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
I've been out of town enjoying my grandchildren and was amazed at all the emails in my box when I returned. Diane, you stirred up a hornet's nest!
I have to say Amen to Mary's message. I never visited Sandy's pages so I don't know what kind of job she did on them. If she was booted for not doing her "job", that's one thing. But if it was because of her opinions, that's another. Her messages were often disruptive, but they also generated good discussions and made me pause to think. As someone who believes in freedom of speech and likes to express my opinion even if no one else wants to listen, I would hate it if Sandy was ousted just because a few people couldn't take straight talk. We all have a delete button for messages we don't want to read.
As far as the rules and regulations, I think they're a nice guideline but since we're strictly volunteers that's what they should be--goals and guidelines. Life happens and genealogy gets put on the back burner sometimes. There's a difference in a site that has been abandoned and one that only occasionally needs updating. Each county site needs to be considered separately and carefully before action is taken. Personally, I'd rather have a volunteer who does something rather than have a county waiting for adoption. Also, if you put all the responsibility of the state on just a few volunteers--as in giving each person multiple counties--you take a risk. If something happens to that one person, you could lose much more research, besides missing out on different perspectives.
Diane, I appreciate your willingness to work on the Project, but you need to realize that you cannot handle the whole state by yourself. The reasoning behind setting up the GenWeb Project so that each county is represented was solid and good planning. I suggest you let your CC's do their jobs, encourage them, replace them when they quit (whether officially or not), offer your assistance, but not be the "Project Police". I agree that it's not much fun when you know "Big Brother is Watching"!
Linda
Transylvania CC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mary Ellis" <mwellis(a)triad.rr.com>
....
> And while I am writing I will include my 'opinion' since we all have
> one.... Regardless of how much we dislike some one I don't think we have
> the right to take their pages away. I never cared for Sandy's attitude
> or the 'sound' of her emails, but she is entitled to her 'opinion' just
> as I am. If voicing those opinions are going to get you booted then
> you can bet this will be my last email about what I think.
>
> Was the board appointed or elected? I think if they are going to have
> the power to oust people from their sites they should be elected.
>
> Mary
Warren
I am sorry about your illness, and believe me I know that limits sometimes.........I am 62 years old, and have stage 4 breast
cancer, so yes I know.
So the genealogical society, has done all the cems?---Old ?records, including cems are in the Public Domain, but it costs
money to get the books and it takes a LOT of time to transcribe info off of microfilm (have done that)..........?
And I do know what it is to have to "cross swords" with genealogical societies.........been there done that several times.
The whole goal?of the USGenWeb, and always has been is for researchers to be able to have?access to FREE genealogy.
You write that you won't give up Johnston County and that you can't put up info, because everybody else has done all of it,
but you are looking forward to going back to work at the Heritage Center..........isn't Johnston Co NCGen as important as the Heritage Center???????
So what if someone transcribed a cemetery in Johnston County, and offered it to you to put on the site?? Would you tell them to put it in the Archives, or better yet, you can't take it because the genealogical society had already done it ?????
Sharon
-----Original Message-----
From: Warren T. Bagley <wtbagley(a)nc.rr.com>
To: ncgenweb-discuss(a)rootsweb.com
Sent: Fri, Jul 31, 2009 8:28 am
Subject: [NCGENWEB-DISCUSS] New data, transcribing and trouble
I am against any requirement to add new data to our sites. I think every county
is different and must be considered.
In my case, Johnston County. Johnston was very big and an early county in the
state formation. The genealogical society has been transcribing for more than
40 years. And for more than 15 years we have a Heritage Center that is probably
one of the best in the US. They to have been transcribing like crazy. If you
have ever heard of Wynette Hawn, she has transcribed an unbelievable amount of
Johnston record. I to have put a lot of data on my site in the past but it's
so hard to find something that fits and does not step on other toes. The
genealogical society has surveyed and published over 1000 cemeteries. Even all
our deed have been abstracted from 1746 to over 1850. And I have personally put
up 7 census years (1784 to 1840) even though the county is very large.
I live in the county and try to always keep it a win win situation. I have to
deal with the genealogical society, heritage center, and lots of individual
transcribers and publisher . It's sort of hard to transcribe data that is
already available online or already published. I try to promote them all and in
every case the researcher is a big winner in Johnston County.
I hate to mention it but I probably should. I have been in very poor health and
it's difficult for me to discuss the current matters on this list. No Diane,
don't suggest that I put up my county for adaption like you so easily like to
do. I think your goal was to run Sandy out of the project and now you've run
Elizabeth off. You'd much rather have a new person that follows you in the
counties. I mention the poor health because I have personally helped many a
researcher at the Heritage Center. I am not currently doing it because of my
condition. Sandy and Elizabeth were doing a lot for their county. I am and
have too. I am trying to get my health better and go back to helping there.
I have not seen any good leadership from you.
Sure lots of things need to be
done. We have a lot of sleepy counties and always will have. You are never
going to change that. You are going to force your way into it all. You said
you had been even cussed at. I sure would not do that but I understand why a
lot of people have gotten upset with you.
I know some of you want all the records on our sites and free. It "ain't" going
to happen. You better wish you had ancestors in Johnston County. It don't take
long for a researcher to choke on the volume of easy data to be had here.
And one more thing. I voted for you. Wish I had not. I don't think Ron would
have upset the people like you have. I am upset that you have made me write
this email. I have waited much too long to reply.
Enough for this email and please excuse my poor writing.
Warren Bagley, CC Johnston County
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NCGENWEB-DISCUSS-request(a)rootsweb.com
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of
the message
-------Original Message-------
From: ncgenlady(a)aol.com
Date: 7/31/2009 11:25:13 AM
To: garebel(a)roadrunner.com
Subject: Re: [NCGENWEB] Chaos, Rumors, Questions etc.
This is long, but feel it is worth listening to........
I got involved with the USGenWeb in 1997 as a look up volunteer........
I became a CC for the USGenWeb for the first time in 2001......took over a
county in TX that was a mess. I had been a Co-CC
For several counties, where I found the info and my friend Elaine did the
actual data entry. Decided it was time to do it myself.
I managed to build the site up, repair links (and there were a lot of them)
Then I took a site in another state (it shall remain nameless) and then
another one that I had to actually build from nothing.
I had great feed back from researchers on all 3 of these sites........
Then the SC (at the time) from NCGenWeb asked me if I would be willing to
take one of the counties in NC..........whoopee.
At the time I was Co-CC for about 9 counties in TX and CC for another in TX,
and 2 in another state.
Since my Mom's ancestors had migrated out of PA to NC early
on------Mecklenburg, Cabarrus, Anson and later Stanly Co
I accepted Cabarrus County.
In 2007, I was diagnosed for the 2nd time (first was 2006) with stage 4
Breast Cancer...........I was apprehensive about
Maintaining all of these sites, as they were talking chemo, surgery etc.....
....so I gave up all but 2 of my sites.
Now I am back..... Have gone back to being the CC for Cabarrus County, and
just last week took Stanly County.
As a County Coordinator..........my concern is not with the rules and
regulations, I pretty much follow those on my websites
>From doing what I do. That's why I came here. I don't live in Cabarrus
County or even North Carolina......so how could I have
Access to records there..........what I do is find folks who are available
and as exited about genealogy as I am.....they have
Proven to be invaluable to the way the sites have grown.. I search the web,
and use Heritage Quest (haven't been there? Ask
Me about it), read message boards......find out who on FindAGrave is really
on top of cemetery readings, and ask them for
Their submissions, and so on.
My websites, they actually are not mine (to me).......they belong to the
researchers who access them, I am just the person
Who makes them the best they can be. That is why I volunteered.
1) I am not Anti Archives........I have submitted lots of info to the
Archives, have even paid or help pay for Census Records to
Be put in the Archives by S&K. I have submitted information to them on
cemeteries (especially when the county website
Would not answer my emails) or because that was a good thing. But I do keep
a copy or an index on the site, SO IT WILL
PULL UP IN MY COUNTY SITE'S SEARCH ENGINE).
2) Rules are rules.........we have them everywhere, at work, at home, and
life itself.&NB sp; I don't think the rules for websites as Diane
Are TOO MUCH. As far as adding new material to your website, it doesn't have
to be a census reading......but find something
New to add, even if it's just another useful site where researchers can find
info.
Updating your pages............how hard can that be????
So bottom line..........if you took the volunteer job as a county
coordinator...........then do the best you can, make it a great place
To visit for researchers..........don't dump everything into the Archives,
(If they had wanted to go to the Archives, they would have
Gone there, not to YOUR site. Make it interesting, catch their interest.
If everyone put the energy into their websites that they are using to
discuss (which it doesn't sound much like discussing but
More like dis-cussing) then all of the NCGenWeb would be fantastic.
Diane has offered to do transcriptions and go to cemeteries in her area.....
...why haven't some of you taken her up on that????
A couple of others have also............I have some great web sites that I
have run up on, where with a little bit of work, (sorry)
The information would be a great addition also.
Maybe an idea would be to have a county of the month program like they have
here in TXGenWeb, it has definitely added a lot to the way the sites are
done.
BTW sin ce the weekend I have revamped the Stanly Co site.........it's still
under construction, as I have a lot of info to put up
That folks have been very nice to help with.
Thanks for letting me put my 75 cents worth in.
Sharon
Cabarrus & Stanly Counties NCGenWeb
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike & Diane <garebel(a)roadrunner.com>
To: NCGenWeb-L <NCGENWEB-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Fri, Jul 31, 2009 12:47 am
Subject: [NCGENWEB] Chaos, Rumors, Questions etc.
I realize a lot of you have questions, have heard rumors, and think we are
in total chaos right now. I want to put your minds at ease by letting you
know who, what, why, when and how things have come about as they have since
I became a C, then SC and up to and including today. This is a little
lengthy, and for that I apologize but there is a lot that needs to be said,
explained, and hopefully we can all have a discussion on it. I want to
include everyone in the things that are being done and will be done so that
we all have a voice in the future of the project. On that note, I am being
as open and honest with you as I possibly can.
Before I became a CC and even after I noticed that some sites were awesome
and others had been neglected for long periods of time and some had next to
no materials on them whatsoever. I emailed the then CC of Duplin for months
with various things to post to the site and never heard a word. I then
emailed Denise, asked about the CC and why no response and offered to take
the site over. Denise questioned me, if I had HTML experience, genealogy
experience, etc and eventually agreed to let me take Duplin County and so I
began adding the information I had collected and built a relationship with
various researchers and the site took off.
I eventually felt comfortable enough to question why some sites were never
updated, had no info, etc was given some answers and explanations, didn't
like them or understand them sometimes but who was I to question what the SC
was doing, had done or how the Project was run or other sites maintained. So
I kept to myself in my little corner of the project and eventually started
adopting other abandoned sites.
Fast forward.... I have noticed over the years I have been here that some
sites have fallen into my disrepair, CC's never answer emails when I tried
to send materials for them to post, I had researchers Emailing me
complaining about various sites, etc. I decided then that if I ever got the
chance I would run for SC to see if I could help turn the project around,
get all of the sites updated, broken links fixed and get us on the right
path again and try to
help everyone work together to make NCGenWeb a Project
to be proud of.
So, basically my goals to work towards with everyone's help are:
1. To get all broken links repaired on all of the sites.
We are off to a wonderful start! I have seen some awesome improvements on a
great number of the sites and I am really proud and pleased with each and
every person that has worked to help accomplish this goal. Some CC's are
still MIA and not responding to emails...hopefully they will read this and
respond?
2. To get new materials transcribed and added to all of the sites on a
regular basis.
I will help you with this as much as I can or you will allow me. I will
transcribe early census records, if I live close enough I will go and
photograph and transcribe cemeteries for the sites, I will even try my best
if the counties are close enough to go to the court house or register of
deeds to obtain copies of materials for you to post on the sites.
3. To get new county site requirements and bylaws approved so we can move
forward with re-incorporating the project and to start towards guiding us
all into having a huge project and one that we can all be extremely proud of
We are working on these as we speak, we currently have a discussion open on
the county requirements.
4. To get new CC's in the project and to aid and assist everyone into
building a huge network between all of us in tra
ding materials to post to
the various sites so we all have new materials and the researchers benefit
greatly from this and will start contributing more as well.
I know some of you got pretty Po'd and peeved with me when I started sending
the reports out to each host. I didn't do it to be bossy, bitchy, to try and
point out what is wrong with this site or that site. I did it to improve
researchers visits to our sites and to help you by giving you a tool to use
to help in updating the sites. Yes, I did come across strong and gruff with
it, and I did apologize and I still apologize for that. Although my
intentions were meant to help, some still took it as I was out to pick on
them and to hurt them, which is far from the truth. I did it to help our
project improve.
We do have a board which consists of myself, Ron Dailey, Katherine Benbow,
Taneya Koonce and Derick Hartshorn. Derick will be sending out an email
explaining the board to you, as well as asking for a vote from each of you
to confirm it. I tried to include 2 members of the project besides myself
and the ASC's that I thought would be fair and impartial, and I hope that
you do approve of my decisions.
Over the last week or so I have gotten numerous complaints from members of
NCGenWeb Project as well as complaints from members of the USGenWeb Project
about Sandy. Some CC's were threatening to quit, others were stating how
they wer
e afraid to send messages through the mailing lists, etc. The
following are some excerpts from those emails, names removed to protect
everyone's identities:
>From one CC: (I was included on a personal response to her)
If being quiet makes you think I'm afraid of you, you are wrong. Just as on
the Discuss list, I'm quiet right now because I'm observing and learning
people. That is not to say that I don't have strong opinions and will
express them.
You would have been told by me that I took any remarks as a personal attack.
I don't have the time or the extra energy to play games unless it is with my
grandchildren.
In my own observances though, you have given me the impression that you do
not like the USGenWeb. Out of curiosity, why do you continue to be a member?
The similarity would be joining a club and discovering that you have little
to nothing in common with the other members. This has happened to me and I
just quit going to the meetings and did not pay dues the next year.
>From another:
Excuse me for saying so, but this is the last bad apple in the project.
Everything has to be a detailed full on assault.
>From another:
I do not participate on the mailing lists for fear that Sandy will attack me
just like she attacks everyone else. I prefer to just read the mail and if I
have a question or comment I will email you directly. I hope this is20ok
with
you.
Another:
Please take Sandy to task for the way she is treating everyone! I do not
appreciate the way she speaks to others and I do not appreciate having to
read her attacks in my inbox.
Another:
If something isn't done to control Sandy and the way she is allowed to speak
to members of this project I will resign from being a member of NCGenWeb. We
all read it and have to deal with it on the National lists but I think it is
high time someone put a stop to her and I believe you are the right person
for the job. I think every CC would personally send you a huge thank you for
doing so.
Another:
I will be resigning from maintaining my site within the next few weeks if I
have to keep reading the trash that Sandy decides to spread and the attacks
she deals onto people. I do not appreciate it and I feel sorry for the ones
she attacks on every email they send. That is why I refuse to send a message
through our mailing lists.
These are comments to me from people outside of our project who sometimes
read our archives and read her messages on the National Discuss list:
>From another project member:
NC has come a long ways in recent months. Located some interesting info
there awhile back and had had no luck previously. Thank you for what you are
doing. Perhaps ignoring Sandy would do more good than responding. I think
she enjo
ys a good debate.
I was sent this message that was in response to one from Sandy:
No, Sandy. It isn't all about me, it is about ALL of the coordinators that
have worked together and got along throughout the years. Not all of us have
such a jaundiced view of UsGenWeb. I can only think of about 5-6 that are
constantly bitching about how imperfect UsGenWeb is. Sure, any organization
can use some improvement and I have seen much improvement over the years but
most of us don't spend all our time trying to change it. We are happy
working to improve our own little patch of the Internet where we work. Most
of us try to be considerate of others without insulting everyone that doesn
t agree with our viewpoint. If a person can't get along with a lot of other
people, maybe it isn't the other people's fault. In many things throughout
life. One learns to play the hand you are dealt instead of complaining about
the hand.
>From another:
I feel sorry for any state that has to put up with her. And you know what?
If she would use that energy she has for good...WOW!
And the list goes on. I received quite a few today before it was made public
that Sandy had been removed from the project, some even pointing out
archived messages on when other "disruptive" CC's were removed as well as
pointing out some of the attacks that Sandy had sent through. I would like
for each of you to go to the archi
ves and read messages from 2002 to get a
small taste, and please read other years as well to see the pattern that has
taken place over the years. Any bit of a hint of dissatisfaction, someone
voicing an opinion, etc and Sandy is right there in the middle of it
attacking, blaming, etc.
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/NCGENWEB-DISCUSS/http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/NCGENWEB
So, it wasn't an axe to grind, it wasn't just the CC complaints and threats
of CC's quitting that prompted this decision. It is a combination of the
complaints, threats to quit and all of the documented outbursts,
disruptiveness, attacks, etc that Sandy has sent out through the years that
finally gave me no choice but to do something. As I told someone else, I
would rather lose 1 good CC than to lose many great ones.
Unfortunately we did lose Elizabeth, but I am hoping she will reconsider her
decision. She did state to me privately that her decision to leave was
Quote "and to a great extent it's not even about Sandy" Unquote.
I know this is long but I hope it explains some things, answers some
questions and quells any rumors you might have heard.
So, please feel free to start a discussion on the discuss list, email me
privately, ask questions, fuss at me, whatever you feel need
s to be said or
done, please feel free to do so. I will not hold it against anyone as I am
sure a lot of you have many frustrations and resentments built up. I do ask
that you not be rude or curse me, maybe just smack me around a little if
needed. : )
Thanks for listening,
Diane
NCGenWeb SC
NCGenWeb CC
NCGenWeb Special Projects
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
NCGENWEB-request(a)rootsweb.com
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body
of
the message
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.375 / Virus Database: 270.13.38/2274 - Release Date: 07/31/09
05:58:00
I am against any requirement to add new data to our sites. I think every county is different and must be considered.
In my case, Johnston County. Johnston was very big and an early county in the state formation. The genealogical society has been transcribing for more than 40 years. And for more than 15 years we have a Heritage Center that is probably one of the best in the US. They to have been transcribing like crazy. If you have ever heard of Wynette Hawn, she has transcribed an unbelievable amount of Johnston record. I to have put a lot of data on my site in the past but it's so hard to find something that fits and does not step on other toes. The genealogical society has surveyed and published over 1000 cemeteries. Even all our deed have been abstracted from 1746 to over 1850. And I have personally put up 7 census years (1784 to 1840) even though the county is very large.
I live in the county and try to always keep it a win win situation. I have to deal with the genealogical society, heritage center, and lots of individual transcribers and publisher . It's sort of hard to transcribe data that is already available online or already published. I try to promote them all and in every case the researcher is a big winner in Johnston County.
I hate to mention it but I probably should. I have been in very poor health and it's difficult for me to discuss the current matters on this list. No Diane, don't suggest that I put up my county for adaption like you so easily like to do. I think your goal was to run Sandy out of the project and now you've run Elizabeth off. You'd much rather have a new person that follows you in the counties. I mention the poor health because I have personally helped many a researcher at the Heritage Center. I am not currently doing it because of my condition. Sandy and Elizabeth were doing a lot for their county. I am and have too. I am trying to get my health better and go back to helping there.
I have not seen any good leadership from you. Sure lots of things need to be done. We have a lot of sleepy counties and always will have. You are never going to change that. You are going to force your way into it all. You said you had been even cussed at. I sure would not do that but I understand why a lot of people have gotten upset with you.
I know some of you want all the records on our sites and free. It "ain't" going to happen. You better wish you had ancestors in Johnston County. It don't take long for a researcher to choke on the volume of easy data to be had here.
And one more thing. I voted for you. Wish I had not. I don't think Ron would have upset the people like you have. I am upset that you have made me write this email. I have waited much too long to reply.
Enough for this email and please excuse my poor writing.
Warren Bagley, CC Johnston County
It appears I haven't been unsubscribed from the state lists yet, so I
would like to take this opportunity to respond to Diane's message.
>3. To get new county site requirements and bylaws approved so we can move
>forward with re-incorporating the project and to start towards guiding us
>all into having a huge project and one that we can all be extremely proud of
>
>We are working on these as we speak, we currently have a discussion open on
>the county requirements.
and when a couple of us objected to one of those new "requirements",
Diane told us to end the discussion. From my post last Sunday:
[DIANE:>Please refrain from getting into a debate over this.
Diane, you asked for opinions on your new rules and regulations.
Some of us have a problem with the one about transcription activity
being a requirement. We are discussing it. That's exactly what the
-DISCUSS list is for.]
>We do have a board which consists of myself, Ron Dailey, Katherine Benbow,
>Taneya Koonce and Derick Hartshorn. Derick will be sending out an email
>explaining the board to you, as well as asking for a vote from each of you
>to confirm it.
Yet the "board" has acted to remove someone who has been a CC for 13
years, without having themselves been elected or given the authority
by the membership to take such an action.
>Unfortunately we did lose Elizabeth, but I am hoping she will reconsider her
>decision. She did state to me privately that her decision to leave was
>Quote "and to a great extent it's not even about Sandy" Unquote.
Diane quotes from my message only what she would like you to see.
What I actually said was the following:
>This isn't a snap decision, and to a great extent it's not even
>about Sandy, although I happen to agree with a lot of what she's
>said recently.
>
>It's more the shift in philosophy that has taken place over the past
>few years, to the point that it's no longer the fun for me that it
>once was. I'd rather work on my personal pages, where nobody's
>going to tell me I should do it a certain way or criticize me for
>what I'm doing or not doing. There are some other issues too, but
>that's the main one that has brought me to this decision.
To those of you who have written me privately in support, I offer my
public thanks as well. I understand why you are not speaking up on
this list.
--
Elizabeth Harris
ncgen(a)mindspring.com
Personal genealogy webpage: http://www.momslookups.com/generations/
Winston-Salem NC area genealogy: http://www.fmoran.com/
HOLDER DNA project: http://www.holderdna.com/
Hi Folks,
I got the answers I needed for this issue...I will weigh my options as well...
Thanks much,
Rodney Trent Briles
Curator, Briles Information Network and Randolph County Gen Web Project
Trinity, North Carolina
"Our main mission is to promote genealogy research and the preservation of family history." Find-A-Grave Volunteer!"
__________________________________________________
D O T E A S Y - "Join the web hosting revolution!"
http://www.doteasy.com
Elizabeth,
I am truly saddened to learn that you are resigning your position as the
host for Davie and Forsyth Counties. I truly wish you would "sleep on this"
and not make a snap decision in the heat of the moment.
I have spent the past several days and many months prior to my being elected
SC reading various list archives up to and including the NCGenWeb list and
discuss archives. There has been constant turmoil, hard feelings,
accusations, etc thrown by a lot of people and it seems as if Sandy was in
the middle of it each time.
I have thought about this long and hard and along with various complaints
from CC's and members of the USGenWeb Project as a whole as well as a "not
so nice" email Sandy sent to me, as well as ones she sent to various CC's
offlist and copied me on them, I made the decision to ask the board to vote
on her removal. I did not vote and I only presented them with the facts of
the complaints from various NCGenWeb members as well as each of them seeing
and reading the various posts that she has made recently and in the past.
They came to the conclusion to back me in removing her from the NCGenWeb
Project.
I had numerous emails from CC's threatening to quit if something wasn't done
about her, as well as several from various members telling me she is the
reason they never participate in discussions or send emails through the
lists. It is truly sad that some CC's are in fear of sending a message
through the projects mailing lists knowing that if Sandy doesn't agree with
what they say they could be the focus of one of her "not so nice" emails.
It was not an easy decision for anyone to make, but I think in the long run
the NCGenWeb Project will be better off for it.
So, once more I ask that you sleep on this and reconsider your decision to
leave the project. You are a valued member and I have always respected your
opinions and suggestions as have many others before me.
Since Sandy deemed it necessary to send the email I sent to her through to
the National Discuss list I will also post it here for everyone to see along
with her response to it.
Here is her response and my email to her is right below it.
Uh... Well, folks, guess this'll teach me to spend the morning sailing, he?
I am - or was (?) - one of the few remaining of the original NCGenWeb
Project founders, so I do know we don't even have any bylaws, let
Alone a "board." :-)
That said, NCGenWeb, Inc., the private corporation with no members
Which Nola Duffy formed without the project's knowledge back in July
2007, does have a board of directors, so I reckon that board has
Decided the project's volunteers serve at its whim. And given that
Diane is the chairman of USGWP's Grievance Committee, well... Who ya
Gonna call? :-)
I will say that while I certainly dislike the efforts of Diane and
Others to *change* the structure and purpose of the US and NC GenWeb
Projects (particularly to form private NON-membership corporations
Which, by state law, vest *sole* voting rights and authority with the
Corporation's' board of directors), the notion that I'm "dissatisfied"
With NC or USGenWeb is pretty ludicrous. If that was the case, I can
Assure you I wouldn't have helped get NCGenWeb off the ground in the
First place, let alone volunteered in it for the past 13 years.
As for my NCVance site, those who aren't transcribers still have great
Interest and take pride in their sites, and I'm no exception. I'm not
In competition with anyone, and neither genealogy nor the US/NCGenWeb
Project will ever be a central focus of my life. Too much else I'm
Involved with. I assist Vance researchers to the best of my ability,
And they seem to think I do a pretty good job of it. I believe in the
Original concept of the project as a great way for a large and diverse
Group of people to pitch-in together and help other researchers.
That's the only reason I helped get it off the ground and it's the
Reason I've stuck around all these years.
So, NCVance will remain at:
http://home.comcast.net/~teylu/ncvance/
And I'll continue to help Vance researchers.
I'll leave it to others to figure out what the private, non-membership
NCGenWeb, Inc. Has to do with the NCGenWeb and USGenWeb projects.
For my part, I think Lucille and the Beale Street Blues Boy sure got
It right, especially the first few words in the brief intro....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qtm66Z3lebc
Enjoy!
-Sandy :-)
---
"Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened." -- Dr. Seuss
---
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mike & Diane <garebel(a)roadrunner.com>
Date: Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 12:13 PM
Subject: Vance County NCGenWeb
To: Sandy <teylu2(a)gmail.com>
Cc: Derick Hartshorn <DerickH(a)charter.net>, Taneya Koonce
<ncgenwebproject(a)gmail.com>, Katherine Benbow
<benbow.family(a)gmail.com>, Ron Dailey <RonDailey(a)earthlink.net>, Nola
Duffy <nduffy(a)patch.net>, "Paul D. Buckley"
<pauldbuckley(a)worldnet.att.net>, Tina Vickery <tsvickery(a)gmail.com>,
Scott Burow <sburow(a)swbell.net>, Sherri Bradley
<ldrbelties(a)earthlink.net>, Joel Newport <joelnewport(a)gmail.com>
Sandy,
For some time you have shown that you are very dissatisfied with
NCGenWeb as well as the USGenWeb Projects. You have clearly shown the
Dissatisfaction through various emails as well as the lack of interest
You have shown through your work on the Vance County site.
In response the NCGenWeb Project Board members have voted to remove
You from the NCGenWeb Project. You are hereby required to immediately
Remove all NCGenWeb Project and USGenWeb Project logos from the Vance
County, NC site located at:
http://home.comcast.net/~teylu/ncvance/
I do hope that you are able to find a more satisfying volunteer
Position elsewhere.
Good luck to you in the future,
Diane
NCGenWeb State Coordinator
CC: NCGenWeb Board
CC: National Coordinator, SEMA Rep, Grievance Committee, RAL
NCGenWeb SC
NCGenWeb CC
NCGenWeb Special Projects
End of emails.
If anyone else has any comments, questions or wishes to discuss this further
please let me know and I will do my best to answer you as openly and
honestly as I can.
Diane
NCGenWeb SC
NCGenWeb CC
NCGenWeb Special Projects
I learned this afternoon that Sandy Bolick has been removed as CC for
Vance County by a vote of the newly appointed NCGenWeb "Project
Board." If you don't want Sandy, you don't need me either, and I
herewith resign my position as CC for Davie and Forsyth counties. I
hope you will be fortunate enough to find replacements who are as
committed as I am to genealogical research in those counties.
Sandy and I were among the original CCs for NCGenWeb, and over the
years we've gotten to know each other pretty well. We don't always
agree, but we respect each other's opinions. The one issue on which
we were on totally opposite sides was whether RootsWeb was a genuine
"cooperative" or whether the founders would sell out to a commericial
enterprise. She was right, I was wrong, but even on that issue, we
were able to carry on a productive dialog.
Sandy is forthright, and her posts sometimes have a note of sarcasm,
but they have never been hateful. If you think I'm wrong on that, go
back and read the archived posts to NCGENWEB and NCGENWEB-DISCUSS
from past years. (Diane, you in particular might benefit from
getting acquainted with the history of the project you have just
taken over).
Sandy is one of the best genealogical detectives I know, and she has
been tremendously helpful to individual researchers. She goes the
extra mile and much more to find documents, analyze them, and help
people to obtain what they need. So her web site wasn't filled with
transcribed materials - so what? Neither are my sites, and I've
already stated my opinions on this list about the new requirement for
transcription. Both of us had what have been disparagingly referred
to recently as "links sites," but they were good, helpful links, and
we included a lot of history and background information on our
counties. Sandy's Vance Co. site had some particularly nice text
designed to help newbie genealogists get started with North Carolina
research. I hope she keeps this on her personal web pages.
In summary, I am sorry that NCGenWeb has changed so much from what it
was 13 years ago, when we were so enthusiastic about what we were
creating. It's not the same, it's no longer fun, and I have to admit
that I'm looking forward to doing what I want to do, rather than
struggling to comply with a long list of rules and regulations.
Diane, I will send you my pages by private e-mail.
--
Elizabeth Harris
ncgen(a)mindspring.com
Personal genealogy webpage: http://www.momslookups.com/generations/
Winston-Salem NC area genealogy: http://www.fmoran.com/
HOLDER DNA project: http://www.holderdna.com/
Elizabeth,
There is not one member of the NCGenWeb who is not deeply saddened by your
decision. I have written you privately but I still must say publicly that
the state does owe you a great deal for your many years of leadership and
participation. I can only sincerely hope that you will at least consider it
for a day. There really is more to this than is immediately apparent. If
you will at least consider that others are just as concerned about the
NCGenWeb as you have been for all these years, perhaps you will at least try
to see it through the eyes of others.
With my deepest regrets,
Nola
Just FYI - I saw today on the NC State Archives blog (
http://history4all.blogspot.com/) that they are modifying their Saturday
hours. They will no longer be closed for lunch from 12-1 and will be open
continuously from 9am-5pm on Saturdays.
Hope this is of help for those that live within distance to visit them.
Unfortunately, no Saturday hour schedule will help me here in Tennessee :-)
Taneya
--
"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." -- Carl Sagan
I would like to point out an obvious fact.
If a CC did nothing but transcribing (& I am NOT advocating that), there
would be little or no Broken links to repair.
On the other hand, if a CC chose to only have links and no transcriptions (&
I am NOT advocating this either), there would be nothing to do BUT repair
broken links -- which would probably become an enormous task with any kind
of site growth. Some of us have seen this latter phenomenon this past week
or so.
So, it would seem that the choice is between where a CC wants to be on this
spectrum from one end to the other.
It is apparent that the project is divided on which is of more importance.
However, it looks like almost everyone falls somewhere one side or the other
of the middle. Some further from the middle than others.
Now, if one camp prevails, to the exclusion of the other, the project will
take a definite turn from where it is now.
Is this what you want?
- Ron
P.S. - This difference in philosophy is the root cause of the difference of
opinion on the guidelines. If this can't be resolved, the debate on the
guidelines will continue forever.
[Well, not forever on an official basis, since Diane has said it will
terminate on Aug. 1st.]
On 7/26/09, Elizabeth Harris <ncgen(a)mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> In any case, I have been in USGenWeb since before there were any
> by-laws, and I have always maintained my county pages in accordance
> with the goals of the original project.
>
Same here, and I'd dearly love to know where all this obsession with
data has been for the past 13 years. If anybody wants to transcribe
some for Vance, please do! It's not as if I'm trying to keep it
offline. I routinely go to the FHC and wade through the marriage
register film for Vance researchers, so if anybody has the time or
interest to transcribe the sucker, I'd be thrilled. But it won't be
me. And I can assure you, I will not be buying a microfilm reader.
-Sandy
Hard drives, CDs and DVDs are made for saving things. It isn't
necessary to upload something elsewhere on the net just to "save" it.
There's a reason for hyperlinks.
-Sandy
On 7/26/09, Natasha <bittersweet3(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Now, if this information had been "unnecessarily"
> duplicated somewhere, perhaps it would have been saved.
> A lot of people take for granted that everything on the internet is always
> going to be on the internet, and this is just not true. At one time, there
> were years and years worth of old obituaries from a small local newspaper
> online. I had often thought I should make a copy of the obituaries to have
> "just in case." Well, I never got around to making a copy of them, and one
> day they disappeared. The newspaper redid their website, apparently
> abandoning a lot of their archives. I emailed the newspaper about this and
> they said they would work to get the archives back on line, but they never
> have to this date. There was a lot of easy information at everyone's
> fingertips that is now gone for good... Unless you want to travel to the
> town, find copies of the newspaper on microfilm, then transcribe years worth
> of obituaries.
> I have seen this happen too many times, not only with genealogy information,
> to think that having something online once is good enough.
> One topic of discussion was the Find A Grave website which right now is
> completely free and easily accessible to everyone. But what if Ancestry.com
> got it in their heads to buy out Find A Grave and make it part of their
> website? And they offered the Find A Grave owners enough money to make it
> worth their while to abandon their idea of a free cemetery database
> available to everyone? At that point, someone would probably wish they had
> made a few copies of a few cemeteries they were interested in.
>
>
>
But that would mean I'd have to keep watch on everything to make sure it doesn't disappear so then I could step in to the "rescue" with the information I've backed up on my computer. To me, it seems easier to have a few copies of it already circulating online so that if one is gone, another is already there. To me it just doesn't seem to be a big deal if several different websites have some of the same information, and I'm not sure why anyone would think it is a big deal. If you look up almost anything on the internet, not just genealogy, you're bound to find the same thing 10 times over. And often it's presented differently each time. I like to have a lot to choose from, and not to rely on the one thing I need being in one place, and if it's not there, then I'm screwed. Or I have to wait and hope that someone somewhere has backed it up and will put it online again at some indeterminate point in the future, and keep checking back to see when and if it
has been placed online.
I'm certainly not saying no one should ever link to any other sites, that's ridiculous. I link to sites all the time. However, I also know that these other sites can disappear overnight. And I'm not saying that everyone should go and make duplicate copies of every website you link to, but what I am saying is that if you do happen have a duplicate copy of something that's right now already on the web, you're not hurting anything by having a second copy. And in the long run it may turn out to be helpful if the other disappears.
--- On Mon, 7/27/09, Sandy <teylu2(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Sandy <teylu2(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [NCGENWEB-DISCUSS] County Requirements - New guideline
> To: ncgenweb-discuss(a)rootsweb.com
> Date: Monday, July 27, 2009, 1:37 AM
> If it disappears, then you'll have it
> and can upload it, right? The
> whole *reason* for the internet is so sites can LINK to one
> another,
> Natasha. What I'm hearing you say is that you don't think
> anyone
> should link because whatever's on the end of the link might
> not always
> be there. By that reasoning, nobody should link to your
> site or
> anything in all of USGenWeb, either.... they should be
> copying it and
> uploading it elsewhere, "just in case" you and the project
> disappear.
>
> Look, I'm not a transcriber, but you'll find lots of
> useful
> information on my site if you have research in Vance
> County.
> Regardless, I applaud those who DO transcribe. All I'm
> saying is that
> if you're going to transcribe, it makes more sense to
> transcribe stuff
> that's not already online, and simply put a link to that
> which is. No
> *one* site or even *one* project will ever be the
> one-and-only source
> for research. To suggest it ever could be is to promote
> truly bad
> research practices.
>
> -Sandy
>
>
> On 7/26/09, Natasha <bittersweet3(a)yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I do wish that I had saved the information for my own
> purposes, certainly.
> > However, I'm not talking about just for my own use.
> I'm talking about for
> > everyone to use. I can save everything on my computer
> and if it gets taken
> > down, say, oh well at least I have it. But how is this
> helpful for
> > researchers?
> > Personally, I'd rather visit a website that has a lot
> of its own
> > information, even if some of it is duplicated, rather
> than a website that
> > only links to a few things I could find on the web on
> my own with 10 minutes
> > of research. To me, that doesn't seem helpful to
> researchers. Why even have
> > a page that's only contribution is redirecting?
> >
> >
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NCGENWEB-DISCUSS-request(a)rootsweb.com
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the
> subject and the body of the message
>
I do wish that I had saved the information for my own purposes, certainly. However, I'm not talking about just for my own use. I'm talking about for everyone to use. I can save everything on my computer and if it gets taken down, say, oh well at least I have it. But how is this helpful for researchers?
Personally, I'd rather visit a website that has a lot of its own information, even if some of it is duplicated, rather than a website that only links to a few things I could find on the web on my own with 10 minutes of research. To me, that doesn't seem helpful to researchers. Why even have a page that's only contribution is redirecting?
--- On Mon, 7/27/09, Sandy <teylu2(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Sandy <teylu2(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [NCGENWEB-DISCUSS] County Requirements - New guideline
> To: ncgenweb-discuss(a)rootsweb.com
> Date: Monday, July 27, 2009, 12:42 AM
> Hard drives, CDs and DVDs are made
> for saving things. It isn't
> necessary to upload something elsewhere on the net just to
> "save" it.
> There's a reason for hyperlinks.
>
> -Sandy
>
> On 7/26/09, Natasha <bittersweet3(a)yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Now, if this information had been "unnecessarily"
> > duplicated somewhere, perhaps it would have been
> saved.
> > A lot of people take for granted that everything on
> the internet is always
> > going to be on the internet, and this is just not
> true. At one time, there
> > were years and years worth of old obituaries from a
> small local newspaper
> > online. I had often thought I should make a copy of
> the obituaries to have
> > "just in case." Well, I never got around to making a
> copy of them, and one
> > day they disappeared. The newspaper redid their
> website, apparently
> > abandoning a lot of their archives. I emailed the
> newspaper about this and
> > they said they would work to get the archives back on
> line, but they never
> > have to this date. There was a lot of easy information
> at everyone's
> > fingertips that is now gone for good... Unless you
> want to travel to the
> > town, find copies of the newspaper on microfilm, then
> transcribe years worth
> > of obituaries.
> > I have seen this happen too many times, not only with
> genealogy information,
> > to think that having something online once is good
> enough.
> > One topic of discussion was the Find A Grave website
> which right now is
> > completely free and easily accessible to everyone. But
> what if Ancestry.com
> > got it in their heads to buy out Find A Grave and make
> it part of their
> > website? And they offered the Find A Grave owners
> enough money to make it
> > worth their while to abandon their idea of a free
> cemetery database
> > available to everyone? At that point, someone would
> probably wish they had
> > made a few copies of a few cemeteries they were
> interested in.
> >
> >
> >
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NCGENWEB-DISCUSS-request(a)rootsweb.com
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the
> subject and the body of the message
>
Ditto. And it's hard to be the price. :-)
On 7/26/09, Paul D. Buckley <pauldbuckley(a)worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> Nola,
>
> Not that it is necessarily pertinent to our discussion, you may want to
> check your sources about LVA microfilm. I'm on a project right now where I
> have 27 reels on ILL from them...they do however, only send five reels at a
> time.
>
> Regards,
>
> Paul
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nola Duffy" <nduffy(a)patch.net>
> To: <ncgenweb-discuss(a)rootsweb.com>
> Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 8:46 PM
> Subject: Re: [NCGENWEB-DISCUSS] County Requirements - New guideline
>
>
>> Elizabeth,
>>
>> I know how much you have done for the NCGenWeb and the USGenWeb over many
>> years and how many people you help all the time so I doubt you feel that
>> our
>> efforts are really irrelevant and foolish. I can't speak about the VA
>> Patent Records but you know they are at least available.
>>
>> However, I do know someone who has been working with the Salt Lake
>> Library
>> for some time about transcribing the VA orphan bonds. Thanks for reminding
>> me because I think I will try to see if they are making progress or still
>> running up against the usual wall.
>>
>> Virginia is a difficult state to work with if one wants to transcribe any
>> original records from microfilm. The reason is that the VA State Archives
>> decided to stop providing microfilm based on budget restrictions and
>> refers
>> anyone who wishes to buy film to the FHC in Salt Lake. If you try to buy
>> a
>> copy of any records on microfilm the response is that you must first get
>> an
>> authorization from the Virginia State Archives and then you must also get
>> permission from the current county clerk of the particular county. Even
>> that usually only gets you a response saying they do not have the
>> authority
>> to do so and you get referred back to the state again. To say the least,
>> it
>> is a bit discouraging but I do know that someone has worked for quite some
>> time just to get permission to buy copies of microfilm for the various
>> orphan bond records and has people who have agreed to transcribe them if
>> they are successful. I know how difficult it is because I tried to buy
>> some
>> microfilm for a particular Virginia Co. After months of one brick wall
>> after
>> another I gave up. A whole year went by before I got another e-mail from
>> someone in Salt Lake saying that if I would try again, I MIGHT be able to
>> get the film I wanted. I decided not to go through it again based on a
>> simple maybe.
>>
>> Still, I don't see it as being a foolish goal for anyone who wishes to
>> make
>> for original data available to researchers.
>>
>> Thanks to the Project Gutenberg there are thousands of rare books now
>> available to anyone. It took a lot of effort and dedication to accomplish
>> what they have. Obviously it is not something that everyone would want to
>> do but those who saw it as worthwhile should not be mocked or chided as
>> being foolish for wishing to do so. I feel the same about the USGenWeb
>> Project. It is not something that appeals to everyone but I see no reason
>> to belong to the USGenWeb if one sees what we do as being repetitive and
>> foolish. I would certainly not waste my time and energy doing it if I did
>> not honestly think others appreciated the effort and I doubt the 99.9% of
>> the CCs in the country would remain if they felt it was simply repetitive
>> and foolish. The real mystery is why the other .1% percent wish to
>> remain.
>>
>> Just my humble opinion.
>>
>> Nola
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
>> NCGENWEB-DISCUSS-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without
>> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> NCGENWEB-DISCUSS-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without
> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>
I've been with the USGW since 1997 and I'm a member of the OB and TP besides being the SFM for CT and LA. I also have GenWeb counties/parishes in LA, TX, FL and now NC.
For me, at this point, it is not what I know is there that I can add to the site, it is getting the feel of my new county. How is it set up? What do I prefer? Where are some of the pages filed that I see reference to? These are some of the questions that I've been asking myself this weekend and finding the answers to.
It's a hard act to follow when the SC is the former CC. : )
Jo
===
Chahta Ohoyo Holahta,
Honorary
--- On Sun, 7/26/09, Sandy <teylu2(a)gmail.com> wrote:
From: Sandy <teylu2(a)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [NCGENWEB-DISCUSS] County Requirements - New guideline
To: ncgenweb-discuss(a)rootsweb.com
Date: Sunday, July 26, 2009, 10:18 PM
Which is precisely why it's a good idea to put a link on your county
site. The idea is for all data to go into our national database
anyway.
Think of it like the IGI. The IGI is limited because it only contains
a fraction of the data available. Same is true of data in USGenWeb.
But imagine how worthless the IGI would be if you had to search each
location separately, with no international search. Same concept in
USGW. Without the national database, odds are if you DO happen to have
a piece of data on your site that might be of use to a reearcher, but
the researcher has no clue their ancestor was ever in your county or
even in your state, that data is of no use to the researcher because
they'll likely never see it.
-Sandy
On 7/26/09, Jo <bjcb(a)bellsouth.net> wrote:
> In watching this discussion, I became curious so I checked the Tombstone
> Project webpage. Just the "A" and "B" cemetery listings only. The TP has
> eight (8) cemeteries transcribed that the Sampson Co. GenWeb site does not
> have. Of the total of nine (9) that I checked only one (1) had been
> submitted to the Sampson Co. GenWeb site.
>
> Jo Branch
> Sampson Co.
>
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NCGENWEB-DISCUSS-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Paul,
Did you get them via interlibrary loan? I knew I could do that also.
However, there was no way the library would allow me to take them home and
there is no way I can work at the library all day now. I spent $1000+ to
buy a microfilm reader/printer and ended up giving it away. However, if
they allowed you to have them at home, I would certainly be interested in
checking again. It has probably been almost 2 years since my last serious
try.
Thanks,
Nola
>I know how much you have done for the NCGenWeb and the USGenWeb over many
>years and how many people you help all the time so I doubt you feel that our
>efforts are really irrelevant and foolish.
I think it's admirable that so many of you are transcribing material
that is not already available on line, especially documents that you
find in courthouses or recover from old newspapers or other records.
However, given that nobody has infinite amounts of time, I think it's
a waste of effort to duplicate things that are already on line at
reliable sites, or that have been published in book form, especially
if individuals or genealogical societies depend on sales of these
books for income. Our readers would be better served by links to
those other sites and by lookups that we or other volunteers can do
for them.
I do not think that transcription should be a requirement for CCs.
Diane quoted a section of the USGenWeb by-laws to justify her
opinion. I would interpret this section somewhat differently, i.e.
that the Archives project provides the "digital library" that all
county projects can use as their repository.
In any case, I have been in USGenWeb since before there were any
by-laws, and I have always maintained my county pages in accordance
with the goals of the original project.
--
Elizabeth Harris
ncgen(a)mindspring.com
Personal genealogy webpage: http://www.momslookups.com/generations/
Winston-Salem NC area genealogy: http://www.fmoran.com/
HOLDER DNA project: http://www.holderdna.com/
Elizabeth,
I know how much you have done for the NCGenWeb and the USGenWeb over many
years and how many people you help all the time so I doubt you feel that our
efforts are really irrelevant and foolish. I can't speak about the VA
Patent Records but you know they are at least available.
However, I do know someone who has been working with the Salt Lake Library
for some time about transcribing the VA orphan bonds. Thanks for reminding
me because I think I will try to see if they are making progress or still
running up against the usual wall.
Virginia is a difficult state to work with if one wants to transcribe any
original records from microfilm. The reason is that the VA State Archives
decided to stop providing microfilm based on budget restrictions and refers
anyone who wishes to buy film to the FHC in Salt Lake. If you try to buy a
copy of any records on microfilm the response is that you must first get an
authorization from the Virginia State Archives and then you must also get
permission from the current county clerk of the particular county. Even
that usually only gets you a response saying they do not have the authority
to do so and you get referred back to the state again. To say the least, it
is a bit discouraging but I do know that someone has worked for quite some
time just to get permission to buy copies of microfilm for the various
orphan bond records and has people who have agreed to transcribe them if
they are successful. I know how difficult it is because I tried to buy some
microfilm for a particular Virginia Co. After months of one brick wall after
another I gave up. A whole year went by before I got another e-mail from
someone in Salt Lake saying that if I would try again, I MIGHT be able to
get the film I wanted. I decided not to go through it again based on a
simple maybe.
Still, I don't see it as being a foolish goal for anyone who wishes to make
for original data available to researchers.
Thanks to the Project Gutenberg there are thousands of rare books now
available to anyone. It took a lot of effort and dedication to accomplish
what they have. Obviously it is not something that everyone would want to
do but those who saw it as worthwhile should not be mocked or chided as
being foolish for wishing to do so. I feel the same about the USGenWeb
Project. It is not something that appeals to everyone but I see no reason
to belong to the USGenWeb if one sees what we do as being repetitive and
foolish. I would certainly not waste my time and energy doing it if I did
not honestly think others appreciated the effort and I doubt the 99.9% of
the CCs in the country would remain if they felt it was simply repetitive
and foolish. The real mystery is why the other .1% percent wish to remain.
Just my humble opinion.
Nola