Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 06:34:48 -0800 From: "Kay Mason" To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-Id: <199812051437.GAA27856@mail.networkone.net> Subject: [Board-Exec-L] Re: Possible solution to the ALL list Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT I've set the list to reply to list.. now for some reason, it takes a while to go into effect..don't ask me why, but it did for the nominations list.. I still think that one of us needs to do a "Daily Board Report" and steal merope's thunder...there has to be one of us with the time to do it.. and I just don't...it should only take a few minutes..as there is usualy nothing to report. I don't think that we should allow folks to sub even if they can't post.. although we can do that (Board-L) The new list should be moderated..that is the only way to keep it civil... Kay Date forwarded: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 03:20:05 -0800 (PST) Date sent: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 06:04:50 -0500 From: Bob Bamford Subject: Re: Possible solution to the ALL list To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Forwarded by: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com > At 09:37 PM 12/4/98 -0600, Betsy Mills wrote: > >I know Bob told us to think about this, but being a RW staff member puts me > >in a different position sometimes. > > > > Obviously, you've been thinking :>) > > Here is how I see it: (always by the numbers) :>) > > 1. All mention of the -ALL list is removed from the national pages eff. > 12/8 (don't want to use 12/7 because of it's potential for historic > reference.) > > I can do this. > > 2. Establish a new list: > > USGenWeb-Members-L ist administered by person(s) appointed by board (same > as webmaster.) > > To accomplish this would require a motion of the board: > a. To establish and > b. To appoint listowner(s) > > 3. -ALL list is renamed gw-open and let 'em do what they want. (If we're > going to force a name change it should not have a USGW connotation.) > > This would require a note from the board to RW stating that the -ALL list > has no connection to the USGW Project and request that they rename. > > 4. We still go ahead with the "read only" Daily Board Report. > > > > > >It seems that RootsLady and Rita Maggard have both asked for a new kinder > >list. Brian is anxious to grant someone, anyone's wish to help resolve the > >ALL list mess. I was asked as staff to provide "leadership" to Tim and > >Vicki about the solution to which list to create. (I think that translates > >that I am older and wiser! ) So, I am putting everyone on hold with > >this - Rita, RootsLady, Tim and Vicki - while I get the input from the > >board. I believe Megan would also be willing to work with Rita and > >RootsLady to help keep the list under control. > > > >So, I need some input and approval from the board to make this a list > >blessed by the board. The listowner(s) need to start writing their welcome > >message that will include the rules for participation. And I need to > >report progress on this to my boss! Otherwise, Rita will get a list > >and we will still have the old ALL list hanging over our heads. > > > >I recommend that we keep the old ALL list and rename it something like > >USGW-POLITICS-L so that people who join will know that is what will be > >discussed. Maybe they can use it to work on bylaws revisions since it > >looks like it is headed that way. > > > >We need to either allow people to sub to board-l without being able to post > >or we need the new list that is read-only that Bob mentioned for our own > >Daily Board Report. We will be able to get that one very quickly also. > >(Should I have numbered these, Bob? ) > > > >Suggestions?? Comments?? > >Betsy > > > > > >At 01:16 PM 12/4/98 -0500, Bob Bamford wrote: > >>I've read an meditated on the various responses to the above posting. They > >>ranged from frustration as to what to do to physical mayhem :>) > >> > >>The consensus is that we should disassociate ourselves from the -ALL list. > >>In doing so we need to have a plan as to where we are going. Pardon if I > >>ramble but here are my thoughts: > >> > >>1. We can cut the link (mention to the -ALL list from all national USGW > >pages. > >> > >>2. Do we need to replace it with the "help" list I suggested? Or would our > >>volunteers be better served working with their state organizations, thereby > >>getting localized (and geographically more knowledgeable) help. I think so. > >>The national organization should not be playing mother hen to CCs. The SC > >>should. We are in fact usurping the SCs authority. So... I say no > >replacement. > >> > >>3. I have asked the sender ofg the message that percipitated this > >>discussion to use it (without attribution), possibly to send to the -ALL > >>list or possibly to post on the board list. Until e have an ok, we won't > >>persue how to use it. > >> > >>4. I had suggested, and we had discussed, sporadically, a Daily Board > >>Report to counter the misinterpretation and innuendo contained in the daily > >>Board Show. Someone had suggested a mailing list that CCs could > >>(optionally) belong to but ONLY get mail, not send it. > >>They would get a Daily report from the board following these lines: > >> > >>MOTIONS > >>Motion, as made and seconded along with voting period. > >>Results of votes > >> > >>TOPICS UNDER DISCUSSION > >>Items "on the floor" with the board for example: > >>Discussing improved communication > >>Discussing complaint about a certain page carrying advertising (no > specifics) > >>etc. > >> > >>GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENTS > >>Call for volunteers to help with election at state level. > >>Date for closing of nominations > >>etc. > >> > >>I think I outlined all this before. > >> > >>We absolutely need to develop a line of communication directly with the CCs > >>(at their option) that does not place the communication burden on the SCs. > >> > >>In addition to the ML I would suggest that the last 10, 15 or 30 days > >>reports, be on a web page on the national site for anyone to visit. This > >>would replace Celia's posting of votes. > >> > >>The intent here, very simply is to develop a line of communication that > >>makes the -ALL list redundant. As someone suggested, let it die on the vine. > >> > >>Chew on that. I'm taking the rest of the day off. > >> > >>Bob > >> > > > > > USGenWeb Census Project http://www.usgenweb.org/census/ http://www.usgenweb.com/census http://www.usgenweb.net/census/ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 12:31:29 -0600 From: Kathy Welch Heidel To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-ID: <36697C00.52961DBB@tri.net> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec-L] Re: Possible solution to the ALL list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have to agree with Bridgett. At least with the top part. A new list will not accomplish a thing except trouble. I will help with the Board list at least as long as I am here. Kathy Bridgett Smith wrote: > WARNING ! I have been up maybe 30 minutes with one cup of > coffee down the tubes, but if I don't say what I am thinking I'll loose it > > > On 5 Dec 98, at 6:04, Bob Bamford wrote: > > > At 09:37 PM 12/4/98 -0600, Betsy Mills wrote: > > >I know Bob told us to think about this, but being a RW staff member puts > > >me in a different position sometimes. > > > > > > > Obviously, you've been thinking :>) > > > > Here is how I see it: (always by the numbers) :>) > > > > 1. All mention of the -ALL list is removed from the national pages eff. > > 12/8 (don't want to use 12/7 because of it's potential for historic > > reference.) > > > > I can do this. > > I agree 100%, however, word has to get out to SC's. I have been to > a requirement page for one XXGenWeb and they mandate > subscribing to the -ALL list. > > > > > 2. Establish a new list: > > > > USGenWeb-Members-L ist administered by person(s) appointed by board (same > > as webmaster.) > > > > To accomplish this would require a motion of the board: > > a. To establish and > > b. To appoint listowner(s) > > > > I know you are trying to get a mechanism in place to make it easy > for folks to know what the board is doing. HOWEVER, I don't think a > national list for members is necessary. If you have this new list and > someone gets out of hand in posting to it -- who's going to say no > more or you're out of here? What will happen next is that the AB, or > their puppets, have stifled the freedom of speech. You, we, won't get > away from the group that feels that our single purpose in life is to be > secretive and to "rule" in that fashion. > > If we can possibly get a read only list, and subscribe that list to the > Board-L list in digest format -- then those folks who do want to know > whether we stepped out of the back door with our left or right foot > can get the news first hand by subscribing to that list. Again, that > way they get the news, and still can't post to the BL list. Does this > sound out in left field? > > This above covers the below items. > > > 3. -ALL list is renamed gw-open and let 'em do what they want. (If we're > > going to force a name change it should not have a USGW connotation.) > > > > This would require a note from the board to RW stating that the -ALL list > > has no connection to the USGW Project and request that they rename. > > > > 4. We still go ahead with the "read only" Daily Board Report. > > Hopefully what I've said doesn't sound like I am still asleep > > B. > > Bridgett Smith > SC Rep SE/Mid-Atlantic Region > > bascs@wizard.com > > *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* > > TNGenWeb State Coordinator > http://www.tngenweb.org/ -- Kathy Welch Heidel ~ mailto:kheidel@tri.net ~ ~ICQ# 10547674 ~ AOL I/M heidelhaus~ Temporary USGW CC Rep for the SC/SW Region of the USA ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 18:30:02 EST From: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Board-Exec-L] UPDATE: Possible solution to the ALL list Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Bob wrote: << Guess we're stuck with it unless we can change the character of the list to "for posting of By-Laws ammedments." >> How about keeping the list, named as it is, but making an announcement that the character of the list will change as of Dec. 8th. From that point forward, ONLY By-Laws amendments will be posted there. All other posts will be deleted... Actually, I think there is no need for a national list, as those who complain most loudly should be complaining to their SC and/or Board Reps directly instead of relying on us to wade through the trash every day. The basic concept was for "bottom up" leadership, and based on that premise, national lists and pages should be simply for informational purposes. Using them as "soapboxes" implies that power is "top down," IMO. Ginger ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 16:56:28 -0800 From: "Bridgett Smith" To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-Id: <199812060101.RAA08975@jubjub.wizard.com> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec-L] UPDATE: Possible solution to the ALL list Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT This does not prevent us from quietly removing the recommendation off the USGW pages for folks to subcribe to it does it? Bridgett On 5 Dec 98, at 14:30, Bob Bamford wrote: > Guess we're stuck with it unless we can change the character of the list > to "for posting of By-Laws ammedments." Bridgett Smith SC Rep SE/Mid-Atlantic Region bascs@wizard.com *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* TNGenWeb State Coordinator http://www.tngenweb.org/ ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 17:07:48 -0800 From: "Bridgett Smith" To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-Id: <199812060113.RAA09174@jubjub.wizard.com> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec-L] Request for link to RootsWeb Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT I was beginning to wonder about that myself. I don't think I have seen anything about it, or my mail is messed up again B. On 5 Dec 98, at 18:56, Betsy Mills wrote: > Who is sending the request for the link to RootsWeb?? And has this been > done?? If it has, I aplogize for asking, but remember I had teenagers > until just recently and it is habit for me to follow up on things! > > Betsy > > Bridgett Smith SC Rep SE/Mid-Atlantic Region bascs@wizard.com *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* TNGenWeb State Coordinator http://www.tngenweb.org/ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 06:04:50 -0500 From: Bob Bamford To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981205060450.007c4b10@citrus.infi.net> Subject: Re: Possible solution to the ALL list Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 09:37 PM 12/4/98 -0600, Betsy Mills wrote: >I know Bob told us to think about this, but being a RW staff member puts me >in a different position sometimes. > Obviously, you've been thinking :>) Here is how I see it: (always by the numbers) :>) 1. All mention of the -ALL list is removed from the national pages eff. 12/8 (don't want to use 12/7 because of it's potential for historic reference.) I can do this. 2. Establish a new list: USGenWeb-Members-L ist administered by person(s) appointed by board (same as webmaster.) To accomplish this would require a motion of the board: a. To establish and b. To appoint listowner(s) 3. -ALL list is renamed gw-open and let 'em do what they want. (If we're going to force a name change it should not have a USGW connotation.) This would require a note from the board to RW stating that the -ALL list has no connection to the USGW Project and request that they rename. 4. We still go ahead with the "read only" Daily Board Report. >It seems that RootsLady and Rita Maggard have both asked for a new kinder >list. Brian is anxious to grant someone, anyone's wish to help resolve the >ALL list mess. I was asked as staff to provide "leadership" to Tim and >Vicki about the solution to which list to create. (I think that translates >that I am older and wiser! ) So, I am putting everyone on hold with >this - Rita, RootsLady, Tim and Vicki - while I get the input from the >board. I believe Megan would also be willing to work with Rita and >RootsLady to help keep the list under control. > >So, I need some input and approval from the board to make this a list >blessed by the board. The listowner(s) need to start writing their welcome >message that will include the rules for participation. And I need to >report progress on this to my boss! Otherwise, Rita will get a list >and we will still have the old ALL list hanging over our heads. > >I recommend that we keep the old ALL list and rename it something like >USGW-POLITICS-L so that people who join will know that is what will be >discussed. Maybe they can use it to work on bylaws revisions since it >looks like it is headed that way. > >We need to either allow people to sub to board-l without being able to post >or we need the new list that is read-only that Bob mentioned for our own >Daily Board Report. We will be able to get that one very quickly also. >(Should I have numbered these, Bob? ) > >Suggestions?? Comments?? >Betsy > > >At 01:16 PM 12/4/98 -0500, Bob Bamford wrote: >>I've read an meditated on the various responses to the above posting. They >>ranged from frustration as to what to do to physical mayhem :>) >> >>The consensus is that we should disassociate ourselves from the -ALL list. >>In doing so we need to have a plan as to where we are going. Pardon if I >>ramble but here are my thoughts: >> >>1. We can cut the link (mention to the -ALL list from all national USGW >pages. >> >>2. Do we need to replace it with the "help" list I suggested? Or would our >>volunteers be better served working with their state organizations, thereby >>getting localized (and geographically more knowledgeable) help. I think so. >>The national organization should not be playing mother hen to CCs. The SC >>should. We are in fact usurping the SCs authority. So... I say no >replacement. >> >>3. I have asked the sender ofg the message that percipitated this >>discussion to use it (without attribution), possibly to send to the -ALL >>list or possibly to post on the board list. Until e have an ok, we won't >>persue how to use it. >> >>4. I had suggested, and we had discussed, sporadically, a Daily Board >>Report to counter the misinterpretation and innuendo contained in the daily >>Board Show. Someone had suggested a mailing list that CCs could >>(optionally) belong to but ONLY get mail, not send it. >>They would get a Daily report from the board following these lines: >> >>MOTIONS >>Motion, as made and seconded along with voting period. >>Results of votes >> >>TOPICS UNDER DISCUSSION >>Items "on the floor" with the board for example: >>Discussing improved communication >>Discussing complaint about a certain page carrying advertising (no specifics) >>etc. >> >>GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENTS >>Call for volunteers to help with election at state level. >>Date for closing of nominations >>etc. >> >>I think I outlined all this before. >> >>We absolutely need to develop a line of communication directly with the CCs >>(at their option) that does not place the communication burden on the SCs. >> >>In addition to the ML I would suggest that the last 10, 15 or 30 days >>reports, be on a web page on the national site for anyone to visit. This >>would replace Celia's posting of votes. >> >>The intent here, very simply is to develop a line of communication that >>makes the -ALL list redundant. As someone suggested, let it die on the vine. >> >>Chew on that. I'm taking the rest of the day off. >> >>Bob >> > > ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 06:18:50 -0500 From: Bob Bamford To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981205061850.007c4740@citrus.infi.net> Subject: You Should Be Proud! Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" FYI - I plan to send this to the -ALL list later today. Bob -------------------------------------------- I received the message below from a potential CC. Hopefully my explanation that this list is subscribed to by less than 10% of the volunteers and the "offensive" material is submitted by only about 10 % of those, will help them overcome their trepidation and join the project as one of the dedicated volunteers that make it "work" on a day to day basis. Bob Bamford "I was recently introduced to your online genealogy project. It was very appealing to me, and I immediately wanted to volunteer to be a county coordinator. I feel many persons have helped me to find out what information I have on my genealogy, and I could use my spare time in helping others. I am having second thoughts, however, after subscribing to the mailing list (as was suggested on the site). It seems I was quite naive in respect to the idea that this project was about helping researchers. I am still "wet behind the ears" regarding genealogy and computing, but have been working very hard the last couple of weeks trying to learn html, installing an editor, and now learning what ftp's are. Now I'm afraid that since I am not experience that these people will unleash on me. Some of them seem to be regular pitbulls. I've only been subscribed to the list for a couple of days, and still don't know exactly what is going on, I assume board elections are coming up, but some of the messages coming over sure are ugly. Is all this fighting something common with this project? If so, I think I'll take up another hobby!! Thank you for your time." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ USGenWeb National Coordinator (Interim) USGenWeb County Coordinator Representative: Northeast/North Central Central Region Florida GenWeb Advisory Board County Coordinator Essex, County, MA County Coordinator Citrus, County, FL Town Coordinator Newbury, MA Town Coordinator Newburyport, MA -------------------------------------------------- http://www.hertge.com/essex e-mail: essxbook@citrus.infi.net P.O. Box 811 Lecanto, FL 34460-0811 (352) 527-2270 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 07:04:12 -0700 From: Jan Craven To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981205070412.0081db10@mail.usunwired.net> Subject: Re: Possible solution to the ALL list Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Kay, would you set this list so that it defaults the reply back to the list? About what Betsy said. What I would like to comment on is the suggestion to use the all to do bylaws revisions. I think this list is too far gone and has too bad a reputation to use it for anything except for what it is now. If there needs to be a list for bylaws (or what ever) then create one. I don't want merope & the gang running the bylaws list like they are the all list. I also like the idea of letting folks sub to Board-L in read only mode. Earlier it was suggested that each one of us take a turn doing the board report. Folks, I simply do not have time to do anything like that and I know that there are probably other board members who are maxed out on their time committments also. If one of the board memebers does have time and would volunteer to do this report, then that is another story. Other than these comments what Bob and Betsy both say makes sense. J At 09:37 PM 12/4/1998 -0600, Betsy Mills wrote: >I know Bob told us to think about this, but being a RW staff member puts me >in a different position sometimes. > >It seems that RootsLady and Rita Maggard have both asked for a new kinder >list. Brian is anxious to grant someone, anyone's wish to help resolve the >ALL list mess. I was asked as staff to provide "leadership" to Tim and >Vicki about the solution to which list to create. (I think that translates >that I am older and wiser! ) So, I am putting everyone on hold with >this - Rita, RootsLady, Tim and Vicki - while I get the input from the >board. I believe Megan would also be willing to work with Rita and >RootsLady to help keep the list under control. > >So, I need some input and approval from the board to make this a list >blessed by the board. The listowner(s) need to start writing their welcome >message that will include the rules for participation. And I need to >report progress on this to my boss! Otherwise, Rita will get a list >and we will still have the old ALL list hanging over our heads. > >I recommend that we keep the old ALL list and rename it something like >USGW-POLITICS-L so that people who join will know that is what will be >discussed. Maybe they can use it to work on bylaws revisions since it >looks like it is headed that way. > >We need to either allow people to sub to board-l without being able to post >or we need the new list that is read-only that Bob mentioned for our own >Daily Board Report. We will be able to get that one very quickly also. >(Should I have numbered these, Bob? ) > >Suggestions?? Comments?? >Betsy > > >At 01:16 PM 12/4/98 -0500, Bob Bamford wrote: >>I've read an meditated on the various responses to the above posting. They >>ranged from frustration as to what to do to physical mayhem :>) >> >>The consensus is that we should disassociate ourselves from the -ALL list. >>In doing so we need to have a plan as to where we are going. Pardon if I >>ramble but here are my thoughts: >> >>1. We can cut the link (mention to the -ALL list from all national USGW >pages. >> >>2. Do we need to replace it with the "help" list I suggested? Or would our >>volunteers be better served working with their state organizations, thereby >>getting localized (and geographically more knowledgeable) help. I think so. >>The national organization should not be playing mother hen to CCs. The SC >>should. We are in fact usurping the SCs authority. So... I say no >replacement. >> >>3. I have asked the sender ofg the message that percipitated this >>discussion to use it (without attribution), possibly to send to the -ALL >>list or possibly to post on the board list. Until e have an ok, we won't >>persue how to use it. >> >>4. I had suggested, and we had discussed, sporadically, a Daily Board >>Report to counter the misinterpretation and innuendo contained in the daily >>Board Show. Someone had suggested a mailing list that CCs could >>(optionally) belong to but ONLY get mail, not send it. >>They would get a Daily report from the board following these lines: >> >>MOTIONS >>Motion, as made and seconded along with voting period. >>Results of votes >> >>TOPICS UNDER DISCUSSION >>Items "on the floor" with the board for example: >>Discussing improved communication >>Discussing complaint about a certain page carrying advertising (no specifics) >>etc. >> >>GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENTS >>Call for volunteers to help with election at state level. >>Date for closing of nominations >>etc. >> >>I think I outlined all this before. >> >>We absolutely need to develop a line of communication directly with the CCs >>(at their option) that does not place the communication burden on the SCs. >> >>In addition to the ML I would suggest that the last 10, 15 or 30 days >>reports, be on a web page on the national site for anyone to visit. This >>would replace Celia's posting of votes. >> >>The intent here, very simply is to develop a line of communication that >>makes the -ALL list redundant. As someone suggested, let it die on the vine. >> >>Chew on that. I'm taking the rest of the day off. >> >>Bob >> > > > ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 08:15:56 -0500 From: Bob Bamford To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981205081556.007b6d40@citrus.infi.net> Subject: Re: Possible solution to the ALL list Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 07:04 AM 12/5/98 -0700, Jan Craven wrote: >Kay, would you set this list so that it defaults the reply back to the list? > I agree. Kay... when you feel up to it. (Kay is feeling poorly) >About what Betsy said. >What I would like to comment on is the suggestion to use the all to do >bylaws revisions. I think this list is too far gone and has too bad a >reputation See my later comments. Bob ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 07:35:31 -0700 From: Jan Craven To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981205073531.0083c9e0@mail.usunwired.net> Subject: Re: Possible solution to the ALL list Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sorry you are feeling bad again, Kay. AND, I forgot to say PLEEEZE! My mama taught me better! J At 08:15 AM 12/5/1998 -0500, Bob Bamford wrote: >At 07:04 AM 12/5/98 -0700, Jan Craven wrote: >>Kay, would you set this list so that it defaults the reply back to the list? >> >I agree. Kay... when you feel up to it. (Kay is feeling poorly) > >>About what Betsy said. >>What I would like to comment on is the suggestion to use the all to do >>bylaws revisions. I think this list is too far gone and has too bad a >>reputation > >See my later comments. > >Bob > > > > ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 13:47:19 -0500 From: Bob Bamford To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981205134719.007bd210@citrus.infi.net> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec-L] Re: Possible solution to the ALL list Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 12:31 PM 12/5/98 -0600, Kathy Welch Heidel wrote: >I have to agree with Bridgett. At least with the top part. A new list will not accomplish a thing >except trouble. >I will help with the Board list at least as long as I am here. >Kathy Trying to insure your election? :>) You have my vote :>) Bob ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 13:04:22 -0600 From: Kathy Welch Heidel To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-ID: <366983B5.9CF09B5@tri.net> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec-L] Re: Possible solution to the ALL list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bob Bamford wrote: > At 12:31 PM 12/5/98 -0600, Kathy Welch Heidel wrote: > >I have to agree with Bridgett. At least with the top part. A new list > will not accomplish a thing > >except trouble. > >I will help with the Board list at least as long as I am here. > >Kathy > > Trying to insure your election? :>) > > You have my vote :>) > > Bob You bet! ;o} Funny thing you guys kinda grew on me. I have really enjoyed all of you. Kathy -- Kathy Welch Heidel ~ mailto:kheidel@tri.net ~ ~ICQ# 10547674 ~ AOL I/M heidelhaus~ Temporary USGW CC Rep for the SC/SW Region of the USA ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 13:20:20 -0600 From: Teresa Davis To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-Id: <199812051919.OAA07219@mail.msy.bellsouth.net> Subject: [Board-Exec-L] Re: Possible solution to the ALL list Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I have to agree with Jan on the issue of the -ALL list. I don't really think the -ALL list could (or should) be used by us at all. "Us" meaning the USGenWeb Projects, the Board or anything else. I've been kind of sitting back and reading everyones suggestions/thoughts on this issue. I for one would like to see that any list we get going be controlable, at least as regards merope, and that bunch. I really see nothing wrong with opposing thoughts, ideas and etc., but how they are voiced does make a difference. Merope seems to be bent for 'destruction', and not 'construction'. I promised myself when I got back on that I was not going to sub to that list, and I meant it. Whether we disassociate ourselves or not. The suggestion of making the BOARD-L read only, and let others sub to it -- well I don't know. Of course I don't know the tech end of that, but if we were to do that, there would really be no need for a web page (such as was suggested)?? The BOARD-L might be good to go out in Digest? That sounds pretty good to me. Terry At 07:04 AM 12/5/98 -0700, Jan Craven wrote: >Kay, would you set this list so that it defaults the reply back to the list? > >About what Betsy said. >What I would like to comment on is the suggestion to use the all to do >bylaws revisions. I think this list is too far gone and has too bad a >reputation >to use it for anything except for what it is now. If there needs to be a >list >for bylaws (or what ever) then create one. I don't want merope & the gang >running the bylaws list like they are the all list. > >I also like the idea of letting folks sub to Board-L in read only mode. >Earlier it was suggested that each one of us take a turn doing the board >report. >Folks, I simply do not have time to do anything like that and I know that >there >are probably other board members who are maxed out on their time committments >also. If one of the board memebers does have time and would volunteer to >do this report, then that is another story. > >Other than these comments what Bob and Betsy both say makes sense. >J >At 09:37 PM 12/4/1998 -0600, Betsy Mills wrote: >>I know Bob told us to think about this, but being a RW staff member puts me >>in a different position sometimes. >> >>It seems that RootsLady and Rita Maggard have both asked for a new kinder >>list. Brian is anxious to grant someone, anyone's wish to help resolve the >>ALL list mess. I was asked as staff to provide "leadership" to Tim and >>Vicki about the solution to which list to create. (I think that translates >>that I am older and wiser! ) So, I am putting everyone on hold with >>this - Rita, RootsLady, Tim and Vicki - while I get the input from the >>board. I believe Megan would also be willing to work with Rita and >>RootsLady to help keep the list under control. >> >>So, I need some input and approval from the board to make this a list >>blessed by the board. The listowner(s) need to start writing their welcome >>message that will include the rules for participation. And I need to >>report progress on this to my boss! Otherwise, Rita will get a list >>and we will still have the old ALL list hanging over our heads. >> >>I recommend that we keep the old ALL list and rename it something like >>USGW-POLITICS-L so that people who join will know that is what will be >>discussed. Maybe they can use it to work on bylaws revisions since it >>looks like it is headed that way. >> >>We need to either allow people to sub to board-l without being able to post >>or we need the new list that is read-only that Bob mentioned for our own >>Daily Board Report. We will be able to get that one very quickly also. >>(Should I have numbered these, Bob? ) >> >>Suggestions?? Comments?? >>Betsy >> >> >>At 01:16 PM 12/4/98 -0500, Bob Bamford wrote: >>>I've read an meditated on the various responses to the above posting. They >>>ranged from frustration as to what to do to physical mayhem :>) >>> >>>The consensus is that we should disassociate ourselves from the -ALL list. >>>In doing so we need to have a plan as to where we are going. Pardon if I >>>ramble but here are my thoughts: >>> >>>1. We can cut the link (mention to the -ALL list from all national USGW >>pages. >>> >>>2. Do we need to replace it with the "help" list I suggested? Or would our >>>volunteers be better served working with their state organizations, thereby >>>getting localized (and geographically more knowledgeable) help. I think so. >>>The national organization should not be playing mother hen to CCs. The SC >>>should. We are in fact usurping the SCs authority. So... I say no >>replacement. >>> >>>3. I have asked the sender ofg the message that percipitated this >>>discussion to use it (without attribution), possibly to send to the -ALL >>>list or possibly to post on the board list. Until e have an ok, we won't >>>persue how to use it. >>> >>>4. I had suggested, and we had discussed, sporadically, a Daily Board >>>Report to counter the misinterpretation and innuendo contained in the daily >>>Board Show. Someone had suggested a mailing list that CCs could >>>(optionally) belong to but ONLY get mail, not send it. >>>They would get a Daily report from the board following these lines: >>> >>>MOTIONS >>>Motion, as made and seconded along with voting period. >>>Results of votes >>> >>>TOPICS UNDER DISCUSSION >>>Items "on the floor" with the board for example: >>>Discussing improved communication >>>Discussing complaint about a certain page carrying advertising (no >specifics) >>>etc. >>> >>>GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENTS >>>Call for volunteers to help with election at state level. >>>Date for closing of nominations >>>etc. >>> >>>I think I outlined all this before. >>> >>>We absolutely need to develop a line of communication directly with the CCs >>>(at their option) that does not place the communication burden on the SCs. >>> >>>In addition to the ML I would suggest that the last 10, 15 or 30 days >>>reports, be on a web page on the national site for anyone to visit. This >>>would replace Celia's posting of votes. >>> >>>The intent here, very simply is to develop a line of communication that >>>makes the -ALL list redundant. As someone suggested, let it die on the vine. >>> >>>Chew on that. I'm taking the rest of the day off. >>> >>>Bob >>> >> >> >> > Teresa "Terry" Davis USGW Projects SC Rep NW/Plains Region ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 14:30:45 -0500 From: Bob Bamford To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19981205143045.007acc40@citrus.infi.net> Subject: [Board-Exec-L] UPDATE: Possible solution to the ALL list Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" A TRAP!!! 3. -ALL list is renamed gw-open and let 'em do what they want. (If we're going to force a name change it should not have a USGW connotation.) This would require a note from the board to RW stating that the -ALL list has no connection to the USGW Project and request that they rename. Here's the trap: ARTICLE XVI. AMENDMENT TO BYLAWS Section 3. The proposed amendment, with the sponsor's name and date of posting, shall remain posted for a period of at least thirty (30) days prior to the annual voting period of July 1-July 31. Any proposed amendment shall require a minimum of five (5) states as co-sponsors to command that it be placed on the ballot. State projects wishing to co-sponsor the amendment shall notify the Advisory Board and make an announcement on the USGenWeb-All Mailing List. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Guess we're stuck with it unless we can change the character of the list to "for posting of By-Laws ammedments." Bob ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 18:30:13 -0600 From: Betsy Mills To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-Id: <199812060028.QAA25836@bl-3.rootsweb.com> Subject: [Board-Exec-L] Re: Possible solution to the ALL list Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 07:04 AM 12/5/98 -0700, Jan Craven wrote: >What I would like to comment on is the suggestion to use the all to do >bylaws revisions. I think this list is too far gone and has too bad a >reputation >to use it for anything except for what it is now. If there needs to be a >list >for bylaws (or what ever) then create one. I don't want merope & the gang >running the bylaws list like they are the all list. Sorry, you all misunderstood this part of my message. I meant that the gang on the ALL list seems to be discussing how to implement changes to the bylaws by following the procedure established by the bylaws - a state submits a revision request and it has to be supported by 5 states. THEY are using that list for that purpose and I have no problem with it. We, the board, do not implement changes and I am not talking about a board committee that will handle these requests using that list. My apologies for the misunderstanding. Betsy >I also like the idea of letting folks sub to Board-L in read only mode. >Earlier it was suggested that each one of us take a turn doing the board >report. >Folks, I simply do not have time to do anything like that and I know that >there >are probably other board members who are maxed out on their time committments >also. If one of the board memebers does have time and would volunteer to >do this report, then that is another story. > >Other than these comments what Bob and Betsy both say makes sense. >J >At 09:37 PM 12/4/1998 -0600, Betsy Mills wrote: >>I know Bob told us to think about this, but being a RW staff member puts me >>in a different position sometimes. >> >>It seems that RootsLady and Rita Maggard have both asked for a new kinder >>list. Brian is anxious to grant someone, anyone's wish to help resolve the >>ALL list mess. I was asked as staff to provide "leadership" to Tim and >>Vicki about the solution to which list to create. (I think that translates >>that I am older and wiser! ) So, I am putting everyone on hold with >>this - Rita, RootsLady, Tim and Vicki - while I get the input from the >>board. I believe Megan would also be willing to work with Rita and >>RootsLady to help keep the list under control. >> >>So, I need some input and approval from the board to make this a list >>blessed by the board. The listowner(s) need to start writing their welcome >>message that will include the rules for participation. And I need to >>report progress on this to my boss! Otherwise, Rita will get a list >>and we will still have the old ALL list hanging over our heads. >> >>I recommend that we keep the old ALL list and rename it something like >>USGW-POLITICS-L so that people who join will know that is what will be >>discussed. Maybe they can use it to work on bylaws revisions since it >>looks like it is headed that way. >> >>We need to either allow people to sub to board-l without being able to post >>or we need the new list that is read-only that Bob mentioned for our own >>Daily Board Report. We will be able to get that one very quickly also. >>(Should I have numbered these, Bob? ) >> >>Suggestions?? Comments?? >>Betsy >> >> >>At 01:16 PM 12/4/98 -0500, Bob Bamford wrote: >>>I've read an meditated on the various responses to the above posting. They >>>ranged from frustration as to what to do to physical mayhem :>) >>> >>>The consensus is that we should disassociate ourselves from the -ALL list. >>>In doing so we need to have a plan as to where we are going. Pardon if I >>>ramble but here are my thoughts: >>> >>>1. We can cut the link (mention to the -ALL list from all national USGW >>pages. >>> >>>2. Do we need to replace it with the "help" list I suggested? Or would our >>>volunteers be better served working with their state organizations, thereby >>>getting localized (and geographically more knowledgeable) help. I think so. >>>The national organization should not be playing mother hen to CCs. The SC >>>should. We are in fact usurping the SCs authority. So... I say no >>replacement. >>> >>>3. I have asked the sender ofg the message that percipitated this >>>discussion to use it (without attribution), possibly to send to the -ALL >>>list or possibly to post on the board list. Until e have an ok, we won't >>>persue how to use it. >>> >>>4. I had suggested, and we had discussed, sporadically, a Daily Board >>>Report to counter the misinterpretation and innuendo contained in the daily >>>Board Show. Someone had suggested a mailing list that CCs could >>>(optionally) belong to but ONLY get mail, not send it. >>>They would get a Daily report from the board following these lines: >>> >>>MOTIONS >>>Motion, as made and seconded along with voting period. >>>Results of votes >>> >>>TOPICS UNDER DISCUSSION >>>Items "on the floor" with the board for example: >>>Discussing improved communication >>>Discussing complaint about a certain page carrying advertising (no >specifics) >>>etc. >>> >>>GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENTS >>>Call for volunteers to help with election at state level. >>>Date for closing of nominations >>>etc. >>> >>>I think I outlined all this before. >>> >>>We absolutely need to develop a line of communication directly with the CCs >>>(at their option) that does not place the communication burden on the SCs. >>> >>>In addition to the ML I would suggest that the last 10, 15 or 30 days >>>reports, be on a web page on the national site for anyone to visit. This >>>would replace Celia's posting of votes. >>> >>>The intent here, very simply is to develop a line of communication that >>>makes the -ALL list redundant. As someone suggested, let it die on the vine. >>> >>>Chew on that. I'm taking the rest of the day off. >>> >>>Bob >>> >> >> >> > ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 18:46:23 -0600 From: Kathy Welch Heidel To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-ID: <3669D3D9.99B51C7C@tri.net> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec-L] UPDATE: Possible solution to the ALL list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Bob wrote: > > << Guess we're stuck with it unless we can change the character of the list to > "for posting of By-Laws ammedments." >> I still believe you should leave well enough alone. At least we know how the wind is blowing. And another storm is brewing right now, with the announcement of the Learning Company Acquisition. We don't have to take ALL list personally, but it is a Forum for information we need to know about. If we change the "ALL" at this time it will be seen as another attempt to control. And in truthfulness it is. If you want to change the format I would suggest that be done during the Summer Election time, see what the CC's want first, it is their list not ours. Just my thoughts, Kathy -- Kathy Welch Heidel ~ mailto:kheidel@tri.net ~ ~ICQ# 10547674 ~ AOL I/M heidelhaus~ Temporary USGW CC Rep for the SC/SW Region of the USA ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 18:56:06 -0600 From: Betsy Mills To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-Id: <199812060053.QAA27695@bl-3.rootsweb.com> Subject: [Board-Exec-L] Request for link to RootsWeb Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Who is sending the request for the link to RootsWeb?? And has this been done?? If it has, I aplogize for asking, but remember I had teenagers until just recently and it is habit for me to follow up on things! Betsy ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 17:15:24 -0800 (PST) From: To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-Id: <199812060115.RAA23197@bw-10.rootsweb.com> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec-L] Request for link to RootsWeb Content-Type: text > > Who is sending the request for the link to RootsWeb?? And has this been > > done?? If it has, I aplogize for asking, but remember I had teenagers > > until just recently and it is habit for me to follow up on things! Just couch it in some official sounding language and send the request off to leverich@rootsweb.com, but cc karen@rootsweb.com and marceline@rootsweb.com. (Brian because he's Brian, me because I'll actually do the update, and Marceline because she's building a new version of the page and that's the safest way to make sure the link doesn't disappear when we roll out the new page...) Karen, realizing it's a bit daft to talk about herself in the third person... ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 20:04:30 -0600 From: Betsy Mills To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-Id: <199812060202.SAA02185@bl-3.rootsweb.com> Subject: Re: [Board-Exec-L] Request for link to RootsWeb Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 05:15 PM 12/5/98 -0800, you wrote: >Just couch it in some official sounding language and send the request >off to leverich@rootsweb.com, but cc karen@rootsweb.com and >marceline@rootsweb.com. (Brian because he's Brian, me because I'll Actually, that one is marce@rootsweb.com! Betsy - who knows, because the other address always bounces back into her mailbox! >actually do the update, and Marceline because she's building a new >version of the page and that's the safest way to make sure the >link doesn't disappear when we roll out the new page...) > >Karen, realizing it's a bit daft to talk about herself in the > third person... > ______________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 20:13:10 -0600 From: Kathy Welch Heidel To: Board-Exec-L@rootsweb.com Message-ID: <3669E834.F5415614@tri.net> Subject: [Board-Exec-L] Question Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have a question I need an answer to. If I am on the Board even as a Temp. does my vote "not" count? I just looked at the Board-L and I am not on there as voting. Could I not be seeing me? I have voted on the last 2 issues. Kathy -- Kathy Welch Heidel ~ mailto:kheidel@tri.net ~ ~ICQ# 10547674 ~ AOL I/M heidelhaus~ Temporary USGW CC Rep for the SC/SW Region of the USA ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~