I have heard commentary for several days about the strife on this list. I
think it needs to stop. Why does it need to stop? It needs to stop because
it is detrimental to the project and it is roughtly the same 8 or 10 CC's
over and over again attacking Tim. It is not the entire project or even a
good representation of the project.
I have heard for days about the GRC status. Its status is "Dead" the
committee was legally dismissed by the chair who raised it per the
guidelines. The poll was a poll. Whoever issues a poll has the right to at
his/her discretion consider the results as either the yeses vs the entire
population that could have voted or as a percentage of the total votes.
Are Tim's attackers the squeaky wheel. In my opinion they are. If Tim was
nearly as bad as some of you make out you would have all been dismissed from
the project long ago. Tim is to my perceptions at this point a man of
almost infinite patience who has worked tirelessly for the good of the
project. I am sure that I will now be flamed both on list and off list. Well
have at it. I have a right to my opinion and I have stated it.
You talk about the council like we are all Tim's automatons. That couldn't
be further from the truth. Tim has allowed several who continually give him
flack in one form or another to remain in that group as well.
I absolutely do not care whether some CC serves on the National Advisory
Board or whether they are SC's in another state - this is Georgia and we are
dealing with GAGenWeb and what is best for this subproject of the National
Project. It matters not that another State project may have moved in a
different direction. The direction of the Georgia Project is and has always
been and always should remain "free genealogy on the internet" with data
gathered and contributed to the various county projects.
I don't know if any other RC has exactly the same situation as I do but as
an RC I have both of the ASC's and the SC maintaining counties as CC's in my
region and I beleive (contrary to comment which I have received from a
couple of the squeaky wheels) that they do a creditable job particuarly
considering their other duties and responsibilities
Bill Clody
CC Walker County Georgia
RC Northwest Georgia, GAGenWeb
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Stowell" <tstowell(a)chattanooga.net>
To: <GAGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 10:29 PM
Subject: RE: [GAGEN] GRC Status
At 10:27 AM 4/21/04 -0400, L Barton wrote:
>Gloria,
>
>If it were a "poll" instead of a "vote" then there should have
been
>"Rules for a Poll" posted here before such was taken. The reason there
>are guidelines and bylaws in this project is so that people can't make
>up rules in the middle of the game or as we go along. We, as CC's,
>deserve that protection.
There aren't too many entities I know of that can protect folks from
not using the brain cells they had at birth and have supposedly gained
since.
Most folks know what a poll is and what a vote is. I clearly stated
this was a POLL. Most folks know what rules for polls are - someone
asks a series of questions and either give the respondent an open
ended answer or a series of choices to select from.
I chose the latter - but also allowed for those who wished to send
comments - ie open ended poll.
By doing so by poll and comments I learned what those who
responded wished me to know regarding the question asked.
>I don't know how you know that four more people would have voted one way
>or another IF they had been available to vote, but if that were to
>matter there could have been 20 other people who would have voted one
>way or another also that you aren't aware of.
I suppose she knows because folks told her. I agree Gloria nor
anyone else I'm aware of in the group, is clairvoyant.
>It is beside the point - the timing was chosen by SC. That isn't an
>issue.
>
>The issue is the "take" on the numbers in light of the present rules we
>are all supposed to be operating by.
There are no 'rules' for polls. The NC himself has used polls, the AB
did a poll of the North Carolina CCs a couple of years ago - I doubt
the North Carolina CCs were given rules - they were asked a series
of questions.
>In doing a quick search on Google I found the following information
>concerning parliamentary procedure on votes and/or polls.
We could do everything, every move made by looking for rules somewhere
to govern every action - why would you want to make it difficult to
ascertain anything? This project is not Laws 101.
I realize some would wish it that way - but why one would wish
to complicate CCs lives for little or no gain in data on web sites
defies logic.
>Majority - The number greater than half the votes cast - agreed
>Abstention - Means going along with the will of the majority - crock
>
>If you see in the GAGenWeb Guidelines or the USGenWeb Project Bylaws, a
>definition of the difference in a "poll" and a "vote", could you
point
>that out to us please?
I believe Webster can do that just fine.
Tim
==== GAGEN Mailing List ====
This list is for coordinators of the GAGenWeb Project. If you wish to
address only
the GAGenWeb Board, send your email to:
<GAGENWEB-L(a)rootsweb.com>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (
http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.661 / Virus Database: 424 - Release Date: 4/19/2004