ms. Lindquist has shown > toward Mr. Samuelson and toward many other members of this organization. It > is unlikely she will respond to our disapproval and withdraw and apologize. > > Similar matters regarding Ms. Lindquist have been discussed on this list in > the past. The conclusion has been "She thrives on attention. Ignore her and > she will go away." She hasn't. > > Are we will in to take action at this time? Are her actions so serious and > have they been repeated enough times that we are willing to officially > reprimand her and then to suspend/expel her from the Board and from the > organization if she will not withdraw her statements and apologize. > > -Isaiah > > The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied. > From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 18:57:39 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA12645 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:00:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g32N0hCl019601 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:00:44 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g32N0Fq22507; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:00:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:00:15 -0700 X-Original-Sender: gingerh@shawneelink.com Tue Apr 2 16:00:15 2002 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 16:55:59 -0600 From: GingerH Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-id: <002b01c1da99$8f0f98a0$0101a8c0@pavilion> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1811 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: f7ec5a73273e0a625a451ec0a4df1ba2 ****The use of this message in any count of posts in the DBS or elsewhere is solely at the discretion of whoever reads it. When I reach the point where I am so afraid someone will quotem, or summarize, what I say elsewhere then I will stop posting. If I am misquoted or or my words twisted beyone what I said then I either did not express myself clearly, or the person misusing my words has a problem ..... and that is exactly what it is,....their problem***** Please explain how the NC is protecting the RAL, thereby giving the RAL a "unique license" to do whatever she wants. Please be specific. You are making a serious charge against the NC and I would hope you have some proof of this "protection". Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana Black" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 1:32 PM Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > ***The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied > including mention of it in a count of how many posts were made by whom.*** > > Fellow AB Members, > > I agree with Isaiah. One would think that by expressing our opinions on this > subject repeatedly and consistently as so many of us have over the term of > this AB year, that we were moving towards *doing* something to change the > way our own RAL published responsibly in the DBS. One would think that by > having access to what she has called the "secret lists" the RAL would have > learned that what we post here is reputable and honest in intent and does > not include any manipulation to subvert the Project as she has suggested in > the past. One could even dream that the RAL might offer positive comment in > the DBS.... one might dream.... > > However, it has been quite evident that our NC sees little merit in what so > many of us have said but and chooses to instead "protect" the RAL *from* us. > Therefore, the RAL apparently has a unique license to do say whatever she > wants to say and do whatever she wants to do whenever she wants to do it, > without any consequences, all because the RAL says she "reserves the right." > It does not matter what the RAL says or that she baits people, nor does it > matter when what she does turns people away from the Project in disgust. > Naturally, the (heaven forbid) *feelings* of earnest hard working well > intended fellow board members are unimportant as well. And, this behavior is > not limited to AB members... anyone in the Project is fair game. In the > present instance a relatively simple error was reported as an attempt to > "grab or steal" data. Immediate responsiveness to complaint regarding the > error or immediate correction/resolution of the error goes unreported. > Teresa *gets* to take what Project members say out of context, twist it and > tweak it until it looks pretty rotten and then *gets* to publish the results > in in a way that offers no recourse for victims nor any accountability or > correction from her. It all but guarantees negative impressions will be > cast. No wonder we have so few stepping forward to volunteer. > > Of 9 AB members who have responded with comments on Mr. Samuelsen's > complaint, 7 have taken issue with the *way* Ms. Lindquist operates and > called for retraction, correction, clarification and/or apology. But once > again, the NC is silent, apparently ignoring the voices of her board or > treating their opinions as unimportant. Gee, do you wonder why many feel > frustrated and get nothing done?? Do you wonder why we are seeing > progressively less and less participation from AB members???? > > One would hope that the NC *has* listened to those of us who have spoken up > before and will not allow herself to be used as an intermediary for the RAL > to post messages. One would hope the NC will demonstrate leadership and > insist that the RAL take personal responsibility and post on EXEC if she has > anything to say in her own defense or go unheard. One would hope that *if* > the RAL in_any_way_ makes mention of any discussion taking place here this > week in the DBS especially without addressing us herself here in this forum, > that the NC would bump the RAL off the EXEC list (including the RAL posting > a count of posts and who made them). Do I think the NC will do any of this > or take action? NO. > > I would say it is not the egregiousness of any one transgression that is our > issue but rather the baseless unproved repetitions of disrespect, etc. shown > over and over by an AB member that should earn the RAL suspension/expulsion. > I can agree to give the RAL "one more chance" to demonstrate a change in her > attitude by waiting to see if she prints retraction, correction, > clarification and/or apology in this week's DBS. Otherwise, I will certainly > be willing to add my name to the list of AB members who determine we have no > alternative other than to suspend/expel the RAL from the Board and from the > organization. And I will state my reasons for choosing to do so publicly on > my own. > > As I have said many times, it is not my preference to suspend or expel > Teresa Lindquist. I have stated before and will state again that I believe > the RAL has an excellent mind and can be a *huge* asset to this Project when > she decides to work *for* the Project rather than to undermine it with > irresponsible techniques. Many times I have agreed with the RAL and I would > like the chance to work with her. But the choice is up to Teresa Lindquist. > I completely agree with Tina that the RAL knows exactly what she is doing. > At this point, it is my opinion the RAL needs to decide what is more > important to her, productive work within the Project or playing > non-productive games with people's reputations in the DBS. > > But I am just one of nine (so far) and if things go as usual, I will be > either lambasted or ignored - shrug. > > Jana Black > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Harrison [mailto:IsaiahHarrison@cs.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 10:30 AM > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > > It is well and good to express our displeasure at the excesses of Teresa > Lindquist and the Daily Board Show, but what is anyone willing to do about > it? > > It is highly inappropriate for one member of an organization, especially an > elected Board member, to treat other members with the degree of > discourtesy, disrespect, dirision, contempt that Ms. Lindquist has shown > toward Mr. Samuelson and toward many other members of this organization. It > is unlikely she will respond to our disapproval and withdraw and apologize. > > Similar matters regarding Ms. Lindquist have been discussed on this list in > the past. The conclusion has been "She thrives on attention. Ignore her and > she will go away." She hasn't. > > Are we will in to take action at this time? Are her actions so serious and > have they been repeated enough times that we are willing to officially > reprimand her and then to suspend/expel her from the Board and from the > organization if she will not withdraw her statements and apologize. > > -Isaiah > > The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied. > From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 18:57:39 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA13119 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:03:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g32N3PCl020154 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:03:26 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g32N2x115630; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:02:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:02:59 -0700 X-Original-Sender: usgenweb@cox.net Tue Apr 2 16:02:59 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020402171909.00bf5560@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: usgenweb@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 18:06:24 -0500 Old-To: board-exec-l@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1812 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 9e8e68a95d1cfe37830b78dacb742fac Not one of you has been chastised or even spoken to about anything said outside the Board lists. After a warning to all of you one person was moderated for a couple of days for rudeness on Board-L and he continues to choose not to post at all. Yet several of you sit there and make assumptions about me based on nothing but pure conjecture. Some of you busily write to each other and to small groups of others some outrageous slurs and insinuations (you think some of those haven't been shared with me? ...think again). This group has deteriorated into a bunch of children who vote for and against things not because of the merit of the item but because of who made it or supports it and who delight in taking jabs at me and thwarting every attempt at progress out of spite and retaliation no matter what innocent bystanders (such as Alice Gayley) get clobbered in the meantime. If Teresa is rude or personally insulting on Board-L she will get the same treatment as anyone else. If any or all of you are tacky or insulting on -ALL or other venues, that's your right. I have no authority over your behavior off the official lists unless you speak specifically for the Board as a whole, not just for yourself. No, I do not like nor have I ever liked the way Teresa reports things in the DBS and I have probably come in for more insults and misrepresentations there than any one of you on this Board. If she steps over the line she is walking on reporting action on Exec by reporting more than the number etc of messages, I will remove her from this list but I will not censor anyone of you off the official Board lists. On the Board list I will censor behavior. If this Board wishes to censor speech outside of the Board list then by all means make a motion to do so. You have been invited before to make motions in regard to Teresa but have yet to do so but beware of censorship, it is a two edged sword. Two or three of you are basically silent, another two or three primarily address issues and are able to move on, agreeing to disagree when you don't get your way. To this small minority, I apologize for the above, it is not directed towards you but to the controlling remainder of this board who care less about this project than they do about their own ego's. Frankly, I am sick of watching the pots call the kettle black. Holly From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 18:57:39 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA16871 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:44:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g32NiKCl025777 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:44:20 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g32Nhob10914; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:43:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:43:50 -0700 X-Original-Sender: gingerh@shawneelink.com Tue Apr 2 16:43:49 2002 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 17:39:36 -0600 From: GingerH Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-id: <000b01c1da9f$a785bee0$0101a8c0@pavilion> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: Resent-Message-ID: <0ZIVtB.A.TqC.2Ikq8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1814 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 320ba97c7e71735f771ec3a5b3175394 Ok, so it's ok for you cast aspersions and not offer any proof. Isn't that what you're accusing the RAL of? Several of you saying it does not constitute proof. I may be the "new kid", as you so kindly put it, but I wasn't born yesterday. Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana Black" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:35 PM Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > No Ginger, I am not going to get into this kind of conversation with you. To > do so would be to disclose information you have no right to as it occurred > before you were on the AB. Take as proof that several of us are saying the > same thing. As "new kid" you are going to have to trust. > > Jana > > -----Original Message----- > From: GingerH [mailto:gingerh@shawneelink.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 2:56 PM > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > ****The use of this message in any count of posts > in the DBS or elsewhere is solely at the discretion > of whoever reads it. When I reach the point where I > am so afraid someone will quotem, or summarize, what > I say elsewhere then I will stop posting. If I am > misquoted or or my words twisted beyone what I said > then I either did not express myself clearly, or the person > misusing my words has a problem ..... and that is exactly > what it is,....their problem***** > > Please explain how the NC is protecting the > RAL, thereby giving the RAL a "unique license" > to do whatever she wants. Please be specific. > You are making a serious charge against the NC > and I would hope you have some proof of this > "protection". > > Ginger > gingerh@shawneelink.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jana Black" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 1:32 PM > Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > ***The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied > > including mention of it in a count of how many posts were made by whom.*** > > > > Fellow AB Members, > > > > I agree with Isaiah. One would think that by expressing our opinions on > this > > subject repeatedly and consistently as so many of us have over the term of > > this AB year, that we were moving towards *doing* something to change the > > way our own RAL published responsibly in the DBS. One would think that by > > having access to what she has called the "secret lists" the RAL would have > > learned that what we post here is reputable and honest in intent and does > > not include any manipulation to subvert the Project as she has suggested > in > > the past. One could even dream that the RAL might offer positive comment > in > > the DBS.... one might dream.... > > > > However, it has been quite evident that our NC sees little merit in what > so > > many of us have said but and chooses to instead "protect" the RAL *from* > us. > > Therefore, the RAL apparently has a unique license to do say whatever she > > wants to say and do whatever she wants to do whenever she wants to do it, > > without any consequences, all because the RAL says she "reserves the > right." > > It does not matter what the RAL says or that she baits people, nor does it > > matter when what she does turns people away from the Project in disgust. > > Naturally, the (heaven forbid) *feelings* of earnest hard working well > > intended fellow board members are unimportant as well. And, this behavior > is > > not limited to AB members... anyone in the Project is fair game. In the > > present instance a relatively simple error was reported as an attempt to > > "grab or steal" data. Immediate responsiveness to complaint regarding the > > error or immediate correction/resolution of the error goes unreported. > > Teresa *gets* to take what Project members say out of context, twist it > and > > tweak it until it looks pretty rotten and then *gets* to publish the > results > > in in a way that offers no recourse for victims nor any accountability or > > correction from her. It all but guarantees negative impressions will be > > cast. No wonder we have so few stepping forward to volunteer. > > > > Of 9 AB members who have responded with comments on Mr. Samuelsen's > > complaint, 7 have taken issue with the *way* Ms. Lindquist operates and > > called for retraction, correction, clarification and/or apology. But once > > again, the NC is silent, apparently ignoring the voices of her board or > > treating their opinions as unimportant. Gee, do you wonder why many feel > > frustrated and get nothing done?? Do you wonder why we are seeing > > progressively less and less participation from AB members???? > > > > One would hope that the NC *has* listened to those of us who have spoken > up > > before and will not allow herself to be used as an intermediary for the > RAL > > to post messages. One would hope the NC will demonstrate leadership and > > insist that the RAL take personal responsibility and post on EXEC if she > has > > anything to say in her own defense or go unheard. One would hope that *if* > > the RAL in_any_way_ makes mention of any discussion taking place here this > > week in the DBS especially without addressing us herself here in this > forum, > > that the NC would bump the RAL off the EXEC list (including the RAL > posting > > a count of posts and who made them). Do I think the NC will do any of this > > or take action? NO. > > > > I would say it is not the egregiousness of any one transgression that is > our > > issue but rather the baseless unproved repetitions of disrespect, etc. > shown > > over and over by an AB member that should earn the RAL > suspension/expulsion. > > I can agree to give the RAL "one more chance" to demonstrate a change in > her > > attitude by waiting to see if she prints retraction, correction, > > clarification and/or apology in this week's DBS. Otherwise, I will > certainly > > be willing to add my name to the list of AB members who determine we have > no > > alternative other than to suspend/expel the RAL from the Board and from > the > > organization. And I will state my reasons for choosing to do so publicly > on > > my own. > > > > As I have said many times, it is not my preference to suspend or expel > > Teresa Lindquist. I have stated before and will state again that I believe > > the RAL has an excellent mind and can be a *huge* asset to this Project > when > > she decides to work *for* the Project rather than to undermine it with > > irresponsible techniques. Many times I have agreed with the RAL and I > would > > like the chance to work with her. But the choice is up to Teresa > Lindquist. > > I completely agree with Tina that the RAL knows exactly what she is doing. > > At this point, it is my opinion the RAL needs to decide what is more > > important to her, productive work within the Project or playing > > non-productive games with people's reputations in the DBS. > > > > But I am just one of nine (so far) and if things go as usual, I will be > > either lambasted or ignored - shrug. > > > > Jana Black > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Richard Harrison [mailto:IsaiahHarrison@cs.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 10:30 AM > > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > > > > > > > It is well and good to express our displeasure at the excesses of Teresa > > Lindquist and the Daily Board Show, but what is anyone willing to do about > > it? > > > > It is highly inappropriate for one member of an organization, especially > an > > elected Board member, to treat other members with the degree of > > discourtesy, disrespect, dirision, contempt that Ms. Lindquist has shown > > toward Mr. Samuelson and toward many other members of this organization. > It > > is unlikely she will respond to our disapproval and withdraw and > apologize. > > > > Similar matters regarding Ms. Lindquist have been discussed on this list > in > > the past. The conclusion has been "She thrives on attention. Ignore her > and > > she will go away." She hasn't. > > > > Are we will in to take action at this time? Are her actions so serious and > > have they been repeated enough times that we are willing to officially > > reprimand her and then to suspend/expel her from the Board and from the > > organization if she will not withdraw her statements and apologize. > > > > -Isaiah > > > > The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied. > > > From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 19:06:58 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA18098 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:55:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g32NtbCl027227 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:55:38 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g32Nt8m28096; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:55:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:55:08 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Tue Apr 2 16:55:07 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 15:10:12 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <000b01c1da9f$a785bee0$0101a8c0@pavilion> Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1815 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: a52d5dac5e77c7e02cbd6195e177886a Enough of us know what I am talking about that I am not worried, Ginger. If one new AB member does not know the proof it changes nothing. And, none of us were born yesterday either. You can deal with it. Jana -----Original Message----- From: GingerH [mailto:gingerh@shawneelink.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 3:40 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS Ok, so it's ok for you cast aspersions and not offer any proof. Isn't that what you're accusing the RAL of? Several of you saying it does not constitute proof. I may be the "new kid", as you so kindly put it, but I wasn't born yesterday. Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana Black" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:35 PM Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > No Ginger, I am not going to get into this kind of conversation with you. To > do so would be to disclose information you have no right to as it occurred > before you were on the AB. Take as proof that several of us are saying the > same thing. As "new kid" you are going to have to trust. > > Jana > > -----Original Message----- > From: GingerH [mailto:gingerh@shawneelink.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 2:56 PM > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > ****The use of this message in any count of posts > in the DBS or elsewhere is solely at the discretion > of whoever reads it. When I reach the point where I > am so afraid someone will quotem, or summarize, what > I say elsewhere then I will stop posting. If I am > misquoted or or my words twisted beyone what I said > then I either did not express myself clearly, or the person > misusing my words has a problem ..... and that is exactly > what it is,....their problem***** > > Please explain how the NC is protecting the > RAL, thereby giving the RAL a "unique license" > to do whatever she wants. Please be specific. > You are making a serious charge against the NC > and I would hope you have some proof of this > "protection". > > Ginger > gingerh@shawneelink.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jana Black" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 1:32 PM > Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > ***The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied > > including mention of it in a count of how many posts were made by whom.*** > > > > Fellow AB Members, > > > > I agree with Isaiah. One would think that by expressing our opinions on > this > > subject repeatedly and consistently as so many of us have over the term of > > this AB year, that we were moving towards *doing* something to change the > > way our own RAL published responsibly in the DBS. One would think that by > > having access to what she has called the "secret lists" the RAL would have > > learned that what we post here is reputable and honest in intent and does > > not include any manipulation to subvert the Project as she has suggested > in > > the past. One could even dream that the RAL might offer positive comment > in > > the DBS.... one might dream.... > > > > However, it has been quite evident that our NC sees little merit in what > so > > many of us have said but and chooses to instead "protect" the RAL *from* > us. > > Therefore, the RAL apparently has a unique license to do say whatever she > > wants to say and do whatever she wants to do whenever she wants to do it, > > without any consequences, all because the RAL says she "reserves the > right." > > It does not matter what the RAL says or that she baits people, nor does it > > matter when what she does turns people away from the Project in disgust. > > Naturally, the (heaven forbid) *feelings* of earnest hard working well > > intended fellow board members are unimportant as well. And, this behavior > is > > not limited to AB members... anyone in the Project is fair game. In the > > present instance a relatively simple error was reported as an attempt to > > "grab or steal" data. Immediate responsiveness to complaint regarding the > > error or immediate correction/resolution of the error goes unreported. > > Teresa *gets* to take what Project members say out of context, twist it > and > > tweak it until it looks pretty rotten and then *gets* to publish the > results > > in in a way that offers no recourse for victims nor any accountability or > > correction from her. It all but guarantees negative impressions will be > > cast. No wonder we have so few stepping forward to volunteer. > > > > Of 9 AB members who have responded with comments on Mr. Samuelsen's > > complaint, 7 have taken issue with the *way* Ms. Lindquist operates and > > called for retraction, correction, clarification and/or apology. But once > > again, the NC is silent, apparently ignoring the voices of her board or > > treating their opinions as unimportant. Gee, do you wonder why many feel > > frustrated and get nothing done?? Do you wonder why we are seeing > > progressively less and less participation from AB members???? > > > > One would hope that the NC *has* listened to those of us who have spoken > up > > before and will not allow herself to be used as an intermediary for the > RAL > > to post messages. One would hope the NC will demonstrate leadership and > > insist that the RAL take personal responsibility and post on EXEC if she > has > > anything to say in her own defense or go unheard. One would hope that *if* > > the RAL in_any_way_ makes mention of any discussion taking place here this > > week in the DBS especially without addressing us herself here in this > forum, > > that the NC would bump the RAL off the EXEC list (including the RAL > posting > > a count of posts and who made them). Do I think the NC will do any of this > > or take action? NO. > > > > I would say it is not the egregiousness of any one transgression that is > our > > issue but rather the baseless unproved repetitions of disrespect, etc. > shown > > over and over by an AB member that should earn the RAL > suspension/expulsion. > > I can agree to give the RAL "one more chance" to demonstrate a change in > her > > attitude by waiting to see if she prints retraction, correction, > > clarification and/or apology in this week's DBS. Otherwise, I will > certainly > > be willing to add my name to the list of AB members who determine we have > no > > alternative other than to suspend/expel the RAL from the Board and from > the > > organization. And I will state my reasons for choosing to do so publicly > on > > my own. > > > > As I have said many times, it is not my preference to suspend or expel > > Teresa Lindquist. I have stated before and will state again that I believe > > the RAL has an excellent mind and can be a *huge* asset to this Project > when > > she decides to work *for* the Project rather than to undermine it with > > irresponsible techniques. Many times I have agreed with the RAL and I > would > > like the chance to work with her. But the choice is up to Teresa > Lindquist. > > I completely agree with Tina that the RAL knows exactly what she is doing. > > At this point, it is my opinion the RAL needs to decide what is more > > important to her, productive work within the Project or playing > > non-productive games with people's reputations in the DBS. > > > > But I am just one of nine (so far) and if things go as usual, I will be > > either lambasted or ignored - shrug. > > > > Jana Black > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Richard Harrison [mailto:IsaiahHarrison@cs.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 10:30 AM > > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > > > > > > > It is well and good to express our displeasure at the excesses of Teresa > > Lindquist and the Daily Board Show, but what is anyone willing to do about > > it? > > > > It is highly inappropriate for one member of an organization, especially > an > > elected Board member, to treat other members with the degree of > > discourtesy, disrespect, dirision, contempt that Ms. Lindquist has shown > > toward Mr. Samuelson and toward many other members of this organization. > It > > is unlikely she will respond to our disapproval and withdraw and > apologize. > > > > Similar matters regarding Ms. Lindquist have been discussed on this list > in > > the past. The conclusion has been "She thrives on attention. Ignore her > and > > she will go away." She hasn't. > > > > Are we will in to take action at this time? Are her actions so serious and > > have they been repeated enough times that we are willing to officially > > reprimand her and then to suspend/expel her from the Board and from the > > organization if she will not withdraw her statements and apologize. > > > > -Isaiah > > > > The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied. > > > From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 19:12:16 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA18606 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 19:01:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33019Cl027919 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 19:01:10 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3300dN08725; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 17:00:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 17:00:39 -0700 X-Original-Sender: wchs@getgoin.net Tue Apr 2 17:00:39 2002 Message-ID: <002b01c1daa2$05bcc920$d3967a3f@wchs> From: "Phyllis Rippee" Old-To: Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 17:56:34 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Declude-Spoolname: D4591168201a05ca3.SMD Subject: [Board-Exec] Adults Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1816 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: c16312e2d41e4f8e24b19bf8680e5d03 No adult wants to be told that something he/she is serious about, is "silly." That is a rude, offensive and unnecessary remark. Yet, Teresa made it in response to the EC question where Tim had suggested placing "none of the above" on the ballot. When Tim responded, Tim was moderated and the NC made no comment about "It's silly." Impartial?.....I don't think so. While I'm venting........I voted "no" in regard to Alice Gayley because I do not like Alice Gayley. If I want to slap Holly, I will do so without hurting someone else to do it. Once it was pointed out that AB members are not to question other AB members about their votes, a way around was found whereby "motives" for the votes would be assigned. You know, I can forgive being questioned about a vote because I have a chance to answer. What I cannot and will not under any circumstance forgive is "motive assigning." Phyllis From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 19:21:04 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19158 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 19:06:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3306pCl028670 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 19:06:52 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3306L509203; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 17:06:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 17:06:21 -0700 X-Original-Sender: gingerh@shawneelink.com Tue Apr 2 17:06:20 2002 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 18:01:56 -0600 From: GingerH Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-id: <001701c1daa2$c5f1cd80$0101a8c0@pavilion> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1817 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 235b084a52352572f7e3d5b32a031568 Dear Board Members, Since Jana has stated that I am the only one unaware of the proof of collusion between the NC and the RAL would one of you please be so kind as to forward me the proof. There has been a very serious charge made against the NC that needs to be resolved. It would be extremely hard for me to make an informed decision without seeing the proof. Thanks! Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana Black" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 5:10 PM Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > Enough of us know what I am talking about that I am not worried, Ginger. If > one new AB member does not know the proof it changes nothing. And, none of > us were born yesterday either. You can deal with it. > > Jana > > -----Original Message----- > From: GingerH [mailto:gingerh@shawneelink.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 3:40 PM > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > Ok, so it's ok for you cast aspersions and not > offer any proof. Isn't that what you're accusing > the RAL of? Several of you saying it does not > constitute proof. > > I may be the "new kid", as you so kindly put it, > but I wasn't born yesterday. > > Ginger > gingerh@shawneelink.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jana Black" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:35 PM > Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > No Ginger, I am not going to get into this kind of conversation with you. > To > > do so would be to disclose information you have no right to as it occurred > > before you were on the AB. Take as proof that several of us are saying the > > same thing. As "new kid" you are going to have to trust. > > > > Jana > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: GingerH [mailto:gingerh@shawneelink.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 2:56 PM > > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > > > ****The use of this message in any count of posts > > in the DBS or elsewhere is solely at the discretion > > of whoever reads it. When I reach the point where I > > am so afraid someone will quotem, or summarize, what > > I say elsewhere then I will stop posting. If I am > > misquoted or or my words twisted beyone what I said > > then I either did not express myself clearly, or the person > > misusing my words has a problem ..... and that is exactly > > what it is,....their problem***** > > > > Please explain how the NC is protecting the > > RAL, thereby giving the RAL a "unique license" > > to do whatever she wants. Please be specific. > > You are making a serious charge against the NC > > and I would hope you have some proof of this > > "protection". > > > > Ginger > > gingerh@shawneelink.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jana Black" > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 1:32 PM > > Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > > > > ***The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is > denied > > > including mention of it in a count of how many posts were made by > whom.*** > > > > > > Fellow AB Members, > > > > > > I agree with Isaiah. One would think that by expressing our opinions on > > this > > > subject repeatedly and consistently as so many of us have over the term > of > > > this AB year, that we were moving towards *doing* something to change > the > > > way our own RAL published responsibly in the DBS. One would think that > by > > > having access to what she has called the "secret lists" the RAL would > have > > > learned that what we post here is reputable and honest in intent and > does > > > not include any manipulation to subvert the Project as she has suggested > > in > > > the past. One could even dream that the RAL might offer positive comment > > in > > > the DBS.... one might dream.... > > > > > > However, it has been quite evident that our NC sees little merit in what > > so > > > many of us have said but and chooses to instead "protect" the RAL *from* > > us. > > > Therefore, the RAL apparently has a unique license to do say whatever > she > > > wants to say and do whatever she wants to do whenever she wants to do > it, > > > without any consequences, all because the RAL says she "reserves the > > right." > > > It does not matter what the RAL says or that she baits people, nor does > it > > > matter when what she does turns people away from the Project in disgust. > > > Naturally, the (heaven forbid) *feelings* of earnest hard working well > > > intended fellow board members are unimportant as well. And, this > behavior > > is > > > not limited to AB members... anyone in the Project is fair game. In the > > > present instance a relatively simple error was reported as an attempt to > > > "grab or steal" data. Immediate responsiveness to complaint regarding > the > > > error or immediate correction/resolution of the error goes unreported. > > > Teresa *gets* to take what Project members say out of context, twist it > > and > > > tweak it until it looks pretty rotten and then *gets* to publish the > > results > > > in in a way that offers no recourse for victims nor any accountability > or > > > correction from her. It all but guarantees negative impressions will be > > > cast. No wonder we have so few stepping forward to volunteer. > > > > > > Of 9 AB members who have responded with comments on Mr. Samuelsen's > > > complaint, 7 have taken issue with the *way* Ms. Lindquist operates and > > > called for retraction, correction, clarification and/or apology. But > once > > > again, the NC is silent, apparently ignoring the voices of her board or > > > treating their opinions as unimportant. Gee, do you wonder why many feel > > > frustrated and get nothing done?? Do you wonder why we are seeing > > > progressively less and less participation from AB members???? > > > > > > One would hope that the NC *has* listened to those of us who have spoken > > up > > > before and will not allow herself to be used as an intermediary for the > > RAL > > > to post messages. One would hope the NC will demonstrate leadership and > > > insist that the RAL take personal responsibility and post on EXEC if she > > has > > > anything to say in her own defense or go unheard. One would hope that > *if* > > > the RAL in_any_way_ makes mention of any discussion taking place here > this > > > week in the DBS especially without addressing us herself here in this > > forum, > > > that the NC would bump the RAL off the EXEC list (including the RAL > > posting > > > a count of posts and who made them). Do I think the NC will do any of > this > > > or take action? NO. > > > > > > I would say it is not the egregiousness of any one transgression that is > > our > > > issue but rather the baseless unproved repetitions of disrespect, etc. > > shown > > > over and over by an AB member that should earn the RAL > > suspension/expulsion. > > > I can agree to give the RAL "one more chance" to demonstrate a change in > > her > > > attitude by waiting to see if she prints retraction, correction, > > > clarification and/or apology in this week's DBS. Otherwise, I will > > certainly > > > be willing to add my name to the list of AB members who determine we > have > > no > > > alternative other than to suspend/expel the RAL from the Board and from > > the > > > organization. And I will state my reasons for choosing to do so publicly > > on > > > my own. > > > > > > As I have said many times, it is not my preference to suspend or expel > > > Teresa Lindquist. I have stated before and will state again that I > believe > > > the RAL has an excellent mind and can be a *huge* asset to this Project > > when > > > she decides to work *for* the Project rather than to undermine it with > > > irresponsible techniques. Many times I have agreed with the RAL and I > > would > > > like the chance to work with her. But the choice is up to Teresa > > Lindquist. > > > I completely agree with Tina that the RAL knows exactly what she is > doing. > > > At this point, it is my opinion the RAL needs to decide what is more > > > important to her, productive work within the Project or playing > > > non-productive games with people's reputations in the DBS. > > > > > > But I am just one of nine (so far) and if things go as usual, I will be > > > either lambasted or ignored - shrug. > > > > > > Jana Black > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Richard Harrison [mailto:IsaiahHarrison@cs.com] > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 10:30 AM > > > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > > > Subject: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is well and good to express our displeasure at the excesses of Teresa > > > Lindquist and the Daily Board Show, but what is anyone willing to do > about > > > it? > > > > > > It is highly inappropriate for one member of an organization, especially > > an > > > elected Board member, to treat other members with the degree of > > > discourtesy, disrespect, dirision, contempt that Ms. Lindquist has shown > > > toward Mr. Samuelson and toward many other members of this organization. > > It > > > is unlikely she will respond to our disapproval and withdraw and > > apologize. > > > > > > Similar matters regarding Ms. Lindquist have been discussed on this list > > in > > > the past. The conclusion has been "She thrives on attention. Ignore her > > and > > > she will go away." She hasn't. > > > > > > Are we will in to take action at this time? Are her actions so serious > and > > > have they been repeated enough times that we are willing to officially > > > reprimand her and then to suspend/expel her from the Board and from the > > > organization if she will not withdraw her statements and apologize. > > > > > > -Isaiah > > > > > > The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied. > > > > > > From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 19:42:17 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA20889 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 19:24:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g330OhCl001109 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 19:24:44 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g330OHI05661; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 17:24:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 17:24:17 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Tue Apr 2 17:24:16 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 15:38:25 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <001701c1daa2$c5f1cd80$0101a8c0@pavilion> Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1818 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: a90fe8290275a2f867ede26313ac93e8 Collusion is not anything I said, Ginger. Nor did I say you are "the only one unaware." Time to be careful. Go back and read the posts on the regarding Mr. Samuelsen's formal complaint, you have enough information. Jana -----Original Message----- From: GingerH [mailto:gingerh@shawneelink.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:02 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS Dear Board Members, Since Jana has stated that I am the only one unaware of the proof of collusion between the NC and the RAL would one of you please be so kind as to forward me the proof. There has been a very serious charge made against the NC that needs to be resolved. It would be extremely hard for me to make an informed decision without seeing the proof. Thanks! Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana Black" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 5:10 PM Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > Enough of us know what I am talking about that I am not worried, Ginger. If > one new AB member does not know the proof it changes nothing. And, none of > us were born yesterday either. You can deal with it. > > Jana > > -----Original Message----- > From: GingerH [mailto:gingerh@shawneelink.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 3:40 PM > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > Ok, so it's ok for you cast aspersions and not > offer any proof. Isn't that what you're accusing > the RAL of? Several of you saying it does not > constitute proof. > > I may be the "new kid", as you so kindly put it, > but I wasn't born yesterday. > > Ginger > gingerh@shawneelink.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jana Black" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:35 PM > Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > No Ginger, I am not going to get into this kind of conversation with you. > To > > do so would be to disclose information you have no right to as it occurred > > before you were on the AB. Take as proof that several of us are saying the > > same thing. As "new kid" you are going to have to trust. > > > > Jana > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: GingerH [mailto:gingerh@shawneelink.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 2:56 PM > > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > > > ****The use of this message in any count of posts > > in the DBS or elsewhere is solely at the discretion > > of whoever reads it. When I reach the point where I > > am so afraid someone will quotem, or summarize, what > > I say elsewhere then I will stop posting. If I am > > misquoted or or my words twisted beyone what I said > > then I either did not express myself clearly, or the person > > misusing my words has a problem ..... and that is exactly > > what it is,....their problem***** > > > > Please explain how the NC is protecting the > > RAL, thereby giving the RAL a "unique license" > > to do whatever she wants. Please be specific. > > You are making a serious charge against the NC > > and I would hope you have some proof of this > > "protection". > > > > Ginger > > gingerh@shawneelink.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jana Black" > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 1:32 PM > > Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > > > > ***The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is > denied > > > including mention of it in a count of how many posts were made by > whom.*** > > > > > > Fellow AB Members, > > > > > > I agree with Isaiah. One would think that by expressing our opinions on > > this > > > subject repeatedly and consistently as so many of us have over the term > of > > > this AB year, that we were moving towards *doing* something to change > the > > > way our own RAL published responsibly in the DBS. One would think that > by > > > having access to what she has called the "secret lists" the RAL would > have > > > learned that what we post here is reputable and honest in intent and > does > > > not include any manipulation to subvert the Project as she has suggested > > in > > > the past. One could even dream that the RAL might offer positive comment > > in > > > the DBS.... one might dream.... > > > > > > However, it has been quite evident that our NC sees little merit in what > > so > > > many of us have said but and chooses to instead "protect" the RAL *from* > > us. > > > Therefore, the RAL apparently has a unique license to do say whatever > she > > > wants to say and do whatever she wants to do whenever she wants to do > it, > > > without any consequences, all because the RAL says she "reserves the > > right." > > > It does not matter what the RAL says or that she baits people, nor does > it > > > matter when what she does turns people away from the Project in disgust. > > > Naturally, the (heaven forbid) *feelings* of earnest hard working well > > > intended fellow board members are unimportant as well. And, this > behavior > > is > > > not limited to AB members... anyone in the Project is fair game. In the > > > present instance a relatively simple error was reported as an attempt to > > > "grab or steal" data. Immediate responsiveness to complaint regarding > the > > > error or immediate correction/resolution of the error goes unreported. > > > Teresa *gets* to take what Project members say out of context, twist it > > and > > > tweak it until it looks pretty rotten and then *gets* to publish the > > results > > > in in a way that offers no recourse for victims nor any accountability > or > > > correction from her. It all but guarantees negative impressions will be > > > cast. No wonder we have so few stepping forward to volunteer. > > > > > > Of 9 AB members who have responded with comments on Mr. Samuelsen's > > > complaint, 7 have taken issue with the *way* Ms. Lindquist operates and > > > called for retraction, correction, clarification and/or apology. But > once > > > again, the NC is silent, apparently ignoring the voices of her board or > > > treating their opinions as unimportant. Gee, do you wonder why many feel > > > frustrated and get nothing done?? Do you wonder why we are seeing > > > progressively less and less participation from AB members???? > > > > > > One would hope that the NC *has* listened to those of us who have spoken > > up > > > before and will not allow herself to be used as an intermediary for the > > RAL > > > to post messages. One would hope the NC will demonstrate leadership and > > > insist that the RAL take personal responsibility and post on EXEC if she > > has > > > anything to say in her own defense or go unheard. One would hope that > *if* > > > the RAL in_any_way_ makes mention of any discussion taking place here > this > > > week in the DBS especially without addressing us herself here in this > > forum, > > > that the NC would bump the RAL off the EXEC list (including the RAL > > posting > > > a count of posts and who made them). Do I think the NC will do any of > this > > > or take action? NO. > > > > > > I would say it is not the egregiousness of any one transgression that is > > our > > > issue but rather the baseless unproved repetitions of disrespect, etc. > > shown > > > over and over by an AB member that should earn the RAL > > suspension/expulsion. > > > I can agree to give the RAL "one more chance" to demonstrate a change in > > her > > > attitude by waiting to see if she prints retraction, correction, > > > clarification and/or apology in this week's DBS. Otherwise, I will > > certainly > > > be willing to add my name to the list of AB members who determine we > have > > no > > > alternative other than to suspend/expel the RAL from the Board and from > > the > > > organization. And I will state my reasons for choosing to do so publicly > > on > > > my own. > > > > > > As I have said many times, it is not my preference to suspend or expel > > > Teresa Lindquist. I have stated before and will state again that I > believe > > > the RAL has an excellent mind and can be a *huge* asset to this Project > > when > > > she decides to work *for* the Project rather than to undermine it with > > > irresponsible techniques. Many times I have agreed with the RAL and I > > would > > > like the chance to work with her. But the choice is up to Teresa > > Lindquist. > > > I completely agree with Tina that the RAL knows exactly what she is > doing. > > > At this point, it is my opinion the RAL needs to decide what is more > > > important to her, productive work within the Project or playing > > > non-productive games with people's reputations in the DBS. > > > > > > But I am just one of nine (so far) and if things go as usual, I will be > > > either lambasted or ignored - shrug. > > > > > > Jana Black > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Richard Harrison [mailto:IsaiahHarrison@cs.com] > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 10:30 AM > > > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > > > Subject: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is well and good to express our displeasure at the excesses of Teresa > > > Lindquist and the Daily Board Show, but what is anyone willing to do > about > > > it? > > > > > > It is highly inappropriate for one member of an organization, especially > > an > > > elected Board member, to treat other members with the degree of > > > discourtesy, disrespect, dirision, contempt that Ms. Lindquist has shown > > > toward Mr. Samuelson and toward many other members of this organization. > > It > > > is unlikely she will respond to our disapproval and withdraw and > > apologize. > > > > > > Similar matters regarding Ms. Lindquist have been discussed on this list > > in > > > the past. The conclusion has been "She thrives on attention. Ignore her > > and > > > she will go away." She hasn't. > > > > > > Are we will in to take action at this time? Are her actions so serious > and > > > have they been repeated enough times that we are willing to officially > > > reprimand her and then to suspend/expel her from the Board and from the > > > organization if she will not withdraw her statements and apologize. > > > > > > -Isaiah > > > > > > The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied. > > > > > > From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 20:55:31 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA22094 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 19:37:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g330bOCl002786 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 19:37:25 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g330axj19100; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 17:36:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 17:36:59 -0700 X-Original-Sender: gingerh@shawneelink.com Tue Apr 2 17:36:58 2002 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 18:32:30 -0600 From: GingerH Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-id: <002f01c1daa7$0a9c65e0$0101a8c0@pavilion> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1819 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 861035acd7cc02f96a9aaa7d332f0d38 Maybe you should take time to reread. I am referring to your accusation against the NC. Mr. Samuelson's complaint against the RAL is a seperate matter. ref: "However, it has been quite evident that our NC sees little merit in what so many of us have said but and chooses to instead "protect" the RAL *from* us." Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana Black" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 5:38 PM Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > Collusion is not anything I said, Ginger. Nor did I say you are "the only > one unaware." Time to be careful. Go back and read the posts on the > regarding Mr. Samuelsen's formal complaint, you have enough information. > > Jana > > -----Original Message----- > From: GingerH [mailto:gingerh@shawneelink.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:02 PM > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > Dear Board Members, > Since Jana has stated that I am the only one unaware > of the proof of collusion between the NC and the RAL > would one of you please be so kind as to forward me the > proof. There has been a very serious charge made against > the NC that needs to be resolved. It would be extremely > hard for me to make an informed decision without seeing > the proof. > > Thanks! > Ginger > gingerh@shawneelink.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jana Black" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 5:10 PM > Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > Enough of us know what I am talking about that I am not worried, Ginger. > If > > one new AB member does not know the proof it changes nothing. And, none of > > us were born yesterday either. You can deal with it. > > > > Jana > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: GingerH [mailto:gingerh@shawneelink.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 3:40 PM > > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > > > Ok, so it's ok for you cast aspersions and not > > offer any proof. Isn't that what you're accusing > > the RAL of? Several of you saying it does not > > constitute proof. > > > > I may be the "new kid", as you so kindly put it, > > but I wasn't born yesterday. > > > > Ginger > > gingerh@shawneelink.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jana Black" > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:35 PM > > Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > > > > No Ginger, I am not going to get into this kind of conversation with > you. > > To > > > do so would be to disclose information you have no right to as it > occurred > > > before you were on the AB. Take as proof that several of us are saying > the > > > same thing. As "new kid" you are going to have to trust. > > > > > > Jana > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: GingerH [mailto:gingerh@shawneelink.com] > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 2:56 PM > > > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > > > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > > > > > > ****The use of this message in any count of posts > > > in the DBS or elsewhere is solely at the discretion > > > of whoever reads it. When I reach the point where I > > > am so afraid someone will quotem, or summarize, what > > > I say elsewhere then I will stop posting. If I am > > > misquoted or or my words twisted beyone what I said > > > then I either did not express myself clearly, or the person > > > misusing my words has a problem ..... and that is exactly > > > what it is,....their problem***** > > > > > > Please explain how the NC is protecting the > > > RAL, thereby giving the RAL a "unique license" > > > to do whatever she wants. Please be specific. > > > You are making a serious charge against the NC > > > and I would hope you have some proof of this > > > "protection". > > > > > > Ginger > > > gingerh@shawneelink.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Jana Black" > > > To: > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 1:32 PM > > > Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > > > > > > > ***The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is > > denied > > > > including mention of it in a count of how many posts were made by > > whom.*** > > > > > > > > Fellow AB Members, > > > > > > > > I agree with Isaiah. One would think that by expressing our opinions > on > > > this > > > > subject repeatedly and consistently as so many of us have over the > term > > of > > > > this AB year, that we were moving towards *doing* something to change > > the > > > > way our own RAL published responsibly in the DBS. One would think that > > by > > > > having access to what she has called the "secret lists" the RAL would > > have > > > > learned that what we post here is reputable and honest in intent and > > does > > > > not include any manipulation to subvert the Project as she has > suggested > > > in > > > > the past. One could even dream that the RAL might offer positive > comment > > > in > > > > the DBS.... one might dream.... > > > > > > > > However, it has been quite evident that our NC sees little merit in > what > > > so > > > > many of us have said but and chooses to instead "protect" the RAL > *from* > > > us. > > > > Therefore, the RAL apparently has a unique license to do say whatever > > she > > > > wants to say and do whatever she wants to do whenever she wants to do > > it, > > > > without any consequences, all because the RAL says she "reserves the > > > right." > > > > It does not matter what the RAL says or that she baits people, nor > does > > it > > > > matter when what she does turns people away from the Project in > disgust. > > > > Naturally, the (heaven forbid) *feelings* of earnest hard working well > > > > intended fellow board members are unimportant as well. And, this > > behavior > > > is > > > > not limited to AB members... anyone in the Project is fair game. In > the > > > > present instance a relatively simple error was reported as an attempt > to > > > > "grab or steal" data. Immediate responsiveness to complaint regarding > > the > > > > error or immediate correction/resolution of the error goes unreported. > > > > Teresa *gets* to take what Project members say out of context, twist > it > > > and > > > > tweak it until it looks pretty rotten and then *gets* to publish the > > > results > > > > in in a way that offers no recourse for victims nor any accountability > > or > > > > correction from her. It all but guarantees negative impressions will > be > > > > cast. No wonder we have so few stepping forward to volunteer. > > > > > > > > Of 9 AB members who have responded with comments on Mr. Samuelsen's > > > > complaint, 7 have taken issue with the *way* Ms. Lindquist operates > and > > > > called for retraction, correction, clarification and/or apology. But > > once > > > > again, the NC is silent, apparently ignoring the voices of her board > or > > > > treating their opinions as unimportant. Gee, do you wonder why many > feel > > > > frustrated and get nothing done?? Do you wonder why we are seeing > > > > progressively less and less participation from AB members???? > > > > > > > > One would hope that the NC *has* listened to those of us who have > spoken > > > up > > > > before and will not allow herself to be used as an intermediary for > the > > > RAL > > > > to post messages. One would hope the NC will demonstrate leadership > and > > > > insist that the RAL take personal responsibility and post on EXEC if > she > > > has > > > > anything to say in her own defense or go unheard. One would hope that > > *if* > > > > the RAL in_any_way_ makes mention of any discussion taking place here > > this > > > > week in the DBS especially without addressing us herself here in this > > > forum, > > > > that the NC would bump the RAL off the EXEC list (including the RAL > > > posting > > > > a count of posts and who made them). Do I think the NC will do any of > > this > > > > or take action? NO. > > > > > > > > I would say it is not the egregiousness of any one transgression that > is > > > our > > > > issue but rather the baseless unproved repetitions of disrespect, etc. > > > shown > > > > over and over by an AB member that should earn the RAL > > > suspension/expulsion. > > > > I can agree to give the RAL "one more chance" to demonstrate a change > in > > > her > > > > attitude by waiting to see if she prints retraction, correction, > > > > clarification and/or apology in this week's DBS. Otherwise, I will > > > certainly > > > > be willing to add my name to the list of AB members who determine we > > have > > > no > > > > alternative other than to suspend/expel the RAL from the Board and > from > > > the > > > > organization. And I will state my reasons for choosing to do so > publicly > > > on > > > > my own. > > > > > > > > As I have said many times, it is not my preference to suspend or expel > > > > Teresa Lindquist. I have stated before and will state again that I > > believe > > > > the RAL has an excellent mind and can be a *huge* asset to this > Project > > > when > > > > she decides to work *for* the Project rather than to undermine it with > > > > irresponsible techniques. Many times I have agreed with the RAL and I > > > would > > > > like the chance to work with her. But the choice is up to Teresa > > > Lindquist. > > > > I completely agree with Tina that the RAL knows exactly what she is > > doing. > > > > At this point, it is my opinion the RAL needs to decide what is more > > > > important to her, productive work within the Project or playing > > > > non-productive games with people's reputations in the DBS. > > > > > > > > But I am just one of nine (so far) and if things go as usual, I will > be > > > > either lambasted or ignored - shrug. > > > > > > > > Jana Black > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Richard Harrison [mailto:IsaiahHarrison@cs.com] > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 10:30 AM > > > > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > > > > Subject: [Board-Exec] The DBS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is well and good to express our displeasure at the excesses of > Teresa > > > > Lindquist and the Daily Board Show, but what is anyone willing to do > > about > > > > it? > > > > > > > > It is highly inappropriate for one member of an organization, > especially > > > an > > > > elected Board member, to treat other members with the degree of > > > > discourtesy, disrespect, dirision, contempt that Ms. Lindquist has > shown > > > > toward Mr. Samuelson and toward many other members of this > organization. > > > It > > > > is unlikely she will respond to our disapproval and withdraw and > > > apologize. > > > > > > > > Similar matters regarding Ms. Lindquist have been discussed on this > list > > > in > > > > the past. The conclusion has been "She thrives on attention. Ignore > her > > > and > > > > she will go away." She hasn't. > > > > > > > > Are we will in to take action at this time? Are her actions so serious > > and > > > > have they been repeated enough times that we are willing to officially > > > > reprimand her and then to suspend/expel her from the Board and from > the > > > > organization if she will not withdraw her statements and apologize. > > > > > > > > -Isaiah > > > > > > > > The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is > denied. > > > > > > > > > > > From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 20:55:32 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA26121 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 20:22:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g331MiCl008554 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 20:22:45 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g331M7914163; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:22:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:22:07 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Tue Apr 2 18:22:07 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:33:54 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020402164312.00a01300@imap.cs.com> Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1822 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: ac28c2ef06c3acfc8937509ca60fa41a Once again, Isaiah, I agree with you. If my post enlarged the scope of conversation, that was not my intention. I apologize for allowing a need to vent to obfuscate the issue. I am feeling quite frustrated. The primary issue *is* what to do with a member who consistently ignores fellow AB member's requests that she cease and desist from impugning their names and twisting their words. Yes, I think the AB needs to inform Ms. Lindquist in her capacity as RAL that she is obliged to retract, correct, clarify and/or apologize to Mr. Samuelsen for her unjust characterization of him in the DBS. I believe the AB also should spell out clearly what steps will be taken should the RAL in the future use less than ethical journalistic practices in what she writes in the DBS while she is on the AB. Jana Black -----Original Message----- From: Richard Harrison [mailto:IsaiahHarrison@cs.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:55 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera My original post was in regard to the statements in DBS regarding Mr. Samuelson and Ms. Lindquist's responsibility in the matter. It was not about the NC. Nor about who knows what concerning other issues, real or imagined. I would like to get back to that issue and settle it or drop it. Censure (not censorship) is a serious business, but what to do when a member has for so long ignored requests to treat the other members of this project with a reasonable amount of respect. Should the Board take any action regarding Mr. Samuelson's complaint, and the long history of complaints regarding the DBS? -Isaiah From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 20:55:32 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA24229 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 20:02:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3312GCl005948 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 20:02:17 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3311mk16741; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:01:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:01:48 -0700 X-Original-Sender: IsaiahHarrison@cs.com Tue Apr 2 18:01:48 2002 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020402164312.00a01300@imap.cs.com> X-Sender: IsaiahHarrison@imap.cs.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 16:55:18 -0800 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Richard Harrison Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20020402171909.00bf5560@pop.east.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <3MO7u.A.SFE.8Rlq8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1820 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 297fb2308adb1032d47c14cd8b846365 My original post was in regard to the statements in DBS regarding Mr. Samuelson and Ms. Lindquist's responsibility in the matter. It was not about the NC. Nor about who knows what concerning other issues, real or imagined. I would like to get back to that issue and settle it or drop it. Censure (not censorship) is a serious business, but what to do when a member has for so long ignored requests to treat the other members of this project with a reasonable amount of respect. Should the Board take any action regarding Mr. Samuelson's complaint, and the long history of complaints regarding the DBS? -Isaiah From ???@??? Tue Apr 02 20:55:32 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA25277 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 20:13:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g331DwCl007358 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 20:13:59 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g331DJI02498; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:13:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:13:19 -0700 X-Original-Sender: TVick65536@aol.com Tue Apr 2 18:13:19 2002 From: TVick65536@aol.com Message-ID: <81.199dbbd4.29dbb12c@aol.com> Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 20:13:16 EST Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1821 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 0a5cd81bcd86861457e5492323fc920f In a message dated 4/2/2002 8:02:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, IsaiahHarrison@cs.com writes: > Should the Board take any action regarding Mr. Samuelson's complaint, and > the long history of complaints regarding the DBS? > > -Isaiah > > Do you do pose two separate questions? *And* suggests lumping.. for lack of a better word. Tina From ???@??? Wed Apr 03 06:06:29 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA25248 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 02:39:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g337d0Cl020156 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 02:39:01 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g337cNR03376; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:38:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:38:23 -0700 X-Original-Sender: tstowell@chattanooga.net Wed Apr 3 00:38:23 2002 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20020402191847.009f1980@mail.chattanooga.net> X-Sender: tstowell@mail.chattanooga.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 19:18:47 -0500 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Tim Stowell Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20020402171909.00bf5560@pop.east.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.7 required=10.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,AWL version=2.11 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1832 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: c663807a19362a37b494634becf8ae16 At 06:06 PM 4/2/02 -0500, you wrote: > >Not one of you has been chastised or even spoken to about anything said >outside the Board lists. After a warning to all of you one person was >moderated for a couple of days for rudeness on Board-L and he continues to >choose not to post at all. Yet several of you sit there and make >assumptions about me based on nothing but pure conjecture. Some of you >busily write to each other and to small groups of others some outrageous >slurs and insinuations (you think some of those haven't been shared with >me? ...think again). I was unaware my status had changed - having not received notice to the contrary. >This group has deteriorated into a bunch of children who vote for and >against things not because of the merit of the item but because of who made >it or supports it and who delight in taking jabs at me and thwarting every >attempt at progress out of spite and retaliation no matter what innocent >bystanders (such as Alice Gayley) get clobbered in the meantime. Well Holly, when I was NC, I was told it went with the territory/job by the -all and usgw-cc crowds. One either gets offended now and then or one develops thick skin. >If Teresa is rude or personally insulting on Board-L she will get the same >treatment as anyone else. If any or all of you are tacky or insulting on >-ALL or other venues, that's your right. I have no authority over your >behavior off the official lists unless you speak specifically for the Board >as a whole, not just for yourself. Then may I ask why in your note of moderation to me about the Board list you stated something along the lines - "and what you do elsewhere"? >No, I do not like nor have I ever liked the way Teresa reports things in >the DBS and I have probably come in for more insults and misrepresentations >there than any one of you on this Board. I'm willing to bet I've more starzz than you. >If she steps over the line she is >walking on reporting action on Exec by reporting more than the number etc >of messages, I will remove her from this list but I will not censor anyone >of you off the official Board lists. On the Board list I will censor behavior. May I ask why one list and not the other? To anyone - what does Sturgis say about censureship of another Board member? What constitutes a censureable event? What penalities does it recommend, if any? >If this Board wishes to censor speech outside of the Board list then by all >means make a motion to do so. You have been invited before to make motions >in regard to Teresa but have yet to do so but beware of censorship, it is a >two edged sword. Is it really censorship when one sits on a board and takes pot shots at fellow members outside the Board? I believe Sturgis and RRO same something about that. >Two or three of you are basically silent, another two or three primarily >address issues and are able to move on, agreeing to disagree when you don't >get your way. To this small minority, I apologize for the above, it is not >directed towards you but to the controlling remainder of this board who >care less about this project than they do about their own ego's. Frankly, I >am sick of watching the pots call the kettle black. > >Holly Tim From ???@??? Wed Apr 03 06:06:29 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA25224 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 02:38:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g337cRCl020138 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 02:38:28 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g337c1W03145; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:38:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:38:01 -0700 X-Original-Sender: tstowell@chattanooga.net Wed Apr 3 00:38:01 2002 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20020402192003.00967440@mail.chattanooga.net> X-Sender: foghorn@mail.chattanooga.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 19:20:03 -0500 Old-To: board-exec-l@rootsweb.com From: Tim Stowell Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.3 required=10.0 tests=SUBJ_ALL_CAPS,AWL version=2.11 Subject: [Board-Exec] ETC. Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1831 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 0673d9aa2fec95e92239785472c4a8f0 Since etc has come up - What is the NC's ruling regarding proxy opinions here or proxy votes on Board-l? Tim From ???@??? Wed Apr 03 06:06:29 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA04909 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 22:05:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3335pCl021322 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 22:05:52 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g33356P06029; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 20:05:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 20:05:06 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Tue Apr 2 20:05:06 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 18:11:45 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20020402215633.00b659b0@pop.east.cox.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1826 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 7d2e6d699a68404d34af8ddbb0d2338b I am hinting at nothing. It has all been said. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Holly Timm [mailto:usgenweb@cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 6:57 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS At 03:38 PM 4/2/02 -0800, Jana Black wrote: >Collusion is not anything I said, Ginger. Nor did I say you are "the only >one unaware." Time to be careful. Go back and read the posts on the >regarding Mr. Samuelsen's formal complaint, you have enough information. What precisely are you hinting at here Jana? From ???@??? Wed Apr 03 06:06:29 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA03614 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 21:48:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g332mECl019319 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 21:48:15 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g332lI115933; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 19:47:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 19:47:18 -0700 X-Original-Sender: rkeason@tir.com Tue Apr 2 19:47:17 2002 Message-ID: <021301c1dab9$a15212c0$3da028d8@hppav> From: "Ron Eason" Old-To: References: Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 21:45:33 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1823 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 8a87596dc0bbbc3cbab0bd3e3359d9c8 I would like to make an opinion. This is not in support of ANYONE ! It is an observation made, without prejudice to anyone and regarding no one person as being right or wrong. 1. Teresa is a Board Member. However, she is still an individual. She has every right, as do every one of us, to post messages concerning our opinions anywhere she chooses to. To the ALL list, or any other list, including personal email. 2. The DBS, is by subscription. As far as I know, she does not post it to the ALL list or to any other USGW sponsored list. (You may correct me if I am wrong). As such, she posts her DBS as an individual that also happens to be a member of the USGW Project and the RAL of said Project. But she does not write her DBS , AS the RAL or AS a Board Member. She writes it as Teresa Lindquist and sends it to people who CHOOSE to accept it into their Inboxes. 3. There is no where in the Bylaws, or any other guidelines that gives the Advisory Board any control over what private individuals do off of the Projects lists or Project pages. Now, I realize that there are many of you who are upset about her way of reporting what she sees and thinks. But she has the right to think it and to say it, if she chooses, without fear of reprisal from anyone else. Just as many of you, and myself included, have often done on the ALL list, with rude comments and accusations, just as has been made recently. Your accusations of collusion or of a protection of Teresa or every other accusation that has been made and every other rude comment that has been made is nothing more than conjecture on all of your parts. You presume to be able to know and read the mind and thoughts of another person, when in fact, you don't have a clue as to the validity of your claims. In fact I would dare say that, just as I am telling you here and now, that Holly is of the same opinion, and it has nothing to do with trying to protect Teresa. The fact is, that this Board has no say so in what she says in her DBS, unless it is proven to be "private and/or confidential" information taken from this list and this list alone. If she happens to make a rude statement, which some here have openly done themselves, about someone else in her DBS, then it is between her and the other person. Just as, if she does the same on a list like the ALL list, it is up to the list moderator to act, and remove her from the list if that is what is merited. Her report about David, may or may not have been correct. Whether she stretched the truth is only for David and the others involved to say. The fact still remains that she didn't get the information from the Board list or the Exec list, and that, leave this Board, without the right to get involved. It is absolutely no different than Fred Smoot and Chip Browns problem, that was completely out of the realm of the Boards control. We can no sooner tell Teresa she has to apologize to David, than any of you want to tell Sharon what to do in her State. And where you find the idea to think we can, is beyond me. I am not saying that David does not deserve an apology. We however cannot force one to be given. I am not saying that a retraction is not warranted. We however cannot force one to be made. If you want to try and make an issue that she is not acting in the best interest of the Project, as the RAL of the Project, then you need to get your ducks in a row and try to make such a case, but pointing fingers and making accusations about others, is placing yourself in no better light than what you are complaining about. You are acting no better than what you are accusing Teresa of. Some of the things that some of you have said and acted towards Holly is, in my opinion far worse than anything Teresa has done, and you stand there proud to be pointing your fngers. If you want to make a case, then make one on solid grounds. But please, stop the crying about one person, while you do the same to others. We are all allowed our opinions. But if you are going to stoop down to try and convict someone of your own actions, please take a long look in a mirror and see that your words against others are no better than the words you seek to silence. Thanks, Ron From ???@??? Wed Apr 03 06:06:29 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04100 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 21:54:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g332sRCl020024 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 21:54:27 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g332rsE26249; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 19:53:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 19:53:54 -0700 X-Original-Sender: usgenweb@cox.net Tue Apr 2 19:53:53 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020402215633.00b659b0@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: usgenweb@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 21:57:22 -0500 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS In-Reply-To: References: <001701c1daa2$c5f1cd80$0101a8c0@pavilion> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1824 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: b127672eea0116391f58c61075ced6cb At 03:38 PM 4/2/02 -0800, Jana Black wrote: >Collusion is not anything I said, Ginger. Nor did I say you are "the only >one unaware." Time to be careful. Go back and read the posts on the >regarding Mr. Samuelsen's formal complaint, you have enough information. What precisely are you hinting at here Jana? From ???@??? Wed Apr 03 06:06:29 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA04583 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 22:02:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33326Cl020875 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 22:02:06 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3331b428594; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 20:01:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 20:01:37 -0700 X-Original-Sender: gingerh@shawneelink.com Tue Apr 2 20:01:36 2002 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 20:57:26 -0600 From: GingerH Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-id: <007701c1dabb$4b954da0$0101a8c0@pavilion> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <021301c1dab9$a15212c0$3da028d8@hppav> Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1825 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: a270627fe5c1d57a9638f35826551027 B R A V O ! ! ! ! ! Very well said Ron Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Eason" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 8:45 PM Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera > I would like to make an opinion. > > This is not in support of ANYONE ! > > It is an observation made, without prejudice to anyone > and regarding no one person as being right or wrong. > > 1. Teresa is a Board Member. However, she is still an individual. > She has every right, as do every one of us, to post messages concerning > our opinions anywhere she chooses to. To the ALL list, or any other > list, including personal email. > > 2. The DBS, is by subscription. As far as I know, she does not post it to > the ALL list or to any other USGW sponsored list. (You may correct me if I > am wrong). As such, she posts her DBS as an individual that also happens to > be a member of the USGW Project and the RAL of said Project. But she does > not write her DBS , AS the RAL or AS a Board Member. She writes it as > Teresa Lindquist and sends it to people who CHOOSE to accept it into their > Inboxes. > > 3. There is no where in the Bylaws, or any other guidelines that gives the > Advisory Board any control over what private individuals do off of the > Projects lists or Project pages. > > Now, I realize that there are many of you who are upset about her way of > reporting what she sees and thinks. But she has the right to think it and > to say it, if she chooses, without fear of reprisal from anyone else. Just > as many of you, and myself included, have often done on the ALL list, with > rude comments and accusations, just as has been made recently. > > Your accusations of collusion or of a protection of Teresa or every other > accusation that has been made and every other rude comment that has been > made is nothing more than conjecture on all of your parts. You presume to > be able to know and read the mind and thoughts of another person, when in > fact, you don't have a clue as to the validity of your claims. In fact I > would dare say that, just as I am telling you here and now, that Holly is of > the same opinion, and it has nothing to do with trying to protect Teresa. > The fact is, that this Board has no say so in what she says in her DBS, > unless it is proven to be "private and/or confidential" information taken > from this list and this list alone. > > If she happens to make a rude statement, which some here have openly done > themselves, about someone else in her DBS, then it is between her and the > other person. Just as, if she does the same on a list like the ALL list, it > is up to the list moderator to act, and remove her from the list if that is > what is merited. Her report about David, may or may not have been correct. > Whether she stretched the truth is only for David and the others involved to > say. The fact still remains that she didn't get the information from the > Board list or the Exec list, and that, leave this Board, without the right > to get involved. > > It is absolutely no different than Fred Smoot and Chip Browns problem, that > was completely out of the realm of the Boards control. We can no sooner > tell Teresa she has to apologize to David, than any of you want to tell > Sharon what to do in her State. And where you find the idea to think we > can, is beyond me. > > I am not saying that David does not deserve an apology. We however cannot > force one to be given. I am not saying that a retraction is not warranted. > We however cannot force one to be made. If you want to try and make an > issue that she is not acting in the best interest of the Project, as the RAL > of the Project, then you need to get your ducks in a row and try to make > such a case, but pointing fingers and making accusations about others, is > placing yourself in no better light than what you are complaining about. > You are acting no better than what you are accusing Teresa of. Some of the > things that some of you have said and acted towards Holly is, in my opinion > far worse than anything Teresa has done, and you stand there proud to be > pointing your fngers. > > If you want to make a case, then make one on solid grounds. > But please, stop the crying about one person, while you do the same to > others. We are all allowed our opinions. But if you are going to stoop > down to try and convict someone of your own actions, please take a long look > in a mirror and see that your words against others are no better than the > words you seek to silence. > > Thanks, > Ron > From ???@??? Wed Apr 03 06:06:29 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA05729 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 22:15:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g333FtCl022555 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 22:15:56 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g333FFp23640; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 20:15:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 20:15:15 -0700 X-Original-Sender: pamreid@comcast.net Tue Apr 2 20:15:15 2002 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 22:14:00 -0500 From: Pam Reid Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera In-reply-to: <021301c1dab9$a15212c0$3da028d8@hppav> Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1827 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 31bb71f780ea9410dd642b4644e4a0cb I agree with you, Ron. I personally often dislike the tone that Teresa uses in her DBS posts. For that reason, I rarely read them. Teresa has the right of free speech, regardless of her AB position. The main problem I can see that could come about from the DBS reports is the way they are perceived by DBS readers. Since Teresa is a Board member, she is an "insider" and therefore it is quite possible that many readers will put a lot of stock into the editorial comments she makes and infer a great deal from her tone. However much I might not like that, it is Teresa's right to say what she pleases. Holly is NOT protecting Teresa in any way. Holly is allowing Teresa her freedom of speech, which she has no power to censure in any way. Pam -----Original Message----- From: Ron Eason [mailto:rkeason@tir.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 9:46 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera I would like to make an opinion. This is not in support of ANYONE ! It is an observation made, without prejudice to anyone and regarding no one person as being right or wrong. 1. Teresa is a Board Member. However, she is still an individual. She has every right, as do every one of us, to post messages concerning our opinions anywhere she chooses to. To the ALL list, or any other list, including personal email. 2. The DBS, is by subscription. As far as I know, she does not post it to the ALL list or to any other USGW sponsored list. (You may correct me if I am wrong). As such, she posts her DBS as an individual that also happens to be a member of the USGW Project and the RAL of said Project. But she does not write her DBS , AS the RAL or AS a Board Member. She writes it as Teresa Lindquist and sends it to people who CHOOSE to accept it into their Inboxes. 3. There is no where in the Bylaws, or any other guidelines that gives the Advisory Board any control over what private individuals do off of the Projects lists or Project pages. Now, I realize that there are many of you who are upset about her way of reporting what she sees and thinks. But she has the right to think it and to say it, if she chooses, without fear of reprisal from anyone else. Just as many of you, and myself included, have often done on the ALL list, with rude comments and accusations, just as has been made recently. Your accusations of collusion or of a protection of Teresa or every other accusation that has been made and every other rude comment that has been made is nothing more than conjecture on all of your parts. You presume to be able to know and read the mind and thoughts of another person, when in fact, you don't have a clue as to the validity of your claims. In fact I would dare say that, just as I am telling you here and now, that Holly is of the same opinion, and it has nothing to do with trying to protect Teresa. The fact is, that this Board has no say so in what she says in her DBS, unless it is proven to be "private and/or confidential" information taken from this list and this list alone. If she happens to make a rude statement, which some here have openly done themselves, about someone else in her DBS, then it is between her and the other person. Just as, if she does the same on a list like the ALL list, it is up to the list moderator to act, and remove her from the list if that is what is merited. Her report about David, may or may not have been correct. Whether she stretched the truth is only for David and the others involved to say. The fact still remains that she didn't get the information from the Board list or the Exec list, and that, leave this Board, without the right to get involved. It is absolutely no different than Fred Smoot and Chip Browns problem, that was completely out of the realm of the Boards control. We can no sooner tell Teresa she has to apologize to David, than any of you want to tell Sharon what to do in her State. And where you find the idea to think we can, is beyond me. I am not saying that David does not deserve an apology. We however cannot force one to be given. I am not saying that a retraction is not warranted. We however cannot force one to be made. If you want to try and make an issue that she is not acting in the best interest of the Project, as the RAL of the Project, then you need to get your ducks in a row and try to make such a case, but pointing fingers and making accusations about others, is placing yourself in no better light than what you are complaining about. You are acting no better than what you are accusing Teresa of. Some of the things that some of you have said and acted towards Holly is, in my opinion far worse than anything Teresa has done, and you stand there proud to be pointing your fngers. If you want to make a case, then make one on solid grounds. But please, stop the crying about one person, while you do the same to others. We are all allowed our opinions. But if you are going to stoop down to try and convict someone of your own actions, please take a long look in a mirror and see that your words against others are no better than the words you seek to silence. Thanks, Ron From ???@??? Wed Apr 03 06:06:29 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA09068 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 23:02:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33420Cl027787 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 23:02:01 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3340QB22486; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 21:00:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 21:00:26 -0700 X-Original-Sender: kheidel@tri.net Tue Apr 2 21:00:26 2002 Message-ID: <001101c1dac4$518c9f20$a1f499cd@sasnak.net> From: "Kathy Heidel" Old-To: References: <021301c1dab9$a15212c0$3da028d8@hppav> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 22:02:03 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1828 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 262b4a3b4c64250f3035c639d992c523 Ron I am able to almost agree with you, and I have not accused Holly or any other person on this Board of anything. other than Teresa. And I did not accuse her, I stated facts. I have asked her repeatedly to kindly omit my name on her DBS and she refuses to abide by my wishes. And isn't it a rather interesting observation that almost every person who has responded to Teresa's little posts have put "not to be used on the DBS". Why do you suppose that is? Reckon that no one trusts her and doesn't want to be the object of ridicule on the DBS? I would rather not have someone do a search on my name and come up with hits that lead to the DBS. That is AB business and I don't appreciate it do you? But I can come up with those for my name on any search engine and I can tell you it doesn't make the USGW P shine. Oh Well guess I just don't get it, Kathy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Eason" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 8:45 PM Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera > I would like to make an opinion. > > This is not in support of ANYONE ! > > It is an observation made, without prejudice to anyone > and regarding no one person as being right or wrong. > > 1. Teresa is a Board Member. However, she is still an individual. > She has every right, as do every one of us, to post messages concerning > our opinions anywhere she chooses to. To the ALL list, or any other > list, including personal email. > > 2. The DBS, is by subscription. As far as I know, she does not post it to > the ALL list or to any other USGW sponsored list. (You may correct me if I > am wrong). As such, she posts her DBS as an individual that also happens to > be a member of the USGW Project and the RAL of said Project. But she does > not write her DBS , AS the RAL or AS a Board Member. She writes it as > Teresa Lindquist and sends it to people who CHOOSE to accept it into their > Inboxes. > > 3. There is no where in the Bylaws, or any other guidelines that gives the > Advisory Board any control over what private individuals do off of the > Projects lists or Project pages. > > Now, I realize that there are many of you who are upset about her way of > reporting what she sees and thinks. But she has the right to think it and > to say it, if she chooses, without fear of reprisal from anyone else. Just > as many of you, and myself included, have often done on the ALL list, with > rude comments and accusations, just as has been made recently. > > Your accusations of collusion or of a protection of Teresa or every other > accusation that has been made and every other rude comment that has been > made is nothing more than conjecture on all of your parts. You presume to > be able to know and read the mind and thoughts of another person, when in > fact, you don't have a clue as to the validity of your claims. In fact I > would dare say that, just as I am telling you here and now, that Holly is of > the same opinion, and it has nothing to do with trying to protect Teresa. > The fact is, that this Board has no say so in what she says in her DBS, > unless it is proven to be "private and/or confidential" information taken > from this list and this list alone. > > If she happens to make a rude statement, which some here have openly done > themselves, about someone else in her DBS, then it is between her and the > other person. Just as, if she does the same on a list like the ALL list, it > is up to the list moderator to act, and remove her from the list if that is > what is merited. Her report about David, may or may not have been correct. > Whether she stretched the truth is only for David and the others involved to > say. The fact still remains that she didn't get the information from the > Board list or the Exec list, and that, leave this Board, without the right > to get involved. > > It is absolutely no different than Fred Smoot and Chip Browns problem, that > was completely out of the realm of the Boards control. We can no sooner > tell Teresa she has to apologize to David, than any of you want to tell > Sharon what to do in her State. And where you find the idea to think we > can, is beyond me. > > I am not saying that David does not deserve an apology. We however cannot > force one to be given. I am not saying that a retraction is not warranted. > We however cannot force one to be made. If you want to try and make an > issue that she is not acting in the best interest of the Project, as the RAL > of the Project, then you need to get your ducks in a row and try to make > such a case, but pointing fingers and making accusations about others, is > placing yourself in no better light than what you are complaining about. > You are acting no better than what you are accusing Teresa of. Some of the > things that some of you have said and acted towards Holly is, in my opinion > far worse than anything Teresa has done, and you stand there proud to be > pointing your fngers. > > If you want to make a case, then make one on solid grounds. > But please, stop the crying about one person, while you do the same to > others. We are all allowed our opinions. But if you are going to stoop > down to try and convict someone of your own actions, please take a long look > in a mirror and see that your words against others are no better than the > words you seek to silence. > > Thanks, > Ron > > From ???@??? Wed Apr 03 06:06:29 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA16424 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:38:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g335cnCl008413 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:38:49 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g335cGq24050; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 22:38:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 22:38:16 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Tue Apr 2 22:38:16 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 20:41:49 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <021301c1dab9$a15212c0$3da028d8@hppav> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1829 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: d4c66fa26c9af0d5526cd1849c79ea27 Hi Ron, I appreciate what you are saying, but using this logic, any elected individual, like Gary Condit or Bill Clinton or the Enron leaders are not accountable for what they do as individuals. I do not agree. When you put yourself in a public arena and up for election, then get elected, you have to hold yourself to a higher standard. The issue is not free speech, the issue is how Ms. Lindquist represents the Project and its members in her role as RAL to the *public.* Teresa has stated that she has subscribers who are not connected to the Project in any way, but who read what she writes for pure amusement. Do you really think that it is in the best interests of the USGW Project to do nothing??? If it our goal to allow ourselves to be portrayed as a bunch of irresponsible people, we are doing a pretty good job. I think there are things we can do. I suggest that any AB member go to Yahoo (where the DBS lives), put your own name in the search engine and see what you get. I'll betcha it includes references to the DBS, and I bet that if you are in there, it is not in a positive light. I suggest you compare what you read about yourself to what Ms. Lindquist writes about herself and assess who is getting the better end of the stick. The DBS is archived thru Yahoo, so what is said there has way more "punch" than might otherwise be the case. I agree we have no *control* outside our "chambers" but we do have the ability within the confines of Sturgis - p. 174 and 224 to discipline, suspend or expel a member who "misrepresents the organization and its officers to outside persons." While we cannot force Ms. Lindquist to do the right thing, we can limit her access to information as fuel for what she writes. This is not about opinions, this is about how one *uses* their opinions. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Ron Eason [mailto:rkeason@tir.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 6:46 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera I would like to make an opinion. This is not in support of ANYONE ! It is an observation made, without prejudice to anyone and regarding no one person as being right or wrong. 1. Teresa is a Board Member. However, she is still an individual. She has every right, as do every one of us, to post messages concerning our opinions anywhere she chooses to. To the ALL list, or any other list, including personal email. 2. The DBS, is by subscription. As far as I know, she does not post it to the ALL list or to any other USGW sponsored list. (You may correct me if I am wrong). As such, she posts her DBS as an individual that also happens to be a member of the USGW Project and the RAL of said Project. But she does not write her DBS , AS the RAL or AS a Board Member. She writes it as Teresa Lindquist and sends it to people who CHOOSE to accept it into their Inboxes. 3. There is no where in the Bylaws, or any other guidelines that gives the Advisory Board any control over what private individuals do off of the Projects lists or Project pages. Now, I realize that there are many of you who are upset about her way of reporting what she sees and thinks. But she has the right to think it and to say it, if she chooses, without fear of reprisal from anyone else. Just as many of you, and myself included, have often done on the ALL list, with rude comments and accusations, just as has been made recently. Your accusations of collusion or of a protection of Teresa or every other accusation that has been made and every other rude comment that has been made is nothing more than conjecture on all of your parts. You presume to be able to know and read the mind and thoughts of another person, when in fact, you don't have a clue as to the validity of your claims. In fact I would dare say that, just as I am telling you here and now, that Holly is of the same opinion, and it has nothing to do with trying to protect Teresa. The fact is, that this Board has no say so in what she says in her DBS, unless it is proven to be "private and/or confidential" information taken from this list and this list alone. If she happens to make a rude statement, which some here have openly done themselves, about someone else in her DBS, then it is between her and the other person. Just as, if she does the same on a list like the ALL list, it is up to the list moderator to act, and remove her from the list if that is what is merited. Her report about David, may or may not have been correct. Whether she stretched the truth is only for David and the others involved to say. The fact still remains that she didn't get the information from the Board list or the Exec list, and that, leave this Board, without the right to get involved. It is absolutely no different than Fred Smoot and Chip Browns problem, that was completely out of the realm of the Boards control. We can no sooner tell Teresa she has to apologize to David, than any of you want to tell Sharon what to do in her State. And where you find the idea to think we can, is beyond me. I am not saying that David does not deserve an apology. We however cannot force one to be given. I am not saying that a retraction is not warranted. We however cannot force one to be made. If you want to try and make an issue that she is not acting in the best interest of the Project, as the RAL of the Project, then you need to get your ducks in a row and try to make such a case, but pointing fingers and making accusations about others, is placing yourself in no better light than what you are complaining about. You are acting no better than what you are accusing Teresa of. Some of the things that some of you have said and acted towards Holly is, in my opinion far worse than anything Teresa has done, and you stand there proud to be pointing your fngers. If you want to make a case, then make one on solid grounds. But please, stop the crying about one person, while you do the same to others. We are all allowed our opinions. But if you are going to stoop down to try and convict someone of your own actions, please take a long look in a mirror and see that your words against others are no better than the words you seek to silence. Thanks, Ron From ???@??? Wed Apr 03 06:06:29 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA24642 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 02:27:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g337RVCl019208 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 02:27:31 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g337R0425891; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:27:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:27:00 -0700 X-Original-Sender: IsaiahHarrison@cs.com Wed Apr 3 00:27:00 2002 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020402213621.009ffc40@imap.cs.com> X-Sender: IsaiahHarrison@imap.cs.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 21:47:13 -0800 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Richard Harrison Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera In-Reply-To: <81.199dbbd4.29dbb12c@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Apparently-From: IsaiahHarrison@cs.com Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1830 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 0cc35da7a55feaeb960874cad93087bd At 08:13 PM 4/2/2002 -0500, you wrote: >In a message dated 4/2/2002 8:02:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, >IsaiahHarrison@cs.com writes: > > > > Should the Board take any action regarding Mr. Samuelson's complaint, and > > the long history of complaints regarding the DBS? > > > > -Isaiah > > > > > >Do you do pose two separate questions? *And* suggests lumping.. for lack of a >better word. > >Tina There are two questions, but action on either of them affects the other. -Isaiah From ???@??? Wed Apr 03 06:06:29 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA27554 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 03:19:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g338JkCl023699 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 03:19:47 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g338JKL20665; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:19:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:19:20 -0700 X-Original-Sender: tstowell@chattanooga.net Wed Apr 3 01:19:20 2002 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20020403030528.012bce60@mail.chattanooga.net> X-Sender: tstowell@mail.chattanooga.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 03:05:28 -0500 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Tim Stowell Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera In-Reply-To: <021301c1dab9$a15212c0$3da028d8@hppav> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.8 required=10.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,AWL version=2.11 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1833 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 7c70e2d916836289f651c856cd0dcc76 At 09:45 PM 4/2/02 -0500, R.Eason wrote: > We can no sooner tell , than any of you want to tell >Sharon what to do in her State. And where you find the idea to think we >can, is beyond me. Speaking of which - what ever happened to this issue? Tim From ???@??? Wed Apr 03 06:06:29 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA27571 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 03:20:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g338K5Cl023723 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 03:20:05 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g338JRf20733; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:19:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:19:27 -0700 X-Original-Sender: tstowell@chattanooga.net Wed Apr 3 01:19:27 2002 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20020403031153.0153a810@mail.chattanooga.net> X-Sender: tstowell@mail.chattanooga.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 03:11:53 -0500 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Tim Stowell Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020402213621.009ffc40@imap.cs.com> References: <81.199dbbd4.29dbb12c@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.8 required=10.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,AWL version=2.11 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1834 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: ded7097f2c002431fd0898bd56315d9f At 09:47 PM 4/2/02 -0800, you wrote: >At 08:13 PM 4/2/2002 -0500, you wrote: >>In a message dated 4/2/2002 8:02:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, >>IsaiahHarrison@cs.com writes: >> >> >> > Should the Board take any action regarding Mr. Samuelson's complaint, and >> > the long history of complaints regarding the DBS? >> > >> > -Isaiah >> > >> > >> >>Do you do pose two separate questions? *And* suggests lumping.. for lack of a >>better word. >> >>Tina > >There are two questions, but action on either of them affects the other. > >-Isaiah Or they could also be mutually exclusive. Mr. Samuelson's complaint is now while on the other hand you said the second question was 'the long history'. Tim From ???@??? Wed Apr 03 06:06:29 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA27559 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 03:19:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g338JtCl023702 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 03:19:56 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g338JUn20802; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:19:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:19:30 -0700 X-Original-Sender: tstowell@chattanooga.net Wed Apr 3 01:19:30 2002 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20020403032044.01153c40@mail.chattanooga.net> X-Sender: tstowell@mail.chattanooga.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 03:20:44 -0500 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Tim Stowell Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020402095246.00a01840@imap.cs.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.8 required=10.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,AWL version=2.11 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1835 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 135d1c1719c08cc00a3b006737718d3a At 11:32 AM 4/2/02 -0800, Jana wrote: >***The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied >including mention of it in a count of how many posts were made by whom.*** No disclaimer from me - for I'm sure it'll be ignored anyway. >Fellow AB Members, > >I agree with Isaiah. One would think that by expressing our opinions on this >subject repeatedly and consistently as so many of us have over the term of >this AB year, that we were moving towards *doing* something to change the >way our own RAL published responsibly in the DBS. One would think that by >having access to what she has called the "secret lists" the RAL would have >learned that what we post here is reputable and honest in intent and does >not include any manipulation to subvert the Project as she has suggested in >the past. One could even dream that the RAL might offer positive comment in >the DBS.... one might dream.... One might turn blue waiting. >However, it has been quite evident that our NC sees little merit in what so >many of us have said but and chooses to instead "protect" the RAL *from* us. >Therefore, the RAL apparently has a unique license to do say whatever she >wants to say and do whatever she wants to do whenever she wants to do it, >without any consequences, all because the RAL says she "reserves the right." >It does not matter what the RAL says or that she baits people, nor does it >matter when what she does turns people away from the Project in disgust. >Naturally, the (heaven forbid) *feelings* of earnest hard working well >intended fellow board members are unimportant as well. And, this behavior is >not limited to AB members... anyone in the Project is fair game. In the >present instance a relatively simple error was reported as an attempt to >"grab or steal" data. Immediate responsiveness to complaint regarding the >error or immediate correction/resolution of the error goes unreported. >Teresa *gets* to take what Project members say out of context, twist it and >tweak it until it looks pretty rotten and then *gets* to publish the results >in in a way that offers no recourse for victims nor any accountability or >correction from her. It all but guarantees negative impressions will be >cast. No wonder we have so few stepping forward to volunteer. > >Of 9 AB members who have responded with comments on Mr. Samuelsen's >complaint, 7 have taken issue with the *way* Ms. Lindquist operates and >called for retraction, correction, clarification and/or apology. But once >again, the NC is silent, apparently ignoring the voices of her board or >treating their opinions as unimportant. Gee, do you wonder why many feel >frustrated and get nothing done?? Do you wonder why we are seeing >progressively less and less participation from AB members???? I take issue with it too - and have for a long time but until someone or a group of persons can find a solution..... Regarding the NC's supposed silence - when I was NC - a good chunk of the conversations took place during working hours - as has this one - so I know where the NC is coming from when she can't or doesn't answer in the hours from 8 to 5 or thereabouts. >One would hope that the NC *has* listened to those of us who have spoken up >before and will not allow herself to be used as an intermediary for the RAL >to post messages. One would hope the NC will demonstrate leadership and >insist that the RAL take personal responsibility and post on EXEC if she has >anything to say in her own defense or go unheard. One would hope that *if* >the RAL in_any_way_ makes mention of any discussion taking place here this >week in the DBS especially without addressing us herself here in this forum, >that the NC would bump the RAL off the EXEC list (including the RAL posting >a count of posts and who made them). Do I think the NC will do any of this >or take action? NO. Hence my question concerning proxy - since it has been used at least once here. Tim From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA17724 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 08:20:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33DK1Cl023219 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 08:20:02 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g33DJJi24376; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 06:19:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 06:19:19 -0700 X-Original-Sender: kheidel@tri.net Wed Apr 3 06:19:18 2002 Message-ID: <005301c1db12$62d05800$8ff499cd@sasnak.net> From: "Kathy Heidel" Old-To: References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020402095246.00a01840@imap.cs.com> <3.0.5.32.20020403032044.01153c40@mail.chattanooga.net> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] The DBS Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 07:20:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: <44D2P.A.t8F.XFwq8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1836 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: e118460d71925fd1831217fe8661ef9e Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 2 Answering Tim's question Proxy Voting Sturgis pgs 147 - 148 In non-profit corporations or organizations, voting by proxy is legal in most states only if it is authorized by statute and provided for in the bylaws of the org. Board members cannot vote by proxy in their meetings, since this would mean the delegation of a discretionary legislative duty which they cannot delegate. The use of proxies in organizations in which all members have an equal vote is ill advised and is never permissible unless specifically authorized by the bylaws. Kathy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Stowell" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:20 AM Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] The DBS > At 11:32 AM 4/2/02 -0800, Jana wrote: > >***The use of any part of this reply in the DBS or anywhere else is denied > >including mention of it in a count of how many posts were made by whom.*** > > No disclaimer from me - for I'm sure it'll be ignored anyway. > > >Fellow AB Members, > > > >I agree with Isaiah. One would think that by expressing our opinions on this > >subject repeatedly and consistently as so many of us have over the term of > >this AB year, that we were moving towards *doing* something to change the > >way our own RAL published responsibly in the DBS. One would think that by > >having access to what she has called the "secret lists" the RAL would have > >learned that what we post here is reputable and honest in intent and does > >not include any manipulation to subvert the Project as she has suggested in > >the past. One could even dream that the RAL might offer positive comment in > >the DBS.... one might dream.... > > One might turn blue waiting. > > >However, it has been quite evident that our NC sees little merit in what so > >many of us have said but and chooses to instead "protect" the RAL *from* us. > >Therefore, the RAL apparently has a unique license to do say whatever she > >wants to say and do whatever she wants to do whenever she wants to do it, > >without any consequences, all because the RAL says she "reserves the right." > >It does not matter what the RAL says or that she baits people, nor does it > >matter when what she does turns people away from the Project in disgust. > >Naturally, the (heaven forbid) *feelings* of earnest hard working well > >intended fellow board members are unimportant as well. And, this behavior is > >not limited to AB members... anyone in the Project is fair game. In the > >present instance a relatively simple error was reported as an attempt to > >"grab or steal" data. Immediate responsiveness to complaint regarding the > >error or immediate correction/resolution of the error goes unreported. > >Teresa *gets* to take what Project members say out of context, twist it and > >tweak it until it looks pretty rotten and then *gets* to publish the results > >in in a way that offers no recourse for victims nor any accountability or > >correction from her. It all but guarantees negative impressions will be > >cast. No wonder we have so few stepping forward to volunteer. > > > >Of 9 AB members who have responded with comments on Mr. Samuelsen's > >complaint, 7 have taken issue with the *way* Ms. Lindquist operates and > >called for retraction, correction, clarification and/or apology. But once > >again, the NC is silent, apparently ignoring the voices of her board or > >treating their opinions as unimportant. Gee, do you wonder why many feel > >frustrated and get nothing done?? Do you wonder why we are seeing > >progressively less and less participation from AB members???? > > I take issue with it too - and have for a long time but until someone or > a group of persons can find a solution..... > > Regarding the NC's supposed silence - when I was NC - a good chunk of the > conversations took place during working hours - as has this one - so I know > where the NC is coming from when she can't or doesn't answer in the hours > from > 8 to 5 or thereabouts. > > >One would hope that the NC *has* listened to those of us who have spoken up > >before and will not allow herself to be used as an intermediary for the RAL > >to post messages. One would hope the NC will demonstrate leadership and > >insist that the RAL take personal responsibility and post on EXEC if she has > >anything to say in her own defense or go unheard. One would hope that *if* > >the RAL in_any_way_ makes mention of any discussion taking place here this > >week in the DBS especially without addressing us herself here in this forum, > >that the NC would bump the RAL off the EXEC list (including the RAL posting > >a count of posts and who made them). Do I think the NC will do any of this > >or take action? NO. > > Hence my question concerning proxy - since it has been used at least once > here. > > Tim > > From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA27763 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 10:09:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33F97Cl007640 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 10:09:08 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g33F8dh12403; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 08:08:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 08:08:39 -0700 X-Original-Sender: wchs@getgoin.net Wed Apr 3 08:08:39 2002 Message-ID: <005301c1db20$da40c9c0$4d04c941@wchs> From: "Phyllis Rippee" Old-To: Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 09:04:25 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Declude-Spoolname: D1a5c51e9004c9731.SMD Subject: [Board-Exec] Okay! Resent-Message-ID: <2ELmrD.A.kBD.3rxq8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1837 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 487c65010496739320c944b9037b743c Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 6 So, based on Ron's statement that posts to these lists may be reposted anywhere at any time........why have Board-Exec? Phyllis From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA00360 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 10:31:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33FVQCl010842 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 10:31:28 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g33FUxx24334; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 08:30:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 08:30:59 -0700 X-Original-Sender: wchs@getgoin.net Wed Apr 3 08:30:59 2002 Message-ID: <007c01c1db23$f9ea3a60$4d04c941@wchs> From: "Phyllis Rippee" Old-To: Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 09:26:49 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Declude-Spoolname: D1f9a593700fe0ffa.SMD Subject: [Board-Exec] P.A. Resent-Message-ID: <7mb_Q.A._7F.zAyq8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1838 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 88e373da4de6a7b6ae709c919288d65d Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 7 Tim and Isaiah......parliamentary authority (Sturgis) prohibits a member of the assembly from going outside of the assembly and making statements about assembly business and/or assembly members. There are penalities for doing this. Perhaps Kathy will quote Sturgis for us. Phyllis From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA15664 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 12:50:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33HoCCl000437 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 12:50:12 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g33Hmj515038; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 10:48:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 10:48:45 -0700 X-Original-Sender: gingerh@shawneelink.com Wed Apr 3 10:48:45 2002 Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 10:24:42 -0600 From: GingerH Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] P.A. Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-id: <007101c1db37$33a32a60$0101a8c0@pavilion> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <007c01c1db23$f9ea3a60$4d04c941@wchs> Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1839 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: f3a0d1111aa240cc9799bb36b14ae495 Please define assembly. Thanks. Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phyllis Rippee" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:26 AM Subject: [Board-Exec] P.A. > Tim and Isaiah......parliamentary authority (Sturgis) prohibits a member of > the assembly from going outside of the assembly and making statements about > assembly business and/or assembly members. > > There are penalities for doing this. Perhaps Kathy will quote Sturgis for > us. > > Phyllis > From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA22671 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 13:54:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33IsQCl009536 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 13:54:26 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g33Irtx12382; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 11:53:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 11:53:55 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Wed Apr 3 11:53:54 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] P.A. Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 09:38:16 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <007101c1db37$33a32a60$0101a8c0@pavilion> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1841 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 52e2170955d367423698736fe8f4c879 Merriam - Webster Online: Main Entry: as·sem·bly Pronunciation: &-'sem-blE Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural -blies Etymology: Middle English assemblee, from Middle French, from Old French, from assembler Date: 14th century 1 : a company of persons gathered for deliberation and legislation, worship, or entertainment (successive entries go into legislative bodies - irrelevant to us) Dictionary.com: as·sem·bly Pronunciation Key (-smbl) n. pl. as·sem·blies 1) a) The act of assembling. b) The state of being assembled. 2) A group of persons gathered together for a common reason, as for a legislative, religious, educational, or social purpose. (ditto as above... the next definitions go into legislative, governmental stuff - irrelevant to us) Page 106 - Sturgis: Meetings and Conventions Defined A *meeting* is an official assembly of the members of an organization or board for any length of time during which the members do not separate for a recess. It covers the period from the time the group convenes until the time it adjourns. Hope this clarifies it for you. Jana -----Original Message----- From: GingerH [mailto:gingerh@shawneelink.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 8:25 AM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] P.A. Please define assembly. Thanks. Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phyllis Rippee" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:26 AM Subject: [Board-Exec] P.A. > Tim and Isaiah......parliamentary authority (Sturgis) prohibits a member of > the assembly from going outside of the assembly and making statements about > assembly business and/or assembly members. > > There are penalities for doing this. Perhaps Kathy will quote Sturgis for > us. > > Phyllis > From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16430 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 12:58:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33HwZCl001620 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 12:58:35 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g33HumM23011; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 10:56:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 10:56:48 -0700 X-Original-Sender: kheidel@tri.net Wed Apr 3 10:56:48 2002 Message-ID: <007801c1db39$27522c00$9af499cd@sasnak.net> From: "Kathy Heidel" Old-To: "Teresa" Old-Cc: "Board-Exec" Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 11:58:24 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Subject: [Board-Exec] Complaint Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1840 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 327eaf1c7b1b17a7cc79af5540f5189a This is the email I have sent to Yahoo. I have waited for Teresa to answer my email and she has not responded. I am CCing so that you will know what I wrote and it will not be taken out of context for DBS. I went back through my emails and I have been asking Teresa to leave my name off of her DBS since Sept 6, 2001. Don't you think I have been patient enough? Kathy To the Staff, I have since September requested that Teresa Lindquist Representative at Large of the USGenWeb Project refrain from quoting my posts which she has taken from the USGenWeb Project Board Meetings and placed on her Daily Board Show which resides on Yahoo Groups. These posts are frequently rearranged or misquoted and different meanings applied to them. I have repeatedly been held up for ridicule and appear very inappropriately to "not get it" in her words as far as my understanding to various motions and etc. I am not stupid and I resent being represented as such. I have sent her email stating that she does not have my approval to quote my posts and this has been overlooked by Ms. Lindquist although in essence she is taking copyrighted material from Rootsweb Archives and placing them on Yahoo in the form of her DBS. I have been a member of the USGenWeb Project as a County Coordinator, Assistant State Coordinator for several years and Advisory Board member since September 1, 2001. I have used your search engine, typing in my own name, and several others, and have come up with many "hits" which lead the general public to the DBS. I feel that my reputation is being injured by these posts which are attributed to me and I would like to ask that perhaps you might be able to expunge them from the Yahoo Archives and ask Ms. Lindquist to not use my information on her site again. I have read your TOS and I feel that Ms. Lindquist has overstepped these guidelines, especially #6 a. and f. Sincerely, Kathy Welch Heidel "I was cut out to be rich.....but I was sewn up wrong!" Kathy Welch Heidel South Dakota, West ASC ~ USGWP Dewey Co. South Dakota http://www.rootsweb.com/~sddewey/ Kansas Native American Genealogy http://skyways.lib.ks.us/genweb/nativeam Kansas Native American Discussion List http://groups.yahoo.com/group/KansasNA/ Kansas in the Civil War http://skyways.lib.ks.us/genweb/civilwar/index.html McPherson Co. Kansas http://skyways.lib.ks.us/genweb/mcpherso/index.html Shannon Co., MO http://www.rootsweb.com/~moshanno/ USGWP NW/Plains CC Rep. "The world is full of stories, and from time to time they permit themselves to be told." Old Cherokee Saying From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA26464 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 14:29:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33JTJCl014320 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 14:29:20 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g33JSlL25978; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 12:28:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 12:28:47 -0700 X-Original-Sender: rkeason@tir.com Wed Apr 3 12:28:47 2002 Message-ID: <00ae01c1db45$89604a60$74a028d8@hppav> From: "Ron Eason" Old-To: References: <005301c1db20$da40c9c0$4d04c941@wchs> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay! Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 14:27:02 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: <9TT1eD.A.sVG.vf1q8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1842 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 1ee61618703761fe91e2c70d07e3c75a Phyllis, Your statement is no better than anything you have ever protested about, coming from the DBS. You have blatantly, misquoted me. You are here, like part of a mob, complaining about something you have done. The statement you made about what I said is FALSE. I didn't say that any where in my post. So what makes you any different than what you are complaining about. Please, go read my statement again and show us all where you got that from! And if you are talking about, in the first statement, then you have read it wrong. It refers to her use of personal email to make her opinions known. Did you write to me and ask to verify if that was what I meant? Something that is also being complained about. This is exactly what I was referring to when I said that there are others in this body that do no better than Teresa, yet they are complaining. But I will not ask you for a retraction and I will not ask you for an apology. But it would be nice if everyone would take a nice long look at themselves before pointing their fingers. Ron ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phyllis Rippee" > So, based on Ron's statement that posts to these lists may be reposted > anywhere at any time........why have Board-Exec? > Phyllis From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA27744 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 14:40:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33JeBCl015929 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 14:40:12 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g33JdXK32215; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 12:39:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 12:39:33 -0700 X-Original-Sender: gingerh@shawneelink.com Wed Apr 3 12:39:32 2002 Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:35:08 -0600 From: GingerH Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] P.A. Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-id: <00b301c1db46$aac1b620$0101a8c0@pavilion> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1843 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 0135089b7edb0bf79d16ed8846192111 I'm aware of the definition but thank you anyway. I was asking Phyllis her definition. Whether she meant the whole assembly (organization) or just the board meeting. Your efforts at gagging a board member can have far reaching consequences. In your zealous attempt to get rid of a board member you may intiiate something that can have an unpleasant effect on the project as a whole. These types of efforts generally result in more harm than good. It's a real shame there isn't as much effort expended into addressing project issues as there is in this piddly stuff. Anyone who ran for this board thinking they were not going to catch flak has spent their time in the project with blinders on. Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana Black" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 11:38 AM Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] P.A. > Merriam - Webster Online: > > Main Entry: as·sem·bly > Pronunciation: &-'sem-blE > Function: noun > Inflected Form(s): plural -blies > Etymology: Middle English assemblee, from Middle French, from Old French, > from assembler > Date: 14th century > 1 : a company of persons gathered for deliberation and legislation, worship, > or entertainment > > (successive entries go into legislative bodies - irrelevant to us) > > Dictionary.com: > > as·sem·bly Pronunciation Key (-smbl) > n. pl. as·sem·blies > > 1) > a) The act of assembling. > b) The state of being assembled. > 2) A group of persons gathered together for a common reason, as for a > legislative, religious, educational, or social purpose. > > (ditto as above... the next definitions go into legislative, governmental > stuff - irrelevant to us) > > Page 106 - Sturgis: > > Meetings and Conventions Defined > > A *meeting* is an official assembly of the members of an organization or > board for any length of time during which the members do not separate for a > recess. It covers the period from the time the group convenes until the time > it adjourns. > > Hope this clarifies it for you. > > Jana > -----Original Message----- > From: GingerH [mailto:gingerh@shawneelink.com] > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 8:25 AM > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] P.A. > > > Please define assembly. > > Thanks. > Ginger > gingerh@shawneelink.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Phyllis Rippee" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:26 AM > Subject: [Board-Exec] P.A. > > > > Tim and Isaiah......parliamentary authority (Sturgis) prohibits a member > of > > the assembly from going outside of the assembly and making statements > about > > assembly business and/or assembly members. > > > > There are penalities for doing this. Perhaps Kathy will quote Sturgis for > > us. > > > > Phyllis > > > From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29529 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 14:55:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33JtoCl018244 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 14:55:51 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g33JtHW12600; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 12:55:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 12:55:17 -0700 X-Original-Sender: rkeason@tir.com Wed Apr 3 12:55:17 2002 Message-ID: <00b801c1db49$3cc93780$74a028d8@hppav> From: "Ron Eason" Old-To: References: Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 14:53:32 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1844 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: e0b04295e3cd83bc8e28b0bc0431fced Jana, I did not say that they weren't accountable for their representation of the Project. I believe if you re-read it, you will see that I said, if someone wants to make a case, they should do so, but properly, not just complaining about what or how she portrays other people. And what I said was: " The fact is, that this Board has no say so in what she says in her DBS, unless it is proven to be "private and/or confidential" information taken from this list and this list alone." If this is the case, then we do have every right to charge her and discipline her for breach of confidentiality, but as everyone knows, she only reports how many posts have been made to this list, and by whom, which is not necessarily illegal. As far as a public figure is concerned, they have a responsibility to those that elected them, not necessarily to those they serve with, as far as editorializing. There is much leeway granted to editorializing about public figures unless the editorial is blatantly false and causes damage to the individual, however this must be proven in a court of law. I doubt that you would find Teresa's editorials to be blatant lies. They may be out of context or we may not like her personal opinion about it, but it would be rather hard to find a court that would convict because we do not like what and how she says something. I do not disagree that most people may not like what or how she editorializes her personal opinions. I do not disagree that sometimes, like in David's case, he may have been made to look bad when it very well may have been an innocent oversight. I am not disagreeing to any of that. I am merely saying that you have to look at things differently when you are a public figure. We are all public figures. If we were CEO's or Politicians, we would have to expect that there will be editorials done about us in major newspapers that we may not like. But most of the time, whether you like it or not, it does come with the territory/job, as Tim said about Holly. Is it okay for some here to ridicule or speak rudely to or about the NC ? What makes that any different from editorials in the DBS ? I don't see any, myself! And those comments are made openly on the BOARD-L, which are all archived at Rootsweb. Shall we go do a search and see who has the most offenses ? Is there a kettle and pot syndrome afoot ? So, if you want to charge Teresa with something, then do it properly and legally according to the Bylaws and Sturgis. If you just don't like that she talks about what you said, I would suggest a personal remedy as you can. But I would also suggest that if any of you can find rude comments in a search of the Rootsweb system about our NC, or anyone else on this Board, then maybe you are not the person to be casting the first stone. Thanks, Ron From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA00760 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 15:05:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33K54Cl019607 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 15:05:05 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g33K45B13356; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 13:04:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 13:04:05 -0700 X-Original-Sender: kheidel@tri.net Wed Apr 3 13:04:04 2002 Message-ID: <00e901c1db4a$eea46aa0$9af499cd@sasnak.net> From: "Kathy Heidel" Old-To: References: <00b301c1db46$aac1b620$0101a8c0@pavilion> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] P.A. Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 14:00:03 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1845 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: a9190193a0dcfec047159508ad4a8248 I have no intention of gagging anyone on the AB Ginger and please don't insinuate that. I am and have been asking Teresa to refrain from using my name on her DBS. That is not the AB it is a newsletter written separate from this Board by a member of this AB who is misrepresenting us. She can talk about me in this forum in any way, shape or form and I can respond. I have no way to rebut what she states in the DBS. And she is taking material from this forum and placing on another. I understand Editorials, and I can respond to them most places but the DBS. Kathy ----- Original Message ----- From: "GingerH" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:35 PM Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] P.A. > I'm aware of the definition but thank you > anyway. > > I was asking Phyllis her definition. Whether > she meant the whole assembly (organization) > or just the board meeting. > > Your efforts at gagging a board member can > have far reaching consequences. In your > zealous attempt to get rid of a board member > you may intiiate something that can have an > unpleasant effect on the project as a whole. > These types of efforts generally result in more > harm than good. > > It's a real shame there isn't as much effort expended > into addressing project issues as there is in this > piddly stuff. Anyone who ran for this board thinking > they were not going to catch flak has spent their time > in the project with blinders on. > > Ginger > gingerh@shawneelink.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jana Black" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 11:38 AM > Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] P.A. > > > > Merriam - Webster Online: > > > > Main Entry: as·sem·bly > > Pronunciation: &-'sem-blE > > Function: noun > > Inflected Form(s): plural -blies > > Etymology: Middle English assemblee, from Middle French, from Old French, > > from assembler > > Date: 14th century > > 1 : a company of persons gathered for deliberation and legislation, > worship, > > or entertainment > > > > (successive entries go into legislative bodies - irrelevant to us) > > > > Dictionary.com: > > > > as·sem·bly Pronunciation Key (-smbl) > > n. pl. as·sem·blies > > > > 1) > > a) The act of assembling. > > b) The state of being assembled. > > 2) A group of persons gathered together for a common reason, as for a > > legislative, religious, educational, or social purpose. > > > > (ditto as above... the next definitions go into legislative, governmental > > stuff - irrelevant to us) > > > > Page 106 - Sturgis: > > > > Meetings and Conventions Defined > > > > A *meeting* is an official assembly of the members of an organization or > > board for any length of time during which the members do not separate for > a > > recess. It covers the period from the time the group convenes until the > time > > it adjourns. > > > > Hope this clarifies it for you. > > > > Jana > > -----Original Message----- > > From: GingerH [mailto:gingerh@shawneelink.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 8:25 AM > > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] P.A. > > > > > > Please define assembly. > > > > Thanks. > > Ginger > > gingerh@shawneelink.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Phyllis Rippee" > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:26 AM > > Subject: [Board-Exec] P.A. > > > > > > > Tim and Isaiah......parliamentary authority (Sturgis) prohibits a member > > of > > > the assembly from going outside of the assembly and making statements > > about > > > assembly business and/or assembly members. > > > > > > There are penalities for doing this. Perhaps Kathy will quote Sturgis > for > > > us. > > > > > > Phyllis > > > > > > > From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA15448 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 17:11:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33MBQCl006862 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 17:11:26 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g33MArM14308; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 15:10:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 15:10:53 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Wed Apr 3 15:10:52 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 12:48:32 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <00b801c1db49$3cc93780$74a028d8@hppav> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1847 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 97b25cb60076d2255663804f4a23c1dc Ron, Not to belabor this, as we may have to agree to disagree. In fact, as Kathy has suggested, this AB does have say in what Ms. Lindquist says in her DBS using, as Kathy suggested, the TOS for Yahoo. I too have filed a complaint as Ms. Lindquist is using her usual technique of refusing to respond or show any kind of respect for fellow AB members. Now, I wait to see what she puts in the DBS this week and I wait to see what Yahoo thinks. We are not talking about editorializing, we are talking about unethical journalistic technique as I have stated before and it has nothing to do with whether any of the rest of us have ever made "rude" comments. Teresa regularly commits the "sin of omission" in not checking out the facts of a given situation before reporting as fact half-truths. There is a huge difference between half-truth, distortion and rude commentary. And, BTW, if there is a "pot and the kettle" syndrome, I am sure you will agree the NC is no less guilty than any of the rest of us including yourself... Mostly, though, I agree with you that we need to approach this properly and legally. Some of us have begun that course by registering complaints with Yahoo and by presenting here what Sturgis says regarding the standards an AB member must hold themselves to. If you agree, I suggest you also begin to use legitimate avenues to remedy the situation. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Ron Eason [mailto:rkeason@tir.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 11:54 AM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera Jana, I did not say that they weren't accountable for their representation of the Project. I believe if you re-read it, you will see that I said, if someone wants to make a case, they should do so, but properly, not just complaining about what or how she portrays other people. And what I said was: " The fact is, that this Board has no say so in what she says in her DBS, unless it is proven to be "private and/or confidential" information taken from this list and this list alone." If this is the case, then we do have every right to charge her and discipline her for breach of confidentiality, but as everyone knows, she only reports how many posts have been made to this list, and by whom, which is not necessarily illegal. As far as a public figure is concerned, they have a responsibility to those that elected them, not necessarily to those they serve with, as far as editorializing. There is much leeway granted to editorializing about public figures unless the editorial is blatantly false and causes damage to the individual, however this must be proven in a court of law. I doubt that you would find Teresa's editorials to be blatant lies. They may be out of context or we may not like her personal opinion about it, but it would be rather hard to find a court that would convict because we do not like what and how she says something. I do not disagree that most people may not like what or how she editorializes her personal opinions. I do not disagree that sometimes, like in David's case, he may have been made to look bad when it very well may have been an innocent oversight. I am not disagreeing to any of that. I am merely saying that you have to look at things differently when you are a public figure. We are all public figures. If we were CEO's or Politicians, we would have to expect that there will be editorials done about us in major newspapers that we may not like. But most of the time, whether you like it or not, it does come with the territory/job, as Tim said about Holly. Is it okay for some here to ridicule or speak rudely to or about the NC ? What makes that any different from editorials in the DBS ? I don't see any, myself! And those comments are made openly on the BOARD-L, which are all archived at Rootsweb. Shall we go do a search and see who has the most offenses ? Is there a kettle and pot syndrome afoot ? So, if you want to charge Teresa with something, then do it properly and legally according to the Bylaws and Sturgis. If you just don't like that she talks about what you said, I would suggest a personal remedy as you can. But I would also suggest that if any of you can find rude comments in a search of the Rootsweb system about our NC, or anyone else on this Board, then maybe you are not the person to be casting the first stone. Thanks, Ron From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA11830 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 16:40:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33LeSCl002621 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 16:40:29 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g33LdoY08489; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 14:39:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 14:39:50 -0700 X-Original-Sender: wchs@getgoin.net Wed Apr 3 14:39:50 2002 Message-ID: <007d01c1db57$81c084c0$c9967a3f@wchs> From: "Phyllis Rippee" Old-To: Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 15:35:41 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Declude-Spoolname: D760e083f0282c597.SMD Subject: [Board-Exec] DBS, etc. Resent-Message-ID: <3yRtqC.A.bEC.ma3q8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1846 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 2d281f3339af827f3ec70a063a600ad8 Ron Eason wrote: . " Teresa is a Board Member. However, she is still an individual. She has every right, as do every one of us, to post messages concerning our opinions anywhere she chooses to. To the ALL list, or any other list, including personal email." Read the above very carefully and you will see that Ron has said: "She has every right to post messages concerning our opinions anywhere she chooses to." Now, apparently, that right applies only to Teresa.....because Mr. Eason does not like the fact that I posted a message concerning his opinion on "anywhere I choose", namely Board-Exec! _________________ Now, Ginger, you piously say we should be discussing issues? Yesterday, I posted on Board-L a list of the EC questions that Holly said needed further discussion. Holly came on Board-L and clarified a point about the first question. I made a statement and then, after thinking about it last night, I changed my mind. That statement was posted on Board-L this morning. Guess what......for all the "wanting" to discuss issues.....not a single, solitary Advisory Board member has gone on Board-L to comment on the EC issues yet to be opined/opinionated upon. So, hate me; get on your high horse and make yourself feel that you are better than I am; it makes no difference to me. Some of you may have "bought into" Teresa's lie on DBS that I am positioning myself for another run for NC. Teresa makes definite, positive statements in the DBS....not bothering to designate truth from supposition.....and that's where she is doing wrong. The truth is that the only thing that I plan on running for......and that will be in 149 days...is my 245-acres of rocks, rills and wooded hills, where the coyotes howl, the cows moo to their calves and the raccoons and 'possums come to the back porch for the dog food graciously and amply supplied by their hostess. Phyllis From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA19474 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 17:49:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33Mn7Cl012139 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 17:49:07 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g33MmCm22520; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 15:48:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 15:48:12 -0700 X-Original-Sender: rkeason@tir.com Wed Apr 3 15:48:12 2002 Message-ID: <016a01c1db61$6419af00$74a028d8@hppav> From: "Ron Eason" Old-To: References: <007d01c1db57$81c084c0$c9967a3f@wchs> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS, etc. Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 17:46:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: <46H7h.A.ofF.sa4q8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1848 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 98a42b117fe60330eb8d0e149316221c > She has every right, as do every one of us, to post messages concerning > our opinions anywhere she chooses to. To the ALL list, or any other list, > including personal email." > Phyllis, You have your opinion, and if you ask me, I will tell you that what I said was that she, as do we, ALL have our own rights to post messages concerning our opinions anywhere. I will grant to you that the grammar may have been a little lacking. However, as you would like for her to do, you didn't ask for confirmation before reprinting my statement, even though you were wrong in your assumption of what I meant to say. Yes, the word "our" should have been "her" or else the sentence possibly should have been restructured. The point is still valid and it is still a true statement. Some got it, you didn't. And I don't care if you want to post a message concerning my opinion. Feel free. BUT, if you are going to complain about Teresa to everyone else, then you should be obliged to do as much as you would want her to do, which is check her facts before printing them or at least ensure that what she is printing is in context. My point is that you did the same thing. I made a mistake in grammar, and you grabbed it and ran with an entirely different idea from what I was saying, or attempting to. As Jana and Kathy have done, there are avenues for those who feel they have had enough. I personally have not had a problem. I am sure it is not because I am anyone's pet, but my name has been in the DBS often enough, I just have not felt threatened by it or hindered from it. Regardless of what she says in her DBS, I am most positive that there are twice as many private emails by some here and elsewhere that have much worse to say about me than Teresa would or could. I have taken attacks openly from Tim acting as NC, from Linda Lewis acting as Archives Rep. and from countless other Board Members and CC's alike. I've been accused of lying, stealing and every other form of unGodliness you can think of, all because I didn't fit into a certain Archives mold. Not that my opinion was wrong, but because it was different from others. The Bylaws say that an SP can have their directory any where they choose to put it, just like a state or a county and that their files can reside on any server they choose, just like a state or county. But because we chose not to put our files into the Archives, we were branded and even de-linked. There is no law that says you have to, but that is what THEY wanted. So, I have had it from all sides. The pettiness of it all bothers me, but the attacks and the mis-information do not. Tim and others will tell you that it is because we tried to file as a "for-profit" inc. however if that was the only reason, when we had already changed it, (because of my error), and we changed it before the vote was finished, and yet, it was not stopped. It was not stopped because that is the way, SOME wanted it. They wanted me out of the way. So I have been at it with the best. Teresa's DBS is nothing in comparison. Phyllis, truly, I doubt that anyone hates anyone else, of course I do not profess to read minds, so there could be exceptions, but there certainly does need to be a bit more cooperation and courtesy amongst this group and a lot less agitation by strong wills who want to fight back because they don't get their way. Attacking people and personalities and being rude is not in anyone's best interest. There is plenty of work to do. Can we get to some of it. And I would also like to know what has become of the grievance ? Thanks, Ron From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:22 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA28642 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 19:23:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g340NWCl024201 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 19:23:33 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g340N6W10760; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 17:23:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 17:23:06 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Wed Apr 3 17:23:05 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] DBS, etc. Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 14:50:48 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <016a01c1db61$6419af00$74a028d8@hppav> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: <1MW7QD.A.6nC.qz5q8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1850 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: ed515d243240e8642048c9a01566bc6c Hi Ron, I want to clarify one thing and ditto one thing. CLARIFICATION: I am not upset about what Teresa says about me personally - I grew way thick enough skin by about September 2 to take care of that What bothers me is the effect her words have on overall progress within the Project. Waaaay out here in CA I am in pretty good contact and go to regular meetings including lots of CA CCs (we all wear multiple hats). But for two CCs that I know, the rest all won't sub to or read ALL-L or BOARD-L because they refuse to sift thru the "garbage" to get worthy information. This means we have no means to communicate with the majority of people involved in our Project. I think it is a real problem. None read DBS, but many refer to Ms. Lindquist as "that woman who is such a troublemaker." What bothers me is the fact that these same very good people mostly do not vote because they do not feel informed and they are responsible, intelligent people who produce amazing county sites. They do not vote because they will not tolerate the level of immature interaction that mostly takes place on ALL. This, I think, affects they Project as a whole in a very negative way! Meanwhile, when good people like David get trashed in a venue like DBS open to outsiders, it also casts a shadow over the entire Project. This is what I find unconscionable and is what was the basis for my complaint to Yahoo. DITTO: "what *has* become of the grievance?" The NC is correct in saying we have no way of knowing what she is thinking when she does not reply. No wonder we resort sometimes to "make assumptions about (her) based on nothing but pure conjecture" Shrug. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Ron Eason [mailto:rkeason@tir.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:46 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS, etc. As Jana and Kathy have done, there are avenues for those who feel they have had enough. I personally have not had a problem. I am sure it is not because I am anyone's pet, but my name has been in the DBS often enough, I just have not felt threatened by it or hindered from it. Regardless of what she says in her DBS, I am most positive that there are twice as many private emails by some here and elsewhere that have much worse to say about me than Teresa would or could. Attacking people and personalities and being rude is not in anyone's best interest. There is plenty of work to do. Can we get to some of it. And I would also like to know what has become of the grievance ? Thanks, Ron From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA24026 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 18:31:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g33NV3Cl017665 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 18:31:03 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g33NUZk09446; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 16:30:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 16:30:35 -0700 X-Original-Sender: wchs@getgoin.net Wed Apr 3 16:30:35 2002 Message-ID: <005201c1db66$f2646f20$4328c141@wchs> From: "Phyllis Rippee" Old-To: Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 17:25:40 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Declude-Spoolname: D8ff529c20058f508.SMD Subject: [Board-Exec] DBS, etc Resent-Message-ID: <5BDXT.A.aTC.bC5q8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1849 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 779a0ec442dd79a80bf905f122913764 No, Ron, you are the one who just doesn't get it. You posted to Board-Exec. I posted to Board-Exec. This is a confidential list. I did not post to a place where people who never saw what you wrote, or who have absolutely no connection with the USGW P, could read either version. Very often, AB members will reply to each other by quoting a portion of what someone else wrote. This is done on the SAME list as the original quote. There is nothing wrong with that.....a point is being made to the same group of people who were privy to the first post. Teresa's "version" of events is placed in a public forum....where people can read only what she wants them to think was said. She does it for fun. Because she views it as "fun", she may think (notice I said "may" because unlike her I refuse to claim a knowledge of what goes on in other people's minds) that people read the DBS only for entertainment. Lives have been ruined by tabloids that do the very same thing because once something is in print, there are people who will believe it as some believe the Gospel. We've all done a lot of venting the last two days. I don't hate anyone, but neither do I give a rap about someone hating me. The FACT is that since I came on the AB, EVERYTHING has revolved around Teresa. And, it's revolving around her again. There are three bits of unfinished business that should be taken care of on Board-Exec....two of them have to do with Guess Who? First, there is the grievance. Second, there should be a Board Resolution placed in the Archives and "signed" by those who want to go on record as there being absolutely NO PROOF that Roger Swafford "threw" the election to Tim Stowell. Three, there should be a censure statement and poll in regard to Guess Who, which should then be taken to Board-L. Once again, I'll refer you to Board-L. The EC asked us some questions. After our initial response, the NC stated that there were some that needed further discussion. These four, with my opinions were posted yesterday....with a change of opinion posted this morning. I'm not a gambler, but I'd almost bet that Teresa manages to place herself in the center of the EC questions issue. Phyllis From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:22 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA04126 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 03:01:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3481MCl011937 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 03:01:23 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3480o822460; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 01:00:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 01:00:50 -0700 X-Original-Sender: tstowell@chattanooga.net Thu Apr 4 01:00:50 2002 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20020404000323.00b27380@mail.chattanooga.net> X-Sender: tstowell@mail.chattanooga.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 00:03:23 -0500 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Tim Stowell Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera In-Reply-To: <00b801c1db49$3cc93780$74a028d8@hppav> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.8 required=10.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,AWL version=2.11 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1851 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 785fd68c28b06d82cd568921120b0edf At 02:53 PM 4/3/02 -0500, R. Eason wrote: >So, if you want to charge Teresa with something, then do it properly and >legally according to the Bylaws and Sturgis. If you just don't like that >she talks about what you said, I would suggest a personal remedy as you can. >But I would also suggest that if any of you can find rude comments in a >search of the Rootsweb system about our NC, or anyone else on this Board, >then maybe you are not the person to be casting the first stone. > >Thanks, >Ron As far as I know you are not a priest/pastor - and certainly haven't been asked to serve as one here - therefore I ask that you refrain from religious references here - for I find it distasteful. If we wanted to hear a sermon we can go to the religious service of our choice. We don't need it here. Tim From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:22 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA04136 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 03:01:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3481VCl011945 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 03:01:32 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3480qQ22559; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 01:00:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 01:00:52 -0700 X-Original-Sender: tstowell@chattanooga.net Thu Apr 4 01:00:51 2002 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20020404001115.00b29bd0@mail.chattanooga.net> X-Sender: tstowell@mail.chattanooga.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 00:11:15 -0500 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Tim Stowell Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] P.A. In-Reply-To: <00b301c1db46$aac1b620$0101a8c0@pavilion> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.8 required=10.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,AWL version=2.11 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1852 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: e2a18324d4c40d9ec86346f23b2815fb At 01:35 PM 4/3/02 -0600, Ginger wrote: Your efforts at gagging a board member can >have far reaching consequences. In your >zealous attempt to get rid of a board member >you may intiiate something that can have an >unpleasant effect on the project as a whole. >These types of efforts generally result in more >harm than good. Would you please elaborate on what the downside of such an event would be? >It's a real shame there isn't as much effort expended >into addressing project issues as there is in this >piddly stuff. Do you have an issue in mind beyond the EC questions and the Board Secretary? BTW, where in the world does Motion 02-09 stand? >Anyone who ran for this board thinking >they were not going to catch flak has spent their time >in the project with blinders on. Agreed. Tim From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 06:33:08 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16293 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 12:56:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from tri.net (qmail.tri.net [205.153.244.4]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g33HurCl001306 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 12:56:53 -0500 (EST) Received: (qmail 22008 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2002 17:56:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO 1) (205.153.244.154) by qmail.tri.net with SMTP; 3 Apr 2002 17:56:49 -0000 Message-ID: <007801c1db39$27522c00$9af499cd@sasnak.net> From: "Kathy Heidel" To: "Teresa" Cc: "Board-Exec" Subject: Complaint Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 11:58:24 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-UIDL: 597bfcee5768354e93ce7bb8ed35abdd This is the email I have sent to Yahoo. I have waited for Teresa to answer my email and she has not responded. I am CCing so that you will know what I wrote and it will not be taken out of context for DBS. I went back through my emails and I have been asking Teresa to leave my name off of her DBS since Sept 6, 2001. Don't you think I have been patient enough? Kathy To the Staff, I have since September requested that Teresa Lindquist Representative at Large of the USGenWeb Project refrain from quoting my posts which she has taken from the USGenWeb Project Board Meetings and placed on her Daily Board Show which resides on Yahoo Groups. These posts are frequently rearranged or misquoted and different meanings applied to them. I have repeatedly been held up for ridicule and appear very inappropriately to "not get it" in her words as far as my understanding to various motions and etc. I am not stupid and I resent being represented as such. I have sent her email stating that she does not have my approval to quote my posts and this has been overlooked by Ms. Lindquist although in essence she is taking copyrighted material from Rootsweb Archives and placing them on Yahoo in the form of her DBS. I have been a member of the USGenWeb Project as a County Coordinator, Assistant State Coordinator for several years and Advisory Board member since September 1, 2001. I have used your search engine, typing in my own name, and several others, and have come up with many "hits" which lead the general public to the DBS. I feel that my reputation is being injured by these posts which are attributed to me and I would like to ask that perhaps you might be able to expunge them from the Yahoo Archives and ask Ms. Lindquist to not use my information on her site again. I have read your TOS and I feel that Ms. Lindquist has overstepped these guidelines, especially #6 a. and f. Sincerely, Kathy Welch Heidel "I was cut out to be rich.....but I was sewn up wrong!" Kathy Welch Heidel South Dakota, West ASC ~ USGWP Dewey Co. South Dakota http://www.rootsweb.com/~sddewey/ Kansas Native American Genealogy http://skyways.lib.ks.us/genweb/nativeam Kansas Native American Discussion List http://groups.yahoo.com/group/KansasNA/ Kansas in the Civil War http://skyways.lib.ks.us/genweb/civilwar/index.html McPherson Co. Kansas http://skyways.lib.ks.us/genweb/mcpherso/index.html Shannon Co., MO http://www.rootsweb.com/~moshanno/ USGWP NW/Plains CC Rep. "The world is full of stories, and from time to time they permit themselves to be told." Old Cherokee Saying From ???@??? Thu Apr 04 16:35:59 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA14885 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 11:07:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g34G6xCl003579 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 11:07:00 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g34G6WV13751; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 09:06:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 09:06:32 -0700 X-Original-Sender: rkeason@tir.com Thu Apr 4 09:06:32 2002 Message-ID: <008a01c1dbf2$7064b020$93a028d8@hppav> From: "Ron Eason" Old-To: References: <3.0.5.32.20020404000323.00b27380@mail.chattanooga.net> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 11:04:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1853 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 8a19c29899792b54c90f9bc4b7a2bd98 Why Tim, Haven't you ever heard of, "those who live in glass houses, should not cast stones"? I see no reference you should find distasteful. Just because I only used part of the phrase? Or are you presuming to be a mind reader ? Unless you find it distasteful that anyone else should be considered as being just as wrong as the accused when it comes to turning words, meanings and Bylaws around to fit a need that was not intended. Some are just able to get away with more than others. Since you brought up religious service, I hope you all enjoyed the past Easter holiday. I found it quite refreshing. Ron ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Stowell" To: Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 12:03 AM Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera > At 02:53 PM 4/3/02 -0500, R. Eason wrote: > > >So, if you want to charge Teresa with something, then do it properly and > >legally according to the Bylaws and Sturgis. If you just don't like that > >she talks about what you said, I would suggest a personal remedy as you can. > >But I would also suggest that if any of you can find rude comments in a > >search of the Rootsweb system about our NC, or anyone else on this Board, > >then maybe you are not the person to be casting the first stone. > > > >Thanks, > >Ron > > As far as I know you are not a priest/pastor - and certainly haven't > been asked to serve as one here - therefore I ask that you refrain from > religious references here - for I find it distasteful. If we wanted to > hear a sermon we can go to the religious service of our choice. We don't > need it here. > > Tim > > From ???@??? Fri Apr 05 13:52:51 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA17318 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2002 07:20:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g35CKdCl021364 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2002 07:20:39 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g35CKHA22623; Fri, 5 Apr 2002 05:20:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 05:20:17 -0700 X-Original-Sender: usgenweb@cox.net Fri Apr 5 05:20:17 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.0.20020405071541.00a9dad0@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: usgenweb@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3 Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2002 07:20:11 -0500 Old-To: board-exec-l@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [Board-Exec] computer troubles Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1854 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 15ec3434b3812512e273b24b2627bebb My main computer it still refusing to operate correctly and opens only in safe mode and this after an entire evening of trying several things and finally reinstalling windows, an operation which got nearly completed and then stalled. It is almost certain I will be spending the weekend reformatting my hard drive and reinstalling everything I have this morning gotten eudora installed and set up on my laptop and downloaded my mail (all 647 messages in my inbox) no filters or address book yet. This evening I will try to respond to *business* but right now I have to leave for work in about ten minutes. Holly From ???@??? Mon Apr 01 06:40:53 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA21877 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 01:30:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail.pwebtech.com (outgoing.pwebtech.com [64.21.143.152] (may be forged)) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g316UkCl003727 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 01:30:47 -0500 (EST) Received: (qmail 11228 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2002 06:31:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sampubco.com) (208.187.59.169) by rt1.pwebtech.com with SMTP; 1 Apr 2002 06:31:04 -0000 Message-ID: <3CA7FE6E.484F6522@sampubco.com> Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 23:30:06 -0700 From: W David Samuelsen Organization: SAMPUBCO X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD477 (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Holly Timm CC: tngibson@att.net, pamreid@comcast.net, gingerh@shawneelink.com, bremerr@oclc.org, TVick65536@aol.com, nw_plains_sc_rep@hotmail.com, ArtDept@compuserve.com, kheidel@tri.net, tstowell@chattanooga.net, ky.quest@gte.net, rkeason@tir.com, betsym@1starnet.com, wchs@getgoin.net, janab@slip.net, Penny Menges-Rodighiero , Linda Russell Lewis , merope , borks@aracnet.com, dsam@sampubco.com Subject: Formal complaint against Teresa Lindquist Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UIDL: eb68db2419e52d61dc8b9bc088621516 ATTENTION: Entire AB, Linda, Penny, Janine, including the lady who chose to twist to her needs. Notice: Teresa Lindquist, YOU are explictly FORBIDDEN to use any part of this information message for your DBS, whatsoever. Nor are you permitted to forward this to any list anywhere. - David Notice: to the rest, you are NOT authorized to foward this to ANY person or any list whatsoever except limited to the above named in the Carbon Copy list - David Begin Message: Completely taken out of context entirely! This amount to slander or libel. My PML intercepted this message. The original messages are way below this message ===================================================================== A result of your requested PML search. To refine or cancel this search, please visit http://pml.rootsweb.com/ ===================================================================== (name of mailing list cut out to protect the forwarder's identity) FYI...... --- merope wrote: > To: Daily Board Show > > From: merope > Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 08:18:35 -0500 > Subject: [DBS] Daily Board Show, weekly edition, > 3/31/2002 > Reply-to: dailyboardshow-owner@yahoogroups.com > > > Archives Escapades Corner: You know that long > periods of silence from the > Archives usually bode no good. We heard today about > a transcriber who > found out that approximately 75 of her > transcriptions regarding > biographies, obits, and newspaper extractions from > Wallowa county, OR had > been "donated" to the USGenWeb Archives (tm) when it > was announced by W. > David Samuelsen on an AHGP mailing list. When we > first heard about this > yesterday morning, all items were online and clearly > showed the > transcriber's name and a current copyright. By > yesterday afternoon they > were all removed. As it turns out, someone else > "donated" the records to > the Archives (tm) in the transcriber's name. > Apparently David Samuelsen > told the transcriber that her work was fair game > because the sources from > which she transcribed were in the public domain. > After some casual > mention of legal action against USGenWeb, Root$web > and Ancestry.con the > misappropriated transcriptions were removed quietly > and without apology by > an Archives staff member. > > === > > "If you don't want it printed, don't let it happen." > ---Motto of the Aspen Daily News > > This has been your Daily Board Show. > > -Teresa Lindquist > merope@radix.net > ------- > Daily Board Show, (c) 2002 by Teresa Lindquist, all > rights reserved. > > > This is the ORIGINAL message from Janice Borks about HER files. Dear W. David, I didn't donate these bios, nor was I asked about taking them. Why are my bios and information in your archives? I have them on my American History and Genealogy Project page for a reason. When GenWeb started stealing information from people a couple of years ago, I moved my stuff specifically because I knew this was going on. Janine > New files in USGenWeb Archives > < > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/baker/census/1880/ > (please note that this county's census is not done - is in progress) > > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/bios/bio-jennings-ce.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/bios/bio-johnson-fs.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/bios/bio-johnson-j.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/bios/bio-johnson-jf.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/bios/bio-kernan-w.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/bios/bio-knapper-l.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/bios/bio-kuhn-dw.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/bios/bio-kuykendall-wh.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/bios/bio-wedhoff-ar.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-hagen-a.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-hallgarth-s.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-halms-inf.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-halsey-inf.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-hamilton-r.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-harris-dl.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-heller-f.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-hillman-r.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-holbrook-g.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-howerton-lt.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-huff-s.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-hulse.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-hunter-ja.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-jennings-w.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-keeler-r.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-kelley-hf.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-kimble-e.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-kingery-c.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-kirkland-ap.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-kruse-rw.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-shafer-w.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-shelts.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-sherod-t.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-sloan-j.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-southwick-ap.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-spence-l.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-spurling.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-stanford-r.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-steinks-jc.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-stevenson.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/newspapers/n-storie-m.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-hall-a.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-hall-jc.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-hammack-a.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-hammack-jw.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-hammond-r.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-harmon-wt.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-harris-dh.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-haun-jf.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-haun-l.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-henry-wa.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-hepburn-j.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-herzog-h.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-hirsh-n.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-hockett-l.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-hodge-wh.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-holmes-gh.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-holst-e.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-hovis-e.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-hulburd-f.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-jennings-a.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-jennings-ce.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-kimble-lw.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-king-se.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-knapp-mi.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-knapper-em.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-kotz-g.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-samms-wp.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-sample-ll.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-sargent-e.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-sasser-em.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-schaupp-a.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-schell-j.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-scott-s.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-shinn-le.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-showers-rw.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-shuss-s.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-simpson-ln.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-singleton-mf.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-sizemore-vl.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-skaggs-ht.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-smmerhouse-e.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-spencer-se.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-stein-j.txt > http://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/or/wallowa/obits/o-stewart-he.txt > > > > The search engine is located at: > http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/ussearch.htm > be sure to click button left of "OR" before submitting to search Here is her 2nd reply with my original reply to her intact. W David Samuelsen wrote: > Inasmuch since I do not subscribe to AGHP mailing list, you can > forward my reply to the list. > > It was a surprise when I saw the daily uploads this morning listing > a lot of Wallowa files and I literally went straight to the files to > see who submitted them. Your name is listed on every one of them. > > Tonight after I got back from work, only to see this "accusation" > made against me! I went to check the TOC. The submitter is Julie > Botts. > > Penny will not upload any files if she know they were taken from > another site without permission. > > You might want to talk with Julie Botts FIRST before making any > request to remove the files. > > W. David Samuelsen > Dear W. David, I will contact Julie Botts. I have filed a complaint. It came from your e-mail address to the OR list. It did NOT say it was donated by Julie Botts nor I in your e-mail. How am I supposed to know who does what when it doesn't even say. All I have is an e-mail with YOUR address that gives files that were supposed to be donated by me. I only found out about them by clicking on them. Otherwise I would have had no idea that my information was taken. I will also contact Penny and let her know that my permission was not given for this. I am furious. Janine Her 3rd reply, again, with my reply to above message intact, courtesy of Janine W David Samuelsen wrote: > I report what is uploaded for the State of Oregon. That is all. > > If it's my own work, it won't be announced until it is listed in > "Daily-Uploads" announcement first. If I know any file comes from > somewhere else, I would contact the archivst privately and advise > of the problem. > > PS I notified Penny of my reply to you so she will be aware and wait > for your request. Just please be polite. > > David I would have contacted the person, but I am the person who supposedly donated! How would you feel if I loaded all your information from your private site and didn't bother letting you know and you found out about it that way. Would you not be upset? It's common knowledge how I feel about the Archives. I contacted Penny and requested Julie's e-mail address and the removal of my information. I'll also forward your e-mail with an explanation that it was a third party and that you will take the information down. Janine Her 4th reply, with part of my reply clipped out by Janine W David Samuelsen wrote: > I'm not the one to take files out. Penny is the only person who can > remove them. > > In order to locate Julie Botts, I ran a search using google.com > > and guess what, very first hit:? > > read this - this is straight from your AGHP site: Gee, W. David, I tried that e-mail address to send to her and got the e-mail back. Do you have a more current one? It's neither here nor there. The information is mine and I want it out of Linda Lewis's archives. I've contacted Penny and am waiting for her response. Janine FYI, to the Board and others The files in question were removed promptly by Penny, the state archivst upon being informed by me immediately. I did caution Janine that some of her work *MAY BE* on thin ice since the files in question were all pre-1923 copyright cutoff, meaning somebody else can transcribe the same information and deposit in the USGenWeb Archives. I did tell Janine that Julie Botts can send HER (Julie's) copies to any place, even if it is Archives, AND Janine's site, for all I care. Teresa Lindquist OWE me a BIG PUBLIC apology for this incredible blunder of a slander/libel!!! And owe an apology to Janine, too for having the effect of dragging her in the mud along with me. Nowhere in any message between me and Janine was any mention of lawsuit or whatever it is. W. David Samuelsen From ???@??? Sun Apr 07 18:50:12 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA03137 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 2002 16:40:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g37Ke7Cl017356 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 2002 16:40:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g37KdRL09532; Sun, 7 Apr 2002 14:39:27 -0600 Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 14:39:27 -0600 X-Original-Sender: ky.quest@gte.net Sun Apr 7 14:39:27 2002 Message-ID: <001c01c1de74$4eead530$6501a8c0@Diane> From: "Diane M. Parsons" Old-To: Old-Cc: "Holly" Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 16:39:25 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Subject: [Board-Exec] out of touch for the next 24-36 hours Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1855 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 28a57b90747a2eb10ad905d7df024312 Greetings all, I will be out of touch for the next 24-36 hours. I am painting & re-doing my computer room.We are adding another computer to the room and I wanted to get everything "overhauled" before setting it up. This new computer will be the fourth (4th) in this room, our computer room. I guess you are wondering what I need with 4 computers?? Ok.. here goes 1. my computer 2. the kids ( Sara & Todd) share a computer 3. I work for a company and run their computer out of my home 4 The fourth computer that is comning will be my hubby's. The one the kids have was suppose to be his, but as they were always on it.. Well, you know how that goes !! He is finally getting his very own computer and he is excited! Poor guy ! LOL Anway, I hope to see you guys when I come back online. I will not be disconnecting this puter until tonight and I will check my mail again before I do. Diane Parsons From ???@??? Mon Apr 08 23:14:24 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA22335 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 12:37:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g38GbaCl015692 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 12:37:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g38GZWO08670; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 10:35:32 -0600 Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 10:35:32 -0600 X-Original-Sender: wchs@getgoin.net Mon Apr 8 10:35:32 2002 Message-ID: <00d501c1df1c$16ee9f60$c5967a3f@wchs> From: "Phyllis Rippee" Old-To: Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 11:40:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Declude-Spoolname: Dc617045201e268de.SMD Subject: [BOARD-L] Rescinding Resent-Message-ID: <_NqTmB.A.LHC.Ubcs8@lists5.rootsweb.com> To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/8966 X-Loop: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: BOARD-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 55ef312f41d002630e8b20e7352c182b Look it up in Sturgis. The ONLY time that it is necessary to rescind a motion is when one has been made and whatever it has established is not work, BUT there is not going to be another motion to establish something on the same subject. For example: Suppose that this Advisory Board decided that it did not want any specific parliamentary authority established as being "official." Since we currently have designated Sturgis, we would have to have a rescinding motion to do away with the motion that established Sturgis. In the case of Board Secretary motions: It is not necessary (although there is probably nothing wrong with doing it) to rescind any previous motion on the subject of Board Secretary. Parliamentary Authority says that the latest/newest motion in regard to a specific subject is the one that is to be followed. Phyllis From ???@??? Mon Apr 08 23:14:24 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA25488 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 17:14:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g38LEACl022721 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 17:14:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g38LDfp05037; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:13:41 -0600 Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:13:41 -0600 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Mon Apr 8 15:13:40 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 14:12:43 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20020402171909.00bf5560@pop.east.cox.net> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1856 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 559855abdea2804e97ed3a05553b50c4 Madame NC, I hope your computer problems are resolved - it has been about a week since this post and Project activity needs to begin once more. Comments below.... Jana -----Original Message----- From: Holly Timm [mailto:usgenweb@cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 3:06 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera Not one of you has been chastised or even spoken to about anything said outside the Board lists. After a warning to all of you one person was moderated for a couple of days for rudeness on Board-L and he continues to choose not to post at all. Yet several of you sit there and make assumptions about me based on nothing but pure conjecture. Some of you busily write to each other and to small groups of others some outrageous slurs and insinuations (you think some of those haven't been shared with me? ...think again). JMB: Of course not, so long as we do not *publicly* defame the Project *outside the group*, (which none of us has done, to my knowledge), you would be proceeding improperly to chastise or speak to any of us in such a manner. And, everyone has the right to personal email... if someone shared something out of personal exchanges, they are no better than our RAL. Still your conjecture regarding such is entirely without proof as it stands now - shrug. I suggest that if there are small groups interacting, it is only because they have been forced "underground" thanks to an inability to trust that what is said on Exec will remain confidential. For you to say the RAL has not been rude or personally insulting on BOARD-L is utterly myopic. You have the ability to discipline/suspend her for her behavior as RAL but you do not. Instead, you let her go on baiting and baiting after AB members say they do not want a debate or try to answer her respectfully several times. She does not stop! Next w/o saying a word to her regarding the ceaseless nature of her behavior, you come down on other board members hollering CEASE AND DESIST then moderate others whose "rudeness" was surely no less than the RAL's. I venture to say had the RAL not started her usually sarcastic, irreverent lines of conversation up, other AB members would have had no reason to follow her lead and reply. But, somehow, your censorship of behavior never applies to the RAL. The only conclusion we can reach is that her "line to cross" must be waaaaaay more generous in your book than the line you apply to the rest of us. So, as long as you choose to apply such standards, we will continue to get nothing done and participate less and less. If conjecture is used where you are concerned it is because we have nothing concrete to reply to when you do not reply to us. Look back thru your mail, there is quite a list of unanswered questions waiting ... all addressed to you. Still, we wait. Before we get too far into "pot and kettle" metaphors, let me remind you that I was invited "in" on some chats early on in my AB term in which no punches were pulled by you regarding what you said about certain AB members, so do not act as if you do not have your own pot to attend. What you say affects and sets the tone for the rest of us in your capacity as NC, no matter where you say it to us. Perhaps it is time for you to consider how those conversations have had an overall effect. It does not work to play both sides of the fence Holly, because then you compromise your own integrity. The best thing in what you said below is: 1) that you *do* agree that the way Teresa reports gives us reason to complain and includes insults and misrepresentations 2) that you *will* remove her from Exec *if* she goes beyond a count of messages (but I am a bit worried as to what your "etc" means) Do you realize this is the first time all year you have let us know your actual opinion on the subject regarding Exec??? This is good!! Now we can just read what Ms. Lindquist has reported this week and go from there. She surely now "knows" what line you say you will draw. No, I do not like nor have I ever liked the way Teresa reports things in the DBS and I have probably come in for more insults and misrepresentations there than any one of you on this Board. If she steps over the line she is walking on reporting action on Exec by reporting more than the number etc of messages, I will remove her from this list but I will not censor anyone of you off the official Board lists. On the Board list I will censor behavior. JMB: In the DBS dated 31 March - 7 April 2002, Ms. Lindquist has changed her "Exec Report" style to list *names* of all people who posted on a given day, but w/o the number of posts as in the past. Based on what you say above, certainly *names* are "more than the number etc of messages" so the question now is: "Will you make good on what you said and remove her from the Exec list?" WE all will wait to see. Here is the text of what she wrote about Exec: 31 March - 7 April 2002 In Executive Session: April 1: messages from Tim Stowell, Holly Timm, Diane Parsons, Jana Black, Pam Reid, Tina Vickery, Kathy Heidel April 2: messages from Phyllis Rippee, Richard Harrison, Jana Black, Ginger Hayes, Holly Timm, Tina Vickery, Tim Stowell, Ron Eason, Pam Reid, Kathy Heidel April 3: messages from Tim Stowell, Kathy Heidel, Phyllis Rippee, Ginger Hayes, Jana Black, Ron Eason April 4: messages from Tim Stowell, Ron Eason April 5: messages from Holly Timm This is after she was specifically directed and told she had no permission not to mention names by *several* AB members. Please! If you agree that what Ms. Lindquist publishes is inaccurate and irresponsible, *DO* something about it in the name of the Project! We can hold her accountable in her position as RAL. Holly From ???@??? Mon Apr 08 23:14:24 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA26240 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 17:21:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g38LLPCl023704 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 17:21:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g38LKoM18146; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:20:50 -0600 Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:20:50 -0600 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Mon Apr 8 15:20:49 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 14:19:44 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Subject: [Board-Exec] Correction Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1857 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 686bb169bfac804464b0e0d270651416 Please read the 2nd to last paragraph this way: This is after she was specifically directed and told she had no permission to mention names by *several* AB members. -----Original Message----- From: Jana Black [mailto:janab@websweweave.net] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 2:13 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera Madame NC, I hope your computer problems are resolved - it has been about a week since this post and Project activity needs to begin once more. Comments below.... Jana -----Original Message----- From: Holly Timm [mailto:usgenweb@cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 3:06 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [Board-Exec] DBS et cetera Not one of you has been chastised or even spoken to about anything said outside the Board lists. After a warning to all of you one person was moderated for a couple of days for rudeness on Board-L and he continues to choose not to post at all. Yet several of you sit there and make assumptions about me based on nothing but pure conjecture. Some of you busily write to each other and to small groups of others some outrageous slurs and insinuations (you think some of those haven't been shared with me? ...think again). JMB: Of course not, so long as we do not *publicly* defame the Project *outside the group*, (which none of us has done, to my knowledge), you would be proceeding improperly to chastise or speak to any of us in such a manner. And, everyone has the right to personal email... if someone shared something out of personal exchanges, they are no better than our RAL. Still your conjecture regarding such is entirely without proof as it stands now - shrug. I suggest that if there are small groups interacting, it is only because they have been forced "underground" thanks to an inability to trust that what is said on Exec will remain confidential. For you to say the RAL has not been rude or personally insulting on BOARD-L is utterly myopic. You have the ability to discipline/suspend her for her behavior as RAL but you do not. Instead, you let her go on baiting and baiting after AB members say they do not want a debate or try to answer her respectfully several times. She does not stop! Next w/o saying a word to her regarding the ceaseless nature of her behavior, you come down on other board members hollering CEASE AND DESIST then moderate others whose "rudeness" was surely no less than the RAL's. I venture to say had the RAL not started her usually sarcastic, irreverent lines of conversation up, other AB members would have had no reason to follow her lead and reply. But, somehow, your censorship of behavior never applies to the RAL. The only conclusion we can reach is that her "line to cross" must be waaaaaay more generous in your book than the line you apply to the rest of us. So, as long as you choose to apply such standards, we will continue to get nothing done and participate less and less. If conjecture is used where you are concerned it is because we have nothing concrete to reply to when you do not reply to us. Look back thru your mail, there is quite a list of unanswered questions waiting ... all addressed to you. Still, we wait. Before we get too far into "pot and kettle" metaphors, let me remind you that I was invited "in" on some chats early on in my AB term in which no punches were pulled by you regarding what you said about certain AB members, so do not act as if you do not have your own pot to attend. What you say affects and sets the tone for the rest of us in your capacity as NC, no matter where you say it to us. Perhaps it is time for you to consider how those conversations have had an overall effect. It does not work to play both sides of the fence Holly, because then you compromise your own integrity. The best thing in what you said below is: 1) that you *do* agree that the way Teresa reports gives us reason to complain and includes insults and misrepresentations 2) that you *will* remove her from Exec *if* she goes beyond a count of messages (but I am a bit worried as to what your "etc" means) Do you realize this is the first time all year you have let us know your actual opinion on the subject regarding Exec??? This is good!! Now we can just read what Ms. Lindquist has reported this week and go from there. She surely now "knows" what line you say you will draw. No, I do not like nor have I ever liked the way Teresa reports things in the DBS and I have probably come in for more insults and misrepresentations there than any one of you on this Board. If she steps over the line she is walking on reporting action on Exec by reporting more than the number etc of messages, I will remove her from this list but I will not censor anyone of you off the official Board lists. On the Board list I will censor behavior. JMB: In the DBS dated 31 March - 7 April 2002, Ms. Lindquist has changed her "Exec Report" style to list *names* of all people who posted on a given day, but w/o the number of posts as in the past. Based on what you say above, certainly *names* are "more than the number etc of messages" so the question now is: "Will you make good on what you said and remove her from the Exec list?" WE all will wait to see. Here is the text of what she wrote about Exec: 31 March - 7 April 2002 In Executive Session: April 1: messages from Tim Stowell, Holly Timm, Diane Parsons, Jana Black, Pam Reid, Tina Vickery, Kathy Heidel April 2: messages from Phyllis Rippee, Richard Harrison, Jana Black, Ginger Hayes, Holly Timm, Tina Vickery, Tim Stowell, Ron Eason, Pam Reid, Kathy Heidel April 3: messages from Tim Stowell, Kathy Heidel, Phyllis Rippee, Ginger Hayes, Jana Black, Ron Eason April 4: messages from Tim Stowell, Ron Eason April 5: messages from Holly Timm This is after she was specifically directed and told she had no permission not to mention names by *several* AB members. Please! If you agree that what Ms. Lindquist publishes is inaccurate and irresponsible, *DO* something about it in the name of the Project! We can hold her accountable in her position as RAL. Holly From ???@??? Mon Apr 08 23:14:35 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA04010 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 18:27:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g38MRhCl002916 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 18:27:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g38MR1m29376; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 16:27:01 -0600 Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 16:27:01 -0600 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Mon Apr 8 16:27:00 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:25:39 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Subject: [Board-Exec] Mr. Samuelsen's formal complaint Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1858 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: d66d410eb35bdcccf5ce962f6cd0c9ec Fellow Colleagues of the AB, In reading the current DBS, while Ms. Lindquist appears to offer some clarification regarding what she published last week, nowhere does she apologize directly to Mr. Samuelsen nor does she make the important admissions and corrections that concerned many of us. As many of us noted initially, it is not *what* she said, it is the WAY she said it that is at issue - I think it is important for the AB to note what Ms. Lindquist chose to do under the circumstances as it does reflect upon the integrity of the Project given her dual personality as RAL. We still need to consider as an AB whether there are further steps we do need to take in this situation. Here is what she posted: "Correction Corner: Last week we reported on yet another incident of someone's files appearing mysteriously in the Archives. We have been contacted by some participants in the incident, and our account of the events is correct. However, we did incorrectly report that the placement of the files in the Archives was originally announced in an AHGP mailing list when it was in fact first reported on an ORGenWeb mailing list and then forwarded to the AHGP mailing list. We also understand that the Archives did eventually apologize to the transcriber for their "oversight." We regret these errors." All she addresses is *what* she reported, not "how" she reported it..... more follows below. Next in the DBS, Ms. Lindquist publishes a forwarded copy of an email from Janine Bork (who cannot find Ms. Lindquist's email address - hmmm), to Ms. Lindquist's credit, does print the email in full (BTW, she also could have easily forwarded same to Exec-L, as the RAL certainly had permission to forward from Ms. Bork, but apparently, the AB is not important enough to include even tho the RAL is entirely aware a formal complaint has been filed .... AB members have to go after the information and read it in the DBS to learn about the topic... gee, great way to induce readership. Again, we see a lack of respect for fellow AB members.) The email includes the following statements pertinent to the formal complaint: "I was extremely upset with W. David's remark about being on thin ice, in regards to information having an expired copyright, coming within the context of having my information just being taken. After "talking" with him I think this may have been an over-reaction on my part. It was not his intention to use my information and take my name off it. I did say if I found my information in the archives without my name on it, I would take legal action, if necessary. I have not had to do that nor do I expect to have to do it." Further she says: "W. David DID NOT take my information." And: " This whole thing ended up on something called DBS on the internet. It was sent to me. This was taken totally out of context. I don't appreciate being talked about on some internet site. Also having my posts twisted around for someone else's "agenda". Yet here is how the level of responsibility our RAL offers: Although I am sorry that Ms. Bork is unhappy about her messages being forwarded off the AHGP mailing list, that's really not my problem. NO mailing list is ever truly private and posting to them is a risk you take. If you don't want the world to know about it, then don't post it. I do thank her for forwarding this post [and the other one she sent] as it verifies several points from her original post to the AHGP list: 1) her files _were_ taken without her permission and submitted to the Archives, which accepted them and posted them even though the submitter was not the transcriber; 2) David Samuelsen _did_ publicly announce the availability of her work in the Archives and _did_ tell her that she was "on thin ice" regarding her claims to her own work; and 3) Ms. Bork _did_ suggest that she would consider legal action if the files were not removed. This is substantially what was reported in this space last week. I have not seen _any_ response from _anyone_ involved in this [and pretty much everyone has weighed in, including the Archives] that changes the basic facts of what was reported in last week's DBS, other than as noted above. My conclusions are that the RAL still has some "damage control" work to do regarding Mr. Samuelsen that should be written and cc-ed to include the AB and to answer the formal complaint received last week. I believe we need to direct the RAL to apologize directly and specifically for: 1) connecting Mr. Samuelsen's good name with any wrongdoing 2) the statement about legal action, retracting and correcting it accurately Regarding Ms. Bork, the RAL needs to write her as well (CC-ing the AB) and admit that she took information out of context from a mailing list without permission and distorted what it said then she needs to apologize for same. PLEASE NOTE: in this same DBS, Ms. Lindquist also editorializes on the public vs private nature of the internet saying; "it is fairly easy to be anonymous as a volunteer and still be effective..." in response to my comments regarding Tina's question about posting names of CCs on an EC list. So, (scratching my head) I ask, which is it regarding the privacy and the internet??? Apparently according to our RAL, the internet is more anonymous than mailing lists..... whomever suggested Ms. Lindquist just likes to mess with our heads is "right on" in my book. What a shame for the Project. Jana From ???@??? Mon Apr 08 23:14:35 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06417 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 18:51:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g38MpQCl005873 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 18:51:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g38MovL01356; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 16:50:57 -0600 Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 16:50:57 -0600 X-Original-Sender: usgenweb@cox.net Mon Apr 8 16:50:57 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020408182915.048d8100@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: usgenweb@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 18:51:23 -0400 Old-To: board-exec-l@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [Board-Exec] finally back I think Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1859 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 427220433d1e4dba8c639a25334aad88 After an entire weekend of struggling with a sick computer and stupid software that thinks it knows what my video settings should be in total disregard of what my computer and all my other software wants, my computer now has a new hard drive with most programs reinstalled. The video problem was finally solved late last night. I am now busy catching up on everything and will try to get some replies off in various directions this evening. Holly From ???@??? Mon Apr 08 23:14:35 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA10465 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 19:38:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g38NcNCl011419 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 19:38:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g38Nbmj07532; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 17:37:48 -0600 Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 17:37:48 -0600 X-Original-Sender: usgenweb@cox.net Mon Apr 8 17:37:47 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020408185245.048dd100@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: usgenweb@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 19:38:16 -0400 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Correction In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <5KhNX.A.b1B.Lnis8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1860 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 4fd773a6d78c66bd2fe8b8cb2793f4ad At 02:19 PM 4/8/02 -0700, Jana Black wrote: >This is after she was specifically directed and told she had no permission >not to mention names by *several* AB members. > >Please! If you agree that what Ms. Lindquist publishes is inaccurate and >irresponsible, *DO* something about it in the name of the Project! We can >hold her accountable in her position as RAL. You and others personally as individuals told her not to do so and as such can follow through as individuals if you find you have grounds to do so although I don't think there is any law against publishing someone's name in this manner. If you (the plural you meaning any of the board) wish to set any rules and consequences you are free to make motions to that effect and you have been invited to do so several times and yet have not done so. From ???@??? Mon Apr 08 23:14:35 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA23196 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 22:03:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g39230Cl028813 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 22:03:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3922Wa14333; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 20:02:32 -0600 Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 20:02:32 -0600 X-Original-Sender: usgenweb@cox.net Mon Apr 8 20:02:31 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020408220216.00c9b3c0@mail.bright.net> X-Sender: usgenweb@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 22:03:01 -0400 Old-To: board-exec-l@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Old-Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====================_21395590==_" Subject: [Board-Exec] Fwd: Blue Roses Publishing Company Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1861 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 2e19cf15e59dbc208298181b890ab60e --=====================_21395590==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed comments please? >From: "Mary Brooks" >To: >Subject: Blue Roses Publishing Company >Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:25:25 -0500 > >I have a complaint! I have mailed some information regarding resources CD >ROM Census Records including the 1930 which is available from my business >Blue Roses Publishing Company. I have given your Coordinators permissions >to post Blue Roses Publishing Company's copyrighted images of various >counties upon your web sites which constitutes an existing relationship >with USGen Web. Your Coordinators have web sites on USGen Web/Rootweb >servers which is owned by a commercial business and not private citizens. > >One of your Coordinators has turned my Company in to Tripod for >spamming. The law clearly states that if there is an existing >relationship between you and my Company that I have not spammed. Now >Tripod.Com is closing down my web site. >I have enclosed an attachment containing notification of the same. One of >your USGen Web Coordinators complained about my Company once before and I >informed him that he had a link to Blue Roses Publishing Company (among >other commercial business) on his web site. He said that he thought the >email were from someone else. > >Please notify Tripod.Com and inform them that USGenWeb has an existing >relationship with Blue Roses Publishing Company. I feel like my >reputation and business is being damaged by USGen Web Coordinators by >closing down my Internet business. Some of your USGen Web Coordinators >are my Customers and I have given some of them permission to post my >Images of County Census Records on your server and they are posted >there. This also constitutes an existing relationship. > >You have some very fine people that serve as Coordinators and also are my >customers and I don't want them to be punished by being closed down. > >Please let me know what you intend to do and hopefully you can help keep >my business on the Internet so that I can continue to serve USGen Web >Coordinators. > >Thank you very kindly, >Mary Brooks >Blue Roses Publishing Company > > > >Return-Path: >Received: from bos-dns1.tripod.com ([209.202.196.11]) by mta004.verizon.net > (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with ESMTP > id > <20020408181050.TQYO12102.mta004.verizon.net@bos-dns1.tripod.com> > for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 13:10:50 -0500 >Received: from bos-membership.tripod.com (membership.tripod.com >[209.202.196.202]) > by bos-dns1.tripod.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g38IAbx07280 > for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 14:10:48 -0400 (EDT) >Received: (from jcarney@localhost) > by bos-membership.tripod.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) id OAA05352; > Mon, 8 Apr 2002 14:10:37 -0400 (EDT) >Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 14:10:37 -0400 (EDT) >From: abuse@tripod.com >Message-Id: <200204081810.OAA05352@bos-membership.tripod.com> >X-Authentication-Warning: bos-membership.tripod.com: jcarney set sender to >abuse@tripod.com using -f >To: roses.blue@verizon.net >Subject: Cancellation of your account --=====================_21395590==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Cancellation of your account.eml" Dear sweetblueroses, Tripod has received a variety of complaints regarding the promotion of your Tripod page by means of sending unsolicited e-mail or posting inappropriate messages to newsgroups. Known generally as spamming, these activites are costly and wasteful of Internet resources while being in direct violation of the Terms of Service that you agreed to at the time of registration. Tripod has therefore discontinued serving your content, and this notice should serve as cancellation of your Tripod membership. --=====================_21395590==_-- From ???@??? Tue Apr 09 06:24:15 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA24481 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 04:58:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g398w1Cl008889 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 04:58:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g398vfr31832; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 02:57:41 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 02:57:41 -0600 X-Original-Sender: IsaiahHarrison@cs.com Tue Apr 9 02:57:40 2002 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020409014309.009ff5d0@imap.cs.com> X-Sender: IsaiahHarrison@imap.cs.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 01:56:10 -0700 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Richard Harrison Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Fwd: Blue Roses Publishing Company In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20020408220216.00c9b3c0@mail.bright.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1862 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 9e3606f3d71633335e5501cc8d2b1eca At 10:03 PM 4/8/2002 -0400, you wrote: >comments please? > > >From: "Mary Brooks" > >To: > >Subject: Blue Roses Publishing Company > >Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:25:25 -0500 > > > >I have a complaint! [SNIP] I don't recall getting any spam from Blue Roses but someone provided this for me: >>>> Delivered-To: XXX X-Envelope-To: XXX From: "res0ajh8" To: Subject: Census Records Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 22:36:12 -0500 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 <<<< Hello, Blue Roses Publishing Company is a Census Records Resource Company referred by U S GenWeb to County Coordinators. Have a nice day! CD ROM Census Records - Entire U.S. Census including Native Americans. http://members.tripod.com/~sweetblueroses/index.html Mirror Site http://www.angelfire.com/tx/1850censusrecords/cdrom/index.html Thank you, Mary Brooks Blue Roses Publishing Company <<<< If I received this, I would consider it spam (unsolicited email advertising) and I don't like the implication that Blue Roses is recommended by "U S GenWeb." I well know that business need to promote themselves, but I don't think we should sanction her advertising activities. -Isaiah From ???@??? Tue Apr 09 20:13:20 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA05630 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 12:40:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g39GeBCl002929 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 12:40:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g39GdG723725; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 10:39:16 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 10:39:16 -0600 X-Original-Sender: wchs@getgoin.net Tue Apr 9 10:39:16 2002 Message-ID: <002001c1dfe5$d2048160$26967a3f@wchs> From: "Phyllis Rippee" Old-To: Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 11:44:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Declude-Spoolname: D188fe16c005a8ea8.SMD Subject: [Board-Exec] Okay Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1863 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 08f598aa319f0c7e6dc0c11a071b284c Holly, Where do you want the censure motion in regard to the R.A.L. sent? Is it a personnel matter to be decided here BEFORE it goes to Board-L? Or do you want it sent to Board-L with a full explanation as to why it is being made? And, will you quash it before it gets there; ignore it after it gets there; or quash it after it gets there? Phyllis From ???@??? Tue Apr 09 20:13:20 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA20343 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 14:48:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g39ImQCl021205 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 14:48:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g39IlxZ19020; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 12:47:59 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 12:47:59 -0600 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Tue Apr 9 12:47:59 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Fwd: Blue Roses Publishing Company Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 11:37:42 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020409014309.009ff5d0@imap.cs.com> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1864 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: d423166aaca2a62b067a8bc569a3c6ad I agree Richard. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Richard Harrison [mailto:IsaiahHarrison@cs.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 1:56 AM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Fwd: Blue Roses Publishing Company At 10:03 PM 4/8/2002 -0400, you wrote: >comments please? > > >From: "Mary Brooks" > >To: > >Subject: Blue Roses Publishing Company > >Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:25:25 -0500 > > > >I have a complaint! [SNIP] I don't recall getting any spam from Blue Roses but someone provided this for me: >>>> Delivered-To: XXX X-Envelope-To: XXX From: "res0ajh8" To: Subject: Census Records Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 22:36:12 -0500 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 <<<< Hello, Blue Roses Publishing Company is a Census Records Resource Company referred by U S GenWeb to County Coordinators. Have a nice day! CD ROM Census Records - Entire U.S. Census including Native Americans. http://members.tripod.com/~sweetblueroses/index.html Mirror Site http://www.angelfire.com/tx/1850censusrecords/cdrom/index.html Thank you, Mary Brooks Blue Roses Publishing Company <<<< If I received this, I would consider it spam (unsolicited email advertising) and I don't like the implication that Blue Roses is recommended by "U S GenWeb." I well know that business need to promote themselves, but I don't think we should sanction her advertising activities. -Isaiah From ???@??? Tue Apr 09 20:13:20 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA23215 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 15:12:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g39JCOCl024702 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 15:12:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g39JBxc20759; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 13:11:59 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 13:11:59 -0600 X-Original-Sender: betsym@1starnet.com Tue Apr 9 13:11:58 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020409141108.03828ba0@mail.1starnet.com> X-Sender: betsym@mail.1starnet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 14:12:03 -0500 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Betsy Mills Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Fwd: Blue Roses Publishing Company In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020409014309.009ff5d0@imap.cs.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1865 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 7915408c2c8775ff8224bbecc12e5542 Her agreement with a few of the CCs gives her a relationship with those few CCs, not with the whole Project. It doesn't give her license to SPAM other lists. Betsy On 11:37 AM 4/9/2002 -0700, Jana Black said: >I agree Richard. Jana > >-----Original Message----- >From: Richard Harrison [mailto:IsaiahHarrison@cs.com] >Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 1:56 AM >To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com >Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Fwd: Blue Roses Publishing Company > > >At 10:03 PM 4/8/2002 -0400, you wrote: > > >comments please? > > > > >From: "Mary Brooks" > > >To: > > >Subject: Blue Roses Publishing Company > > >Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:25:25 -0500 > > > > > >I have a complaint! >[SNIP] > >I don't recall getting any spam from Blue Roses but someone provided this >for me: > > >>>> >Delivered-To: XXX >X-Envelope-To: XXX >From: "res0ajh8" >To: >Subject: Census Records >Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 22:36:12 -0500 >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 > ><<<< > >Hello, >Blue Roses Publishing Company is a Census Records Resource Company referred >by U S GenWeb to County Coordinators. Have a nice day! > >CD ROM Census Records - Entire U.S. Census including Native Americans. >http://members.tripod.com/~sweetblueroses/index.html >Mirror Site >http://www.angelfire.com/tx/1850censusrecords/cdrom/index.html > >Thank you, >Mary Brooks >Blue Roses Publishing Company ><<<< > >If I received this, I would consider it spam (unsolicited email >advertising) and I don't like the implication that Blue Roses is >recommended by "U S GenWeb." > >I well know that business need to promote themselves, but I don't think we >should sanction her advertising activities. > >-Isaiah From ???@??? Tue Apr 09 20:13:20 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA04570 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 16:51:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g39KpZCl009502 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 16:51:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g39Kp7V15582; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 14:51:07 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 14:51:07 -0600 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Tue Apr 9 14:51:07 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Correction Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 13:40:17 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20020408185245.048dd100@pop.east.cox.net> Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1866 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: ebdc1376da6bcbb159feb50c56b9bf9d Holly (LOL!!!!) Glad to see you back, computer problems resolved....however...ROTFL!!! This response is sooooo typical of you! You know, I just knew the addition of "etc" would give you a way *not* to act - it'd almost be funny .... except it is too sad. No Holly, this is wrong: "You and others personally as individuals told her not to do so and as such can follow through as individuals..." NO, many of us in our respective AB positions on the official AB-EXEC mailing list denied her permission to use any of what we said, to use our names, and/or to mention that we had said anything at all. WE did this in our official capacities, not as individuals and you as NC are where our buck stops in this regard. Clearly you must believe you have no authority at all as NC. How very sad. This AB is already known as a joke and a group of folks who accomplished essentially nothing in our elected positions. I venture to say it is l50% because we have tried perhaps too hard to work fairly with an RAL who never had any intention of working to move the Project forward, but rather merely to cause havoc. The other 50% IMHO lies right at your doorstep as you evade the issues and do not use the authority of your Office. Whatever your opinion, I will eventually leave this AB knowing in my own heart that *most* of us have tried to work fairly and objectively while serving here. You said: "If she steps over the line she is walking on reporting action on Exec by reporting more than the number etc of messages, I will remove her from this list but I will not censor anyone of you off the official Board lists." Soooo, I gather that all those names she printed must be the "etc" you meant, so even tho She DID report *more* than "the number" that little "etc" lets you right off your own hook. So, even tho you are the list mgr for Exec, even tho you stated clearly what you would do, instead of following through, you want "motions" from the AB and you blame us????? You say you have read it all, but I wonder if you have understood.... so, trying one more time, I am repeating a few salient items: >From the USGWP Bylaws: "ARTICLE VI: DUTIES/QUALIFICATIONS OF ADVISORY BOARD Section 2. The National Coordinator is responsible for the day-to-day administration of The USGenWeb Project and serves as the public representative for the project. The National Coordinator shall preside at all meetings of the Advisory Board, serve as an ex officio member of all sub-committees, and maintain the national organizational mail lists (i.e., State Coordinators, Advisory Board, and any appropriate sub-lists)." Not only do you preside over meetings and act as daily administrator, you are responsible as our public representative for what "word" goes out publicly and for how it gets out AND you are responsible for maintaining the mail lists. Sturgis outlines as valid cause for removal of an officer (p.174, #5): "misrepresentation of the organization and its officers to outside persons" ... I cannot think of a better definition of the effect of the DBS on the USGWP. You can take her off the Exec list and at least muzzle her that far. Before I go any further, I want to repeat, I am not interested in removing the RAL, therefore, I do not make any such motions. I am in favor however, of using "in house" discipline to bring her into compliance with the best interests of the USGWP. That, Madame NC, is your responsibility and privilege. Our adopted Parliamentary Authority puts it this way: (p. 223) "The rights of each member are definite and are protected by law; they must, however, be regarded in relation to the rights of the other members and the organization ... If the rights of an individual member or a minority of members conflict with the rights of the majority of the assembly, the rights of the majority ultimately must prevail ... The rights of members to oppose ideas and candidates does not extend to the right to undermine the organization itself." Yet even tho most of us have repeatedly objected, the RAL is allowed by the NC to function as she wishes. The NC does not use the authority of the Office to prevent what can be prevented. Frankly, I'd rather take heat from some accusing the AB of using "secret lists" as I believe that most of our members understand the need for confidential sessions to manage sensitive business in the best interests of the organization. For goodness sake, we are talking about list rules here! PA already describes the protocols for closed/executive session. You already have the authority to determine who is included and to boot those who do not honor the confidentiality of such sensitive sessions. Respectfully submitted by one who has given waaay too much time to trying to write this well and who will now go do other things. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Holly Timm [mailto:usgenweb@cox.net] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 4:38 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Correction At 02:19 PM 4/8/02 -0700, Jana Black wrote: >This is after she was specifically directed and told she had no permission >not to mention names by *several* AB members. > >Please! If you agree that what Ms. Lindquist publishes is inaccurate and >irresponsible, *DO* something about it in the name of the Project! We can >hold her accountable in her position as RAL. You and others personally as individuals told her not to do so and as such can follow through as individuals if you find you have grounds to do so although I don't think there is any law against publishing someone's name in this manner. If you (the plural you meaning any of the board) wish to set any rules and consequences you are free to make motions to that effect and you have been invited to do so several times and yet have not done so. From ???@??? Tue Apr 09 20:13:20 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA17859 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 18:53:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g39Mr1Cl026491 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 18:53:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g39MqXA22218; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 16:52:33 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 16:52:33 -0600 X-Original-Sender: gingerh@shawneelink.com Tue Apr 9 16:52:33 2002 Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 17:48:07 -0500 From: GingerH Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Correction Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-id: <009601c1e018$9eeaa7e0$0101a8c0@pavilion> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1867 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: d9914e9d29891966287997a744699ded > > Whatever your opinion, I will eventually leave this AB knowing in my own > heart that *most* of us have tried to work fairly and objectively while > serving here. > As you say.....ROFL! Since I can only assume you are referring to yourself here. > > Before I go any further, I want to repeat, I am not interested in removing > the RAL, therefore, I do not make any such motions. I am in favor however, > of using "in house" discipline to bring her into compliance with the best > interests of the USGWP. That, Madame NC, is your responsibility and > privilege. Our adopted Parliamentary Authority puts it this way: > Always nicer when you can try to shove someone into doing your dirty work for you, isn't it? A little honesty would go a long way too, for someone who claims to not be interested in removing the RAL you certainly spend an inordinate amount of time on the subject. If the subject has your bloomers in that much of a wad then why aren't you making a motion? Good Grief! I can think of a heck of a lot more important things this board should be dealing with than whether or not it was mentioned that _______ (fill in the blank) sent 1, 2 or 50 notes to Board-exec. I've come into my share of guff from the Teresa in her DBS but it has never occured to me to wail and whine for eons over it. If I say it then I say it. How she reports it is her problem. If she spends her time in misrepresentations it will catch up to her . Most people are not stupid. Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana Black" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 3:40 PM Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Correction > Holly (LOL!!!!) > > Glad to see you back, computer problems resolved....however...ROTFL!!! This > response is sooooo typical of you! You know, I just knew the addition of > "etc" would give you a way *not* to act - it'd almost be funny .... except > it is too sad. > > No Holly, this is wrong: "You and others personally as individuals told her > not to do so and as such can follow through as individuals..." NO, many of > us in our respective AB positions on the official AB-EXEC mailing list > denied her permission to use any of what we said, to use our names, and/or > to mention that we had said anything at all. WE did this in our official > capacities, not as individuals and you as NC are where our buck stops in > this regard. Clearly you must believe you have no authority at all as NC. > How very sad. This AB is already known as a joke and a group of folks who > accomplished essentially nothing in our elected positions. I venture to say > it is l50% because we have tried perhaps too hard to work fairly with an RAL > who never had any intention of working to move the Project forward, but > rather merely to cause havoc. The other 50% IMHO lies right at your doorstep > as you evade the issues and do not use the authority of your Office. > > Whatever your opinion, I will eventually leave this AB knowing in my own > heart that *most* of us have tried to work fairly and objectively while > serving here. > > You said: "If she steps over the line she is walking on reporting action on > Exec by reporting more than the number etc > of messages, I will remove her from this list but I will not censor anyone > of you off the official Board lists." Soooo, I gather that all those names > she printed must be the "etc" you meant, so even tho She DID report *more* > than "the number" that little "etc" lets you right off your own hook. So, > even tho you are the list mgr for Exec, even tho you stated clearly what you > would do, instead of following through, you want "motions" from the AB and > you blame us????? > > You say you have read it all, but I wonder if you have understood.... so, > trying one more time, I am repeating a few salient items: > > From the USGWP Bylaws: > > "ARTICLE VI: DUTIES/QUALIFICATIONS OF ADVISORY BOARD > > Section 2. The National Coordinator is responsible for the day-to-day > administration of The USGenWeb Project and serves as the public > representative for the project. The National Coordinator shall preside at > all meetings of the Advisory Board, serve as an ex officio member of all > sub-committees, and maintain the national organizational mail lists (i.e., > State Coordinators, Advisory Board, and any appropriate sub-lists)." > > Not only do you preside over meetings and act as daily administrator, you > are responsible as our public representative for what "word" goes out > publicly and for how it gets out AND you are responsible for maintaining the > mail lists. Sturgis outlines as valid cause for removal of an officer > (p.174, #5): "misrepresentation of the organization and its officers to > outside persons" ... I cannot think of a better definition of the effect of > the DBS on the USGWP. You can take her off the Exec list and at least muzzle > her that far. > > Before I go any further, I want to repeat, I am not interested in removing > the RAL, therefore, I do not make any such motions. I am in favor however, > of using "in house" discipline to bring her into compliance with the best > interests of the USGWP. That, Madame NC, is your responsibility and > privilege. Our adopted Parliamentary Authority puts it this way: > > (p. 223) "The rights of each member are definite and are protected by law; > they must, however, be regarded in relation to the rights of the other > members and the organization ... If the rights of an individual member or a > minority of members conflict with the rights of the majority of the > assembly, the rights of the majority ultimately must prevail ... The rights > of members to oppose ideas and candidates does not extend to the right to > undermine the organization itself." Yet even tho most of us have repeatedly > objected, the RAL is allowed by the NC to function as she wishes. The NC > does not use the authority of the Office to prevent what can be prevented. > Frankly, I'd rather take heat from some accusing the AB of using "secret > lists" as I believe that most of our members understand the need for > confidential sessions to manage sensitive business in the best interests of > the organization. > > For goodness sake, we are talking about list rules here! PA already > describes the protocols for closed/executive session. You already have the > authority to determine who is included and to boot those who do not honor > the confidentiality of such sensitive sessions. > > Respectfully submitted by one who has given waaay too much time to trying to > write this well and who will now go do other things. > > Jana > > -----Original Message----- > From: Holly Timm [mailto:usgenweb@cox.net] > Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 4:38 PM > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Correction > > > At 02:19 PM 4/8/02 -0700, Jana Black wrote: > >This is after she was specifically directed and told she had no permission > >not to mention names by *several* AB members. > > > >Please! If you agree that what Ms. Lindquist publishes is inaccurate and > >irresponsible, *DO* something about it in the name of the Project! We can > >hold her accountable in her position as RAL. > > You and others personally as individuals told her not to do so and as such > can follow through as individuals if you find you have grounds to do so > although I don't think there is any law against publishing someone's name > in this manner. > > If you (the plural you meaning any of the board) wish to set any rules and > consequences you are free to make motions to that effect and you have been > invited to do so several times and yet have not done so. > > From ???@??? Tue Apr 09 20:13:20 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19621 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 19:10:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g39NAGCl028603 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 19:10:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g39N9nb09040; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 17:09:49 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 17:09:49 -0600 X-Original-Sender: nw_plains_sc_rep@hotmail.com Tue Apr 9 17:09:48 2002 X-Originating-IP: [64.108.116.199] From: "Mary Ann Hetrick" Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Fwd: Blue Roses Publishing Company Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 19:09:48 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Apr 2002 23:09:49.0027 (UTC) FILETIME=[A59BBB30:01C1E01B] Resent-Message-ID: <4gQmm.A.ANC.9S3s8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1868 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: cdeae5b539c3f7ba23e578b45a67820d I have recived emails from her as well. Some just to ask to link to her site. If Tripod is closing her buisness, they must have had more than one complaint. As well as some proof to back up the same. I don't see how we are going to be able to counter act what has been proven to Tripod already. Mary Ann Hetrick >From: Holly Timm >Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com >To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com >Subject: [Board-Exec] Fwd: Blue Roses Publishing Company >Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 22:03:01 -0400 > >--=====================_21395590==_ >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > > >comments please? > > >From: "Mary Brooks" > >To: > >Subject: Blue Roses Publishing Company > >Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:25:25 -0500 > > > >I have a complaint! I have mailed some information regarding resources >CD > >ROM Census Records including the 1930 which is available from my business > >Blue Roses Publishing Company. I have given your Coordinators >permissions > >to post Blue Roses Publishing Company's copyrighted images of various > >counties upon your web sites which constitutes an existing relationship > >with USGen Web. Your Coordinators have web sites on USGen Web/Rootweb > >servers which is owned by a commercial business and not private citizens. > > > >One of your Coordinators has turned my Company in to Tripod for > >spamming. The law clearly states that if there is an existing > >relationship between you and my Company that I have not spammed. Now > >Tripod.Com is closing down my web site. > >I have enclosed an attachment containing notification of the same. One >of > >your USGen Web Coordinators complained about my Company once before and I > >informed him that he had a link to Blue Roses Publishing Company (among > >other commercial business) on his web site. He said that he thought the > >email were from someone else. > > > >Please notify Tripod.Com and inform them that USGenWeb has an existing > >relationship with Blue Roses Publishing Company. I feel like my > >reputation and business is being damaged by USGen Web Coordinators by > >closing down my Internet business. Some of your USGen Web Coordinators > >are my Customers and I have given some of them permission to post my > >Images of County Census Records on your server and they are posted > >there. This also constitutes an existing relationship. > > > >You have some very fine people that serve as Coordinators and also are my > >customers and I don't want them to be punished by being closed down. > > > >Please let me know what you intend to do and hopefully you can help keep > >my business on the Internet so that I can continue to serve USGen Web > >Coordinators. > > > >Thank you very kindly, > >Mary Brooks > >Blue Roses Publishing Company > > > > > > > >Return-Path: > >Received: from bos-dns1.tripod.com ([209.202.196.11]) by >mta004.verizon.net > > (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with >ESMTP > > id > > <20020408181050.TQYO12102.mta004.verizon.net@bos-dns1.tripod.com> > > for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 13:10:50 -0500 > >Received: from bos-membership.tripod.com (membership.tripod.com > >[209.202.196.202]) > > by bos-dns1.tripod.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id >g38IAbx07280 > > for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2002 14:10:48 -0400 >(EDT) > >Received: (from jcarney@localhost) > > by bos-membership.tripod.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) id OAA05352; > > Mon, 8 Apr 2002 14:10:37 -0400 (EDT) > >Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 14:10:37 -0400 (EDT) > >From: abuse@tripod.com > >Message-Id: <200204081810.OAA05352@bos-membership.tripod.com> > >X-Authentication-Warning: bos-membership.tripod.com: jcarney set sender >to > >abuse@tripod.com using -f > >To: roses.blue@verizon.net > >Subject: Cancellation of your account > >--=====================_21395590==_ >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Cancellation of your >account.eml" > >Dear sweetblueroses, > >Tripod has received a variety of complaints regarding the promotion of your >Tripod >page by means of sending unsolicited e-mail or posting inappropriate >messages to newsgroups. >Known generally as spamming, these activites are costly and wasteful of >Internet resources >while being in direct violation of the Terms of Service that you agreed to >at the time of registration. Tripod >has therefore discontinued serving your content, and this notice should >serve as cancellation of >your Tripod membership. > >--=====================_21395590==_-- > _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Tue Apr 09 20:13:20 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA21509 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 19:29:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g39NTVCl000860 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 19:29:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g39NT1I31663; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 17:29:01 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 17:29:01 -0600 X-Original-Sender: usgenweb@cox.net Tue Apr 9 17:29:01 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020409192249.00c71c30@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: usgenweb@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 19:29:31 -0400 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay In-Reply-To: <002001c1dfe5$d2048160$26967a3f@wchs> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1869 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 8eb4f1cda9a3d8e5fd3b0795ea18f81c At 11:44 AM 4/9/02 -0500, Phyllis Rippee wrote: >Holly, > >Where do you want the censure motion in regard to the R.A.L. sent? Is it a >personnel matter to be decided here BEFORE it goes to Board-L? >Or do you want it sent to Board-L with a full explanation as to why it is >being made? I would imagine that a great deal would depend on what the motion said and what action it proposed. If you have a motion in mind and are not certain it would probably be best to post it here to exec first and request opinion of myself AND your fellow board members on whether it should go to board-l or not. >And, will you quash it before it gets there; ignore it after it gets there; >or quash it after it gets there? Are those the only choices I get? Phyllis, this was totally uncalled for. I don't quash motions based on whether or not I agree with them. From ???@??? Tue Apr 09 20:13:20 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA23055 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 19:45:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g39NjaCl003069 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 19:45:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g39Nj7324094; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 17:45:07 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 17:45:07 -0600 X-Original-Sender: TVick65536@aol.com Tue Apr 9 17:45:07 2002 From: TVick65536@aol.com Message-ID: <163.bdecbec.29e4d6fa@aol.com> Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 19:44:58 EDT Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1870 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: ad8fa07655778b34348370dde598d06a In a message dated 4/9/2002 7:29:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time, usgenweb@cox.net writes: > >And, will you quash it before it gets there; ignore it after it gets there; > >or quash it after it gets there? > > Are those the only choices I get? > > Phyllis, this was totally uncalled for. I don't quash motions based on > whether or not I agree with them. > > > I will amen that, In my experience working together without veiled sarcasm works best. Pose a question without multiple choice, and you would be amazed at the results. Let's say we give it a shot, Phyllis ... Tina From ???@??? Tue Apr 09 20:13:21 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA24449 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 20:00:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3A007Cl004778 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 20:00:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g39NxaF25984; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 17:59:36 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 17:59:36 -0600 X-Original-Sender: usgenweb@cox.net Tue Apr 9 17:59:35 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020409193003.00c72450@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: usgenweb@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 20:00:06 -0400 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Correction In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020408185245.048dd100@pop.east.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1871 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: cf017401f452c99a72353deb5783aaee At 01:40 PM 4/9/02 -0700, Jana Black wrote: >No Holly, this is wrong: "You and others personally as individuals told her >not to do so and as such can follow through as individuals..." NO, many of >us in our respective AB positions on the official AB-EXEC mailing list >denied her permission to use any of what we said, to use our names, and/or >to mention that we had said anything at all. WE did this in our official >capacities, not as individuals and you as NC are where our buck stops in >this regard. This board did not order anything of the sort. Some board members did so individually. You did not speak for the board as a whole but only for yourselves as individual board members. If you have actions you wish to pursue in this regard then do so. >Clearly you must believe you have no authority at all as NC. >How very sad. No, what is truly sad is that you have nothing better to do with your time than to trash me because I don't do your bidding. I have already told you that I am not going to wield the axe of censorship on what is said elsewhere, most especially in non official venues. You have been told repeatedly that if you wish to see such an axe wielded to make a motion to do so. I will follow the direction of this board even if I disagree with it as long as it conforms to the bylaws. >This AB is already known as a joke and a group of folks who >accomplished essentially nothing in our elected positions. I venture to say >it is l50% because we have tried perhaps too hard to work fairly with an RAL >who never had any intention of working to move the Project forward, but >rather merely to cause havoc. As I look back at what has taken place so far in this board's term, I see far more havoc caused by your incessant yammering and disrespect on this list and on board-l than on actions outside the official arena by anyone else. >The other 50% IMHO lies right at your doorstep >as you evade the issues and do not use the authority of your Office. No, I simply do not do as you direct, I do as I believe is correct. If I am such a terrible BC, then take action to remove me or at the least ask for a vote of confidence. >Whatever your opinion, I will eventually leave this AB knowing in my own >heart that *most* of us have tried to work fairly and objectively while >serving here. >You said: "If she steps over the line she is walking on reporting action on >Exec by reporting more than the number etc >of messages, I will remove her from this list but I will not censor anyone >of you off the official Board lists." Soooo, I gather that all those names >she printed must be the "etc" you meant, so even tho She DID report *more* >than "the number" that little "etc" lets you right off your own hook. The etc was shorthand for precisely what she had been citing all along, number of messages by who. I'm not thrilled with that either but found it not quite over the line. I see no reason to change that definition of it now. >So, even tho you are the list mgr for Exec, even tho you stated clearly >what you >would do, instead of following through, you want "motions" from the AB and >you blame us????? If you want me to take actions I do not see as appropriate then yes, I must be directed by a majority vote of this board. >Not only do you preside over meetings and act as daily administrator, you >are responsible as our public representative for what "word" goes out >publicly and for how it gets out AND you are responsible for maintaining the >mail lists. Sturgis outlines as valid cause for removal of an officer >(p.174, #5): "misrepresentation of the organization and its officers to >outside persons" ... I cannot think of a better definition of the effect of >the DBS on the USGWP. You can take her off the Exec list and at least muzzle >her that far. The statements that set this off have had no bearing whatsoever on the exec list. The report was not written based on discussion here nor even on anything said by any board member. >undermine the organization itself." Yet even tho most of us have repeatedly >objected, the RAL is allowed by the NC to function as she wishes. The NC >does not use the authority of the Office to prevent what can be prevented. >Frankly, I'd rather take heat from some accusing the AB of using "secret >lists" as I believe that most of our members understand the need for >confidential sessions to manage sensitive business in the best interests of >the organization. The RAL's behavior is an arena outside my area of authority, as would be the same if it was you rather than her. >PA already describes the protocols for closed/executive session. You >already have the >authority to determine who is included and to boot those who do not honor >the confidentiality of such sensitive sessions. No confidentiality of closed sessions has been broken. From ???@??? Tue Apr 09 21:17:22 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA27955 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 20:37:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3A0bOCl009245 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 20:37:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3A0am502282; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 18:36:48 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 18:36:48 -0600 X-Original-Sender: TVick65536@aol.com Tue Apr 9 18:36:48 2002 From: TVick65536@aol.com Message-ID: <15e.bde5e88.29e4e319@aol.com> Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 20:36:41 EDT Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Correction Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121 Resent-Message-ID: <3L_ggB.A.aj.gk4s8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1872 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 86c6a4d16976a1a7ec05041f681b03d6 Jana, respectfully, as I have other things to do as well... YOUR rudeness on this list is unacceptable to me, both as an advisory board member and as a USGenWeb Project Volunteer. You sit here and spout about what *is* and *isn't*, shows total disrespect for the NC, as is evident by your post. Pretty presumptuous of you, IMHO. Perhaps no less than the RAL is accused of doing? Tina From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 06:17:56 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA01105 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 21:10:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3A1AXCl013220 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 21:10:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3A1A7f27846; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 19:10:07 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 19:10:07 -0600 X-Original-Sender: ky.quest@gte.net Tue Apr 9 19:10:07 2002 Message-ID: <002801c1e02c$73934a20$6401a8c0@Diane> From: "Diane M. Parsons" Old-To: "Board-Exe" Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 21:10:06 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Subject: [Board-Exec] I am back online Resent-Message-ID: <1SY2vC.A.2yG.vD5s8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1873 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 0f6e0ce718f484a5613c0c7b442f2afd Greetings all, I am back online. By the looks of my inbox, I believe I have lots of email to sort through & read ! Will spent tomorrow catching up. I have painted for 2 days and there is nothing about me that does not hurt! But, it looks good! ( the computer room) I am working on the dining room as well, have the trim to paint tomorrow and then the border to put up. Regards to all Diane Parsons From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 06:17:56 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id FAA20869 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 05:52:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3A9qFCl004955 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 05:52:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3A9ppK22749; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 03:51:51 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 03:51:51 -0600 X-Original-Sender: IsaiahHarrison@cs.com Wed Apr 10 03:51:50 2002 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020409182814.00a046b0@imap.cs.com> X-Sender: IsaiahHarrison@imap.cs.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 18:29:29 -0700 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Richard Harrison Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] I am back online In-Reply-To: <002801c1e02c$73934a20$6401a8c0@Diane> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Apparently-From: IowaGenealogy@cs.com Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1877 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: d206d160e6ad7d0575f31f571366c61a At 09:10 PM 4/9/2002 -0400, you wrote: >Greetings all, > >I am back online. > >By the looks of my inbox, I believe I have lots of email to sort through & >read ! Will spent tomorrow catching up. I have painted for 2 days and >there is nothing about me that does not hurt! But, it looks good! ( >the computer room) > >I am working on the dining room as well, have the trim to paint tomorrow >and then the border to put up. > >Regards to all >Diane Parsons Well, rest up for a couple of days, then you can start on my house! -Isaiah From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 06:17:56 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12863 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 22:55:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3A2txCl025577 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 22:55:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3A2tPg25010; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 20:55:25 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 20:55:25 -0600 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Tue Apr 9 20:55:24 2002 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Correction Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 19:42:30 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1874 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 999e5a9e9a21fda03188970e3370da44 Comments below. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Holly Timm [mailto:usgenweb@cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 5:00 PM To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Correction At 01:40 PM 4/9/02 -0700, Jana Black wrote: This board did not order anything of the sort. Some board members did so individually. You did not speak for the board as a whole but only for yourselves as individual board members. If you have actions you wish to pursue in this regard then do so. JMB: Please do not misquote me. I said "many of us in our respective AB positions on the official AB-EXEC mailing list denied her permission to use any of what we said, to use our names, and/or to mention that we had said anything at all. WE did this in our official capacities...." what this means Holly is that we were speaking as individual_SC_and_CC_Reps, not as individual people. Each of us spoke for ourselves in our official capacities, go back and read the posts. If you want an "official count" of how many AB members are in agreement, ask for it! AND, we were speaking on THE official USGWP Exec list where we can only be as officers holding those positions. You, as NC, are charged to administer daily business for our organization, including the way the Board lists are used. You have the authority to take Ms. Lindquist off the list for the disrespect and disregard she shows fellow AB members, since she only uses Exec for fodder for the DBS... Many of us are telling you in our official capacities that is what we want. No, what is truly sad is that you have nothing better to do with your time than to trash me because I don't do your bidding. I have already told you that I am not going to wield the axe of censorship on what is said elsewhere, most especially in non official venues. You have been told repeatedly that if you wish to see such an axe wielded to make a motion to do so. I will follow the direction of this board even if I disagree with it as long as it conforms to the bylaws. JMB: You would be amazed at how little time I give this any more.... and I am far from alone in asking you to do what I have repeated. Holly, I know you cannot censor what Teresa prints outside, but what you can do is to hold her accountable in two ways: 1) you can take her off Exec so she cannot use it as fodder and 2) you can listen to your AB when we tell you we want Ms. Lindquist to specifically apologize to Mr. Samuelsen (another item that is being ignored). Again, ask us for a count of how many are in agreement. I am not asking you to do my bidding; I am merely unwilling to stay silent when I read the AB telling you what they want and you ignore it. As I look back at what has taken place so far in this board's term, I see far more havoc caused by your incessant yammering and disrespect on this list and on board-l than on actions outside the official arena by anyone else. JMB: I came on this AB to WORK for the Project not to be silent - sorry to disappoint you. My mail does not tell me my constituents are disappointed, nor does it tell me they disagree with my efforts. I will admit, any remaining professional respect I had for you is rapidly vanishing, and I am not alone. You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine - shrug. No, I simply do not do as you direct, I do as I believe is correct. If I am such a terrible BC, then take action to remove me or at the least ask for a vote of confidence. JMB: Nah, too much work. You have made your own bed and elections are not that far off. The etc was shorthand for precisely what she had been citing all along, number of messages by who. I'm not thrilled with that either but found it not quite over the line. I see no reason to change that definition of it now. JMB: Since you say you are not thrilled, you might consider using as a very valid reason the fact that Ms. Lindquist was specifically denied permission by officers of this AB to post their names, or any references to the fact that they had even posted on Exec, let alone numbers of posts and she, (as some suggested would happen) entirely ignored their directives. The statements that set this off have had no bearing whatsoever on the exec list. The report was not written based on discussion here nor even on anything said by any board member. JMB: Excuse me, if you think that Mr. Samuelsen's formal complaint is what "set this off" then you have been ignoring what your AB members have been trying to say to you for even longer than I thought - shrug. The RAL's behavior is an arena outside my area of authority, as would be the same if it was you rather than her. JMB: Oh! I get it, the "RAL's behavior is an arena outside my area of authority" and beyond your ability to censor within the organization, but you will censor the rest of us - I get it! Sorry Madame Chair, I respectfully disagree, the way the RAL *uses* her position to access privileged information is *not* beyond your authority to control. No confidentiality of closed sessions has been broken. JMB: Hmmm, so you have forgotten what happened right out the door regarding the EC??? I am tired of all this... I will leave it to others to remind you of the breeches since the beginning of this term. Meanwhile, we can all ponder just why Linda H-D left as chair of the EC......... From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 06:17:56 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA12873 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 22:56:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3A2u2Cl025582 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 22:56:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3A2tR725100; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 20:55:27 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 20:55:27 -0600 X-Original-Sender: rkeason@tir.com Tue Apr 9 20:55:27 2002 Message-ID: <061501c1e03a$e7828460$cda028d8@hppav> From: "Ron Eason" Old-To: References: <002801c1e02c$73934a20$6401a8c0@Diane> Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 22:53:32 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Subject: [Board-Exec] List, names and who did what games Resent-Message-ID: <-6s5GB.A.-HG.fm6s8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1875 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: c2ffb6e65e3a7d94793e3edfc34a3769 Holly, Can you maybe give a brief description of what you consider to be acceptable use and/or objectionable, non-objectionable usage or re-usage of the information pertaining to the Exec-L. It is obvious that there are some that are extremely disturbed by the mention of their name and the number of post they make to the Exec-L list. I am not one of them. But I think that maybe a reminder or statement of your thoughts on the subject so that we can either put this to rest, once and for all, or get those the information they need to be able to go forward with trying to gag the source of that information. Personally, I don't think that the information is harmful, except it may make some feel as though they are being scrutinized by their use of the list, but then I can't say I understand Teresa's intent in publishing the information unless it is to inform the public of those continuing to operate in *secret*, which really hasn't been abusive by anyone, in my opinion. A means to not aire certain dirty laundry and to handle items of a sensitive/personal nature, or she could just be doing it merely to ruffle the feathers of those who don't like it, just because she can. Either way, it really does not serve a purpose, except in the latter. However, I am of the agreement with some, that the constant belittleing, disrespectable attitudes and continual sarcasm are a far more damaging problem, than Teresa'a irritating posts to a non-project, non-official mailing list. Thanks, Ron From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 06:17:56 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA15294 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 23:15:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3A3FCCl027743 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 23:15:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3A3ENS02888; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 21:14:23 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 21:14:23 -0600 X-Original-Sender: gingerh@shawneelink.com Tue Apr 9 21:14:22 2002 Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 22:10:00 -0500 From: GingerH Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Correction Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-id: <017701c1e03d$34952120$0101a8c0@pavilion> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: Resent-Message-ID: <8Wbom.A.6s.P46s8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1876 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: e96c8dbfecd0d8f0cb78c143a434d618 Judging from the length of these diatribes you give it far more time than you'd have anyone believe. You want censorship? You want the RAL disciplined and/or removed? Then hike yourself over to Board-L and make your motion. In other words Jana, as they say around here: Put up or shut up. My apologies to the rest of you but it has gotten to the point of the ridiculous. Holly if you feel this warrants my removal from this list, feel free, I won't miss it. Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana Black" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 9:42 PM Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Correction > Comments below. Jana > > -----Original Message----- > From: Holly Timm [mailto:usgenweb@cox.net] > Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 5:00 PM > To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Correction > > > At 01:40 PM 4/9/02 -0700, Jana Black wrote: > > > > This board did not order anything of the sort. Some board members did so > individually. You did not speak for the board as a whole but only for > yourselves as individual board members. If you have actions you wish to > pursue in this regard then do so. > > JMB: Please do not misquote me. I said "many of us in our respective AB > positions on the official AB-EXEC mailing list > denied her permission to use any of what we said, to use our names, and/or > to mention that we had said anything at all. WE did this in our official > capacities...." what this means Holly is that we were speaking as > individual_SC_and_CC_Reps, not as individual people. Each of us spoke for > ourselves in our official capacities, go back and read the posts. If you > want an "official count" of how many AB members are in agreement, ask for > it! AND, we were speaking on THE official USGWP Exec list where we can only > be as officers holding those positions. You, as NC, are charged to > administer daily business for our organization, including the way the Board > lists are used. You have the authority to take Ms. Lindquist off the list > for the disrespect and disregard she shows fellow AB members, since she only > uses Exec for fodder for the DBS... Many of us are telling you in our > official capacities that is what we want. > > > > No, what is truly sad is that you have nothing better to do with your time > than to trash me because I don't do your bidding. I have already told you > that I am not going to wield the axe of censorship on what is said > elsewhere, most especially in non official venues. You have been told > repeatedly that if you wish to see such an axe wielded to make a motion to > do so. I will follow the direction of this board even if I disagree with it > as long as it conforms to the bylaws. > > JMB: You would be amazed at how little time I give this any more.... and I > am far from alone in asking you to do what I have repeated. Holly, I know > you cannot censor what Teresa prints outside, but what you can do is to hold > her accountable in two ways: 1) you can take her off Exec so she cannot use > it as fodder and 2) you can listen to your AB when we tell you we want Ms. > Lindquist to specifically apologize to Mr. Samuelsen (another item that is > being ignored). Again, ask us for a count of how many are in agreement. I am > not asking you to do my bidding; I am merely unwilling to stay silent when I > read the AB telling you what they want and you ignore it. > > > > As I look back at what has taken place so far in this board's term, I see > far more havoc caused by your incessant yammering and disrespect on this > list and on board-l than on actions outside the official arena by anyone > else. > > JMB: I came on this AB to WORK for the Project not to be silent - sorry to > disappoint you. My mail does not tell me my constituents are disappointed, > nor does it tell me they disagree with my efforts. I will admit, any > remaining professional respect I had for you is rapidly vanishing, and I am > not alone. You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine - > shrug. > > > > No, I simply do not do as you direct, I do as I believe is correct. If I am > such a terrible BC, then take action to remove me or at the least ask for a > vote of confidence. > > JMB: Nah, too much work. You have made your own bed and elections are not > that far off. > > > > The etc was shorthand for precisely what she had been citing all along, > number of messages by who. I'm not thrilled with that either but found it > not quite over the line. I see no reason to change that definition of it > now. > > JMB: Since you say you are not thrilled, you might consider using as a very > valid reason the fact that Ms. Lindquist was specifically denied permission > by officers of this AB to post their names, or any references to the fact > that they had even posted on Exec, let alone numbers of posts and she, (as > some suggested would happen) entirely ignored their directives. > > > > The statements that set this off have had no bearing whatsoever on the exec > list. The report was not written based on discussion here nor even on > anything said by any board member. > > JMB: Excuse me, if you think that Mr. Samuelsen's formal complaint is what > "set this off" then you have been ignoring what your AB members have been > trying to say to you for even longer than I thought - shrug. > > > > The RAL's behavior is an arena outside my area of authority, as would be > the same if it was you rather than her. > > JMB: Oh! I get it, the "RAL's behavior is an arena outside my area of > authority" and beyond your ability to censor within the organization, but > you will censor the rest of us - I get it! Sorry Madame Chair, I > respectfully disagree, the way the RAL *uses* her position to access > privileged information is *not* beyond your authority to control. > > > > No confidentiality of closed sessions has been broken. > > JMB: Hmmm, so you have forgotten what happened right out the door regarding > the EC??? I am tired of all this... I will leave it to others to remind you > of the breeches since the beginning of this term. > > Meanwhile, we can all ponder just why Linda H-D left as chair of the > EC......... > > > From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 19:19:34 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA26919 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 07:17:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3ABH8Cl012807 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 07:17:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3ABGmQ13583; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 05:16:48 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 05:16:48 -0600 X-Original-Sender: usgenweb@cox.net Wed Apr 10 05:16:48 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020410065533.0296ada0@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: usgenweb@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 07:17:15 -0400 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] List, names and who did what games In-Reply-To: <061501c1e03a$e7828460$cda028d8@hppav> References: <002801c1e02c$73934a20$6401a8c0@Diane> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1878 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 6a37641d5388f15356e212a10db8596b Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 2 At 10:53 PM 4/9/02 -0400, Ron Eason wrote: >Holly, > >Can you maybe give a brief description of what you consider >to be acceptable use and/or objectionable, non-objectionable >usage or re-usage of the information pertaining to the Exec-L. Any discussion/reporting of what is said or discussed here is unacceptable. From the initial setting of the rules Teresa has reported in the DBS the number of messages by whom. This has not changed. >Personally, I don't think that the information is harmful, except >it may make some feel as though they are being scrutinized by >their use of the list, but then I can't say I understand Teresa's >intent in publishing the information unless it is to inform the public >of those continuing to operate in *secret*, which really hasn't >been abusive by anyone, in my opinion. I don't really understand her intent either. Any on this board are certainly free to move that any further inclusion of the listing of the number of messages and names is not allowed. If such a motion passed I would then follow through on the consequences which would presumably be removal of Teresa from the exec list. >However, I am of the agreement with some, that the constant >belittleing, disrespectable attitudes and continual sarcasm are a >far more damaging problem, than Teresa'a irritating posts to a >non-project, non-official mailing list. Removing her from this list will free her to publicly surmise anything she likes about is being said here. From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 19:19:34 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA27645 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 07:29:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3ABTcCl013837 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 07:29:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3ABTJF20146; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 05:29:19 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 05:29:19 -0600 X-Original-Sender: usgenweb@cox.net Wed Apr 10 05:29:19 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020410071755.02966560@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: usgenweb@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 07:29:46 -0400 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Subject: RE: [Board-Exec] Correction In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: <-DuozB.A.l6E.PICt8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1879 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 2b1d94a162d445729aee755f9c567cf8 Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 8 At 07:42 PM 4/9/02 -0700, Jana Black wrote: >JMB: You would be amazed at how little time I give this any more.... and I >am far from alone in asking you to do what I have repeated. Holly, I know >you cannot censor what Teresa prints outside, but what you can do is to hold >her accountable in two ways: 1) you can take her off Exec so she cannot use >it as fodder and 2) you can listen to your AB when we tell you we want Ms. >Lindquist to specifically apologize to Mr. Samuelsen (another item that is >being ignored). Again, ask us for a count of how many are in agreement. I am >not asking you to do my bidding; I am merely unwilling to stay silent when I >read the AB telling you what they want and you ignore it. If you want these things done, make a motion. 1) The only fodder she extracts from here is the number of messages by whom 2) You want that apology made, make a motion although I don't see much value in a forced apology. >JMB: Nah, too much work. You have made your own bed and elections are not >that far off. Is this supposed to bother me? Do you really think being re-elected is important to me? Do you even presume to know whether or not I intend to run again? >Meanwhile, we can all ponder just why Linda H-D left as chair of the >EC......... and you know why? or is this the sort of implication statement you deplore so loudly when made by others? From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 19:19:34 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA15399 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:42:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3AEgZCl006848 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:42:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3AEgDW23945; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:42:13 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:42:13 -0600 X-Original-Sender: wchs@getgoin.net Wed Apr 10 08:42:13 2002 Message-ID: <004b01c1e09e$9a1e0dc0$19967a3f@wchs> From: "Phyllis Rippee" Old-To: Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 09:46:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Declude-Spoolname: D4e96123d028296d3.SMD Subject: [Board-Exec] Okay Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1880 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 97ba827dfe729a77060c74732af47cd6 Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 18 Let's give performing our duties as Advisory Board Members a shot. First, let us expect our National Coordinator to bring us TOGETHER to act on UNFINISHED BUSINESS. 1. A promise from the NC to inform us of what she found out from Traci Parsons-Holder (or Holder-Parsons, whatever) in regard to the purchasing of domains as soon as it was verified by Ms. Traci. Promise never kept. 2. Grievance filed by Terria and Kelly against the SC of North Carolina. Situation discussed, poll taken, more discussion, nothing more resolved on the issue. Was any action been taken by the National Coordinator because no definite decision was ever arrived at by the Advisory Board? 3. Since the R.A.L. refuses to take part in any discussion and/or poll on this (Board-Exec) list, will the National Coordinator continue to cast said R.A.L.'s proxy on any poll that may be taken during this Project year? 4. Would any of my colleagues like to add to this list of unfinished business? Phyllis From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 19:19:34 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17467 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:01:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3AF1vCl009509 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:01:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3AExgs04452; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:59:42 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:59:42 -0600 X-Original-Sender: wchs@getgoin.net Wed Apr 10 08:59:42 2002 Message-ID: <005601c1e0a1$0fd5a260$19967a3f@wchs> From: "Phyllis Rippee" Old-To: Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:04:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Declude-Spoolname: D52b613b002a4b5f6.SMD Subject: [Board-Exec] Correction Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1881 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 827d40cbcdee26a4e1958c56077419d9 Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 19 At least Jana is keeping her comments "in house". She is not going out into a forum where anybody can subscribe. She is also not doing anything contrary to the parliamentary authority we have adopted. And, she is not out of line requesting the NC do something. The fact is that Holly may actually believe that she as NC is walking down the middle of the road. Phyllis From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 19:19:34 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA20023 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:24:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3AFOrCl012516 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:24:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3AFOUE23570; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 09:24:30 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 09:24:30 -0600 X-Original-Sender: tstowell@chattanooga.net Wed Apr 10 09:24:30 2002 Message-ID: <17428.66.129.5.5.1018452268.squirrel@control.chattanooga.net> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:24:28 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay From: "Tim Stowell" Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com In-Reply-To: <004b01c1e09e$9a1e0dc0$19967a3f@wchs> References: <004b01c1e09e$9a1e0dc0$19967a3f@wchs> Reply-To: tstowell@chattanooga.net X-Mailer: SquirrelMail (version 1.0.6) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.9 required=10.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,AWL version=2.11 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1882 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 758f20fb741217b929cb7c66d648a22e Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 23 > 4. Would any of my colleagues like to add to this list of unfinished > business? > > Phyllis Yes. I never got a reply to my question about Proxy voting in general except some blather from Sturgis - which apparently will be followed when convienant or ignored when not - much like the Bylaws, the EC guidelines, motions, requests of a majority of AB members. ------------------------------------------------------via webmail---- Tim Stowell tstowell@chattanooga.net From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 19:19:37 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA02741 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 17:42:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3ALgBCl004476 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 17:42:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3ALfiM05308; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 15:41:44 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 15:41:44 -0600 X-Original-Sender: usgenweb@cox.net Wed Apr 10 15:41:44 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020410173843.00b97840@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: usgenweb@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 17:42:14 -0400 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay In-Reply-To: <004b01c1e09e$9a1e0dc0$19967a3f@wchs> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1883 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: dae8db8fe5e7870e61eb8ab97503f879 At 09:46 AM 4/10/02 -0500, Phyllis Rippee wrote: >Let's give performing our duties as Advisory Board Members a shot. First, >let us expect our National Coordinator to bring us TOGETHER to act on >UNFINISHED BUSINESS. > >1. A promise from the NC to inform us of what she found out from Traci >Parsons-Holder (or Holder-Parsons, whatever) in regard to the purchasing of >domains as soon as it was verified by Ms. Traci. Promise never kept. Sure it was, there was no further communication from Ms Traci whatsoever to inform you baout. >2. Grievance filed by Terria and Kelly against the SC of North Carolina. >Situation discussed, poll taken, more discussion, nothing more resolved on >the issue. Was any action been taken by the National Coordinator because no >definite decision was ever arrived at by the Advisory Board? The Board was split and no majority was arrived at. We can take it back up if anyone thinks there will be any progress on it. >3. Since the R.A.L. refuses to take part in any discussion and/or poll on >this (Board-Exec) list, will the National Coordinator continue to cast said >R.A.L.'s proxy on any poll that may be taken during this Project year? I passed on one message and it was made clear that no further passing on was desired so nothing further has been passed on. From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 19:19:37 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA03516 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 17:48:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3ALmeCl005439 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 17:48:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3ALmCM17370; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 15:48:12 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 15:48:12 -0600 X-Original-Sender: usgenweb@cox.net Wed Apr 10 15:48:11 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020410174258.00b99590@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: usgenweb@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 17:48:42 -0400 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Correction In-Reply-To: <005601c1e0a1$0fd5a260$19967a3f@wchs> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1884 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 98cb346c45ed069fff73414346a696a6 At 10:04 AM 4/10/02 -0500, Phyllis Rippee wrote: >At least Jana is keeping her comments "in house". She is not going out into >a forum where anybody can subscribe. She is also not doing anything >contrary to the parliamentary authority we have adopted. And, she is not >out of line requesting the NC do something. Nor am I out of line in refusing to take the action based on the comments of some without a directive from a majority. >The fact is that Holly may actually believe that she as NC is walking down >the middle of the road. I am trying to, whether I am succeeding is a matter of subjective opinion. From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 20:04:20 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA15853 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 19:53:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3ANrMCl021217 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 19:53:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3ANqsq24807; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 17:52:54 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 17:52:54 -0600 X-Original-Sender: kheidel@tri.net Wed Apr 10 17:52:54 2002 Message-ID: <003f01c1e0eb$11874a60$99f499cd@sasnak.net> From: "Kathy Heidel" Old-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020410173843.00b97840@pop.east.cox.net> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 18:54:33 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: <2kw7t.A.ZDG.WBNt8@lists2.rootsweb.com> To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1885 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: bbf81d18c11dbdf035343cd3d3263366 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Holly Timm" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 4:42 PM Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay > At 09:46 AM 4/10/02 -0500, Phyllis Rippee wrote: > >Let's give performing our duties as Advisory Board Members a shot. First, > >let us expect our National Coordinator to bring us TOGETHER to act on > >UNFINISHED BUSINESS. > >2. Grievance filed by Terria and Kelly against the SC of North Carolina. > >Situation discussed, poll taken, more discussion, nothing more resolved on > >the issue. Was any action been taken by the National Coordinator because no > >definite decision was ever arrived at by the Advisory Board? > The Board was split and no majority was arrived at. We can take it back up > if anyone thinks there will be any progress on it. > Holly, It has been brought to my attention that the situation in NC involves other CC's and they are also on a "Read Only" State List. Ron might know if this is so or not. If this is so perhaps we need to discuss this problem a bit more. CC's should have the benefit of interaction with one another and to exchange ideas and information within their state. I personally do not believe the SC should have total control of a USGW List. I doubt that we can do anything to alleviate the problem, but maybe others on the Board will have input and we might come up with a good outcome. I was under the impression this involved only the one county and the 2 CC's. Evidently not. Thanks, Kathy From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 22:19:19 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA27351 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 22:06:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3B26oCl007399 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 22:06:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3B26Mx01897; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 20:06:22 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 20:06:22 -0600 X-Original-Sender: rkeason@tir.com Wed Apr 10 20:06:21 2002 Message-ID: <009501c1e0fd$34ff9f80$21a028d8@hppav> From: "Ron Eason" Old-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020410173843.00b97840@pop.east.cox.net> <003f01c1e0eb$11874a60$99f499cd@sasnak.net> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 22:04:24 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1886 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 2b63dd681a3820dc92de3ada44f34573 Kathy, The state has two lists. The practice of two lists was started during the current SC reign, ( someone can correct this) One is a mandatory list and ALL CC's are subscribed to it. However it is a one-way list. Only the SC gets to post to it, so no objections or alternative opinions can be voiced in regard to anything she says. What is said is not always fair or proper. The other list has only a small portion of the CC's on it, because it is optional, so anything that is said, if you are trying to clear up something that may have been said in error on the other list, not everyone will hear. I personally have had to demand that Sharon not post any of my emails to her to the private list for this very reason. She would post an email and give her opinion about it, but you were not allowed to say anything in defense of what she said, because those people were not on the optional list. Teresa's DBS is one thing, because it is private and done outside of the jurisdiction of the Project's authority, but Sharon is within the Project's authority, yet she is allowed to practice the very same thing. Ron ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kathy Heidel" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 7:54 PM Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Holly Timm" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 4:42 PM > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay > > > > At 09:46 AM 4/10/02 -0500, Phyllis Rippee wrote: > > >Let's give performing our duties as Advisory Board Members a shot. > First, > > >let us expect our National Coordinator to bring us TOGETHER to act on > > >UNFINISHED BUSINESS. > > >2. Grievance filed by Terria and Kelly against the SC of North Carolina. > > >Situation discussed, poll taken, more discussion, nothing more resolved > on > > >the issue. Was any action been taken by the National Coordinator because > no > > >definite decision was ever arrived at by the Advisory Board? > > > The Board was split and no majority was arrived at. We can take it back up > > if anyone thinks there will be any progress on it. > > > Holly, > It has been brought to my attention that the situation in NC involves > other CC's and they are also on a "Read Only" State List. Ron might know if > this is so or not. If this is so perhaps we need to discuss this problem a > bit more. CC's should have the benefit of interaction with one another and > to exchange ideas and information within their state. I personally do not > believe the SC should have total control of a USGW List. I doubt that we can > do anything to alleviate the problem, but maybe others on the Board will > have input and we might come up with a good outcome. I was under the > impression this involved only the one county and the 2 CC's. Evidently not. > Thanks, > Kathy > > From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 23:19:21 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA01868 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 23:01:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3B31JCl013735 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 23:01:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3B30e404402; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 21:00:40 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 21:00:40 -0600 X-Original-Sender: rkeason@tir.com Wed Apr 10 21:00:40 2002 Message-ID: <00e301c1e104$ca895080$21a028d8@hppav> From: "Ron Eason" Old-To: References: <004b01c1e09e$9a1e0dc0$19967a3f@wchs> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 22:58:34 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1888 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: cf25f0e27be9ab5a9d82de809ac986ef Phyllis, As a member of this Board can you say that you have acted, voted and performed according to the letter of the Parliamentary Procedure? I think not. Each member of this Board could have their feet held just as close to the proverbial fire as some wish to hold Holly's. Shall I bring up the vote of the EC punishment for Teresa. Not according or allowed by Parliamentary Procedure, yet the members of this Board allowed it, because of their personal belief that it was better to allow her to be punished and be wrong according to Sturgis, than to do nothing and let her get away with something, again, and be right with Sturgis. There wasn't even any argument about why it should be done. Because it was known that the authority was not granted previously. No one wants to talk about those things, because everyone has the right to vote the way they want to. EVEN IF IT'S WRONG??? Now you want Holly to do something, because that's the way you THINK it should happen. She already made it plain long before, that in her opinion, that Teresa was not in violation. Which she is not. That some don't like it is the entire point. And as she has also said, either poop or get of the pot. If those that don't like what Teresa reports, then by golly, go make a motion yourselves and let the majority speak. But then the majorities opinion is only important when it pertains to certain end results. Because if the majority did not back the little coup, then there would be something else to complain about. Face it. When it comes to Teresa, there a bunch here that are not going to be happy, unless she is gone. And I am sure, that the sentiment follows for some others. We already saw the sentiment about the latest. The questions you have posed are a litmus test as to what you think is good or bad. What about a litmus test for the rest of us? You already know the outcome of the grievance. Many of you want to let the SC have her way, no matter if she is right or wrong. Because you do not want to see the power of the SC diminished in any way. Well, guess what. That type thinking is not going get us any where. There are definite problems that exist at all levels. If no one ever wants to deal with them unless they are just CC's, then we will always still have the same problems. Know why??? Because of those here that think that change would harm the SC position. That is bunk. If the SC is wrong, then they are wrong. Letting them remain wrong, because they are the SC and we have to protect the sanctity of the SC position is garbage. Since Tracy Parsons paid out a whole lot of money for domains that are worthless to her, guess what??? She's out a whole lot of someone's money. Who gives a rip? The SC's could care less when they had the opportunity to have them. They all have the INC. paranoia. Well, they are public domain and the public snatched them up. They were there, the SC's chose not to take them, and someone did. We have to deal with it. It means nothing, because there is absolutely nothing that this body can or probably ever will do about it. Holly telling you so is a waste of time, because we should all be smart enough to have realized that from the git-go. Trying to lay it at her feet, is just something to holler about. Nothing Holly can say or do about it will make a hill of beans. (No disrespect intended, Holly). Holly already stated months ago, immediately after the very first time of forwarding one opinion, that she would not be doing it again. What is the point of asking the same old question. Re-check your email. So now, what is the point in all of this wasted bandwidth? Is there something that has been accomplished in your attempt at accusation? It has been this way since almost day one. I don't know if it is a jealousy thing or if you just hate Holly, or what, but I sure wish that this trash would come to a screeching halt. It is getting dumber all the time and more worthless. If you have something to complain about, check out your own actions. Everyone. Then see what you have accomplished and what you just added to the advancement of anything. It would be hopeful that it would result in something positive and fruitful, giving rise to great accomplishment or would result in not posting at all. Because these continued accusations and finger pointing is just going to result in bigger problems. If we are not part of the solution, regardless of what has happened, then we are part of the problem. And right now, there is nothing but problems. Got any solutions? If not, then let it go. Ron > Let's give performing our duties as Advisory Board Members a shot. First, > let us expect our National Coordinator to bring us TOGETHER to act on > UNFINISHED BUSINESS. > > 1. A promise from the NC to inform us of what she found out from Traci > Parsons-Holder (or Holder-Parsons, whatever) in regard to the purchasing of > domains as soon as it was verified by Ms. Traci. Promise never kept. > > 2. Grievance filed by Terria and Kelly against the SC of North Carolina. > Situation discussed, poll taken, more discussion, nothing more resolved on > the issue. Was any action been taken by the National Coordinator because no > definite decision was ever arrived at by the Advisory Board? > > 3. Since the R.A.L. refuses to take part in any discussion and/or poll on > this (Board-Exec) list, will the National Coordinator continue to cast said > R.A.L.'s proxy on any poll that may be taken during this Project year? > > 4. Would any of my colleagues like to add to this list of unfinished > business? > > Phyllis > > From ???@??? Wed Apr 10 22:49:20 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29166 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 22:29:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3B2ThCl010029 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 22:29:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3B2TA014827; Wed, 10 Apr 2002 20:29:10 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 20:29:10 -0600 X-Original-Sender: usgenweb@cox.net Wed Apr 10 20:29:10 2002 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020410221925.00b799e0@pop.east.cox.net> X-Sender: usgenweb@pop.east.cox.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 22:29:43 -0400 Old-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay In-Reply-To: <009501c1e0fd$34ff9f80$21a028d8@hppav> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020410173843.00b97840@pop.east.cox.net> <003f01c1e0eb$11874a60$99f499cd@sasnak.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1887 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 0b093b4d389c61528bfabe9ea5beea20 first posts to the NCGenWeb's discuss list were June of 1999, discussion of making the main list read only seems to have originated that summer and continued through the year with a vote taken June/July 2000 of the CC's by the then SC to make the required list a read-only announcement list and the discuss list an in-house discussion list. This was at about the same time as the election for a new SC with the incumbent not running in which Sharon was elected. 38 of the CC's voted yes for this arrangement, 5 no, 1 no opinion. At 10:04 PM 4/10/02 -0400, Ron Eason wrote: >Kathy, > >The state has two lists. >The practice of two lists was started >during the current SC reign, ( someone can correct this) >One is a mandatory list and ALL CC's >are subscribed to it. However it is a one-way list. >Only the SC gets to post to it, so no objections >or alternative opinions can be voiced in regard to >anything she says. What is said is not always >fair or proper. >The other list has only a small portion of the CC's >on it, because it is optional, so anything that is said, >if you are trying to clear up something that may have >been said in error on the other list, not everyone >will hear. > >I personally have had to demand that Sharon not >post any of my emails to her to the private list for this >very reason. She would post an email and give her >opinion about it, but you were not allowed to say anything >in defense of what she said, because those people were >not on the optional list. > >Teresa's DBS is one thing, because it is private and done >outside of the jurisdiction of the Project's authority, but Sharon is >within the Project's authority, yet she is allowed to practice >the very same thing. > >Ron > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Kathy Heidel" >To: >Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 7:54 PM >Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Holly Timm" > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 4:42 PM > > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay > > > > > > > At 09:46 AM 4/10/02 -0500, Phyllis Rippee wrote: > > > >Let's give performing our duties as Advisory Board Members a shot. > > First, > > > >let us expect our National Coordinator to bring us TOGETHER to act on > > > >UNFINISHED BUSINESS. > > > >2. Grievance filed by Terria and Kelly against the SC of North >Carolina. > > > >Situation discussed, poll taken, more discussion, nothing more resolved > > on > > > >the issue. Was any action been taken by the National Coordinator >because > > no > > > >definite decision was ever arrived at by the Advisory Board? > > > > > The Board was split and no majority was arrived at. We can take it back >up > > > if anyone thinks there will be any progress on it. > > > > > Holly, > > It has been brought to my attention that the situation in NC involves > > other CC's and they are also on a "Read Only" State List. Ron might know >if > > this is so or not. If this is so perhaps we need to discuss this problem a > > bit more. CC's should have the benefit of interaction with one another and > > to exchange ideas and information within their state. I personally do not > > believe the SC should have total control of a USGW List. I doubt that we >can > > do anything to alleviate the problem, but maybe others on the Board will > > have input and we might come up with a good outcome. I was under the > > impression this involved only the one county and the 2 CC's. Evidently >not. > > Thanks, > > Kathy > > > > From ???@??? Thu Apr 11 18:39:21 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA19417 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 09:43:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3BDhXCl017409 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 09:43:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3BDhBM17552; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 07:43:11 -0600 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 07:43:11 -0600 X-Original-Sender: kheidel@tri.net Thu Apr 11 07:43:11 2002 Message-ID: <001701c1e15f$0c593480$97f499cd@sasnak.net> From: "Kathy Heidel" Old-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020410173843.00b97840@pop.east.cox.net> <003f01c1e0eb$11874a60$99f499cd@sasnak.net> <009501c1e0fd$34ff9f80$21a028d8@hppav> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 08:44:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1889 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 2610fa134afce85480e77b1c0e066253 Ron, thanks for this information. Now that we do know there is a definite problem, what if anything can "we" do to alleviate this? Also what needs to be done to bring up a new election so the CC's would be able to make some changes or, can any of you come up with other ideas to address this problem? Terria and Kelly are not the only CC's to be have difficulties with Sharon. When I was voicing my opinion previously, to be very honest I thought Terria and Kelly had other plans. Obviously I was wrong and I am willing to admit this. I think we need to help out in some manner. I am not advocating this but, as a CC and ASC who has never had a problem with any of the States I have been in I am not knowledgeable enough in this area and would like more input. Kathy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Eason" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 9:04 PM Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay > Kathy, > > The state has two lists. > The practice of two lists was started > during the current SC reign, ( someone can correct this) > One is a mandatory list and ALL CC's > are subscribed to it. However it is a one-way list. > Only the SC gets to post to it, so no objections > or alternative opinions can be voiced in regard to > anything she says. What is said is not always > fair or proper. > The other list has only a small portion of the CC's > on it, because it is optional, so anything that is said, > if you are trying to clear up something that may have > been said in error on the other list, not everyone > will hear. > > I personally have had to demand that Sharon not > post any of my emails to her to the private list for this > very reason. She would post an email and give her > opinion about it, but you were not allowed to say anything > in defense of what she said, because those people were > not on the optional list. > > Teresa's DBS is one thing, because it is private and done > outside of the jurisdiction of the Project's authority, but Sharon is > within the Project's authority, yet she is allowed to practice > the very same thing. > > Ron > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kathy Heidel" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 7:54 PM > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Holly Timm" > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 4:42 PM > > Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay > > > > > > > At 09:46 AM 4/10/02 -0500, Phyllis Rippee wrote: > > > >Let's give performing our duties as Advisory Board Members a shot. > > First, > > > >let us expect our National Coordinator to bring us TOGETHER to act on > > > >UNFINISHED BUSINESS. > > > >2. Grievance filed by Terria and Kelly against the SC of North > Carolina. > > > >Situation discussed, poll taken, more discussion, nothing more resolved > > on > > > >the issue. Was any action been taken by the National Coordinator > because > > no > > > >definite decision was ever arrived at by the Advisory Board? > > > > > The Board was split and no majority was arrived at. We can take it back > up > > > if anyone thinks there will be any progress on it. > > > > > Holly, > > It has been brought to my attention that the situation in NC involves > > other CC's and they are also on a "Read Only" State List. Ron might know > if > > this is so or not. If this is so perhaps we need to discuss this problem a > > bit more. CC's should have the benefit of interaction with one another and > > to exchange ideas and information within their state. I personally do not > > believe the SC should have total control of a USGW List. I doubt that we > can > > do anything to alleviate the problem, but maybe others on the Board will > > have input and we might come up with a good outcome. I was under the > > impression this involved only the one county and the 2 CC's. Evidently > not. > > Thanks, > > Kathy > > > > > > From ???@??? Fri Apr 12 00:48:18 2002 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.radix.net (mail1.radix.net [207.192.128.31]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA12863 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 19:12:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists2.rootsweb.com (lists2.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.32]) by mail1.radix.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g3BNCNCl007300 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 19:12:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists2.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id g3BNBmJ04860; Thu, 11 Apr 2002 17:11:48 -0600 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 17:11:48 -0600 X-Original-Sender: rkeason@tir.com Thu Apr 11 17:11:48 2002 Message-ID: <015b01c1e1ad$fbd33800$e0a028d8@hppav> From: "Ron Eason" Old-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020410173843.00b97840@pop.east.cox.net> <003f01c1e0eb$11874a60$99f499cd@sasnak.net> <009501c1e0fd$34ff9f80$21a028d8@hppav> <001701c1e15f$0c593480$97f499cd@sasnak.net> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec] Okay Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 19:09:49 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Resent-Message-ID: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1890 X-Loop: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: Board-Exec-L-request@rootsweb.com X-UIDL: 0b8d164130262f9be13b79692dfa313c Kathy, The most needed thing, is uniformity and a chain of command. I know that there are those that do not like to imagine the States being responsible to someone else and being told what to do, but without a chain of com