From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Wed Oct 17 17:24:39 2001 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 RAA27722 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 17:24:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA01740 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 17:24:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f9HLKwa30862; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 15:20:58 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 15:20:58 -0600 X-Original-Sender: hollyft@bright.net Wed Oct 17 15:20:57 2001 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20011017172006.024bd1f0@mail.bright.net> X-Sender: hollyft@mail.bright.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 17:21:10 -0400 Old-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com From: Holly Timm Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/2 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: We seem to be sitting still at square one Why don't we try this by asking and answering questions.... Starting at the beginning.... 1) What is the function/goal of the Guidelines committee to be? 2) How many people would be a viable functioning number and yet allow for some breadth of perspective and opinion? Holly From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Tue Oct 16 22:52:06 2001 Return-Path: Received: from news1.radix.net (news1.radix.net [207.192.128.41]) by saltmine.radix.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA19004 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2001 22:52:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by news1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA09831 for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2001 22:52:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f9H2ppB13595; Tue, 16 Oct 2001 20:51:51 -0600 Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 20:51:51 -0600 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Tue Oct 16 20:51:51 2001 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 19:37:36 -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) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <200110112233.f9BMX4O22589@lists5.rootsweb.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 Subject: [USGW-Guidelines] Guidelines Committee Resent-Message-ID: <1mRDYC.A.QUD.HJPz7@lists5.rootsweb.com> To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: Hello, Having been offline for a week, either posts form this list got lost in cyber space or do not exist... Can someone please catch me up on the conversation? Jana Black From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Wed Oct 17 18:46:48 2001 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 SAA07332 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:46:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA14794 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:46:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f9HMkL005074; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 16:46:21 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 16:46:21 -0600 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Wed Oct 17 16:46:20 2001 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Stab One Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 15:32:34 -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) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20011017172006.024bd1f0@mail.bright.net> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: In working on the Pro/Pub Committee, I began to see it and this group as inevitably interlinked. We need the guidelines first to determine what to promote and how to publicize effectively. From the discussion there, here is what now seems to "fit" the Guidelines Committee's goals - tear it apart friends! The goal of the Guidelines Committee will be to further the growth and development of the US GenWeb Project by: 1) supporting the educational needs of our County Coordinators in building the quality and content of their sites by developing a outline of site goals and suggestions 2) providing an infrastructure of in-Project tools, techniques, assistance, ideas and resources intended to generate an environment of cooperation and mutual objectives within the Project 3) (what did I miss?) As far as group size is concerned... my training says to be viable, a group should not be larger than 6-8 people w/o splitting into sub groups. If you have subgroups, you may want to have one AB member per sub-group and up to 4 CC volunteers. If you see only one group, 1-3 AB members and 3-5 CC reps??? I would like to hear more about what others see regarding goals of the Committee before we get into the scope of the group. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Holly Timm [mailto:hollyft@bright.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 2:21 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started We seem to be sitting still at square one Why don't we try this by asking and answering questions.... Starting at the beginning.... 1) What is the function/goal of the Guidelines committee to be? 2) How many people would be a viable functioning number and yet allow for some breadth of perspective and opinion? Holly From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Wed Oct 17 19:07:44 2001 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 TAA09764 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 19:07:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA18099 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 19:07:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f9HN6oo32554; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 17:06:50 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 17:06:50 -0600 X-Original-Sender: TVick65536@aol.com Wed Oct 17 17:06:49 2001 From: TVick65536@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 19:06:25 EDT Subject: Re: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Old-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 172 Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/4 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 10/17/2001 5:21:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, hollyft@bright.net writes: > 1) What is the function/goal of the Guidelines committee to be? I would like to understand what the word means in context to what we are trying to accomplish. Are guidelines "a statement or other indication of policy or procedure by which to determine a course of action", or are they, in the context of USGenWeb Project, tools and resources to assist the Project volunteers in the realization of it's goals? > > 2) How many people would be a viable functioning number and yet allow for > some breadth of perspective and opinion? > > For me, depends on the input of question 1. Input? Tina From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Wed Oct 17 19:41:41 2001 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 TAA13870 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 19:41:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA23010 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 19:41:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f9HNeQl21035; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 17:40:26 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 17:40:26 -0600 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Wed Oct 17 17:40:25 2001 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 16:26:38 -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) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 Resent-Message-ID: <44F_DC.A.hIF.pbhz7@lists5.rootsweb.com> To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/5 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: For me, the answer is Guidelines are: "a statement or other indication of policy or procedure by which to determine a course of action" which will in turn determine the "tools and resources to assist the Project volunteers in the realization of Project goals..." In other words, the goals of the Guidelines Committee will be in two parts, first we determine what our guidelines are, then we figure out how to put them into place. Hope this is clearer than mud... Jana -----Original Message----- From: TVick65536@aol.com [mailto:TVick65536@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 4:06 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started In a message dated 10/17/2001 5:21:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, hollyft@bright.net writes: > 1) What is the function/goal of the Guidelines committee to be? I would like to understand what the word means in context to what we are trying to accomplish. Are guidelines "a statement or other indication of policy or procedure by which to determine a course of action", or are they, in the context of USGenWeb Project, tools and resources to assist the Project volunteers in the realization of it's goals? > > 2) How many people would be a viable functioning number and yet allow for > some breadth of perspective and opinion? > > For me, depends on the input of question 1. Input? Tina From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Wed Oct 17 19:54:55 2001 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 TAA29077 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 19:54:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA24917 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 19:54:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f9HNpM512439; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 17:51:22 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 17:51:22 -0600 X-Original-Sender: tngibson@att.net Wed Oct 17 17:51:22 2001 Message-ID: <021601c15766$64f14a20$745bfea9@vaio> Reply-To: "Vicki" From: "Vicki" Old-To: References: Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:49:21 -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: [USGW-Guidelines] function/goal of the Guidelines committee Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/6 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: >1) What is the function/goal of the Guidelines committee to be? I thought the Guidelines Committee was to set up some guidelines for county pages. Many are very lacking in content...........NOT html know-how, just content. (this is going to be a very touchy subject as some CC's obviously don't think they should spend 30 minutes on their pages a month, if even that, and are NOT going to like being told ANYTHING) When it comes to the actual composing of pages a "how-to" page isn't really needed. What would be needed is some CC's to volunteer to help out new CC's or CC's with sorry pages. These CC's should be screened by their own county pages for content. Hopefully they could give a new or lacking CC direction in using their mailing list as a tool, answering volunteers promptly and schooling them on not posting information about living individuals in order to further content on their pages. In other words, schooling them on how to have good sound genealogy content. And that's a capital "G" on GENEALOGY! So I would suggest that the Guidelines committee be composed of CC's with outstanding pages. If they are willing to maintain an outstanding county page, I'm sure they wouldn't mind serving on a committee that would help other CC's to do the same. If a Board member is necessary, I'd make sure THEY have a good county page, too. Vicki From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Wed Oct 17 20:01:17 2001 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 UAA06266 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 20:01:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA26020 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 20:01:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f9HNxwo24463; Wed, 17 Oct 2001 17:59:58 -0600 Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 17:59:58 -0600 X-Original-Sender: TVick65536@aol.com Wed Oct 17 17:59:58 2001 From: TVick65536@aol.com Message-ID: <151.29c88f2.28ff7579@aol.com> Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 19:59:53 EDT Subject: Re: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Old-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 172 Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/7 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: What query options are available? What requirements national vs. perhaps what individual states require? Html "how to" resources, ftp resources, guides to who's who, subject matter experts (for the various software applications utilized by our volunteers)? Links to resources inside and outside the project? Is that what we all have in mind? Tina In a message dated 10/17/2001 7:40:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time, janab@websweweave.net writes: > In other words, the goals of the Guidelines Committee will be in two parts, > first we determine what our guidelines are, then we figure out how to put > them into place. > > From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Sun Oct 21 17:05:22 2001 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 RAA01768 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2001 17:05:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA16500 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2001 17:05:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f9LL5Bj01355; Sun, 21 Oct 2001 15:05:11 -0600 Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 15:05:11 -0600 X-Original-Sender: nate@gte.net Sun Oct 21 15:05:11 2001 From: "Nathan Zipfel" Old-To: Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 17:01:15 -0400 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 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2462.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20011017172006.024bd1f0@mail.bright.net> Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/8 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: 1 - review/revise the current guidelines. The existing ones have been in place since the beginning and should be updated. This group will need to work with the By-laws group to ensure consistency. Also we want to ensure that stuff doesn't get put into the bylaws that rightfully belongs in the Guidelines. 2 - 2/3 AB, 8 SC/ASCs, 8 CCs With this committee I believe there should be equal representation of SC/ASCs since they will have to (and I hate to use the word) "enforce" the guidelines so they need to have buyin.. Nate -----Original Message----- From: Holly Timm [mailto:hollyft@bright.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 5:21 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started We seem to be sitting still at square one Why don't we try this by asking and answering questions.... Starting at the beginning.... 1) What is the function/goal of the Guidelines committee to be? 2) How many people would be a viable functioning number and yet allow for some breadth of perspective and opinion? Holly From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Sun Oct 21 18:22:47 2001 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 SAA07934 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2001 18:22:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA24960 for ; Sun, 21 Oct 2001 18:22:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f9LMMZg08248; Sun, 21 Oct 2001 16:22:35 -0600 Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 16:22:35 -0600 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Sun Oct 21 16:22:33 2001 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 15:08:38 -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 V5.50.4807.1700 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/9 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Nate, Glad to see you here. Good points about guidelines vs bylaws, it is extremely important we differentiate. I also think your point regarding SC/ASC buy in is well taken. I am concerned that the size of the committee is too large. How about using the elected Regional SC Reps here and cutting that number to 4, then asking for CC volunteers from each region as well? Then committee composition would be: 2/3 AB, 4 SC Reps and 4 CC Reps? Jana -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 2:01 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started 1 - review/revise the current guidelines. The existing ones have been in place since the beginning and should be updated. This group will need to work with the By-laws group to ensure consistency. Also we want to ensure that stuff doesn't get put into the bylaws that rightfully belongs in the Guidelines. 2 - 2/3 AB, 8 SC/ASCs, 8 CCs With this committee I believe there should be equal representation of SC/ASCs since they will have to (and I hate to use the word) "enforce" the guidelines so they need to have buyin.. Nate From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Mon Oct 22 20:51:59 2001 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 UAA00696 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:51:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA24774 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:51:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f9N0oo825432; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:50:50 -0600 Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:50:50 -0600 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Mon Oct 22 18:50:50 2001 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 17:36:52 -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 V5.50.4807.1700 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/11 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi, I think it is you, me, Tina, Vicki and Teresa with Holly in the wings :) Have heard from everyone but Teresa. If you just joined, I can send you conversation so far.... it has been little. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 5:41 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started works for me.... let's move forward.... who else is on the list?? Nate -----Original Message----- From: Jana Black [mailto:janab@websweweave.net] Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 6:09 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Hi Nate, Glad to see you here. Good points about guidelines vs bylaws, it is extremely important we differentiate. I also think your point regarding SC/ASC buy in is well taken. I am concerned that the size of the committee is too large. How about using the elected Regional SC Reps here and cutting that number to 4, then asking for CC volunteers from each region as well? Then committee composition would be: 2/3 AB, 4 SC Reps and 4 CC Reps? Jana -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 2:01 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started 1 - review/revise the current guidelines. The existing ones have been in place since the beginning and should be updated. This group will need to work with the By-laws group to ensure consistency. Also we want to ensure that stuff doesn't get put into the bylaws that rightfully belongs in the Guidelines. 2 - 2/3 AB, 8 SC/ASCs, 8 CCs With this committee I believe there should be equal representation of SC/ASCs since they will have to (and I hate to use the word) "enforce" the guidelines so they need to have buyin.. Nate From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Mon Oct 22 20:58:45 2001 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 UAA01188 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:58:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA25794 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:58:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f9N0wWT08378; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:58:32 -0600 Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 18:58:32 -0600 X-Original-Sender: nate@gte.net Mon Oct 22 18:58:31 2001 From: "Nathan Zipfel" Old-To: Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:55:08 -0400 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 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2462.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/12 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: Jana, been here since the first day... thanks Nate -----Original Message----- From: Jana Black [mailto:janab@websweweave.net] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:37 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Hi, I think it is you, me, Tina, Vicki and Teresa with Holly in the wings :) Have heard from everyone but Teresa. If you just joined, I can send you conversation so far.... it has been little. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 5:41 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started works for me.... let's move forward.... who else is on the list?? Nate -----Original Message----- From: Jana Black [mailto:janab@websweweave.net] Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 6:09 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Hi Nate, Glad to see you here. Good points about guidelines vs bylaws, it is extremely important we differentiate. I also think your point regarding SC/ASC buy in is well taken. I am concerned that the size of the committee is too large. How about using the elected Regional SC Reps here and cutting that number to 4, then asking for CC volunteers from each region as well? Then committee composition would be: 2/3 AB, 4 SC Reps and 4 CC Reps? Jana -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 2:01 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started 1 - review/revise the current guidelines. The existing ones have been in place since the beginning and should be updated. This group will need to work with the By-laws group to ensure consistency. Also we want to ensure that stuff doesn't get put into the bylaws that rightfully belongs in the Guidelines. 2 - 2/3 AB, 8 SC/ASCs, 8 CCs With this committee I believe there should be equal representation of SC/ASCs since they will have to (and I hate to use the word) "enforce" the guidelines so they need to have buyin.. Nate From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Mon Oct 22 21:13:39 2001 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 VAA02476 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:13:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA27922 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:13:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f9N1DOW17983; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:13:24 -0600 Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:13:24 -0600 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Mon Oct 22 19:13:24 2001 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 17:59:24 -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 V5.50.4807.1700 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/13 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: Good... hope we can get this done soon. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 5:55 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Jana, been here since the first day... thanks Nate -----Original Message----- From: Jana Black [mailto:janab@websweweave.net] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:37 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Hi, I think it is you, me, Tina, Vicki and Teresa with Holly in the wings :) Have heard from everyone but Teresa. If you just joined, I can send you conversation so far.... it has been little. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 5:41 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started works for me.... let's move forward.... who else is on the list?? Nate -----Original Message----- From: Jana Black [mailto:janab@websweweave.net] Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 6:09 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Hi Nate, Glad to see you here. Good points about guidelines vs bylaws, it is extremely important we differentiate. I also think your point regarding SC/ASC buy in is well taken. I am concerned that the size of the committee is too large. How about using the elected Regional SC Reps here and cutting that number to 4, then asking for CC volunteers from each region as well? Then committee composition would be: 2/3 AB, 4 SC Reps and 4 CC Reps? Jana -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 2:01 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started 1 - review/revise the current guidelines. The existing ones have been in place since the beginning and should be updated. This group will need to work with the By-laws group to ensure consistency. Also we want to ensure that stuff doesn't get put into the bylaws that rightfully belongs in the Guidelines. 2 - 2/3 AB, 8 SC/ASCs, 8 CCs With this committee I believe there should be equal representation of SC/ASCs since they will have to (and I hate to use the word) "enforce" the guidelines so they need to have buyin.. Nate From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Mon Oct 22 21:15:06 2001 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 VAA02565 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:15:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA28134 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:15:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f9N1EeK19238; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:14:40 -0600 Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 19:14:40 -0600 X-Original-Sender: nate@gte.net Mon Oct 22 19:14:39 2001 From: "Nathan Zipfel" Old-To: Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:11:20 -0400 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 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2462.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/14 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: me to... -----Original Message----- From: Jana Black [mailto:janab@websweweave.net] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:59 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Good... hope we can get this done soon. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 5:55 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Jana, been here since the first day... thanks Nate -----Original Message----- From: Jana Black [mailto:janab@websweweave.net] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:37 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Hi, I think it is you, me, Tina, Vicki and Teresa with Holly in the wings :) Have heard from everyone but Teresa. If you just joined, I can send you conversation so far.... it has been little. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 5:41 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started works for me.... let's move forward.... who else is on the list?? Nate -----Original Message----- From: Jana Black [mailto:janab@websweweave.net] Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 6:09 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Hi Nate, Glad to see you here. Good points about guidelines vs bylaws, it is extremely important we differentiate. I also think your point regarding SC/ASC buy in is well taken. I am concerned that the size of the committee is too large. How about using the elected Regional SC Reps here and cutting that number to 4, then asking for CC volunteers from each region as well? Then committee composition would be: 2/3 AB, 4 SC Reps and 4 CC Reps? Jana -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 2:01 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started 1 - review/revise the current guidelines. The existing ones have been in place since the beginning and should be updated. This group will need to work with the By-laws group to ensure consistency. Also we want to ensure that stuff doesn't get put into the bylaws that rightfully belongs in the Guidelines. 2 - 2/3 AB, 8 SC/ASCs, 8 CCs With this committee I believe there should be equal representation of SC/ASCs since they will have to (and I hate to use the word) "enforce" the guidelines so they need to have buyin.. Nate From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Mon Oct 22 23:15:21 2001 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 XAA12770 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 23:15:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA15177 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 23:15:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f9N3F6X10849; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:15:06 -0600 Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:15:06 -0600 X-Original-Sender: ky.quest@gte.net Mon Oct 22 21:15:06 2001 Message-ID: <001501c15b70$bc979500$0301a8c0@vz.dsl.genuity.net> From: "Diane Parsons" Old-To: Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 23:13:48 -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 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 Subject: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/15 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: Uh, I am on here too... Diane Montgomery Parsons ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana Black" To: Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:59 PM Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started > Good... hope we can get this done soon. > > Jana > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 5:55 PM > To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started > > > Jana, > > been here since the first day... > > thanks > > Nate > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jana Black [mailto:janab@websweweave.net] > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:37 PM > To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started > > > Hi, > > I think it is you, me, Tina, Vicki and Teresa with Holly in the wings :) > Have heard from everyone but Teresa. > > If you just joined, I can send you conversation so far.... it has been > little. > > Jana > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 5:41 PM > To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started > > > works for me.... let's move forward.... > > who else is on the list?? > > Nate > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jana Black [mailto:janab@websweweave.net] > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 6:09 PM > To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started > > > Hi Nate, > > Glad to see you here. Good points about guidelines vs bylaws, it is > extremely important we differentiate. I also think your point regarding > SC/ASC buy in is well taken. > > I am concerned that the size of the committee is too large. How about using > the elected Regional SC Reps here and cutting that number to 4, then asking > for CC volunteers from each region as well? Then committee composition would > be: > > 2/3 AB, 4 SC Reps and 4 CC Reps? > > Jana > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 2:01 PM > To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started > > > 1 - review/revise the current guidelines. The existing ones have been in > place since the beginning and should be updated. This group will need to > work with the By-laws group to ensure consistency. Also we want to ensure > that stuff doesn't get put into the bylaws that rightfully belongs in the > Guidelines. > > 2 - 2/3 AB, 8 SC/ASCs, 8 CCs With this committee I believe there should be > equal representation of SC/ASCs since they will have to (and I hate to use > the word) "enforce" the guidelines so they need to have buyin.. > > Nate > > > From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Mon Oct 22 23:22:50 2001 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 XAA13269 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 23:22:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA16077 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 23:22:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f9N3MYA22482; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:22:34 -0600 Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 21:22:34 -0600 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Mon Oct 22 21:22:34 2001 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:08:32 -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 V5.50.4807.1700 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <001501c15b70$bc979500$0301a8c0@vz.dsl.genuity.net> Resent-Message-ID: <_6viUD.A.JfF.6JO17@lists5.rootsweb.com> To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/16 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: Well, hello! Would love to hear your input Diane. Jana -----Original Message----- From: Diane Parsons [mailto:ky.quest@gte.net] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:14 PM To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started Uh, I am on here too... Diane Montgomery Parsons ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jana Black" To: Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:59 PM Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started > Good... hope we can get this done soon. > > Jana > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 5:55 PM > To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started > > > Jana, > > been here since the first day... > > thanks > > Nate > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jana Black [mailto:janab@websweweave.net] > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:37 PM > To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started > > > Hi, > > I think it is you, me, Tina, Vicki and Teresa with Holly in the wings :) > Have heard from everyone but Teresa. > > If you just joined, I can send you conversation so far.... it has been > little. > > Jana > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 5:41 PM > To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started > > > works for me.... let's move forward.... > > who else is on the list?? > > Nate > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jana Black [mailto:janab@websweweave.net] > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 6:09 PM > To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started > > > Hi Nate, > > Glad to see you here. Good points about guidelines vs bylaws, it is > extremely important we differentiate. I also think your point regarding > SC/ASC buy in is well taken. > > I am concerned that the size of the committee is too large. How about using > the elected Regional SC Reps here and cutting that number to 4, then asking > for CC volunteers from each region as well? Then committee composition would > be: > > 2/3 AB, 4 SC Reps and 4 CC Reps? > > Jana > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nathan Zipfel [mailto:nate@gte.net] > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2001 2:01 PM > To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Getting Started > > > 1 - review/revise the current guidelines. The existing ones have been in > place since the beginning and should be updated. This group will need to > work with the By-laws group to ensure consistency. Also we want to ensure > that stuff doesn't get put into the bylaws that rightfully belongs in the > Guidelines. > > 2 - 2/3 AB, 8 SC/ASCs, 8 CCs With this committee I believe there should be > equal representation of SC/ASCs since they will have to (and I hate to use > the word) "enforce" the guidelines so they need to have buyin.. > > Nate > > > From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Tue Nov 6 19:26:10 2001 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 TAA05498 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 19:26:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA12892 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 19:26:09 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id fA70Pp805450; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 17:25:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 17:25:51 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Tue Nov 6 17:25:51 2001 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: [USGW-Guidelines] Summary of progress Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 16:23:59 -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 V5.50.4807.1700 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/17 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: A Hello everyone, (I actually began this in the AM :) gee, time flies...... Not quite sure what has happened here, but we have been silent since the 22nd of October. I offer below my own summation of discussion so far. I would like to hear comments/corrections/suggestions from those of you who have not yet spoken. The goal of the Guidelines Committee will be to review/revise the current USGW guidelines. Working with the By-laws Committee, the Guidelines Committee will establish county page prototypes to ensure consistency and encourage a standard foundation for page development. Working with the Publicity/Promotion Committee, the Guidelines Committee will get the word out to CCs/ Committee composition will be: 2 - 2/3 AB, 4 SC Reps and 4 CC Reps Jana From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Tue Nov 6 23:06:15 2001 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 XAA25299 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 23:06:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA15084 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 23:06:13 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id fA742L801820; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 21:02:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 21:02:21 -0700 X-Original-Sender: merope@Radix.Net Tue Nov 6 21:02:19 2001 Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 22:40:48 -0500 (EST) From: merope Old-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [USGW-Guidelines] Summary of progress In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Jana Black wrote: > Committee composition will be: 2 - 2/3 AB, 4 SC Reps and 4 CC Reps > No Special Projects reps? And how exactly are we to manage two and two thirds AB reps? -Teresa > Jana > From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Wed Nov 7 00:00:53 2001 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 AAA00158 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 00:00:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA22339 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 00:00:52 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id fA750dA20931; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 22:00:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 22:00:39 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Tue Nov 6 22:00:38 2001 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Summary of progress Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 20:58:54 -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) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 Resent-Message-ID: <0cpKpB.A.XGF.3_L67@lists5.rootsweb.com> To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: A No Teresa, Nate's suggestion was that we use 2 to 3 AB reps (I copied and pasted), sorry if it was confusing. Teresa, contribute your thoughts and ideas, that is what we are here for. None of this is cast in stone. I just summarized what others have discussed so far. I look forward to seeing the discussion take place. Jana From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Wed Nov 7 06:36:31 2001 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 GAA28831 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 06:36:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA06768 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 06:36:29 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id fA7BaNq06329; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 04:36:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 04:36:23 -0700 X-Original-Sender: merope@Radix.Net Wed Nov 7 04:36:18 2001 Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 06:36:16 -0500 (EST) From: merope Old-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Summary of progress In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/20 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Jana Black wrote: > No Teresa, > > Nate's suggestion was that we use 2 to 3 AB reps (I copied and pasted), > sorry if it was confusing. > > Teresa, contribute your thoughts and ideas, that is what we are here for. Then I suggest that we not continue to ignore the Special Projects in every committee we form. And since we are going to create county templates that we not weight the committee in favor of SCs. And that we not limit the goals of the comittee to telling the CCs what to do, but also expand it to include the state pages and the special projects. -Teresa merope@radix.net From USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Wed Nov 7 16:37:21 2001 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 QAA03023 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 16:37:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [63.92.80.123]) by mail1.radix.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA17863 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 16:37:19 -0500 (EST) Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) id fA7Lb6T22604; Wed, 7 Nov 2001 14:37:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 14:37:06 -0700 X-Original-Sender: janab@websweweave.net Wed Nov 7 14:37:05 2001 From: "Jana Black" Old-To: Subject: RE: [USGW-Guidelines] Summary of progress Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 13:34:58 -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: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 Resent-Message-ID: To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Resent-From: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Reply-To: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/21 X-Loop: USGW-GUIDELINES-L@rootsweb.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: USGW-GUIDELINES-L-request@rootsweb.com Status: RO X-Status: Hello Teresa, If you think that the SPs are being ignored, what do you see as the appropriate role, responsibility or position of the SPs on a Guidelines Committee? I am not trying to be difficult, I do better with "dos" as opposed to "nots"... I would like to hear your ideas here. Please offer your viewpoint. It is not my understanding that we are "going to create county templates" but rather that we will "develop an outline of site goals and suggestions" - forgive me if this is a semantic nuance, but I see a "template" as a cookie cutter approach to design and I am of the opinion that the goal of this committee is to address *site content*, not design or style. Your statement: "weight the committee in favor of SCs" does not make sense to me. It sounds like you see competition here. Please explain. Personally, I would be opposed to any action on the part of this committee that portends "telling the CCs what to do." I do not see our objective as to become "page police." My experience at the last GenTech Conference in our USGW meeting was to meet several brand new CCs who had no web skills of any kind but who cared so much about the goals of the USGW Project that they were willing to jump in with both feet and volunteer. These folks were begging for guidance in developing their sites and that is what got me interested in finding ways to support them. I see CC support as our goal on this committee. OK has just completed a state site scan. I have been quite impressed watching how smoothly it went and how well CCs not only responded but supported each other as they worked. Marti posted guidelines here: http://www.rootsweb.com/~okgenweb/vol/basicreq.htm and also offered a checklist form here: http://www.rootsweb.com/~okgenweb/vol/check_list.htm. It may not be perfect, but the GC could surely use it as a working model or place to begin developing an approach that works. I agree with you that it would be a good idea for the GC to offer State Pages a list of suggestions as well. SPs.... I will be honest, the whole area continues to be so murky in my mind that I am not sure we can address it on a committee level until it has been addressed more specifically by the AB. Perhaps those of you with more "common sense and experience" :):):) than I have can address this....? I am looking forward to seeing this committee get going. Jana