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
My my my! What a warm welcome you have extended to our newest NCGenWeb CC Daryl Lytton, Derick. He has never even posted a message to this list - yet you have posted your first message to him which does nothing but chastise and intimidate him. This being the exact same theme of your warm welcome message to me when I joined - to chastise and intimidate me when I also had done nothing wrong.
You encouraged me to read the USGenWeb Bylaws and the RootsWeb AUP, which I have done. To the best of my knowledge Daryl has done nothing against the AUP - but you have. "When you post to RootsWeb.com, you must either be the copyright holder (that basically means you wrote it), have written permission from the copyright holder...." You posted a message to this list that Daryl sent to you as a private message.
I believe you owe myself, Daryl, and this list an apology.
Maggie
--- "Derick S. Hartshorn" <derickh(a)charter.net> wrote:
>Daryl and all,
>
>Perhaps I didn't make myself clear in a previous post. Daryl has not
>been banned from the North Carolina Lists. If Daryl has been banned
>from the USGW-ALL-list, it is only because the list administrator of
>that list witnessed negative activity, contrary to the list AUP. The
>same thing applies to the NC lists. Should Daryl post material
>contrary to RootsWeb AUP or the USGW By-Laws, or contrary to the well->being of the NCGenWeb Project, including derogitory web pages, we will
>not hesitate to unsub him from the two lists he is currently
>subscribed to in this Project. Should Daryl continue to post anything
>derogatory regarding the USGW Project or make any overt challenges to
>the USGW authority (or those in legally constituted authority within
>this Project) he will be delinked from our project. This includes his
>separation from any county pages he currently is associated with. I
>think seven days notice is ample notification to bring this matter
>into compliance.
>
>--Derick (dated 17 Aug 2002)
>SC, NCGW
On Sat, 17 Aug 2002 Derick S. Hartshorn wrote:
> You sound to me like a chronic complainer.
Really? As far as I know, this is the first message I've posted to this list,
and am doing so only as a response to yours.
> Is there something about our authority that you
> detest?
Who is the "our" you mention? What I don't like, is a member of the AB,
unsubscribing someone from the USGenWeb-ALL list that they are the Admin of,
for a matter of them having a personal grudge with the person...me...as a form
of censorship. Ginger unsubscribed me for her personal interpretation of what
a USGenWeb member is, as her way to censor me, because I criticise the AB for
not following the Sturgis PP which they are to do according to the USGenWeb
Bylaws.
It is my personal belief, that in order to make the USGenWeb Project a better
one, that Everyone, including the AB, should stick to the Bylaws and
guidelines voted upon by the Members. Are you of the same belief?
I was certainly not the only one to criticise the AB, and I'm glad the new NC
has indicated he will do his best to change the things about the AB that
Members complain about...it means my complaints were justifiable :)
I am not a person afraid to make a stand against people who do not follow the
Bylaws & Guidelines. And any time a Member is unjustifable stomped on by a
'leader' I will leap to their defense.
> You are, and have constantly been, subscribed
> to the NCGENWEB-L and NCGENWEB-DISCUSS-L lists.
> You are NOT banned, nor have you been.
As you probably found out from reading Keith's message on the ALL list, no one
said I have been banned from any NCGenWeb list. If you have not read the
message, then I forgive you for making an issue out of it on this list.
> If you are the individual that masquerades as
> "NOMAD," please let us know....
No one masquerades as Nomad...Nomad is Nomad, and as you probably found out
from reading my message on the ALL list kindly forwarded by someone, that
we (WebRoots.org) provide disk space for our Members, that no WebRoots staff
or director has anything to do with Nomad's Rebuttal website, and that
WebRoots does not disclose personal info about our Members including their
real names. If you missed that message, then I forgive you for making an issue
about it on this list.
> If you have come to drive a wedge between the
> volunteers of the NCGenWen Project, please let
> us know.
Riiiiight...and I suppose you think that's the reason I volunteered to help
make Bath County a better website for the NCGenWeb?
>On Sat, 17 Aug 2002 Derick S. Hartshorn wrote:
>
> > IS DARYL BANNED???
>
>That's right Derick! From the ALL list, that is.
>It's because Ginger Hayes, the list admin, has a personal vendetta against
me....
I don't remember giving you permission to post a private message sent to you,
on a public list. As a USGenWeb leader, and as someone who has been around the
Net for some time, I would think that you would know better than to do so. Why
did you feel the need to post my private message to you, on this list? Is this
something I should complain to the AB about? This is certainly a no-no!
Daryl - dlytton(a)mindspring.com
Daryl and all,
Perhaps I didn't make myself clear in a previous post. Daryl has not been
banned from the North Carolina Lists. If Daryl has been banned from the
USGW-ALL-list, it is only because the list administrator of that list
witnessed negative activity, contrary to the list AUP. The same thing
applies to the NC lists. Should Daryl post material contrary to RootsWeb
AUP or the USGW By-Laws, or contrary to the well-being of the NCGenWeb
Project, including derogitory web pages, we will not hesitate to unsub him
from the two lists he is currently subscribed to in this Project. Should
Daryl continue to post anything derogatory regarding the USGW Project or
make any overt challenges to the USGW authority (or those in legally
constituted authority within this Project) he will be delinked from our
project. This includes his separation from any county pages he currently is
associated with. I think seven days notice is ample notification to bring
this matter into compliance.
--Derick (dated 17 Aug 2002)
SC, NCGW
>Daryl,
>
>You sound to me like a chronic complainer. Is there something about our
>authority that you detest?
>You are, and have constantly been, subscribed to the NCGENWEB-L and
>NCGENWEB-DISCUSS-L lists. You are NOT banned, nor have you been. Ginger
>Hayes has nothing to do with our lists. We have received messages from you
>since you first came on-board, in June, 2002.
>If you are the individual that masquerades as "NOMAD," please let us know
>and we will be happy to explain in detail the tenets of our organization.
>We don't need dissension--God knows we have had enough in the NCGenWeb
>Project to last us a lifetime. If you have come to drive a wedge between
>the volunteers of the NCGenWen Project, please let us know. We will stand
>together to try and make the the USGenWeb Project the greatest ever--with
>or without your help. We don't need newcomers in the Project who have
>their own personal agenda to promote. We are the USGenWeb and we have
>had--and will continue to have, a provider for our project, whether or not
>that provider is webroots, ncroots, usgennet or whatever server takes
>money to operate. Get with it! There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
>
>--Derick
>.
>
>At 10:16 PM 8/17/02, you wrote:
>>On Sat, 17 Aug 2002 Derick S. Hartshorn wrote:
>>
>> > IS DARYL BANNED???
>>
>>That's right Derick! From the ALL list, that is. It's because Ginger Hayes,
>>the list admin, has a personal vendetta against me and she figures as long as
>>I can't post to the ALL list, that I can't bring the matter to the attention
>>of the USGenWeb Members, that I'm being censored.
>>
>>The reason she has a problem with me, is because I've posted messages on the
>>ALL list, criticising the AB for not following the Sturgis PP, as they are
>>supposed to do according to the USGenWeb Bylaws. And...Ginger is on the AB.
>>
>>When I complained to Holly Timm about this, she said the ALL list is "a list
>>free from the control or dictates of the management of the USGenWeb Project."
>>As if I'm to stupid to know Ginger is on the AB :)
>>
>>Daryl - dlytton(a)mindspring.com
Daryl,
You sound to me like a chronic complainer. Is there something about our
authority that you detest?
You are, and have constantly been, subscribed to the NCGENWEB-L and
NCGENWEB-DISCUSS-L lists. You are NOT banned, nor have you been. Ginger
Hayes has nothing to do with our lists. We have received messages from you
since you first came on-board, in June, 2002.
If you are the individual that masquerades as "NOMAD," please let us know
and we will be happy to explain in detail the tenets of our organization.
We don't need dissension--God knows we have had enough in the NCGenWeb
Project to last us a lifetime. If you have come to drive a wedge between
the volunteers of the NCGenWen Project, please let us know. We will stand
together to try and make the the USGenWeb Project the greatest ever--with
or without your help. We don't need newcomers in the Project who have their
own personal agenda to promote. We are the USGenWeb and we have had--and
will continue to have, a provider for our project, whether or not that
provider is webroots, ncroots, usgennet or whatever server takes money to
operate. Get with it! There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
--Derick
.
At 10:16 PM 8/17/02, you wrote:
>On Sat, 17 Aug 2002 Derick S. Hartshorn wrote:
>
> > IS DARYL BANNED???
>
>That's right Derick! From the ALL list, that is. It's because Ginger Hayes,
>the list admin, has a personal vendetta against me and she figures as long as
>I can't post to the ALL list, that I can't bring the matter to the attention
>of the USGenWeb Members, that I'm being censored.
>
>The reason she has a problem with me, is because I've posted messages on the
>ALL list, criticising the AB for not following the Sturgis PP, as they are
>supposed to do according to the USGenWeb Bylaws. And...Ginger is on the AB.
>
>When I complained to Holly Timm about this, she said the ALL list is "a list
>free from the control or dictates of the management of the USGenWeb Project."
>As if I'm to stupid to know Ginger is on the AB :)
>
>Daryl - dlytton(a)mindspring.com
Hi folks,
Having been around here for a while, I feel it is my right to speak out,
regardless of what position or opinion I might have in any genealogical web
entity or server support activity. I speak as an individual, the CC of
Burke and Catawba County, NCGenWeb pages and speak in no official position.
Please be advised that I have no axe to grind, nor do I have any financial
attachment to my activities whatsoever. I neither charge for my services
nor do I use genealogy to supplement my income. I have absolutely nothing
against anyone who might charge for professional services--by no means. My
gripe is directed to those who still believe in a free lunch. Those who
leave a dime for a tip in a diner are the same kind of people who probably
expect somebody else to underwrite their activities.
If I didn't know better, I'd swear that the DBS was back. I don't know what
malcontent wrote this diatribe against the Representation of our
organization (NC, AB, Projects, etc), but since the day that Horace Peele
tried to abolish all the By-laws and officers of the USGW, we have been
edging toward anarchy by a few odd individuals. Its really, deja vu, all
over again. Suddenly we see this "completely independent" entity called
WebRoots and now this sour-grape diatribe. The only identifying entity,
using the pseudonym "nomad" seems to have created the entire page and has
taken ALL-L communications and has directly quoted them in this so-called
rebuttal page. This person continually uses words like "We" and "the
author." If this anonymous person can't reveal his or her name, his/her
arguments and rebuttals don't amount to a pile of dog poop. I'm sure that
RootsWeb could take action against this entity for violating their Policy
(check archives for "UP").
The following may apply to you but the decision is strictly that of
RootsWeb. Your posting to the USGW-ALL-L becomes the domain of RootsWeb and
may be subject their AUP.
You own your posts. When you post messages to mailing lists, message
boards, and other facilities at RootsWeb, those posts remain your property
under copyright law.
You should not decrease the enjoyment of others. Your posts should not
flame or otherwise harass other users and should be reasonably on topic for
the areas where they appear, and you should otherwise adhere to the
principles of netiquette. Information about netiquette is available on many
Internet sites.
RootsWeb.com may refuse service. RootsWeb.com may revoke the violator's
right to use part or all of the RootsWeb.com site for violations of this
agreement, or other policies posted on the RootsWeb.com or MyFamily.com,
Inc. websites.
We have seen attackers and frauds like "familydiscovery" and their ilk,
trying to masquerade as an all-inclusive, free, genealogical service. Many
of them merely use the links of others. Some rip off existing material.
Some even charge a "subscription fee." Some copy out-of-print books
(copyright?--don't ask me) and post them. The whole thing seems to boil
down to "What server shall we use?" and "We want a free and independent
server." Never mind that servers don't grow on trees and computers aren't
powered by the sun. At least, not yet.
Many folks have heard complaints about the relationship between USGW and
RootsWeb but very few of the new folks in our Project are acquainted with
the real history of our beginnings. Even though most CC's have the
boilerplate history of the USGW, KYGW, yada, yada, posted on their home
pages, they don't have a clue where the Project was housed in the very
beginning. Nor do they have any concept of the sacrifices of time and money
to maintain the expenses of our early beginnings. Very few are aware of the
early sacrifices. These folks had a dream of free genealogical resources
for the masses. Unfortunately, there were those who saw a way to achieve
self-aggrandizement and refused to support the Project financially.
The whole story, in a nut shell, is an extension of the work of Larry
Stephens and Dr. Brian Leverich and wife, Karen Isaacson. The genealogical
cooperative was assumed by them as an all-volunteer genealogical data
repository. Brian was spending up to $60k out of his own pocket, just to
maintain the Project. Larry was the list genius and Karen was the founder
of Roots Surname List (RSL), through her spare-time work at the Rand
Corp. They were the original server provider. All updates were posted to
Usenet, something that we don't often use now. RSL has been replaced by the
many lists we use today (25,000+ free ones). Nice when someone else foots
the bill, huh? Pretty soon, all three of these genealogical web pioneers,
and a few others who had come on-board to help create the databases, were
operating the first big genealogical web presence. When a hobby begins to
consume the bulk of the household income and time, a new solution needs to
be found. For a while, they tried to support the structure of the new
RootsWeb through donations. They had been providing free pages, lists and
tech. support for as long as they could. Personally, I felt it the right
thing to donate an annual stipend, as I was able. They faithfully hosted my
web page--and continue to, to this day!
Along came Ancestry.com (recently becoming the de facto leader in
genealogical software, publishing, book selling, on-line subscription
services) They posted an agreement to the effect that the RootsWeb segment
would continue to operate independently and would enjoy free sponsorship
for any and all XXGW pages and that none of their data would be burned to
CDs, etc. (See archives for exact wording.) Like hundreds of others, I host
my pages on RootsWeb servers--all 4,000+ of them. Those who had previously
been donors could opt out of page ads. In any case, RootsWeb continues to
offer free hosting of XXGW web pages.
The early folks who expected free page hosting, free lists, and the ability
to advertise their wares suddenly became hostile to the idea of an
"outsider" (or "white knight") picking up the tab. They feared that this
benefactor might pre-empt their goal of becoming a major local web presence
"Supreme Genealogical Guru" (read: warlord). Bear in mind, the loudest,
most disruptive voices belonged to those who provided absolute minimum
support to the original concept and the expenses therein incurred. To this
day, their lukewarm support for the USGW Project is evidenced by a minimum
of compliance to the Logo Amendment (Article IX. Guidelines/Standards For
Websites/Members: Section 1) on their web pages. Some have even had the
audacity to run for elective office in the USGW!!!!
Suddenly, we can identify over half a dozen organizations that compete on
the basis that "they" are the true FREE pages. Sounds like they are
proclaiming themselves to be "protectors of the database." Its really sad
that some have tried to become the de facto spokesmen for "free genealogy"
projects, while at the same time, rejecting the current USGW structure.
Anyone who chooses to track these "empire builders" can use any of several
"domain whois" lookups. The owners of these domains might just surprise
you.You might have even seen their names on the USGW ballot.
Anyway, RootsWeb (and the parent companies) agreed to sustain the USGW, as
a freely sponsored, independent genealogical data cooperative with free
hosting and free lists. Today, the genealogical community enjoys the use of
over 25,000 different genealogical, historic, ethnic and
geographically-oriented lists and a majority of the USGW county pages. And
all this was done, IN PERPETUITY, as evidenced by archived agreements. The
only real change was the replacement of GenConnect with Ancestry query
boards. This was the final straw for some of the more vocal members,
especially since it came without any warning. I'm sure that RootsWeb
learned from this faux pas, which even I had serious concerns.
The bottom line is: "There is no such thing as a free lunch." Somebody has
to pay the bills. X amount of hardware and software is necessary to support
our magnificent effort. And how about the time and effort involved in
making certain that the system works (like the electricity you expect your
power company to provide?) Who pays the bills for electricity, software,
hardware, p[hone calls, etc.? Do you have their word? As far as the folks
that pay OUR bills, we have their promise, in writing. What do the others
GUARANTEE? A big public company like HOME, Inc.? 'Fraid not, they went
belly up. How about those connected to WorldCom? HA HA!
In short, I trust that these folks have been up-front in their objectives.
Ancestry/MyFamily exists to make a profit. Isn't that the American dream?
What do you suppose are the motives of these sometimes-disgraced, former
USGW members who now are registered as look-alike domain owners???? In
short, I trust this USGW organization of folks who share the same
objectives I do. We achieve that by sticking together. I'm not in this
thing to make a name for myself. I would much rather be free to pursue the
things that I enjoy most in life: researching, writing and indexing.
My challenge is to the anonymous author of
http://www.member-webroots.org/rebuttals/ab.htm
If you really think you have a valid argument, come forward with your REAL
NAME and we can have an intelligent debate. Please don't use the Lord's
name in your defense. You seriously blaspheme His name. My name is Derick
S. Hartshorn. What's your's????
Our newest Asst. State Coordinator, NCGenWeb Project, Angie Rayfield, is
currently composing a CC Home Page--a page devoted to the lives and
activities of our CCs. We don't need anonymous detractors. We need the
cooperative efforts of all members to make this the absolutely, #1,
superior source for FREE genealogical information.
How soon before the contributors/volunteers of the XXGW get sick and tired
of this stupid sniping, disruptive crap??????
Best wishes to all true supporters of the USGW,
--Derick
At 04:25 PM 8/17/02, BeaufortGenWeb wrote:
>Hi, It is not a new subject. I know it has been discussed before.
>
>However there is a site that i think explains the lopsided representation
>much better than i could.
>The link it at: http://www.member-webroots.org/rebuttals/ab.htm
>
>diane
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Kathy Heidel" <kheidel(a)tri.net>
>To: <USGENWEB-ALL-L(a)rootsweb.com>
>Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 9:35 AM
>Subject: Re: [ALL-L] Official Recount Election Results
>
>
> > I don't quite know what you are trying to state Diane, but in Kansas for
> > instance there are 2 SC's and 1 ASC for 105 potential CC's. So yes it
>would
> > take fewer votes to elect a SC considering there would only be approx. 15
> > SC's in any given region.
> > Kathy
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "BeaufortGenWeb" <y8g3n2ws(a)coastalnet.com>
> > To: <USGENWEB-ALL-L(a)rootsweb.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 1:09 AM
> > Subject: Re: [ALL-L] Official Recount Election Results
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Yes that is true, i noticed that it only takes about 7 to 11 votes to
> > elect
> > > a SC rep.
> > > Surely this proves something about representation on the AB.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > > diane
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Keith Giddeon" <keith(a)giddeon.com>
> > > To: <USGENWEB-ALL-L(a)rootsweb.com>
> > > Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2002 1:57 AM
> > > Subject: RE: [ALL-L] Official Recount Election Results
> > >
> > >
> > > > Diane,
> > > >
> > > > Judging by the number of votes, I would say this is a CC Rep seat. I
> > doubt
> > > > there are that many SCs and ASCs in any region.
> > > >
> > > > --Keith
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: BeaufortGenWeb [mailto:y8g3n2ws@coastalnet.com]
> > > > > Sent: Friday, August 16, 2002 11:24 PM
> > > > > To: USGENWEB-ALL-L(a)rootsweb.com
> > > > > Subject: Fw: [ALL-L] Official Recount Election Results
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I have two election results below -one for the primaries and one
> > > > > for the run
> > > > > off.
> > > > >
> > > > > In the final runoff, Phyllis is elected for SC Rep
> > > > >
> > > > > In the Primaries she was named a Finalist as a CC rep
> > > > >
> > > > > Can anyone advise me which is correct. I am making a chart.
> > > > >
> > > > > Congrats to the winners!
> > > > >
> > > > > thanks,
> > > > > diane
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Linda Haas Davenport" <lhaasdav(a)mindspring.com>
> > > > > To: <USGENWEB-ALL-L(a)rootsweb.com>
> > > > > Sent: Friday, August 16, 2002 6:59 PM
> > > > > Subject: [ALL-L] Official Recount Election Results
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > The Re-count of votes is completed therefore;
> > > > > > The 2002 Run-Off Election for Advisory Board
> > > > > > Representatives is declared ended. The following are
> > > > > > the results of the Run-Off Election.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Southwest South Central Regional State Coordinator
> > > > > > Representative:
> > > > > > Total Votes: 87
> > > > > > Phyllis Rippee: 45
> > > > > > Bettie Wood: 42
> > > > > > The Election Committee hereby declares Phyllis Rippee
> > > > > > the winner.
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Linda Haas Davenport" <lhaasdav(a)mindspring.com>
> > > > > To: <USGENWEB-ALL-L(a)rootsweb.com>
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 8:46 PM
> > > > > Subject: [ALL-L] Corrected Election Results and Apology
> > > > >
> > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ==== USGENWEB-ALL Mailing List ====
> > > > > The USGenWeb Project is not a commercial project.
> > > > > ---
The National Election Committee has begun accepting voter registration via
online forms.
To register to vote in the next election, you may register here:
http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgwelections/register.html
As I understand it, Co-host may vote in all national elections.
Like the website indicates..."don't be left out."
diane
Why have Albemarle and Bath counties been de-linked from the NCGenWeb counties selection page and now listed as "Adopt Me" counties? I know for a fact that both of those counties have CC's that have not given them up. What seems to be the problem?
Maggie
On Monday, August 5, 2002, at 03:11 PM, Maggie Olson
<maggieo(a)member-webroots.org> wrote:
> I think it best that I send your message to Daryl's addy so that he may
> reply to you. It doesn't appear he is subbed to this list.
Good idea. Perhaps he can explain why this "nonprofit public benefit
corporation," which lists its mailing address as P.O. Box 143 -
Cortero - AZ - 85652-0143, is not, according ot the AZ Secretary of
State, a registered charitable organization in the state of Arizona, nor
is there a record of it in the office of the Arizona Corporation
Commission.
At this point, I surely wouldn't send Webroots any money, and if I were
you, I'd check my credit card statement very carefully, or if you wrote
a check, see who cashed or deposited it.
-Sandy
--- "Marty" <marty(a)ec.rr.com> wrote:
>Am I correct in thinking that they usually use some kind of program to
>spider the source code? So it would be better, then, not to provide a
>link to the email address, but just let the user copy/paste into their
>email program?
Yes - you are correct on both points. But if you have pages with lots of "mailto:" links there is something else you can do instead of changing all those links. Use your text editor to find/replace all of the "@" in the email addys with "& # 64" which is the HTML code for "@". In this message I put a blank space between the & and the # and the 64 so in case you are viewing this in HTML mode it will show. In your webpage though, remove those spaces and don't include the quote marks. Using the HTML code for the "@" will confuse the email harvesting program all to heck! :)
Maggie
--- Sandy <teylu(a)mac.com> wrote:
>
>Good idea. Perhaps he can explain why this "nonprofit public benefit
>corporation," which lists its mailing address as P.O. Box 143 -
>Cortero - AZ - 85652-0143, is not, according ot the AZ Secretary of
>State, a registered charitable organization in the state of Arizona,
>nor is there a record of it in the office of the Arizona Corporation
>Commission.
I am sure we will hear from Daryl soon. He is a very busy person. But I
can verify what you said - WebRoots, Inc., is not an Arizona Corp.
Maggie
Maggie,
If there is a rule about political discussion on NCGENWEB-DISCUSS,
it must be relatively new. I don't recall any mention of said rule when
Derick sent a message to this list on 29 June 2002 with the subject line
"USGW elections-a public letter to John Rigdon". The message was quite
political and opposed to Rigdon's position, including Derick's opinion of
the "touchy-feely stuff" on Rigdon's campaign page.
Of course, an alternative hypothesis is that there might be a double
standard on political messages, dependent on the opinion of our leadership.
Leah
Stanly Co.
lcsims(a)eskimo.com
On Tue, 6 Aug 2002, Maggie Olson wrote:
> Why was she not supposed to mention someone making it to the run-offs?
>I was told by the North Carolina powers-that-be, "I assumed that you were
>familiar with the By-laws of the USGW....I perhaps failed to impress upon
>you that simple common sense would preclude posting testimonials for a
>candidate for the SE/MA Advisory Board."
>So - I read the USGenWeb bylaws, the RootsWeb List AUP, the RootsWeb Tips
>For Listoners, and looked all over the North Carolina website. I could
>not find anywhere the "simple common sense" rule that says we are not
>allowed to post congratulations or political messages supporting our
>home-state girl for making it to the AB run-offs; or any other political
>messages. I asked the powers-that-be to please let me know where that
>"simple common sense" rule was located and have not heard back from them.
--- Marty wrote:
> Whoa guys...
> What's going on with this list?
Hello Marty! I have no idea. I don't understand why I was unsubscribed, and chastised, for breaking rules. My copy of this list subscription confirmation message has no list rules at all.
> Why was Maggie unsubscribed for mentioning Web Roots?
From: NCGENWEB-DISCUSS-L-request(a)rootsweb.com
To: maggieo(a)member-webroots.org
Subject: Re: unsubscribe maggieo(a)member-webroots.org
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 17:42:55 -0600
The reason I got for this unsubscribe was, "I, as list admin on a RootsWeb hosted list have been reminded by them that solicitations of any nature violate their terms of service."
I had to have a RootsWeb expert quote parts of the official RootsWeb AUP and Tips For Listowners, to the North Carolina powers-that-be, that showed not only was my post proper but it is also encouraged to post information about websites that pertain to the list it is posted on. WebRoots has many old books online that pertain to this state, and I certainly did not ask anyone to donate money to them. I was then resubscribed without a word.
> Why was she not supposed to mention someone making it to the run-offs?
I was told by the North Carolina powers-that-be, "I assumed that you were familiar with the By-laws of the USGW....I perhaps failed to impress upon you that simple common sense would preclude posting testimonials for a candidate for the SE/MA Advisory Board."
So - I read the USGenWeb bylaws, the RootsWeb List AUP, the RootsWeb Tips For Listoners, and looked all over the North Carolina website. I could not find anywhere the "simple common sense" rule that says we are not allowed to post congratulations or political messages supporting our home-state girl for making it to the AB run-offs; or any other political messages. I asked the powers-that-be to please let me know where that "simple common sense" rule was located and have not heard back from them.
Just because I am on this list as an old lady with cataracts does not mean I am stupid and blind!
> I sent a message a few days ago asking for some advice about how to
> block the harvesting of email addresses on our sites for use by
> spammers.
A lot of harvesters look for the "mailto:" tag in your HTML. It helps to leave that out and just list the email addy.
Maggie
At 02:29 PM 8/6/02, Marty wrote:
>Whoa guys...
>What's going on with this list?
>Why was Maggie unsubscribed for mentioning Web Roots?
What makes you think she was?
>Why was she not supposed to mention someone making it to the run-offs?
Nothing of the sort. You have been misinformed
--Derick
Whoa guys...
What's going on with this list?
Why was Maggie unsubscribed for mentioning Web Roots?
Why was she not supposed to mention someone making it to the run-offs?
I sent a message a few days ago asking for some advice about how to block
the harvesting of email addresses on our sites for use by spammers. That
message never made it to the list. I don't know why. Was it inappropriate
content?
What are the rules?
Who's making the rules?
Marty Holland
marty(a)ec.rr.com
Currituck County CC
--- Sandy <teylu(a)mac.com> wrote:
>
>Hi Maggie,
>With all due respect, I don't think "fame and glory" is an issue. The
>http://www.webroots.org website says that WebRoots, Inc. is "A
>Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation." It solicits donations via
>credit card through PayPal, without providing any physical address,
>phone number - or even so much as the name of a person. Perhaps I'm
>just overly "cautious," but many of us in NCGenWeb remember the days
>of the so-called "nonprofit" Rootsweb Genealogical Data Cooperative...
>which turned out to be anything but. ;-) I would need to know a good
>bit more information before sending money via the internet to a
>completely unknown entity claiming to be a nonprofit. I notice the
>site is registered to Daryl Lytton in California. If this is the same
>Daryl Lytton now co-hosting our Bath County site which Terria gave up,
>perhaps he can tell us more about WebRoots, Inc?
I don't think you are being overly cautious at all. Especially as you noted, the RootsWeb situation, and I note, the many USGenWeb clones. I think it best that I send your message to Daryl's addy so that he may reply to you. It doesn't appear he is subbed to this list.
>As far as I know there's never been a "policy" concerning CC
>participation, rather the level of participation has always been a
>matter of personal choice, and, for my part at any rate, I'd want it
>to remain personal choice....Our main participation, of course, has
>always been in the area of research and websites....Given that you're
>subbed to this list, I can only assume you were appropriately informed.
>As a new volunteer to NCGenWeb, did you feel there was some
>information that was "lacking"?
Yes but that may be due to the change of leadership and the new leadership hasn't yet gotten around to formalizing introducing new volunteers to the NCGenWeb. It was quite confusing for me as I found myself dealing with four people to get myself going here, instead of just one person. And then after my very first message I found myself unsubscribed from this list because I had told about the new website for North Carolina (among other areas) researchers, WebRoots. For my second message where I congratulated our home-state girl for making it to the USGenWeb run-off election I was chastised for talking USGenWeb politics on this USGenWeb list. In the 'Welcome' message for this list there are no rules as to what can and cannot be posted to the list.
Maggie
If anyone would like the election results (before the run-off), please
write me.
I apologize for failure to do so before. And if Diane Kelly is worried that
folks won't be aware she is a "home state" girl is running for South East /
Mid-Atlantic CC Rep, her page is
at http://www.usgennet.org/usa/nc/county/beaufort/election.htm
She is running against SW Regional Coordinator for GAGenWeb, Jimmy
Epperson. His page is at
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~eppy/USGenWeb/
And by all means, PLEASE VOTE.
At 12:59 AM 8/4/02, you wrote:
>Since you seem interested in our problems, I have an *insight for you.....to
>add to the others we have sent....
>Would you believe that Derick is so concerned with protecting his own
>*ego-driven personal agenda, that he refused to send the election RESULTS
>to our
>required state list?
>
>The only reason (I can guess) was because he didn't want the CCs here, to
>have any idea that a home state girl might be in the running for an elected
>position at the national level.
--- Sandy <teylu(a)mac.com> wrote:
>
>Hi Maggie,
>With all due respect, I don't think "fame and glory" is an issue. The
>http://www.webroots.org website says that WebRoots, Inc. is "A
>Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation." It solicits donations via
>credit card through PayPal, without providing any physical address,
>phone number - or even so much as the name of a person. Perhaps I'm
>just overly "cautious," but many of us in NCGenWeb remember the days
>of the so-called "nonprofit" Rootsweb Genealogical Data Cooperative...
>which turned out to be anything but. ;-) I would need to know a good
>bit more information before sending money via the internet to a
>completely unknown entity claiming to be a nonprofit. I notice the
>site is registered to Daryl Lytton in California. If this is the same
>Daryl Lytton now co-hosting our Bath County site which Terria gave up,
>perhaps he can tell us more about WebRoots, Inc?
I don't think you are being overly cautious at all. Especially as you noted, the RootsWeb situation, and I note, the many USGenWeb clones. I think it best that I send your message to Daryl's addy so that he may reply to you. It doesn't appear he is subbed to this list.
>As far as I know there's never been a "policy" concerning CC
>participation, rather the level of participation has always been a
>matter of personal choice, and, for my part at any rate, I'd want it
>to remain personal choice....Our main participation, of course, has
>always been in the area of research and websites....Given that you're
>subbed to this list, I can only assume you were appropriately informed.
>As a new volunteer to NCGenWeb, did you feel there was some
>information that was "lacking"?
Yes but that may be due to the change of leadership and the new leadership hasn't yet gotten around to formalizing introducing new volunteers to the NCGenWeb. It was quite confusing for me as I found myself dealing with four people to get myself going here, instead of just one person. And then after my very first message I found myself unsubscribed from this list because I had told about the new website for North Carolina (among other areas) researchers, WebRoots. For my second message where I congratulated our home-state girl for making it to the USGenWeb run-off election I was chastised for talking USGenWeb politics on this USGenWeb list. In the 'Welcome' message for this list there are no rules as to what can and cannot be posted to the list.
Maggie
On Saturday, August 3, 2002, at 03:51 PM, Maggie Olson
<maggieo(a)member-webroots.org> wrote:
> None of the organizers names are listed on any of their main pages.
> They seem to be more interested in their project than in fame and glory
> for themselves. A check on the domain name shows they have their own
> servers independant of any other genealogy org such as USGenNet, AHGP,
> and USGW.org. Their snail-mail address is in Arizona.
Hi Maggie,
With all due respect, I don't think "fame and glory" is an issue. The
http://www.webroots.org website says that WebRoots, Inc. is "A Nonprofit
Public Benefit Corporation." It solicits donations via credit card
through PayPal, without providing any physical address, phone number -
or even so much as the name of a person.
Perhaps I'm just overly "cautious," but many of us in NCGenWeb remember
the days of the so-called "nonprofit" Rootsweb Genealogical Data
Cooperative...which turned out to be anything but. ;-)
I would need to know a good bit more information before sending money
via the internet to a completely unknown entity claiming to be a
nonprofit.
I notice the site is registered to Daryl Lytton in California. If this
is the same Daryl Lytton now co-hosting our Bath County site which
Terria gave up, perhaps he can tell us more about WebRoots, Inc ?
> I perhaps should have mentioned in my original message that they are
> not another USGenWeb clone
Perhaps not....but WebRoots, Inc. does have another server at
http://www.usgenweb.us/
which it states is "For the exclusive use of USGenWeb WebPages." Not
quite sure what this is all about, but the main page states: "Until this
Project is turned over to the USGenWeb the server is being managed by
WebRoots, Inc., a nonprofit public benefit corporation."
I have probably just missed something, but I hadn't heard about this
www.usgenweb.us
which also solicits donations via credit card and PayPal.
I see that NCGenWeb's Bath County site is now hosted there at
http://www.usgenweb.us/project/ncbath/
so here again, if you don't know more about this, perhaps Daryl can fill
us in.
If we had more information, perhaps this is a server that might be added
to our listings of webspace options for volunteers.
> Since I am new to the list I don't know what the policy is when it
> comes to the CC's level of participation in decision making. Do you
> know if SC's every once in a while send out messages on the announce
> list inviting CC's to the discuss list? In other words, are the CC's
> ever encouraged to participate?
As far as I know there's never been a "policy" concerning CC
participation, rather the level of participation has always been a
matter of personal choice, and, for my part at any rate, I'd want it to
remain personal choice. I've certainly always felt welcome to
participate in whatever degree I wished. Our main participation, of
course, has always been in the area of research and websites. We do
receive periodic messages on NCGenWeb-L letting us know when discussions
are being held on Discuss, or suggesting that a topic might wish to be
discussed on that list.
Having been around for so long, I honestly don't know what sort of
information new volunteers receive nowadays. Given that you're subbed to
this list, I can only assume you were appropriately informed.
As a new volunteer to NCGenWeb, did you feel there was some information
that was "lacking" ? If so, I'm sure Derick would appreciate hearing
from you so that additional information can be provided to you and to
subsequent new volunteers.
-Sandy
In a message dated 8/4/2002 6:14:49 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
NCGENWEB-DISCUSS-D-request(a)rootsweb.com writes:
> Since I am new to the list I don't know what the policy is when it comes to
> the CC's level of participation in decision making. Do you know if SC's
> every once in a while send out messages on the announce list inviting CC's
> to the discuss list? In other words, are the CC's ever encouraged to
> participate?
>
Many of the CCs elect to not participate in the discussion on this list and
many others refuse to even read the list. I do know for a fact that I have
read "There is a discusion about X on the discuss list" as a message on the
mandatory list so, all CCs should be aware of this list IMHO.
There are also a large number of CCs that elect to not participate in any
discussion whatsoever regarding the NCGenWeb Project -- content to
concentrate on their own project pages and not at all interested in the
politics and policy making procedures of the NCGenWeb Project. Some, like
myself, have complete and total trust in the leadership of the project while
others simply don't care. Both of these ideas are acceptable (IMHO)
attitudes -- even if I do expect to now get several emails informing me that
"you must get involved in the politics if you care about the future of the
project.... la dee la dee da!" or "So-and-so is gonna do
this-that-or-the-other-thing..." Some of us could care less since it doesn't
involve our personal work in the slightest.
Some of the discussions on these lists have become so heated and hurtful that
CCs have resigned. Some of those were very good project volunteers who had
much to offer NCGenWeb. That's truly a sad thing indeed. I can think of a
couple former CCs who had skills, drive, and materials that would contribute
immeasurably to the project -- gone now forever.
As far as I'm concerned (only my own opinion) -- please don't periodically
fill my "mandatory read" mailbox with messages the likes of "hey, there's
another list where we discuss political issues that you don't care about -
please subscribe" -- I'd rather not be "encouraged" to subscribe to any list
that I've already elected to not subscribe to or "encouraged" to participate
in discussions that hold no interest for me. Of course, making sure that
every new CC is given the opportunity to subscribe is a good thing too. If
we do include such material in the mandatory list then it will diminish in
impact. As it is now, I always read those messages as soon as I see them, I
perceive that list as "important stuff". Other lists such as this one get
read in a much lower priority.
Just my thoughts;
CoachT