Hi,
I got to a computer today and was checking email. This came thru on the State
list - a bit late for the election, I'm afraid, but thought some of you would
be interested.
Many of you have expressed questions/concern about the various groups forming
that seem to be in opposition to USGenWeb in some ways. The rest of you will
want to ignore this email.
One of the USGenWeb CC's went to the domain registration sites and drew up a
chart from the registrations. She posted this email on USGENWEB-All and it
was reposted to the State Coord list. It appears to show a link between some
of most of these groups via the same person(s). The names Bill Oliver, Ginger
Cisewski - both of whom are running for National Office with USGenWeb this year
- appear. Other names appear of those who have been in the midst of some very
negative postings, who have formed their own "non-profit" groups that have
turned
out to be "for-profit" domains, and/or who have caused a great deal of
"discussion"
in the past for taking "USGenWeb" domain names, etc. Those of you who have
been in the Project a long time will undoubtedly remember the names of John
Rigdon, Jerry Dill, and Theresa "Merope" Lindquist.
If you're interested in the chart, the file you click below is a PDF file and
will require Adobe Acrobat to open it.
I'll be headed home this coming Thurs, a bit later than planned, and we will
meet my Billings' daughter & family in Bozeman for the Sweet Pea Festival
'doings'.
We'll be home on Sunday!
Corky
Subject: [USGENWEB-ALL-L] Some Clarifaction
Resent-Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 15:20:12 -0700
Resent-From: USGENWEB-ALL-L(a)rootsweb.com
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 18:15:17 -0400
From: "Laurel O'Donnell" <lod(a)zapix.com>
To: USGENWEB-ALL-L(a)rootsweb.com
Hello everyone,
I want to thank everyone for their responses to my email. both critical
and
supportive. All were mature and polite, thank you! Lets strive to
continue with in that vein. To reiterate, personal flames are
intolerable
and will be made public by me.
Unfortunately at this time I am about to embark on a five day sojourn to
Massachusetts and do not have time for individual responses as the
quantity
was indeed overwhelming. My on-line access will be questionable and
sporadic (and I have limited time now due to trip preparation) so I will
address a few general themes here that have been recurring in email
responses regarding the chart (
http://www.holyokemass.com/gen_orgs.pdf).
1. Regarding the scope of the chart, I addressed this in the initial
email and suggest rereading.
2. There have been remarks about the cited data. I took the
information
on the chart directly from web sites and through domain name whois
queries.
If the information is outdated (as many have claimed), it needs to be
updated and should be, for it is what people (like me) see. One would
expect any group or organization would desire to maintain the most
updated
infomation possible on any web site that represents them, especially if
some of the names have negative associations.
3. The info on the chart was copied and compiled on July 26-27. It was
accurately noted. I noticed some people have already made changes to
their
web sites, good for you! I did screen captures of the original pages
the
data was taken from and will try to upload these at some point upon my
return so it can be seen that I did not pointedly modify/skew anything.
4. I am not interpreting the data. It is a simple visual
representation.
I made no value judgement on it, just compiled it and suggested it
deserved
serious contemplation regarding motivational interests. It's up to the
individual to see it for what it is. Question it? Absolutely!
Interpretation is left to the viewer.
5. If a name is connected to a domain registration, one must assume the
person would have some essential involvement, hence the inclusion of
such
data. If the person is uninvolved, their name ought not appear at all I
should think.
6. People denoted on the chart were highly visible on the respective
sites, hence the inclusion. As many also happened to participate
actively
in email postings of a political nature here and elsewhere, this was
included because part of the objective for this chart was to establish a
simple and visual means of understanding the interrelationship (if any)
that exists among the multitude of on-line genealogical initiatives.
With
the active email lobbying occurring this election month, organizational
affiliations interested me, nothing more. Do not respond to this
comment
with outrage that all people/organizations are not included -- please
reread the original email -- I think I addressed it and will not respond
and waste subscribers time by belaboring the point with debate.
As I said in my prior post, I created this chart as a visual aid in an
attempt to personally understand the continued ongoing political
discussion
in order to become an educated, informed voter. It did help me
considerably, and hopefully has helped others too. But then, I think
being
an informed voter in any election is a serious responsibility, whether
it
be for the U.S. Presidency or otherwise.
I would certainly encourage the continuation of helpful posts with
historical notes and explanations provided by individuals who deem it
necessary.
Have a good week everyone,
Laurel O'Donnell
CC Hampden County, MA
http://www.rootsweb.com/~mahampde/