-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Hays <gsdownr(a)geocities.com>
Date: Saturday, January 23, 1999 5:15 PM
Subject: Re:Standards and Ethics Statement
I am sending this to every list that I received it from. I apologize in
advance to those of you who receive it more than once. I have several
problems with this proposal as it is written, and part of the concepts
behind it. I realize that by stating my opposition to this, I am painting a
target on my head.
>Subject: [BOARD-L] Motion Made and Seconded
> Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 10:27:36 -0800 (PST)
> Resent-From: BOARD-L(a)rootsweb.com
> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 13:40:10 -0500
> From: "Beth Wills" <bwills(a)ionia-mi.net>
>
>A motion has been made by Yvonne and seconded by Kay and Ginger that a
>Standards and Ethics Statement be drafted and put into the USGenWeb
Project
>policy for protection of said project.
<snip>
> The county, state and special project coordinators will be held
to the
>following standards:
The standards that we are being held to are already spelled out in the
bylaws that far less than a majority of us voted into being last year.
Those bylaws can't be amended in this way. There is a proper way to amend
them, and the Bylaws Committee should look into this.
>1. The best interests of the project will be at the forefront of
any
>actions by a coordinator that involve the project. No county,
>state or special project coordinator will post derogatory comments
>about the project. Problems that arise within the project will be
>kept at the project level, not posted for our visitors to see. In
>case of a dispute with another volunteer, assume that there is a
>misunderstanding, not that the other person is deliberately
>misstating the truth.
Any criticism can be interpreted as a "derogatory comment." Therefore, we
are no longer allowed to speak out about the problems that the project has,
so what does it matter where "problems" are handled, since we can't discuss
them we obviously don't have any. Truth is dependent on context, content
and frame, and in an e-mail environment, all can be easily misinterpreted,
therefore everybody can be telling or misstating the truth at any time.
These are basic principles that can discussed in any beginning Communication
or Ethics class.
>2. Strive to provide the highest quality of information on your
>web sites. If in doubt as to the quality of data received, reiterate
>the fact that this data, like each new piece of information, must be
>researched and proved or disproved by standard genealogy rules of
>evidence. It is always best to consult original primary material for
>verification.
I will not personally research every item that is sent to me. I don't have
the time to drive 30 minutes every time I want to do my own research, let
alone anybody else's. My work schedule simply doesn't allow it. If that is
not what was intended, then the wording MUST be changed.
>3. Honor property rights, especially copyrights. Become familiar
>with the current copyright laws before posting data to your page.
>Individuals must read and understand the project policy on copyright,
>query management and lookups. Do not copy information from other
>web sites. If you feel that information on another website would be
>helpful to the researchers visiting your page, request permission to
>provide a link to the other website.
You do not need permission to link to any website. I think that the people
who caused all of the lookups ruckuss a while back needed to look at
copyright laws themselves. 90% of what we do falls under either fair use or
uncopyrightable material. If I have permission to copy information from
another website, I will do it regardless of this statement.
>4. Give proper credit where credit is due. As in any genealogy
>research, be sure to document your sources for posted data.
Just because I document it does not mean that I will post my documentation.
Again this is far too time consuming.
>5. Avoid harm to others visiting the project and others working
>within the project. Respect each other's opinions. Politely
>disputing the accuracy of data is not only accepted but encouraged.
>Keep your dispute to issues and/or facts, and not personalities.
>Standard "netiquette" applies to all communication within the
>project. The project will not tolerate foul language, personal
>insults or threats.
Politeness is in the eyes of the beholder. I have been called rude on
several occaisions when I was being very polite. The interpretation of
politeness depends on the frame of the conversation taking place.
>6. Respect the privacy of others. If someone in the project
requests
>that their communication not be made public, this request must be
>respected.
AMEN! See I don't disagree with everything!
>Any member of the project who fails to comply with the standards
and
>ethics policies, as set forth in the Guidelines of the USGenWeb
>Project is subject to the following:
>The matter will be brought before the Standards and Ethics
Committee
>for review. This may be done by any Project member who has witnessed
>said violation. A two-thirds vote of the Committee will be required
>for notification of non-compliance to be sent. Failure to rectify
>said non- compliance within two weeks will result in the member's
>project web sites being de-linked from the Project Three such letters
>of non-compliance will constitute automatic termination in the
>USGenWeb Project.
So now we will have a Standards and Ethics Committee, which will make the
witch hunts that often take place in USGenWeb official??? This is
particularly problematical since no definition of the formation of this
committee has been spelled out. This is supposed to be a bottom up
organization, but without criticism being allowed of the people in charge,
it will quickly turn into a top down organization that is run by a group of
selfish autocratic powerseekers without any form of checks and balances.
This is a horrible idea. McCarthyism went out in the 50's, leave it there.
Patrick Hays