2003 (January Through April) The DBS again published sporadically throughout 2003, particularly after my term of office ended and I was denied the opportunity to run again. Many of the posts below are copies of posts sent to the Board lists; once it became clear that the then-NC Richard Harrison would only forward posts he felt like forwarding, I began posting them to all public lists so that members would know that my voice on the Board was being denied. ======= Names removed to protect the innocent. For those of you who don't know what's going on, Tim Stowell dumped Keith Giddeon because Keith suggested that Tim was devoting too much time to unimportant national issues rather than the GAGenWeb and called for an election of a new SC. Apparently several folks who supported Keith have been summarily removed from their counties and others have resigned. While I certainly do not endorse the removal of any member of USGenWeb from their volunteer position without cause and without an opportunity to address complaints against them, I will admit that I have had a certain amount of enjoyment watching Tim and Keith turn on each other. The mailing list in question is GAGEN and it is archived at Root$web. -Teresa merope@radix.net > Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 06:45:22 -0500 > From: merope > Subject: Re: Disgusted with GeorgiaGenWeb > > Hi, > > Just wanted to let you know that I received your message. I am informed that the Advisory Board is aware of the situation in Georgia and has chosen not to address it. Under the bylaws of the USGenWeb Project, Tim Stowell as SC of GAGenWeb is fully within his rights to remove any member of the GAGenWeb for any reason he chooses and has freely exercised that right throughout his tenure as SC. Traditionally the Board will not involve itself in the internal issues of a state organization. In fact, the Board has NEVER supported any county coordinator against a state coordinator. I wish I could tell you differently, but that is the situation as it stands. > > However, as I am no longer permitted to participate in Advisory Board business I am perhaps not the best person to send your concerns to at this time. I have no way to officially communicate with the Board and they will neither involve me in any discussions nor notify me of any outcomes. I recommend forwarding this either directly to the National Coordinator, Richard Harrison, or to one of your representatives other than Tim Stowell. I personally recommend Ron Eason, as he is one of the few Board members who has consistently shown concern for the rights of county coordinators with the USGenWeb Project. I also refer you to the USGenWeb Project bylaws, where the procedure for removal of an SC are clearly defined. Unfortunately they are so difficult as to make it impossible to actually remove an SC, but if you think you have the support within the state organization, you could give it try. I suggest that any recall drive be organized clandestinely, since of course Tim can just fire anyone who might vote against him. > > Good luck. > > -Teresa Lindquist > Representative At Large, USGenWeb Project > merope@radix.net > > > At 01:19 PM 1/27/03 -0500 [deleted] wrote: > >> I am sending this to you anonymously as I am wary of sharing my identity from fear of retaliation from my State Coordinator and his cronies. This is a friend's email addy who has nothing to do with this. However, you may contact me via this email address. >> >> I volunteered to serve as a CC to continue the wonderful work the USGenWeb has started. I am appalled by the pettiness and the dictatorship that has occurred in Georgia. >> >> The vindictiveness, the back-stabbing, the lack of support if you aren't one of the chosen few is disparagingly contemptuous. >> >> I implore you to take action on this. For further information, I encourage you to read the list archives for the month of December. And I hope you will be responsible enough to take appropriate action. >> >> I know of 3 people (4 including me) who have multiple counties on the GAGenWeb site who are on the verge of quitting. >> >> There are (at least) 15 counties up for adoption in Georgia. Many of the CCs who are letting go of their counties have been hard working volunteers who are tired of the b/s going on in our State. >> >> Thanks, in advance. >> Anon. ======== http://www.giddeon.com/gagenweb.html Tim is an excellent example of absolute power corrupting absolutely. Sadly, I have to work hard at giving a damn about what happens to Keith "pompous ass" Giddeon, but I reiterate this should not EVER happen to a hard-working CC under ANY circumstances. Yes, the Board should do something about it, but since Tim is one of the Chosen, no doubt this will forgotten in due time. On a sadder note, I heard this morning that Ron Eason has resigned from the Board. What a pity. The handful of Board members who ever gave a damn about the CCs is rapidly dwindling and will soon disappear entirely. And apparently the Board is considering putting David Samuelson, a man who rubs sandpaper the wrong way, on the EC. According to sources, discussing Mr. Samuelson's lack of qualifications for the position is inappropriate, and the Board is expected to rubberstamp the appointment and go back to its obedient stupor in short order. Shoveling out... -Teresa Lindquist Representative At Large USGenWeb Project ========= http://pub50.ezboard.com/fgensuckfrm1.showMessage?topicID=161.topic and it appears that David was moderated on USGENWEB-DISCUSS because he called the moderator (Board member Tina Vickery) a hypocrite. That's very very funny. http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/ifetch2?/u1/textindices/U/USGENWEB-DISCUSS+2002+ 7242108743+F -Teresa Lindquist Representative At Large USGenWeb Project merope@radix.net ============ It will clearly be a cold day in hell before King Richard and his Court allow Diane to sit in their holy presences, but ya never know...maybe if enough people petition, they will pretend to consider it for five minutes before picking someone more to their liking. -Teresa Representative At Large Sitting the rest of the term in exile merope@radix.net > To: USGenWeb-SE-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [USGW-SE] VOLUNTEER NEEDED > From: dlytton@mindspring.com > User-Agent: Instant Web Mail 0.61 > Cc: IsaiahH@cox.net, merope@radix.net, wnoliver@worldnet.att.net, > eppy@ticnet.com, rkeason@comcast.net, y8g3n2ws@coastalnet.com > Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 14:23:51 -0500 > X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report > X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server708.rackmonster.com > X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - radix.net > X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [99 99] / [99 99] > X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - server708.rackmonster.com > X-Status: > X-Keywords: > > Diane Mason Kelly (y8g3n2ws@coastalnet.com) is volunteering to serve as > Rep for this region, as per the votes of the majority of this region > reguarding who they want to be their Rep for this AB term. > > I am posting here, for Diane, because she is not subscribed to this > list, and because she believes Richard Harrison is rejecting mail from > her as well as from other CCs, who write to Richard with complaints > wanting to know why the majority of the AB refuses to uphold the rights > of the CCs under the USGenWeb Bylaws. > > Diane hopes that by this post here...Richard will get the message. > > Recently, Richard and eight members of the AB at that time...Phyllis, > Jan, Jana, Larry, Jimmy, Vicki, Joe, and Tina...in an answer to a > greivance wherein they refused to grant CCs their right of a fair > hearing before punishment, as mandated by Sturgis, and refused to > uphold the rights of CCs in accordance to the Bylaws, it was also > stated that, > > "Sturgis says, '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'" > > For the AB to select any other than Diane to fill Rons term, would be > in conflict with the rights of the majority, who have *Already* voted > for Rep for this term: Jimmy and Diane were in a run-off, Jimmy came in > 1st, Diane was 2nd, Jimmy has been seated, it is now Dianes turn to > fulfill the duty she was voted to do...and the rights of the majority, > the CCs who voted, must prevail, according to the AB and Sturgis. > > > Candidates must have at least one year (the twelve months > immediately > > preceding appointment) of continuous service as a Local Coordinator > > within the SEMA region > Diane has been with the NCGenWeb since 1996. Some of her counties she > was the first to adopt or create. > > > and current activity as a member > No one can show any breach of Bylaws or Procedures, or any due process > or fair hearing to exclude Diane as a NCGenWeb member...so, no problem > there. > > > a member in good standing > That must be a misprint, seeing as though we already have a MNIGS on > the AB. However, ditto the above...so, no problem with this > qualification either. > > > and eligibility to vote within The USGenWeb Project. > Diane is both a NCGenWeb member and a USGenWeb member. > > > qualifications and reasons for wanting to serve > Diane has a long and outstanding history of supporting the USGenWeb > Bylaws, and the rights that CCs have...a vitally needed asset to the > Project, especially since as a direct result of the actions of USGenWeb > SC Derick Hartshorn conducting personal vendettas against CCs in the > name of the USGenWeb, and the inactions of NC Richard Harrison, the > USGenWeb is now faced with the most shameful and disgraceful event in > its history, perpetuated by the AB members who permit, condone, and > encourage the harassment of USGenWeb CCs by SCs, by refusing to resolve > greivances and by refusing to uphold the CCs rights under the USGenWeb > Bylaws. > > The rights of the CCs who voted for Diane, outweigh the right of an > individual or minority group to delay the process of seating Diane. > > Daryl - on behalf of Diane > > PS: The issues with the NCGenWeb, the NCGenWeb SC, and the AB in these > matters, are *far* from calming down or being over with...as the AB > well knows. ========== This is just sad. Richard really sucks. -Teresa > X-Sender: IsaiahH@pop.west.cox.net > X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 > Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 22:13:22 -0700 > To: "genweb" , "Ron & Kathy" , > "Bill Oliver" , > "Karen Mitchell" , "merope" , > "Bremer,Robert" , "Rob" > From: "Richard (Isaiah) Harrison" > Subject: Re: CC Rep for SE REgion Re: VOLUNTEER NEEDED > Cc: "Hartshorn, Derick" , > Board Exec > > At 11:42 PM 2/27/2003 -0500, genweb wrote: > >> To the Advisory Board of the USGenWeb Project: >> >> Yes, i am volunteering for the CC Rep position of the SE region. >> I meet all the qualifications. >> >> I have Six years continuous service in the NCGenWeb. I am a member in good >> standing- having never been legitimately declared (per bylaws & PP) to the >> contrary. >> I am eligible to vote because i still have several USGENWEB counties in NC >> that I legally host and because I am also a cohost in NCGenWeb--therefore >> eligible to vote. Robert Chancey has already verified to the AB that I am co >> -CC (6 years), although the SC, for personal vendettas that only he >> comprehends, won't allow my name to show on our website. None the less I am >> legitimately a co-CC in NC in more ways than one. And Robert and I are still >> waiting on the AB for resolution of our grievances in that regard. >> >> And I wish to serve on the AB to help make the Project a better place for >> all involved and to be a voice seeking equality & justice for all CCs >> through enforcement of the bylaws of the Project --which, by the way, do not >> declare that a SC may dictate new laws to the CCs (our foundation). >> >> Diane Kelly >> >> P.S. You probably know that I was the first runner-up behind Jimmy Epperson >> in the recent SE region CC Rep election. In the past that standard has been >> used by the AB in making, vacated seat appointment decisions. > > > > Hi Diane- > > Thank you for your interest in the vacant SEMA CC Rep position. However the NCGWP SC, Derick Hartshorn, informs me you are not at the present time a member in good standing of NCGWP. > > If you have served in a position outside of NCGWP that might qualify you to serve as SEMA CC Rep please let me know. > > -Isaiah > > Richard "Isaiah" Harrison > National Coordinator > The USGenWeb Project ============ > From: "Daryl Lytton" > To: IsaiahH@cox.net, tngibson@att.net, merope@radix.net, > tsvickery@adelphia.net, bremerr@oclc.org, cristian@netonecom.net, > wnoliver@worldnet.att.net, km1109@aculink.net > CC: tstowell@chattanooga.net, eppy@ticnet.com, lflesher@fidnet.com, > wchs@getgoin.net, janab@slip.net, sagitta56@mchsi.com, > y8g3n2ws@coastalnet.com, rkeason@comcast.net, dlytton@mindspring.com > Reply-To: projects@usgenweb.us > Subject: Formal Greivance - State-Coord and Derick > X-Mailer: NeoMail 1.25 > X-IPAddress: 209.178.146.149 > Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 01:40:59 -0500 > X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report > X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server708.rackmonster.com > X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - radix.net > X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [32053 555] / [32053 555] > X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - server708.rackmonster.com > > Formal Greivance against State-Coord Listowner and Derick Hartshorn > > Since Richard became NC, I've sent him 3-4 private messages, pleading > for his help at bringing justice into the USGenWeb, to keep the name of > the Project and the AB out of legal trouble. I can verify such messages > if needed. > > I never received any answers from Richard. I apologize to the AB for > not sending those messages to you all, instead of the just the NC. > > The reason for a criminal investigation is due to harassing messages by > Derick Hartshorn, like below. Derick has written several reviews of > WebRoots.org and knows there is no access fee, and that WebRoots > doesn't resemble genseekers.com an any other way, either. To accuse > WebRoots otherwise, is libel, since he knows the truth. > > It is also a continuation of Dericks harassment...allowed, permitted, > and apparently encouraged, since no one has taken any action to prevent > Derick from posting such messages, even after knowing about the > investigation into that exact issue. This has been an on-going thing > with Derick since Sep of 2002 when we filed our first greivance. > > For those of you who don't know...I was quietly working away in > NCGenWeb and never said a thing on the NCGenWeb-Discuss list, until > Derick initiated a harassing attack on me. Ron can verify this. > > Some of you also don't know that on the old ALL list, Derick posted his > statement of personal vendettas against USGenWeb members who work with > other genealogy orgs also, specifically he mentions NCROOTS which Diane > helped found; and states he will make his primary goal to be running > out of the USGenWeb those that he personally thinks are hostile.* > > These message of Derick cannot be ignored...they are his own proof of > conducting personal harassing vendettas against myself, and Diane, who > has been a NCGenWeb and USGenWeb member since 1996. They are his own > words, to conduct personal vendettas his primary goal, not to be a good > SC, and to use the name of the USGenWeb to conduct those vendettas. > > And now, with Dericks own publically posted evidence against himself, > we also find out that of the greivances we filed concerning being > delinked and expelled...the AB answered, taking Derick's side, without > having the slighest idea of why and how we were being delinked and > expelled...albeit that was the reason for filing the greivances, to > protest his actions. > > This doesn't look very good, either...it is especially damaging to > Diane, who now has a chance to do what she was elected to do, be an AB > Rep from her Region. > > This libelous, harassing, and unjustifiable attack upon WebRoots and > myself, on an AB-managed USGenWeb list, hosted by RootsWeb, is the same > claim of WebRoots being a fradulent entity, that resulted in the Dept. > of Justice initiating the investigation...you guys know that, and yet > you continue to let Derick post messages to USGenWeb lists, using the > name of the USGenWeb to continue his personal vendettas. This doesn't > look very good. > > I ask the AB that For The Good Of The Project, Derick Hartshorn be > unsubscribed from all USGenWeb lists at the National, State, and Local > levels, for at least the remainder of his SCship. > > I also ask the AB for concrete proof that the abuse of CCs will no > longer be tolerated within the USGenWeb, and that the wrongful actions > of Derick will be righted. > > I'm very sorry so many greivances have had to be files since Sept 2002, > but they all involve the exact same thing...being denied our rights, > when the Only thing we have Ever wanted, is to be treated fairly. > > Daryl > > > From: "Derick S. Hartshorn" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 9:08 AM > Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD-L] Another genealogy scam??? > > The same type of scam is offered by http://www.webroots.org/ > This operation is run by a gentleman named Daryl something-or-other. > > --DS Hartshorn > > > At 11:41 PM 3/3/03 -0800, you wrote: > >I am forwarding this out to all the mailing lists > >- read and heed - feel free to pass on. R/S MAK > > > >++++++++ > > > >The old genealogy scam is back. > >http://www.genseekers.com > > > >Behind the password protection are links to the > >free genealogy on-line. There is no content of > >their own. > > > >In order to get the "5-day free trial" you have > >to surrender a credit card or bank account > >number. > >You have to cancel within 5 days or you get > >dinged. > >Guess what? The cancellation e-mail bounces. Does > >this surprise you? > > > >One person who recently fell for the come-on had > >his/her account dinged not once, but twice. > >It is time to remind folks on your state and > >county mailing lists about these scoundrels. It > >has been a couple of years since we have > >mentioned this. > > > >Permission is granted to pass this on. > > > * I have these messages and other public statements of vendetta by > Derick, ready-to-go if you'd like to review them. They are all evidence > of his harassment. To be fair, I have also posted my public statement > of intent of vendetta on the old ALL list, "what I stand for is Truth, > Justice, and the American Way" ============== This is funny as hell. Guess the Board feels a need to cover its ass where NCGenWeb is concerned. -Teresa Your Representative Still At Large! > >Each volunteer in NCGenWeb has one opportunity to participate in the poll, > >regardless of the number of counties. > > >Ellen Pack > >USGW Election Committee > > Dear North Carolina Volunteer: > > Over a protracted period of time, and during the tenures of multiple State > Coordinators, the USGW Advisory Board has received multiple complaints from > County Coordinators about the status of the North Carolina Project. Since > some are more vocal than others, it is difficult for this body to > realistically gauge whether the Project in North Carolina is in good shape > now or not. It is the intent of this poll to determine whether the AB needs > to pay further attention to the status of the Project in North Carolina or > whether most North Carolina County Coordinators are satisfied that problems > have been resolved. This poll is to be conducted via the Election Committee > to ensure your anonymity. > > Please feel assured that your vote will be held in strictest confidence. > The EC and AB will receive results only as numbers, without names. Please > take the time to answer the eight questions. > > To participate in the poll, go to > http://www.indiana.edu/~riskmgmt/Forms/NC_Info.html. The poll is open now > and will close at 8:00 AM (EST) March 19. > > Follow the instructions on the form. Only responses submitted during that > time frame will be included in the results. > > Thank you, > > > The USGenWeb Advisory Board > by way of Ellen Pack > Chair, USGenWeb Election Committee > > If you have questions or problems please contact the EC at: > usgenwebec@mindspring.com > > ********************************************************************* > Each person who shares an e-mail address will receive their own password. ============ This is fascinating stuff... Also fascinating...it turns out the Board is taking a public vote on whether to allow the EC to conduct an election/poll (depending on who you talk to) regarding the removal of Tim "send 'em back to Liberia" Stowell as SC of GAGenWeb. The EC is currently conducting a poll regarding the actions of the NCGenWeb SC, which are described in such delicious detail below. Yet I can find no evidence of a public vote authorizing this poll. I am told by little bird that the Board wants and expects the NC poll to be resoundingly in Derick's favor (how could it not be, given the extensive list of people he's managed to drive out of NCGW in the last few months) and for this to in turn justify their own hateful behavior toward the volunteers of that long-suffering state. A number of currently active members of NCGW claim to have been denied an opportunity to participate in this poll; it is probably not a coincidence that they are not likely to express satisfaction with Derick's jihad. -Teresa "I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest." --Alexandre Dumas (fils) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 06:06:43 -0500 From: Daryl Lytton To: IsaiahH@cox.net, tngibson@att.net, merope@radix.net, tsvickery@adelphia.net, bremerr@oclc.org, cristian@netonecom.net, wnoliver@worldnet.att.net, km1109@aculink.net Cc: tstowell@chattanooga.net, eppy@ticnet.com, lflesher@fidnet.com, wchs@getgoin.net, janab@slip.net, sagitta56@mchsi.com, y8g3n2ws@coastalnet.com, rkeason@comcast.net, dlytton@mindspring.com Subject: The Late Great State of North Carolina NCGenWeb - A FACTUAL State of the State 100 Counties with about 71 CCs [Mar 5 2003] 06/02/02 - Nominations for SC close: Derick Hartshorn, Ron Eason, Angie Rayfield 06/18/02 - Final votes: Derick 18, Ron 16, Angie 13 - Total: 47 06/28/02 - Run-off: Derick 28, Ron 16 - Total: 44 - Everyone who voted for Angie, voted for Derick, except 3 no-voters 06/00/02 - Quit NCGenWeb in June: Scott Lee abt June 3 Debbie Fowler Meg Wilder Linda Sorrell Randy Godfrey 07/02/02 - Derick takes office 07/00/02 - Quit NCGenWeb in July: Jeff Swann Patty Day July 22 Rhonda Tomlinson Barbara Peck Terria Baynor BJ Roundtree Leah Sims 08/17/02 - Derick posts to NCGenWeb-Discuss harassing message directed at Daryl Lytton, who had never posted to the list before, and just wanting to do his job, had even asked to not be announced as a new CC when he joined the NCGenWeb. 08/18/02 - ASC Ron Eason posts to NCGenWeb-Discuss that Daryl Lytton should have been treated with the dignity and respect that the other CCs should be treated with. 08/19/02 - ASC Ron quits as ASC and CC 10/04/02 - Daryl Lytton and Maggie Olson expelled. No breach of Bylaws, no fair hearing, it's just all the sudden posted to the NCGenWeb mandatory list. Signed by Derick, and ASCs Angie Rayfield, Paul Buckley. ASC Elizabeth Harris does not sign. 10/04/02 - ASC Elizabeth Harris quites as ASC 12/29/02 - Derick is the judge and jury and sentences Diane to be expelled, out of the clear blue sky, with no notice of Bylaw infraction and no fair hearing. Derick states on NCGenWeb-L, "Since my personal desires would obviously be open to charges of bias, discrimination and further grievances, I AM PERFECTLY WILLING TO ABIDE BY THE DESIRES OF THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE NCGENWEB PROJECT. Should two-thirds of this membership vote to expel Diane Mason Kelly...." IN ACCORDANCE WITH ROBERT'S PP. 01/05/03 - Paul Buckley rules in favor of Diane, ending the process to expell her. 01/06/03 - Derick expells Diane Mason Kelly on his own, with no breach of Bylaws by Diane and no fair hearing. Co-CCs Lori Twoek and Clarice Mills also expelled. 01/16/03 - ASC Paul Buckley quits as ASC, and as NCGenWeb-Discuss list admin which he had been for several years. 01/17/03 - Derick puts out a call for ASC volunteers... 03/10/03 - No one answers call so far Other CCs who have quit NCGenWeb since Jun 2002: Kelly Blizzard - quite NCGenWeb and kept counties elsewhere Debi Kendrick - abandoned membership Jacque Lopez Peggy Patterson Heather Bagwell Kirk Stephens - Aug 2002 Cody Phoenix - looks like she left Aug 2002 Kris Mayfield - Nov 6 2002 Marceline Beem Sep 25 2002 Will D. Smith - Jan 2003 Deanne Gibson-Roles - may have quit, name not on her page anymore Barbara McMahon - Feb 2003 Angel Roller - Feb 2003 PUBLIC STATEMENTS FROM NCGENWEB SC DERICK HARTSHORN SINCE TAKING OFFICE THAT HE INTENDS TO USE THE NAME OF THE USGENWEB TO CONDUCT HIS PERSONAL VENDETTAS AGAINST CCS. Proof that Derick considers members of other genealogy orgs to be "hostile" to the USGenWeb, are the "angry voices" in the USGenWeb, supports a bylaw to exclude those members, believes that if something isn't done to stop those members that the USGenWeb will be ruined, and specifically states NCROOTS to be one of those hostile orgs, of which Diane is a co-founder of: archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/USGENWEB-ALL/2002-08/1028655774 Subj: Attn: BY-Laws Committee: ARTICLE IV Date: 8/2/2002 6:46:48 PM Pacific Standard Time From: derickh@charter.net To: hollyft@bright.net, eppy@ticnet.com, kblizzar@tampabay.rr.com, sagitta56@mchsi.com, sandiemac@bigpond.com, noelm@noelm.com, shari@tyaskin.com, Kiezza@aol.com, cch@netdoor.com, mudman@cableone.net CC: gingerh@shawneelink.com, nw_plains_sc_rep@hotmail.com, tstowell@chattanooga.net, betsym@1starnet.com, PaulDBuckley@worldnet.att.net, ncgen@mindspring.com Hi folks, Except for the attached letter (sent to me in error, c/o "USGW gize," ) I think our By-Laws are great. However, failure to protect the organization from competing and hostile interests is probably the most vital issue we currently face. Article IV is a marvelously all- inclusive, touchy-feeling piece of garbage. I shudder when I take it all in. I guess Pogo was the most astute observer of all when he commented, "We have met the enemy and they is us." Except for oil, the Western world has ignored the angry voices in the Near East. If we continue to ignore the angry voices in our midst they will attempt to terrorize us and destroy all that we have worked hard for. In short, we should expect an analogous 9/11 event if we really don't care what kind of folks represent us. We innocently allow (and encourage) County representatives to freely advertise their other genealogical pursuits (USGW/AHGP/USGENNET/NCROOTS/etc.,/etc.) If the current course is allowed to proceed we may see the USGW presence on the web simply as our 1996 history boilerplate on some obscure organization's web page. We have yet to see AmericanRoots or MegaRoots but we are witnessing the existence of their kin folk. .... ========== Proof that Derick hopes the 'honerable' USGenWeb members recognize an individual who has their own genealogy org domain name "competing" with the NCGenWeb, as being a bad person for the entire USGenWeb; claims to be a "normal" member who would like to see the bad people separated; he'll devote his time to what he thinks is returning the USGenWeb to it's original concept, instead of being a good SC, by getting rid of the bad people; and the thought of using proper USGenWeb procedure is ludicrous: Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 23:49:13 -0400 From: "Derick S. Hartshorn" To: USGENWEB-ALL-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [ALL-L] Re: [BOARD-L] The appointment process. I truly hope that the folks who are supportive of the USGW will recognize those who are either hostile to or lukewarm in their support for our USGW family. Some of these individuals even have separate domains, "competing" with the NCGenWeb Project and are promoting domains owned by those who have either been expelled from the USGW or who have been accused of using their affiliation with the USGW for personal profit. Why do we have so few candidates for office? Perhaps, because we have normal folks who hate accusations and spite and would rather separate themselves from it. I am one such person---except that I hope to make a difference. I will hope to spend the next year, devoting my time to returning this organization to the original concept. Isn't it time to be just a little more selective in our membership??? If we continue to put up with negative distractions we will never be in a position to grasp the brass ring and assert our pre-eminent position as "Number One" in on-line, non-profit genealogy. Political correctness belongs in the same trash can as all previous social engineering failures. .... ========== More proof that what Derick believes to be the hostile "opposition" within the USGenWeb needs to be eliminated; he declares his personal vendetta of ousting what he perceives to be the opposition, from the USGenWeb, to be his #1 priority, not to be a good SC; and offers to resign if 1/3 of the CCs vote him out: Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2002 02:51:48 -0400 Old-To: USGENWEB-ALL-L@rootsweb.com, IsaiahHarrison@cs.com, NCGENWEB-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com, PaulDBuckley@worldnet.att.net, ncgen@mindspring.com, angie@angiesplace.behosting.com, USGW-ALL-L@rootsweb.com, STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com, lhaasdav@mindspring.com From: "Derick S. Hartshorn" Subject: Re: [ALL-L] was so-called "crimes" - charged by the tyrannical minority- Think about this Old-Cc: tngibson@att.net, mio@netins.net, nw_plains_sc_rep@hotmail.com, tstowell@chattanooga.net, eppy@ticnet.comrkeason@directvinternet.com, lflesher@fidnet.com, betsy@rootsweb.com, leverich@rootsweb.com, crystal@pebbles.net, eppy@ticnet.com, lhaasdav@mindspring.com, Watauga@att.net This world has all the terrorism it can deal with. We are constantly reminded of the banner on bottom of the TV which displays the state of threat we are in. Should we sit back and hope that it won't happen in our Project? Don't we KNOW where the "speed-bumps" are on an otherwise smooth road? Do we not have a mechanism to eliminate the threat of our destruction? Why can't the USGenWeb Project be the very best that it can be? Only one obstacle remains: that of opposition. I am, by no means, seeking notoriety, popularity, power or perpetuation. Several times, I have entertained the notion to kick it all. Who needs it? I would love to return to writing journal articles and immerse myself in migration research. If anyone with who shares my goals wants it--YOU GOT IT!!! I'm here to help you in any way that I am able. If you oppose our Project, you are taking on a formidable adversary. I will do my utmost to make this a project of contributors-- not of whiners--and I will make your ouster my priority goal!!!! If only ONE-THIRD of our voters want me out---I'M GONE--NO QUESTIONS ASKED!!!!!!! ========== Summary Conclusion: There is probably a reason the Dept. of Justice, the DA Investigator, and the Computer Crimes Division, each after a review of the case, decided it warrents the investigation of criminal harassment of USGenWeb CCs by USGenWeb SCs, as permitted by the AB, in violation of members rights under the Bylaws, and in violation of the law. The AB will resolve the wrongful terminations, delinking, expulsions, and harassment, by USGenWeb SC Derick Hartshorn. The guilty will be punished, and the rights of the abused innocent CCs restored to them. The CCs are the majority of the Project...the SCs and the AB are minorities. Sturgis says that when the rights of the majority conflict with the rights of the minority, the rights of the majority must be upheld. Neither the SCs nor the AB has the right to undermine the authority of the Project, by refusing the fair treatment of CCs as mandated by the Bylaws. Daryl Lytton - and also on behalf of all abused USGenWeb CCs ======= What do you know? There IS a Santa Claus! Guess the Board's little popularity contest in North Carolina is moot now... -Teresa Representative At Large! > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Derick S. Hartshorn" > To: "Richard Harrison" ; "Tim Stowell" > ; "Jimmy Epperson" ; "Jana Black" > ; "Larry Flesher" ; "Bill Oliver" > ; "Phyllis Rippee" ; "Vicki > Shaffer" ; "Tina Vickery" ; > "Robert Bremer" ; "Roger Swafford" ; > "Jan Cortez" ; "Karen Mitchell" > ; "Shari Handley" ; "Roger > Swafford" > Cc: ; ; > ; ; ; > > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 10:20 AM > Subject: Rat in the cupboard > > > Dear AB members, > > Publicly posted trash such as the quote below is precisely why I have no > faith in our governing body and why I will soon be leaving. > > Why is it that you folks don't have the guts to expel the one whom you have > declared "not in good standing?" > Why does this individual continue to appear listed as > "Representative-at-Large?" > > Why is it that a distinct minority of you seek to oust the builders of our > Projects and, at the same time, fawn before the disingenuous and the > self-serving disrupters who have publicly tried to destroy this Project? > > It appears that some of you folks intend to make the USGWP as irrelevant as > the United Nations. > > Why can't you folks put the subject of service mark infringement on your > agenda? Or does involvement with State Project matters and SCs provide > more opportunity for political posturing? > > Why is it that nearly all of your pronouncements are political rather than > genealogical in nature? > > Why can't you folks gather together to try and strengthen this Project > instead of wasting precious time trying to decide "Who struck John?" > > Is it that some of you folks enjoy seeing your name listed as an Advisory > Board member and lust after a feeling of power? Don't kid yourselves! Some > of you have forever diminished your influence by the actions you have taken. > > I have seen motions made for my removal from folks who don't even know me, > let alone the situation we suffered under in the NCGWP for six years, with > four different SCs. A very small minority of folks have attempted, through > fraud and intimidation, to cripple our Project. They have been removed for > the good of the Project and yet continue to try and cause harm. Several > present and former AB members have thrown their support behind these same > disruptive individuals. How folks can cause so much turmoil in an > all-volunteer project completely baffles me. > > If the business which I devoted 30 years to operated like the AB, I would > have left long before my retirement and would have chosen to sell apples on > the street-corner instead. If you minority members of the AB enjoy turmoil > as much as you appear to do, why don't you go somewhere else to exercise > your power trip? > > I shall bid you all farewell on July 1, 2003. Please do what is necessary > to accomplish a smooth transition by that time. > > Derick S. Hartshorn > NCGenWeb State Coordinator > nc@usgenweb.org > > Visit the NC home page at: > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ncgenweb/ > > PS--PLEASE, AB, no responses. They will be filtered to my trash. > > =============================== > > From: "merope" > To: "Daily Board Show" > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 6:43 AM > Subject: [DBS] The Late Great State of North Carolina (fwd) > > > > > This is fascinating stuff... > > > > Also fascinating...it turns out the Board is taking a public vote on > > whether to allow the EC to conduct an election/poll (depending on who you > > talk to) regarding the removal of Tim "send 'em back to Liberia" > > Stowell as SC of GAGenWeb. The EC is currently conducting a poll > > regarding the actions of the NCGenWeb SC, which are described in such > > delicious detail below. Yet I can find no evidence of a public vote > > authorizing this poll. > > > > I am told by little bird that the Board wants and expects the NC poll to > > be resoundingly in Derick's favor (how could it not be, given the > > extensive list of people he's managed to drive out of NCGW in the last > > few months) and for this to in turn justify their own hateful behavior > > toward the volunteers of that long-suffering state. A number of currently > > active members of NCGW claim to have been denied an opportunity to > > participate in this poll; it is probably not a coincidence that they are > > not likely to express satisfaction with Derick's jihad. > > > > -Teresa > > > > "I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest." > > --Alexandre Dumas (fils) ============ It has been brought to my attention that, with approximately 24 hours remaining in the poll, the Board has yet to notify the constituent of its decision regarding the attached grievance. I realize that y'all have already decided that because this is a "poll" and not an "election" the EC guidelines do not pertain to the constituent. It would be a courtesy however to notify of her of that fact rather than waiting on the outcome of your little popularity contest to decide whether or not you can bother to be polite to her. Derick has summarily removed and/or chased off a substantial proportion of any NCGenWeb CCs who would have expressed dissatisfaction with his regime. He is now declaring counties abandoned without even bothering to attempt to contact the CCs in order to place "friendly" votes for the upcoming SC election and has overturned years of precedent within both USGenWeb and NCGenWeb to do so. I realize that as a client of _your_ regime he has done his duty and suited your purposes, but innocent people are now being hurt by your inability to come to grips with what you sponsored and have allowed to fester in North Carolina. I realize that you aren't the people to do anything about this. But really, all it takes to tell Diane that you are blowing her off one more time is a push of a button. Can't be that hard, can it? -Teresa Lindquist Representative Still At Large! USGenWeb Project merope@radix.net > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "genweb" > To: "Ellen Pack" ; "Richard Harrison" > ; "Bosque Lover" ; "merope" > ; ; "Karen Mitchell" > > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 10:24 PM > Subject: I have the right to vote...this is my formal grievance in the > matter. > > > > To the EC and to the Advisory Board: > > It is not up to me to resolve. I am lodging my protest and certifying my > > right to vote. The EC rules state plainly the procedure if a CC contests > > the right to vote in a election. I am to be given the benefit of a doubt > > and allowed to vote. NOw if the EC and the AB aren't going to follow > their > > own rules and resolve the issue who do you suggest i turn to-- a MYSTIC or > > maybe the FBI ???? > > > > diane > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Ellen Pack" > > To: "genweb" > > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 9:22 PM > > Subject: Re: Fw:delivery failed: for Ellen > > > > > > > Hi, Diane - > > > > > > The Election Committee did not receive verification that you are a > member > > > in NCGenWeb. I hope you are able to resolve the matter as soon as > > possible. > > > > > > This message is private, and not to be posted publicly. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Ellen > > > > > > At 05:27 PM 3/12/2003 -0500, you wrote: > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > > >From: "genweb" > > > >To: > > > >Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 4:00 PM > > > >Subject: Fw: Mail delivery failed: for Ellen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >I have not received a ballot to vote in this poll. > > > > > > Since i have been illegally dismissed from the counties i CC, and > > since > > > > > and > > > > > > am still a legitimate co CC in NC, i should receive a ballot. > > > > > > diane k. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: "jimmy" > > > > > > To: "genweb" > > > > > > Cc: "Isaiah Harrison" > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 12:07 PM > > > > > > Subject: Re: my grievances .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Diane > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You may be aware the AB is conducting a poll among the CC of NC. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We will be looking at this after the results of that poll comes > > in. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > jimmy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > genweb wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can you confirm that my grievances are being addressed? > > > > > > > > diane > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============ Well, this isn't really an "official" list but since the Board has ignored Charles' request to post it, here ya go. BTW, the singing of little birds tells us that the reality-challenged SC of poor NCGenWeb is telling the Board that "The original Rockingham County Coordinator, Debi Kendrick (who recently experienced traumatic family events), had never heard of Charles Barnam and had no idea how his name became attached to her page." Since its pretty easy to prove otherwise, we figure he's trying to play the Board for a bunch of fools (which, come to think of it....) Anyways, perhaps while Derick is looking up the meaning of "protagonist" in his Merriam Webster, he can also look up the meaning of "shame". -Teresa Lindquist Rabid USGenWeb Protagonist since 1996! > Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 12:35:27 -0800 > From: Charles > Subject: Re: [NCGENWEB] Rockingham County > To: Charles , genweb , > Bill Oliver , Phyllis Rippee , > tim stowell , Jan Cortez , > Karen Mitchell , "Bremer,Robert" , > Roger Swafford , Richard Harrison , > merope > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 > X-Status: > X-Keywords: > > Hello Everyone on the Advisory Board, > > I am protesting today's actions--21 March 2003-- by the staff at North > Carolina GenWeb. They re-assigned the County of Rockingham to another CC. I > do not concur that their action was legal. They did not contact Debi nor > myself; Nor did they specify any reason why the website was not in > compliance with the current standards set by USGenWeb; Nor did they give the > CC 45 days to correct the problems if they did exist, which they do not; > Nor did they use Rules of Order which they claim to use for business at > NCGenWeb. > Please place this letter on whatever official email list you use for Project > business. This is not a grievance, as I realize a grievance filed by a CC > has no chance whatsoever to prevail. > > Have a great day. I wish you all well. > > Charles Barnum, A Member in Good Standing > CC Rockingham County, North Carolina > CC Montgomery County, North Carolina =============== I didn't write this, someone sent it to me. But since it appears that the problems in NCGenWeb won't be going away anytime soon, this might speed up the process of filing the numerous complaints we can expect in the future. Please note however, the Board will most likely file them all in the round file. -Teresa merope@radix.net > - STANDARD DERICK HARTSHORN NCGENWEB INCIDENT REPORT FORM - > > > This is a Formal > [ ] Gripe > [ ] Complaint > [ ] Grievance > > for the Wrongful > [ ] Unsubbing > [ ] Delinking > > of myself from NCGenWeb: ______________ > > which I am/was validly > [ ] Subbed > [ ] CC > [ ] Co-CC > > to/of. > > The above position within the NCGenWeb is/was the only one I held. > [ ]Yes [ ]No > > Therefore the action(s) against me is Also the act of being Expelled > from the NCGenWeb. > [ ]Yes [ ]No > > The action(s) against myself were done contrary to > [ ] USGenWeb Bylaws > [ ] USGenWeb Standing Rules > [ ] United States Constitutional Rights of Due Process > [ ] USGenWeb Ethics > [ ] USGenWeb Spirit of the Project > [ ] USGenWeb Duties of State Coordinators > [ ] All of the above > > >From the following list of items to select from, I received the below > checked "Standard NCGenWeb Due Process and Fair Hearing Procedures" > [ ] None > > Statement of Facts: > [ ] I was Railroaded > [ ] I was Shafted > [ ] Used and Abused > [ ] All of the above > > Resolution Sought: > [ ] My rights in accordance with the Bylaws be upheld > [ ] Wrongful actions taken against me be reversed > [ ] Derick be Suspended for the rest of his SCship > [ ] Derick be Suspended for the rest of his life > [ ] His next lifetime too > [ ] And unsubbed from all USGenWeb lists > [ ] All of the above > > Your name: > Your addy: =========== No pun intended. The popularity contest results, btw, are posted here: http://webpages.charter.net/derickh/Results.html What a silly thing it is...the Board decided to hold a poll in which the outcome would be more or less certain to be in Derick's favor. And lo and behold, it was. Now that they have evidence that Derick has lied to them, they are in a wee bit of a pickle. They can't do anything about him without disregarding the poll results. But if they don't do something about him, he'll just keep on brutalizing those poor few brave enough to express some disappointment in his management style. -Teresa -----Original Message----- From: Derick S. Hartshorn [mailto:derickh@charter.net] Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2003 10:18 PM To: STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [STATE-COORD-L] USGenWeb Project CC turnover To whom it may concern: It has been suggested by some folks who have been traditionally hostile to the USGenWeb Project, that we are an on-line genealogical organization in disarray. It has been further suggested that most County Coordinators have left State Projects due to negative reasons. These same individuals have attacked the Project for reasons best described as divisive and destructive. In addressing this post to our National Coordinator, I am requesting that each State and Special Project Coordinator respond to him and our esteemed AB members, reporting your personal experiences with folks who may have left their Projects. Without taking a poll or trying to predict responses, I would really like to know if any former CCs left any of our Projects because of bad vibes or because of other circumstances. Regardless, these folks should have been included in previously-conducted polls. Our NCGenWeb Project has been infiltrated by a fraudulent entity--and was rightfully expelled. However, this individual's cohorts seek to frustrate the original goals of our Project by filing grievance after grievance and attempting to sow a field of discord. One member of your AB has even suggested that I be removed as State Coordinator because I chose to act in the best interests of our Project by removing one of these destructive forces [see Board-L archives]. Others who were placed in positions of trust within our Project have deserted and turned on us by waging hateful campaigns. One of these weasels continues to display their name on the USGWP "Who's Who" page because of the spineless attitudes of those who have the authority to do the right thing and remove this cancer. On the State level, the vast majority of those who left our Project did so because of outside obligations and time constraints. Two were expelled for detrimental activities and several resigned when they learned that their divisive dissension would not be tolerated. The very fact that the Advisory Board would suggest that I stand before a "popularity" poll in order to retain my position as SC is absurd and totally ludicrous. Nevertheless, a poll was conducted to determine how "popular" I am. I never learned of this poll until after it had been conducted. This poll was initiated because of a complainant who was removed from our Project for just cause. This individual, and cohorts, have logged many negative archived posts attacking the leadership of this Project and the organization of the XXGWP in general. They have banded together to hamper serious genealogical research. They seek instead to foster dissent. Even worse, they have managed to divert the USGWP Advisory Board to waste valuable time for their "cause." Most AB members are dedicated to providing free genealogy resources. Some have chosen to run for AB positions simply because they are energized by a personal ego trip or have a personal agenda. Elections come and elections go. I urge each and every USGWP member to carefully examine the track record of all AB members. Ask yourself if they represent your views or if they have their own personal agendas. The very future of the USGenWeb Project is at stake. Back to the NCGenWeb State Coordinator "Popularity" Poll. Here are the results: http://webpages.charter.net/derickh/Results.html as conducted by YOUR Advisory Board. Regardless of the results, some AB members continue to strive to re-instate former members whose removal was made necessary in the first place by their destructive behavior. Something needs to be done by caring folk. State Coordinators and their associates need to make some very important decisions: Are we here to stake out our turf....or are we here to serve the genealogical public???? I have no axe to grind. I have publicly stated that my term as NCGenWeb SC will end on 1 July 2003. Please, if you do nothing else, please strive to keep this organization together. Don't elect folks who are in this for their own self-gratification. Support those who choose to perpetuate our dream. Please don't tolerate the jerks!!!! Read the archives to determine who is in this for an ego trip and who is in here to promote noble goals. Support our troops in Iraq!!! Derick S. Hartshorn State Coordinator, NCGenWeb Project nc@usgenweb.org ========== As predicted and expected, the Board has washed its hands of the situation in North Carolina and will address no futher concerns there. This is _despite_ the evidence they have of extensive and continuing wrongdoing on the part of the SC and his blatant and repeated lies to them. Their basis for this was the popularity contest they conducted in a state where all vocal dissenters have been forcibly removed and replaced with "safe" votes, where the only side of the story anyone has heard is the SC's side, and where the SC has made it clear that those who disagree with him on anything are actually dangerous to the well-being of USGenWeb and will be removed on his authority alone. The Board has utterly abrograted its responsibility to protect the members of this project and seems right pleased with itself for its brilliant idea of passing their responsibility off on a "poll". Thankfully they are saved the hard work of actually doing something to support wronged CCs. We won't go into how useless public opinion polls are...suffice to say that people freely give their opinions on things that don't exist or which they know nothing about (http://comp.uark.edu/~jtubbs/Biostat/Polls/polls.say.html). As Henry Ford once noted, "the public is an ass" and its the job of elected representatives to ferret out those cases when the public is blatantly wrong and/or misguided and work to fix the situation. Not in USGenWeb though...here we pass off our responsibility to a so-called independent Election Committee and however many uninformed (or wrongly informed) members are willing to risk having an opinion, and call it Miller Time. Apparently such wonderful exercises in pious mismanagement and avoidance of responsibility will be coming soon to a state organization near you. Keep an eye out for 'em. So as the Board heaves a sigh of relief and figures that at the very least, Derick will be shuffling off the stage in a few short months, we leave their sorry asses with this thought: We have it on good authority that Derick is so tickled by the results of the popularity contest that he won't be resigning as SC after all. After all, five or six people voted against him, he has the explicit approval of the Board, and his work is not yet finished. -Teresa Lindquist Representative At Large, USGenWeb Project I used to be disgusted, now I'm just amused merope@radix.net > X-Message: #5 > Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 11:21:06 -0800 > From: "Jana Black" > To: STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <037c01c2f303$b20ad120$0f06fea9@JANA> > Subject: [STATE-COORD-L] RE: USGenWeb Project CC turnover > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="US-ASCII" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Derick, > > While I agree with you that there are some people who seem to have > personal agendas in this Project and that it is the responsibility of > every USGW Project member to pay attention and be involved in what is > going on at organizational levels, I have to take issue with a couple of > facts you have presented here. > > 1) The poll that was taken in NC had nothing to do with popularity. It > was one toll the AB could use to determine what the voice was of CCs in > NC regarding the performance of the SC in their state. Many AB members > thought a poll would not be responded to and would serve no real > purpose, but that was not the case. The poll was answered by very close > to 2/3 of the CCs in that state. The poll determined that, while this > state project, like all state projects has areas that could use > improvement, largely CCs in the state are pleased with the performance > of Derick Hartshorn, their SC. > > 2) Derick, on March 5, you stated in an email that you knew about the > poll and had no objection to it. You may not have known exactly when it > was being conducted, but you surely knew it was going to take place. I > was the initiator of the poll concept. I am proud of its results. I am > pleased to say that given the excellent response to the poll, it is now > being suggested that the AB conduct other polls in other states so the > AB can have an idea of the strength and weakness of the Project. The > poll was initiated NOT due to the complaints of one CC but due to > multiple conflicting complaints that left the AB with no way to gauge > what the truth, in fact, was in the state. Now we know you, as SC in NC, > are largely supported and that is a good thing! The point is for the AB > to use appropriate tools to discover ways to grow and improve this > Project across the board. This tool provided the AB with the information > that it needed to put aside further conversation regarding the project > in NC until and unless another set of facts are presented by a large > enough (10%) contingent of CCs in NC. If that is an agenda, I think it > is "right on." > > What concerns me about your post is that it lumped facts together that > are unrelated to one another. I do agree with you that "Most AB members > are dedicated to providing free genealogy resources." I also agree that > every Project member needs to "I urge each and every USGWP member to > carefully examine the track record of all AB members. Ask yourself if > they represent your views or if they have their own personal agendas. > The very future of the USGenWeb Project is at stake." Lastly, I > completely agree with your statement, "State Coordinators and their > associates need to make some very important > decisions: Are we here to stake out our turf....or are we here to serve > the genealogical public????" > > I for one do not believe that the Project has changed to the point where > if examined it would be proved that most SCs were here to "stake out > turf" - but I certainly agree it is a concern in some states and that > the purpose of a national Advisory Board is to examine each state > Project to ensure that we, as a Project, continue to be here to serve > the genealogical public. > > Jana Black > SW/SC CC Rep > USGW Project ============= At least she admits the popularity contest was rigged. And she does give me an idea... -Teresa Representative At Large -----Original Message----- From: Phyllis Rippee [mailto:wchs@getgoin.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 1:08 PM To: STATE-COORD-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [STATE-COORD-L] USGenWeb Problems Mr. Hartshorn: Jana has assured you that she spoke only for herself. I assure you that I am speaking only for myself. First: I want to commend you for removing some of the troublemakers from the NCGWP. Then, I want to tell you that I do not believe that the end result always justifies the means and your seeming inability to communicate without sarcasm and venom when asked about something that has occurred, or someone whom you have removed, is very difficult to get around when all that was intended was the gathering of information. Second: I was opposed to the poll from the first time it was suggested. It was not conducted until after you had purged the most vocal dissidents. The results were predictable. Third: There were 81 passwords sent out. That leads to the assumption those were the voter-eligible CCs. This means that when 10 responded favorably to the question regarding an election for a new SC, the 10% requirement of the Rule for Removal had been met. Not in petition form, but enough of an indication based on the requirement in that rule for a motion to be put before the AB to determine if 2/3 of a quorum of AB members thought there should be an initation of the procedure. I pointed this out because a truly "out-to-get-someone" AB could have interpreted the poll this way. In other words, "facts" gained from a poll can be slanted in many ways, depending on who might be interpreting them. Fourth: As far as I know, there will be no such motion presented. However, keep in mind that I speak only for myself. Fifth: The USGWP bylaws state that the Advisory Board {paraphrasing} is to help with state problems when asked. That leaves the question as to who does the asking? Certainly, if the SC is the problem, there has to be some way for CCs to ask. There is now a procedure in place for them to ask for help in removing that SC. In my opinion, another standing rule should be adopted that gives the CCs the right to request a poll be conducted, or an SC to make the same request. Furthermore, I do not believe that the AB should use a poll in a state where no request for help has been made. Although, a national poll, might be beneficial in aiding the Advisory Board to better help the Project. Sixth: This is an all volunteer organization. I do not understand why someone would want to come into it and immediately set about to destroy it. If they decide they no longer want to be a part of it, why don't they just leave? Because money is the root of all evil, I can understand [but never condone] someone wanting to take information that has been contributed for free access and try to profit from it. Therefore, when these types of activities do become known, those responsible should be removed immediately. But, having said that, I do not believe that the situation should be taken before a national "audience", especially by the SC who only emboldens the dissidents with this approach. Seventh: You know that Diane Kelly, Daryl Lytton and others like them are going to continue to disrupt the Project. Every time a new AB member is seated, that member is going to hear from Diane. That member is going to be curious about the process used to remove Diane....or any other member. Charles Barnum is not one of my favorite people. But when we heard from him, we needed to know about why he was removed.......especially in light of another fact that we had just learned. My personal opinion is that he belongs in the same padded room with Daryl and his ridiculous assertion that he can bring racial discrimination charges against anyone in the Project, or that the NAACP is even considering anything he might have to say.........well, is just that "ridiculous." As for the AFL-CIO being interested in organizing the CCs......even Jimmy Hoffa must be rolling around in his grave, laughing his head off. Eighth: Hate/dislike me if you will. But, I am one individual and I am not ashamed of anything that I have done in regard to Project business. I am one individual who does not need the carving of a niche. I am one individual who has always walked to the beat of my own drum. I am one individual, who does not speak for anyone other than myself. I am one individual who does not give anyone the right to speak for me. I am one individual upon whose shoulders you may choose to place the blame for everything that is wrong with the Project, but to do that means that you have to exonerate the other members of the AB and that takes away the ability to "lump." Ninth: You are not the only one looking forward to the "soon" of getting out of what is considered to be a "position" of responsibility. Phyllis Rippee SW/SC CC Representative ============= At 06:08 PM 4/3/03 -0800, Jana Black wrote: Thanks to the kind list member who forwarded this pathetic drivel to me. Our Dear Jana is being disingenous in two respects. First, she knows that I did not remove myself from the Board meetings, that was done for me by the late and unlamented Holly Timm. I can certainly "view" discussion by going to the Root$web archives, but I cannot participate at all, since messages I send are not forwarded to the Board. And of course, I can neither view nor participate in the real meeting on the secret list under any circumstances ("All AB meetings are fully open", my ass). Second, I am given to understand that it was Jana who first raised the desirable possibility of getting Tim off the Board by getting him out of Georgia, and she has rather enthusiastically pursued the goal ever since the topic was raised. Despite her verbose protestations of wanting what's best for the project, Jana apparently takes us, and especially the CCs of GAGenweb, for fools. Respectfully, -Teresa Lindquist Representative Still At Large USGenWeb Project merope@radix.net > Hmmm, once again, we hear form Ms. Lindquist misrepresenting the facts. > All AB meetings are fully open and anyone who subscribes to BOARD-L is > in attendance, including Ms. Lindquist who unsubscribed herself. Ms. > Lindquist knows she can not only "view" discussion, she can also > "participate" by sending any comments she has thru the NC who moderates > her posts given her status in the Project. > > Speaking for myself, it never occurred to me to think of Mr. Stowell's > status beyond the petition we have received from the CCs in Ga. I > suppose there may be some AB members who may have thought about further > repercussions should the GA CCs vote to remove Mr. Stowell as their SC > and should the AB support that opinion, but I doubt that number would be > many. > > Regarding Ms. Holback's contentions, Mr. Stowell has no one but himself > to blame for ignoring repeated reminders from the EC to update his lists > and it is he who has done a disservice to the CCs of GA by ignoring his > responsibility. The AB merely has to figure out how to best handle what > is clearly a big mess to attempt to give CCs a vote that is > representative and not stacked. ============ Hmmm...there's few things I enjoy more than reading this crap first thing in the morning. Our Esteemed National Coordinator must be taking lessons in obfuscation from Jana. > Additionally, permission of the chair is required before forwarding any posts to this list. In regard to this there were two errors of fact in the post by Teresa Lindquist (Merope) forwarded to this list. > > 1) "As I am no longer allowed to attend Board meetings, I have not been able > > to view or participate in any of the discussion on this issue and it is > > difficult for me to address specifics." > > Not true. Teresa Lindquist is subscribed to Board-L and is free to paricipate in discussions on or vote on any motion. Mail still goes to her address and does not bounce. I have not been informed of any address change. There's been no address change and my mail apparently does not bounce. And yet I am not allowed to participate in the fake public meeting, the real secret meeting, OR the side-meeting King Richard is running with a selective set of Board members out of fear that someone will crack and send the Board-Exec minutes to me again. This pretense that anything of substance goes on where the general riffraff can see it is quite amusing. > 2) "some members of the Board are beating > > this poor dead horse so thoroughly for a very simple reason. If they are > > succesful in removing him, Tim Stowell is no longer qualified for his Board > > seat, and by removing him from his position as SC of GAGenWeb, they can > > also remove him from the Board." > > Not true. Mr Stowell qualified to run for State Coordinator Representative based on his previous service as a State Coordinator. If he were removed from office as GAGenWeb SC at this point it would have no effect on his current term on the AB. I didn't say that the goal of removing Tim from the Board by removing him from SC of GAGenWeb was based on any kind of accurate interpretation of the bylaws or parliamentary procedure. But I am given to understand that the Board members who are promoting this line of reasoning have been encouraged in it by people who, it is now apparent, do know better. Whatever. Both of Tim's seats are most assuredly safe. From reading the archives on this topic its clear the Board is highly interested in gerrymandering whatever voter list will increase the likelihood of his removal, but even if they are successful fully three quarters of the GAGenWeb voters must vote and 2/3 of those must vote against him before the Board could even consider removing him. And when has there been a vote that high for anything anywhere in the history of this sorry project? > It is appropriate to remind all AB members that you are free to state your OPINIONS whatever they may be regarding whatever motion is being discussed. Just be sure they are stated as your opinions. If you state things as FACTS, be sure you are correct before hitting that send button. LOL. Facts are funny things Richard. They don't respect position or ideology. And they do have teeth. Respectfully, -Teresa Lindquist Member Not In Good Standing Representative At Large USGenWeb Project merope@radix.net ======== Looks like either Jana has waaaaaay too much time on her hands or Barbara Dore is back with us. -Teresa what its supposed to be proof of I have no idea > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jana Black" > To: > Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 4:00 PM > Subject: [BOARD-L] Proof > > > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~pevehouse/CCdates.html > > =========== This is amusing. I'm not sure why they are running a secret vote before the CCs have voted, but whatever. -Teresa > Subject: GAGenWeb State Coordinator Recall Election > Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 13:38:26 -0500 > X-MS-Has-Attach: > X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: > Thread-Topic: GAGenWeb State Coordinator Recall Election > Thread-Index: AcL/kF/jyHiePgT9R5+GeVUMpTE22Q== > From: "Stephens, Larry V" > To: > X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Apr 2003 18:38:27.0150 (UTC) FILETIME=[600AF6E0:01C2FF90] > X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by saltmine.radix.net id h3AIcVlJ027978 > X-Status: > X-Keywords: > > Dear Georgia Volunteer: (Teresa Lindquist) > > Under the Standing Rule for Removal of an SC or ASC, Motion 2 - 23# > > Shall Tim Stowell, State Coordinator GAGenWeb, be removed from office? > > Choices will be 'Yes', 'No', 'Present'. > > The Petition: http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgwelections/2003ggwpetition.htm/ > > The Response: http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgwelections/2003ggwresponse.htm > > To participate in the vote, go to http://www.indiana.edu/~riskmgmt/Forms/GARecall.html. The poll is open now and will close at 8:00 AM (EST) April 21. > > Follow the instructions on the form. Only responses submitted during that time frame will be included in the results. > > You will need to use the e-mail address of this message and the password (supplied below) to participate in the Poll. > > If you have questions or problems please contact the EC at: usgenwebec@mindspring.com > > Your password is listed below and you must have this password to be able to vote. > > ********************************************************************* > PLEASE PRINT OUT OR OTHERWISE SAVE YOUR PASSWORD. PASSWORDS WILL NOT BE RESENT FOR THIS POLL. > ********************************************************************* > > Each person who shares an e-mail address will receive their own password. > > Your Voting email: merope@radix.net > > Your Password: ME9R0 (Your password is case sensitive!) > > (Please note: To avoid confusion because of the way some letters are displayed, all L's are upper case and all i's are lower case to avoid confusion with #1; all o's are lower case to avoid confusion with #0.) > > ABOUT THIS ELECTION: > > In order for the vote to be binding, a quorum of 75% of the eligible Local Coordinators in GAGenWeb must vote. There are 128 Local Coordinators eligible to vote; 96 of them must participate in the vote for this election to be valid. > > In order for the State Coordinator to be removed 2/3 of those voting must vote 'Yes.' If 96 members vote, it would take 64 'Yes' votes to remove. If 110 members voted, it would take 73 'Yes' votes to remove. > > Members may vote 'Yes,' 'No' or 'Present.' 'Present' is the equivalent of 'Abstain.' 'Present' votes will be counted in order to determine the quorum, but not counted to determine whether or not a 2/3 majority has been reached. > > Some examples: > > If 60 members voted 'Yes,' 30 members voted 'No' and 5 members voted 'Present,' the State Coordinator would not be removed because fewer than 96 members voted. > > If 60 members voted 'Yes,' 30 members voted 'No' and 7 members voted 'Present,' the State Coordinator would be removed because at least 96 members voted and at least 2/3 of them voting 'Yes' or 'No' voted 'Yes.' > > Thank you, > > The USGenWeb Election Committee ============ >> From a reader, who asks good questions. At 12:02 PM 4/11/03 -0400, Richard Pettys wrote: > Do you not likewise find it amusing that the AB has now moved to delete the very rule under which they are trying to remove Tim? Do you not likewise find it amusing that the problems with Mr. Hartshorn in NC were much worse and yet Tim is being railroaded in this manner? Do you not likewise find it amusing that the NC deprived Tim of his opportunity to be heard and represented? I don't know about amusing, but essentially many members of the Board supported and applauded Derek Hartshorn's actions against his CCs. Several of those same Board members want Tim gone, off the Board and are hoping to accomplish that by getting him out of GAGenWeb. So that explains the vastly differing treatment of the two situations. (and yes, I did notice that a public request for a ruling on Tim's eligibility to continue on the Board if he is removed as SC was ignored.) > And then how about the actually CHOICES on the ballot? Yes, no and PRESENT? I did not realize this was the Mickey Mouse Roll Call for the Mouseketeers of the GeorgiaGenWeb Project. When has PRESENT ever been used on a ballot? It is done here (without sanction of the AB, as I understand it) solely as a form of trickery to achieve a quorum in THIS election. Its a Mickey Mouse election in a Mickey Mouse project, what did you expect? I personally have no intention of dignifying this cheap charade with a vote, and neither should anyone else. Tim has few redeeming qualities, but if Derek Hartshorn is considered a valued member of this project clearly our standards aren't high enough to warrant removing someone like Tim. -Teresa Lindquist Representative At Large merope@radix.net ========= For discerning losers everywhere! -Teresa merope@radixlnet > > SNEAK PEEK > > > > Very soon, RootsWeb will be starting to release release RootsWeb pins > > that will be available to help demonstrate our support for RootsWeb. > > We understand that while pins are not everybodies' kettle of fish, > > the availability of merchandise items is something that staff is > > regularly asked about as a way to demonstrate a person's support for > > RootsWeb's brand of genealogy. > > > > Presuming that there is sufficient interest this will the first of a > > series of pins, with this set being released very soon. As they will > > be of limited availability, the team at RootsWeb that comprises > > mailing lists has convinced management that list admins had earned > > the right for advanced notice. Find out more about the pins at > > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/prodredir.asp?sourceid=6494&key=P3261 ========== > Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 18:31:27 -0400 > To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com, dbs > From: merope > Subject: Fwd: RE: [BOARD-L] Voter Fraud and Deceit in GAGenWeb > > >> Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 12:39:41 -0600 >> X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Tue Apr 29 12:39:41 2003 >> From: "Jana Black" >> Old-To: >> Subject: RE: [BOARD-L] Voter Fraud and Deceit in GAGenWeb >> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 10:59:51 -0700 >> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 >> Importance: Normal >> To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com > > > [snip] > > >> The situation in GA is a shame and a travesty and puts a black mark on >> face of the entire Project. Now, another motion is in the way, so this >> situation will not get addressed until "later." And people wonder why we >> cannot keep a full AB onboard. > > > My goodness. Where was the outrage when Derek Hartshorn was trampling all over his CCs? I seem to recall public accolades for his actions and yet when Tim does it its a "shame and a travesty". > > What a freakin' hypocrite. > > -Teresa Lindquist > Representative At Large, USGenWeb Project > merope@radix.net > "Hangin's too good for 'em, I say!" > >> Jana Black ======== While the evidence against Margie and Brenda is woefully thin, there is no evidence against Tim Stowell here at all. Apparently we are reduced to relying on guilt by association in our attempts to get him out of Georgia and off the Board. -Teresa Lindquist Representative Still At Large, USGenWeb Project merope@radix.net > > > > You may see all the detailed information to support these allegations of > > voter fraud and deceit at http://www.rootsweb.com/~gaclarke/GA/index.htm > > > > > > > > Jimmy Epperson > > Clarke & Oconee Co. GA CC > > GAGenWeb SW RC > > USGenWeb SE/MA Rep. ========== Perhaps I did not make myself clear. I see precious little evidence of wrong-doing on ANYONE's part, and none whatsoever on Tim's. None of it is anything other than circumstantial, it is not verifiable, and all of it is based on the word of one person. We have seen this before in USGenWeb and the project just should not go there. While Tim is not on my list of favorite people and I would not be surprised to find that he has done what he is accused of doing, he's not responsible for the actions of others, IF they occurred, REGARDLESS of whether or not he appointed them. Before I would even consider booting someone from the project I would expect to see incontrovertible proof that they colluded in these activities, or that he ordered them to do it. Period. Tim is an idiot and turns on people the minute they disagree with him. But until someone can prove he faked members or asked/told others do so, there is no basis for removing him or the others from their positions or from USGW. Unfortunately, as we have recently seen with North Carolina, merely abusing your power as an SC is clearly NOT grounds for removal or sanction of any sort. -Teresa Representative At Large, USGenWeb Project merope@radix.net On Wed, 30 Apr 2003, Derek Nichols wrote: [snip something he doesn't want published] ===========