Beginning March 2nd, 2020 the Mailing Lists functionality on RootsWeb will be discontinued. Users will no longer be able to send outgoing emails or accept incoming emails. Additionally, administration tools will no longer be available to list administrators and mailing lists will be put into an archival state.
Administrators may save the emails in their list prior to March 2nd. After that, mailing list archives will remain available and searchable on RootsWeb
At 03:56 AM 9/30/98 -0400, Timothy Spence wrote:
>Then their is the problem of Ken Thomas, he "WAS" the FM for Kansas
>until Linda decided to "ARBITRARILY" remove him from the position.
Not arbitrary --
he would not reply when e-mailed by his boss. How long would you keep your
job if you did not answer your boss?
he did not upload files to the USGW Archives when people sent him files
earmarked for the USGW Archives, but instead uploaded them to the KSGW
Archives.
>This
>mostly comes from the fact that Kansas decided to draft their own set of
>"bylaws" which gave their CC's some protection from the USGW at times
>like this. He had no hearing by any impartial persons, he was not
>removed by a "legal vote" of the board. Linda just changed his password
>and replaced the KS. "TOC" and appointed two people to replace him. Now
>I ask, what good were any bylaws in this case?
The by-laws are for KS CCs -- as far as I know Kenny is still a CC in KS.
The by-laws are doing their job.
<snip>
>Folks, I am going to say publicly, The NC has nothing but good
>intentions for the USGW project. If we dont support her in her efforts,
>things like the above will continue to happen. I think there are those
>who dont realize the ramifications of blindly supporting someone weather
>they are right or wrong.
I support Nancy Trice. I support the board. Are you blindly supporting
Kenny regardless of whether he is right or wrong??
>
>Besides, if you are a voice of descent, you might be next. Lets see how
>I am dismissed.
For what?? You haven't done anything to be dismissed over!
If you were to stop taking care of your pages, fail to answer messages
asking where are you, I'll bet your SC will disown you, too. I've had to
remove CC's who just didn't work out -- every SC has - and it breaks my
heart every time.
At 03:56 AM 9/30/98 -0400, Timothy Spence wrote:
>Hello All,
>First let me say two things, I have no problem with Polly Menendez. She
>has done a fine job coordinating the Ky. Archives. I have no probem
>with uploading files to the archives that are designated for them,
>infact to this point I have uploaded all files to the archives.
>Having said those two things here are the problems as I see it.
>
>Linda claims that our submitters know before they submit files that they
>are there for ever as long as the project is non-profit. I'm afraid that
>is not the case. No where on the TOC pages does it state this fact to
>the submitters. Understand that theese files are uploaded to the
>archives and technically I or or nobody else can remove them. The USGW
>would have a case in court if we did so. That means that they can take
>theese files and Loose them being electronic data, hack them up change
>them or what ever you want to call it, create a data base of
>genealogical information and by law, it "IS" theirs to sell or
>distribute in any way they choose. You cant take it back folks it
>belongs to the orginazation..... I think this needs to be addressed
>quickly, if not now!!!!!
Aw c'mon now...we have removed data at the request of submitters. I have
removed files, Linda Lewis has removed files, maybe even you have removed
files.
I don't know why we even have it in the guidelines (and understand these
are guidelines, not a Federal Laws!).
Next we (USGW) do not own the data -- we have no right to sell it. Just as
the librarian at your public library has a copy of the Encyclopedia
Britannica, we have a copy of your data in our archives -- and just as the
librarian can't take the EB and make and sell copies of the EB without
permission of the publisher, we can't make copies of your work to sell or
even move to another web site without your permission.
A year and a half (or so) ago, a young man started harvesting data out of
the Archives and putting it on his web site, at first without permission --
and later continued to do so even after being told he needed to get
permission. I was prepared to take him to court to get my materials off his
web site. I am still prepared to do that to protect the integrity of the
Archives.
>The next problem as I see it is as follows: Those of us who have a
>descenting voice from those in "controll" if you will, are labled as,
>trouble makers, out to destroy the USGW, has a "hidden agenda" etc. etc.
>etc. It is my position that those very people with this attitude are
>actualy the ones with the "hidden agenda". Read the above and tell me
>what it might be?
Awww, c'mon. I have very nearly 100 MB of data on-line. I have no hidden
agenda. Now you have switched topics -- I will not mix topics in a message.
A second message will follow addressing the Kenny issue.
Hello All,
First let me say two things, I have no problem with Polly Menendez. She
has done a fine job coordinating the Ky. Archives. I have no probem
with uploading files to the archives that are designated for them,
infact to this point I have uploaded all files to the archives.
Having said those two things here are the problems as I see it.
Linda claims that our submitters know before they submit files that they
are there for ever as long as the project is non-profit. I'm afraid that
is not the case. No where on the TOC pages does it state this fact to
the submitters. Understand that theese files are uploaded to the
archives and technically I or or nobody else can remove them. The USGW
would have a case in court if we did so. That means that they can take
theese files and Loose them being electronic data, hack them up change
them or what ever you want to call it, create a data base of
genealogical information and by law, it "IS" theirs to sell or
distribute in any way they choose. You cant take it back folks it
belongs to the orginazation..... I think this needs to be addressed
quickly, if not now!!!!!
The next problem as I see it is as follows: Those of us who have a
descenting voice from those in "controll" if you will, are labled as,
trouble makers, out to destroy the USGW, has a "hidden agenda" etc. etc.
etc. It is my position that those very people with this attitude are
actualy the ones with the "hidden agenda". Read the above and tell me
what it might be?
Then their is the problem of Ken Thomas, he "WAS" the FM for Kansas
until Linda decided to "ARBITRARILY" remove him from the position. This
mostly comes from the fact that Kansas decided to draft their own set of
"bylaws" which gave their CC's some protection from the USGW at times
like this. He had no hearing by any impartial persons, he was not
removed by a "legal vote" of the board. Linda just changed his password
and replaced the KS. "TOC" and appointed two people to replace him. Now
I ask, what good were any bylaws in this case? Was this fair? Would
this be fair to you? Could this happen to you? You bet it could.
Infact as I recall I saw a post that told Linda to "IGNORE" the bylaws
in this case. Understand, the problem is not where the files were
placed as others would have you concentrate on, but rather the way Ken
was releived of the position.
Folks, I am going to say publicly, The NC has nothing but good
intentions for the USGW project. If we dont support her in her efforts,
things like the above will continue to happen. I think there are those
who dont realize the ramifications of blindly supporting someone weather
they are right or wrong.
Besides, if you are a voice of descent, you might be next. Lets see how
I am dismissed.
Tim Spence
supporter of: Rootsweb.com - USGW - Archives - KYGenWeb
--
Tim & Valorie Taylor Spence
*********************************************************************
Genealogy Published at: http://www.concentric.net/~spence1/
Researching: Spence, Gilbert, Fox, Bishop, Couch, Hacker, Hodges,
Fields, Sandlin, Combs, Davis, Taylor, Neal,
Ryan, Barnett, Campbell, Cassada, Martin, Ridner
************************************************************************
County Coordinator and Archivist for the KyGenWeb Counties of:
Clay Co. GenWeb:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~kyclay/clay.html
Clay Co. Archives:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/ky/clay/clayar.html
Owsley Co. GenWeb:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~kyowsley/owsley.html
Owsley Co. Archives:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/ky/owsley/owsleyar.html
Perry Co. Archives:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/ky/perry/perryar.html
At 05:49 AM 9/30/98 -0400, Timothy Spence wrote:
>Linda,
>The point here is that ever since KS incorporated they have been a
>target by some in the USGW. I wont split hairs over how long they have
>to write bylaws. It matters not.
Do we have to get into this stuff here, too? I'm now getting double notes,
one for this list, another for USGENWEB-ALL.
I was hoping this list would be a "technical" one, to help one another
through formatting, uploading, etc. Can we keep the political mess on ALL?
It's all so silly and unnecessary, anyway.
Thanks,
Ellen
MSGenWeb:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~msgenweb/
Adams Co, MSGenWeb:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~msadams/index.htm
SW MS Territory, MSGenWeb:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~msswterr/index.htm
For Old Times Sake:
http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~binkley/
General Nathan Bedford Forrest Chapter UDC
Cicero, IN:
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Meadows/1568
Adams Co, MS Mailing List: MSADAMS(a)rootsweb.com
PACK Family Mailing List: PACK-L(a)rootsweb.com
In a message dated 98-09-29 22:46:12 EDT, cpalmer(a)ix.netcom.com writes:
<< Likewise, if a person sent me a file and said "this is for the Webster
County Archives", I wouldn't feel it was necessary to discuss it with them
- it would go into the archives.
Carole >>
Thanks to Carole for expressing the very basis that I use to handle material I
receive for the County Archives.
KUDOS>
At 10:41 PM 9/29/98 -0400, Carole Palmer wrote:
>On Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:28:33 -0700, Joy Fisher <jfisher(a)ucla.edu> wrote:
>>Only if the submitter can't
>>get any satisfaction from you, would I expect Polly to step in. This is a
>>typical chain-of-command type situation.
>
>Then I would expect Polly to get out her wet noodle and give me the
>proscribed lashes. <g>
You're lucky -- in SD we use a modem cable! <hehehe>
On Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:28:33 -0700, Joy Fisher <jfisher(a)ucla.edu> wrote:
>Not really a conflict of interest -- the interests of the visitor come first.
The submitter's wishes always come first; I stipulated that myself.
>Maybe not space efficient, but practical. One of my CC's has a wonderful
>cemetery web page. The sexton of the cemetery not only keeps up the files
>with who is buried where, but adds information about each person, complete
>with interviews with older people who knew the person.
>
>The CC has arranged the web page so that it is like visiting the cemetery.
>I couldn't do that with text -- if I tried. Next, we are going to create a
>txt file with the names and enough pertinent info so that it will whet the
>appetite of someone who stumbles across the txt file in the archives, so
>they will visit the html page.
>
>Now we have the best of both worlds -- the person who is looking for Joe
>Blow and doesn't have a clue where to look, might find him in the archives
>txt file using the search engine. The header info at the top of the file
>says there is more info about this cemetery at
>
>http://xxxxx
>
>And everyone looks like a winner. There is no conflict of interest here.
I have a similar arrangement. Two years ago I transcribed over 1700
Webster County obituaries and put them on the web page. Then I did an
every-person index of the obituaries in the form of a text file and placed
that in the archives. At the top of the file it tells where to go to find
the individual obituaries in their entirety.
It works for everyone.
>Agreed! Unless the submitter complains about where you put the info or how
>it is displayed. Then I expect you and the submitter to work out the
>problem. (Wrong color background, or whatever).
They are usually so happy to get their data online that so far I haven't
had any complaints from anyone. Take that back - I got a complaint
tonight. I received some jpg files for the Webster County Family Album and
have been lax in getting them "pasted into" the Album. The sender wanted
to know what was taking me so long. :(
>Only if the submitter can't
>get any satisfaction from you, would I expect Polly to step in. This is a
>typical chain-of-command type situation.
Then I would expect Polly to get out her wet noodle and give me the
proscribed lashes. <g>
Carole Palmer
At 07:29 PM 9/29/98 -0700, Polly A. Menendez wrote:
>I am also in 100% agreement with the way Carole has described handling her
>position as both CC & County Archivist. And I would also like to publically
>commend her personal sacrifices for acquire a microfilm reader and films to
>further the Archives effort for Webster County. She is obviously
fairhanded in
>balancing her commitment to both KyGenWeb and the USGW Archives Project.
I agree.
>
>I apoligize for sending sooo many posts today. I hope its been
informative to
>share these thoughts.
No apology is needed -- it has been a useful dialog. I am sure others had
the same concerns as Carole, but were afraid to ask.
I am also in 100% agreement with the way Carole has described handling her
position as both CC & County Archivist. And I would also like to publically
commend her personal sacrifices for acquire a microfilm reader and films to
further the Archives effort for Webster County. She is obviously fairhanded in
balancing her commitment to both KyGenWeb and the USGW Archives Project.
I apoligize for sending sooo many posts today. I hope its been informative to
share these thoughts.
Polly
----------
From: Carole Palmer <cpalmer(a)ix.netcom.com>
To: ARCHIVES-CC-L(a)rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: [ARCHIVES-CC-L] Re: [KYGEN-L] Destination "Unknown" re: pub domain
material
Date: Tuesday, September 29, 1998 7:09 PM
On Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:33:01 -0700, "Polly A. Menendez"
<bobpolly(a)zapcom.net> wrote:
>To take that thought one step further, just for clarification.
>
>If the submitter requested you only place this at ________, that would take
>precedence over what the CC-Archivist thought was in the best interest of all
>concerned, wouldn't it?
>
>Polly
Polly....
In my opinion, of course it would. I made it plain earlier than if the
submitter expressed no preference as to where the file should go, we would
discuss it and I would tell him/her the various options - GenConnect,
Archives, or web page. Often the web page is not even an option as
submitted files are generally one marriage, one deed, one will, etc.
Likewise, if a person sent me a file and said "this is for the Webster
County Archives", I wouldn't feel it was necessary to discuss it with them
- it would go into the archives.
Carole
On Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:33:01 -0700, "Polly A. Menendez"
<bobpolly(a)zapcom.net> wrote:
>To take that thought one step further, just for clarification.
>
>If the submitter requested you only place this at ________, that would take
>precedence over what the CC-Archivist thought was in the best interest of all
>concerned, wouldn't it?
>
>Polly
Polly....
In my opinion, of course it would. I made it plain earlier than if the
submitter expressed no preference as to where the file should go, we would
discuss it and I would tell him/her the various options - GenConnect,
Archives, or web page. Often the web page is not even an option as
submitted files are generally one marriage, one deed, one will, etc.
Likewise, if a person sent me a file and said "this is for the Webster
County Archives", I wouldn't feel it was necessary to discuss it with them
- it would go into the archives.
Carole
To take that thought one step further, just for clarification.
If the submitter requested you only place this at ________, that would take
precedence over what the CC-Archivist thought was in the best interest of all
concerned, wouldn't it?
Polly
----------
From: Linda Lewis <cityslic(a)ix.netcom.com>
To: ARCHIVES-CC-L(a)rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: [ARCHIVES-CC-L] Re: [KYGEN-L] Destination "Unknown" re: pub domain
material
Date: Tuesday, September 29, 1998 6:18 PM
Carole Palmer wrote:
>
> My opinion was that the cc-archivist should be trusted to know what was in
> the best interests of all concerned - the submitter, the archives, and the
> usgenweb project county pages.
>
> Carole Palmer
I agree with that 100%.
Linda
At 09:01 PM 9/29/98 -0400, you wrote:
>On Tue, 29 Sep 1998 17:26:25 -0700, Joy Fisher <jfisher(a)ucla.edu> wrote:
>
>>Explain "conflict of interest", please?
>
>I'm happy to do so, Joy. Maybe you haven't had a chance to read all the
>messages on this list today; there have been quite a few.
I've read them all.
>
>In earlier messages it was theorized that a person who was serving as both
>a county's cc and that county's archivist might have a problem deciding
>where to place files submitted to him/her. In other words, a conflict of
>interest.
Not really a conflict of interest -- the interests of the visitor come first.
>Several suggestions we made that would make this easy for the cc-archivist
>- I think you made a suggestion yourself - that files could be placed in
>every conceivable location. Doesn't sound very space-efficient to me.
Maybe not space efficient, but practical. One of my CC's has a wonderful
cemetery web page. The sexton of the cemetery not only keeps up the files
with who is buried where, but adds information about each person, complete
with interviews with older people who knew the person.
The CC has arranged the web page so that it is like visiting the cemetery.
I couldn't do that with text -- if I tried. Next, we are going to create a
txt file with the names and enough pertinent info so that it will whet the
appetite of someone who stumbles across the txt file in the archives, so
they will visit the html page.
Now we have the best of both worlds -- the person who is looking for Joe
Blow and doesn't have a clue where to look, might find him in the archives
txt file using the search engine. The header info at the top of the file
says there is more info about this cemetery at
http://xxxxx
And everyone looks like a winner. There is no conflict of interest here.
>Another suggestion was Linda's - that we use the special html code on the
>toc pages that allows one to know from whence an e-mail was sent - e.g. if
>a potential file submitter sent you an e-mail and you could determine that
>the e-mail was sent from the archives toc page - you were obligated to
>place the file they submitted in the archives and not on the web page.
>Linda may not have realized that code does not work with all browsers; my
>users are about 60% AOLers and they complained mightily about that code so
>I removed it from all my pages over two years ago. (It was very
>convenient back in the days when we had time to do lookups for several
>different counties - the lookup request would come with "xxcoky lookup" in
>the subject line; only thing was it didn't work for everyone).
>My opinion was that the cc-archivist should be trusted to know what was in
>the best interests of all concerned - the submitter, the archives, and the
>usgenweb project county pages.
Agreed! Unless the submitter complains about where you put the info or how
it is displayed. Then I expect you and the submitter to work out the
problem. (Wrong color background, or whatever). Only if the submitter can't
get any satisfaction from you, would I expect Polly to step in. This is a
typical chain-of-command type situation.
On Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:18:17 -0700, Linda Lewis <cityslic(a)ix.netcom.com>
wrote:
>Carole Palmer wrote:
>>
>
>> My opinion was that the cc-archivist should be trusted to know what was in
>> the best interests of all concerned - the submitter, the archives, and the
>> usgenweb project county pages.
>>
>> Carole Palmer
>
>I agree with that 100%.
>
>Linda
>
Then we have no disagreement.
Carole Palmer
Carole Palmer wrote:
>
> My opinion was that the cc-archivist should be trusted to know what was in
> the best interests of all concerned - the submitter, the archives, and the
> usgenweb project county pages.
>
> Carole Palmer
I agree with that 100%.
Linda
On Tue, 29 Sep 1998 18:10:11 -0700, Linda Lewis <cityslic(a)ix.netcom.com>
wrote:
>Carole Palmer wrote:
>>
>> My reference was to being forced out of the archives project due to this
>> newly articulated "conflict of interest" business.
>>
>> Carole Palmer
>>
>
>What conflict of interest?
>
>Linda
I have responded to this question in my response to Joy.
Carole Palmer
On Tue, 29 Sep 1998 19:58:43 +0400, Ellen Pack <epack(a)indy.net> wrote:
>Nope. We have a few beasts in MS, and I'm one of them. :-> Don't know
>what I'm doing half the time, but I'm learning. Actually, I thought that's
>what this list was for. But then, it wouldn't be the first time I wandered
>in somewhere I didn't belong. <g>
>
>We have a FM who has done a superb job of setting things up and making it
>easy for us. It takes some of the load off of her, and makes the rest of
>us feel useful and not quite so dependant upon someone else.
Hi Ellen...Our sc asked for cc volunteers who would take over their own
archives pages about a year ago; until that time she was doing them all
herself. Together with her sc responsibilities, it got to be too much for
one person. Several of us jumped in before we really knew what we were
doing but it is something that is easily learned, especially for cc's, who
have experience doing the html portion of it - making the links to the ftp
directories, etc.
I got into it so seriously that I purchased a microfilm reader and invested
in film so I could transcribe records for the Webster County archives. I
doubt I would have gone to that expense if I had not felt a
"responsibility" to fill up those archives. <g>
>BTW, the FM is Sue Skay Abruscato, and her husband may have just had a
>heart attack. If you're so inclined, I'm sure she would appreciate your
>keeping them in your prayers.
Absolutely.
Carole Palmer
Webster County KYGenWeb page coordinator
http://www.rootsweb.com/~kywebste/
Webster County KYGenWeb Archives file manager
http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/ky/webster/webster.html
My personal genealogical data http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~cpalmer/
Carole Palmer wrote:
>
> My reference was to being forced out of the archives project due to this
> newly articulated "conflict of interest" business.
>
> Carole Palmer
>
What conflict of interest?
Linda
On Tue, 29 Sep 1998 17:26:25 -0700, Joy Fisher <jfisher(a)ucla.edu> wrote:
>Explain "conflict of interest", please?
I'm happy to do so, Joy. Maybe you haven't had a chance to read all the
messages on this list today; there have been quite a few.
In earlier messages it was theorized that a person who was serving as both
a county's cc and that county's archivist might have a problem deciding
where to place files submitted to him/her. In other words, a conflict of
interest.
Several suggestions we made that would make this easy for the cc-archivist
- I think you made a suggestion yourself - that files could be placed in
every conceivable location. Doesn't sound very space-efficient to me.
Another suggestion was Linda's - that we use the special html code on the
toc pages that allows one to know from whence an e-mail was sent - e.g. if
a potential file submitter sent you an e-mail and you could determine that
the e-mail was sent from the archives toc page - you were obligated to
place the file they submitted in the archives and not on the web page.
Linda may not have realized that code does not work with all browsers; my
users are about 60% AOLers and they complained mightily about that code so
I removed it from all my pages over two years ago. (It was very
convenient back in the days when we had time to do lookups for several
different counties - the lookup request would come with "xxcoky lookup" in
the subject line; only thing was it didn't work for everyone).
My opinion was that the cc-archivist should be trusted to know what was in
the best interests of all concerned - the submitter, the archives, and the
usgenweb project county pages.
Carole Palmer
>
>At 08:13 PM 9/29/98 -0400, Carole Palmer wrote:
>>I want to make it very clear that I am not worried about Polly Menendez
>>trying to remove me as a cc-archivist.
>>
>>My reference was to being forced out of the archives project due to this
>>newly articulated "conflict of interest" business.
>
>
Explain "conflict of interest", please?
At 08:13 PM 9/29/98 -0400, Carole Palmer wrote:
>I want to make it very clear that I am not worried about Polly Menendez
>trying to remove me as a cc-archivist.
>
>My reference was to being forced out of the archives project due to this
>newly articulated "conflict of interest" business.
On Tue, 29 Sep 1998 14:19:52 -0700, "Polly A. Menendez"
<bobpolly(a)zapcom.net> wrote:
>All I am trying to say here, is that a County Coordinator who is also an
>Archivist has the additional responsibility to determine where the submitter
>wanted the information placed. As a cc-archivist, it seems appropriate to
>place in both places, unless otherwise specified.
>
>There are CC webpages and there are County Archive pages. When the CC receives
>a submission, he/she knows what to do with it. Same for the County Archivist.
>This is about the CC-Archivist.
Polly...If I can't be trusted as a cc-archivist to know where submitted
material needs to go, I must be a mess as both cc and archivist.
>I don't like writing e-mail all day long either, but am only trying to be
>helpful.
My transcription output for today - zilch. You *are* helpful, Polly; I
take every opportunity to tell people how helpful you have been to us.
My complaints were in no way directed at you and I think you know that.
Is Kentucky the only state in this project where we have those strange
beasts - cc-archivists?? If so, I think they gave you the hardest job,
Polly. <grin>
Carole