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
FYI - Tiny Correction.
>At 04:46 PM 8/1/02, you wrote:
>>(forwarding as requested)......--pig
>>*****
>>
>>HELP - I made an error on my election results and I'm due in a meeting
>>in 5 minutes that will last all afternoon. PLEASE send this correction
>>to all the regional lists and to ALL & the SC List.
>>
>>
>>Southeast Mid Atlantic Regional County Coordinator Representative:
>>Total
>>Votes: 163
>>Heather Jones DeGeorge: 22 13.50%
>>Jimmy Epperson: 56 34.35%
>>Diane Kelly: 37 22.70%
>>Tom Parker: 22 13.50%
>>Vickie Stevens: 26 15.95%:
>>Run-off between: Jimmy Epperson and Diane Kelly
First, I say no limit. Though I do kind of see what you were saying. However,
ear had a good idea, if problems should occur we could then go with
de-seating. But, I think we have a good SC now.
Now, why fix what isn't broken? I'm talking about rules. We have done pretty
good without a bunch of rules, so why worry???
Terry
Ellen Pack wrote:
> Hi, Folks -
>
> I've been working on updating the CC Guidelines, mostly for the benefit of
> prospective CCs. I'm including a little blurb on the responsibilities of
> the SC, and would like some input.
>
> MSGW has never placed term limitations on a SC, so theoretically the term
> is for "life." We've been lucky in having mostly good SCs, but if we ever
> get a lousy SC in, we might wish we had some limit. Or maybe you're ready
> for a change now. <g>
>
> I think most states that have limitations, have placed it at two years,
> which seems reasonable. Thoughts? Ideas? Do you want a limitation? How
> much? No limitation? Can current/past SC run again? It's up to y'all, so
> let me know your pleasure, and that's what it'll be. We'll go with
> whatever the majority that speaks up, comes up with.
>
> When the updated guidelines are done, I'll post them, and if there are any
> questions/problems, let me know. Most changes are minor, involving format,
> and nothing is set in stone.
>
> For the record, while we must have some basic guidelines, I am personally
> opposed to tons of rules/state by-laws, and the like. Our MSGW Guidelines
> are really nothing more than a memorialization of policies and practices
> that have evolved in MSGW since it's inception, many of which were first
> implemented by our good friend and founder, Rich Hollar. They've worked
> well for us, so I hope that's the way we can keep it. (Now Rich, don't go
> getting the big head. <g>)
>
> Thanks!
>
> Ellen
--
****************************************
Teresa (Terry) Reed-Davis
Mercer, IL http://www.rootsweb.com/~ilmercer/
Lee, MS http://www.rootsweb.com/~mslee/
My personal pages - main
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/2134/
*****************************************
"Onwards and Upwards" - The only way to go
Looks like we are in agreement generally and that the issue(s) will be
resolved post haste, if not sooner. Ken, thanks for the rationale on one
CC, one vote - very logical and acceptable to me. I was thinking along the
lines of stock ownership and what constitutes controlling interest ;-o I
guess that's okay for business, but not for a bunch of volunteers having
fun.
No term limits is also an acceptable policy, as long as we don't slip into
complacency and take for granted those who serve.
How about a KISS ? (Keep It Short & Simple)
Bill Ward
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Hollingsworth" <goula.boy(a)verizon.net>
To: <MSGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 2:29 PM
Subject: Re: [MSGEN] SC Tenure
> Howdy Fokes,
> Just a quicky here at noon - I like Rose's idea, sorta (same book
Clare
> uses) ;-)
> Bill has some good ideas and thoughts on the issue as well - sorta.
> I do not believe it fair that each county have a vote, but each CC.
What's
> fair about
> me having 6 votes? Nothing.
> 1- No term limits (we don't need to do elections every year or two)
> 2- Majority (51% of those that respond) to remove a run-a-muck SC.
>
> In other words, if something happens to effect our relationship (sc/cc),
we
> will have
> rules that TELL us what is required to remove the SC. Bill, it's not a
rule
> to govern
> or order you to do one thing or another, just guidelines that tells us
what
> is required.
> Better now that when we need it and don't know.
> More later if I think of it.
> Ken Hollingsworth
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Upgrade Outlook® - Add COLOR to your Emails
Outlook® is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corporation
For the past 47 years, I have been an Amateur Radio Operator and
sometimes-member of the American Radio Relay League (ARRL) with members in
almost every country in the world. This activity is governed by rules and
policies of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). One of the basic
tenents of our hobby is that we are "self-policing", which has resulted in
very little intrusion by FCC staffers over the years. This "self-policing"
practice has worked so well that the FCC turned over the license examination
process to volunteers/members of the Amateur Radio community, even
permitting us to select the actual questions that are used in the
examinations which are updated as technology advances.
Big deal, you say. And how does this apply to the question at hand?
Re-read the last paragraph in Ellen's message to us. The bottom line is
that unless you are a control freak, Less Is More. The less we put in
writing, the less we worry about interpretation. Since the inception of
MSGW we have basically operated this way, with few problems that couldn't be
resolved with dialogue. For me, acting as a CC is a hobby activity, not a
job, and it's supposed to be fun. Let's not make it a chore.
Sure, set limitations to the period of service to any arbitrary number of
years. Two are okay. And let a candidate run as many times as he or she
wants. It gives us the opportunity to keep good people in and let
not-so-good people go.
I also like a little used concept of counting every member/CC as a vote,
whether he or she responds to a call for vote or not. For example, ask a
question of all of us and tell us that if we are for it, no response is
necessary, but if we are against it, a negative response must be sent. Or
vice versa. Such a policy encourages voting activity, believe me.
That's my 2 cents. How 'bout yours?
Bill Ward
CC for Lafayette and Yalobusha Cos.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ellen Pack" <e.j.pack(a)telocity.com>
To: <MSGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 10:29 AM
Subject: [MSGEN] SC Tenure
> Hi, Folks -
>
> I've been working on updating the CC Guidelines, mostly for the benefit of
> prospective CCs. I'm including a little blurb on the responsibilities of
> the SC, and would like some input.
>
> MSGW has never placed term limitations on a SC, so theoretically the term
> is for "life." We've been lucky in having mostly good SCs, but if we ever
> get a lousy SC in, we might wish we had some limit. Or maybe you're
ready
> for a change now. <g>
>
> I think most states that have limitations, have placed it at two years,
> which seems reasonable. Thoughts? Ideas? Do you want a limitation? How
> much? No limitation? Can current/past SC run again? It's up to y'all,
so
> let me know your pleasure, and that's what it'll be. We'll go with
> whatever the majority that speaks up, comes up with.
>
> When the updated guidelines are done, I'll post them, and if there are any
> questions/problems, let me know. Most changes are minor, involving
format,
> and nothing is set in stone.
>
> For the record, while we must have some basic guidelines, I am personally
> opposed to tons of rules/state by-laws, and the like. Our MSGW Guidelines
> are really nothing more than a memorialization of policies and practices
> that have evolved in MSGW since it's inception, many of which were first
> implemented by our good friend and founder, Rich Hollar. They've worked
> well for us, so I hope that's the way we can keep it. (Now Rich, don't go
> getting the big head. <g>)
>
> Thanks!
>
> Ellen
>
>
>
>
>
FYI:
>Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 14:01:09 -0400
>From: <lhaasdav(a)mindspring.com>
>Subject: [STATE-COORD-L] USGenWeb Election Results
>To: STATE-COORD-L(a)rootsweb.com
>
>
>The 2002 Annual Election for Advisory Board
>Representatives is declared ended. The following are
>the results of the Election.
>
>For a Candidate to be declared the winner of their
>race they must have received over 50% of the votes
>cast in their race or be running unopposed. In those
>races where no Candidate received the majority of
>votes cast the Election Committee has declared a
>Run-Off Election.
>
>The Run-Off Election will begin Friday Aug 2 at
>9:00USGENWEB-ALL-L@rootsweb.com
>am CT and end Friday Aug 16 at 9:00 am CT.
>
>Passwords for the Run-Off election will be included in
>the EC's Election Results Announcement e-mail to be
>mailed later today.
>
>National Coordinator: Total Votes 465
> Richard Harrison: 221 47.53%
> Richard Pettys: 96 20.64%
> John Rigdon: 148 31.83%
>Run-off between: Richard Harrison and John Rigdon
>
>Special Project - Tombstone Representative:
> Joe Miller - Unopposed Total Votes 4
>The Election Committee hereby declares Joe Miller the
>winner.
>
>
>Northeast North Central Regional County Coordinator
>Representative:
> Jan Cortez - Unopposed Total Votes 79
>The Election Committee hereby declares Jan Cortez the
>winner.
>
>Northwest Plains Regional County Coordinator
>Representative:
>Total Votes 74
> Kelly Courtney-Blizzard: 18 24.32%
> Gail Myer Kilgore: 28 37.84%
> Bill Oliver: 28 37.84%
>Run-off between: Gail Myer Kilgore and Bill Oliver
>
>Southeast Mid Atlantic Regional County Coordinator
>Representative: Total Votes: 163
> Heather Jones DeGeorge: 22 13.50%
> Jimmy Epperson: 34 34.35%
> Diane Kelly: 37 22.70%
> Tom Parker: 22 13.50%
> Vickie Stevens: 26 15.95%
>Run-off between: Jimmy Epperson and Diane Kelly
>
>Southwest South Central Regional State Coordinator
>Representative: Total Votes 7
> Larry Flesher: 6
> Carolyn Ward 1
>The Election Committee hereby declares Larry Flesher
>the winner.
>
>Southwest South Central Regional County Coordinator
>Representative: Total Votes: 116
> Scott Burow: 24 20.69%
> Phyllis Rippee: 42 36.21%
> Roger Swafford: 23 19.83%
> Bettie Wood: 27 23.27%:
>Run-off between: Phyllis Rippee and Bettie Wood
>
>The Election Committee wishes to thank everyone who
>voted and the Candidates for their participation and
>willingness to serve.
>
>USGenWeb Project Election Committee
Hi, Folks -
I've been working on updating the CC Guidelines, mostly for the benefit of
prospective CCs. I'm including a little blurb on the responsibilities of
the SC, and would like some input.
MSGW has never placed term limitations on a SC, so theoretically the term
is for "life." We've been lucky in having mostly good SCs, but if we ever
get a lousy SC in, we might wish we had some limit. Or maybe you're ready
for a change now. <g>
I think most states that have limitations, have placed it at two years,
which seems reasonable. Thoughts? Ideas? Do you want a limitation? How
much? No limitation? Can current/past SC run again? It's up to y'all, so
let me know your pleasure, and that's what it'll be. We'll go with
whatever the majority that speaks up, comes up with.
When the updated guidelines are done, I'll post them, and if there are any
questions/problems, let me know. Most changes are minor, involving format,
and nothing is set in stone.
For the record, while we must have some basic guidelines, I am personally
opposed to tons of rules/state by-laws, and the like. Our MSGW Guidelines
are really nothing more than a memorialization of policies and practices
that have evolved in MSGW since it's inception, many of which were first
implemented by our good friend and founder, Rich Hollar. They've worked
well for us, so I hope that's the way we can keep it. (Now Rich, don't go
getting the big head. <g>)
Thanks!
Ellen
Hi, Folks -
I did a little browsing today, and found a few problems.
The following counties need to remove all the GC logos except for the query
logo:
Adams
Forrest
Hancock
Lafayette
Lamar
The following counties have old SC. Please change to my name
Ellen Pack e.j.pack(a)telocity.com
Issaquena
Marion
Pearl River
The following counties have no USGW or MSGW logos:
Jefferson Davis
Lawrence
Yalobusha
Overall, I think MS counties are terrific! But we need to keep the pages
fresh, so if your county is listed above, please drop everything
immediately, and fix it. <g>
Only kidding, of course - but maybe as soon as you have a chance. It'll
only take a few minutes.
Also, if you use mailmerge, please check to see if it's working
correctly. Recent RW server changes may have interfered. If so, let me
know, and I'll direct you to someone who can help you fix it.
Thanks!
Ellen