Hello NCGenWeb CCs,
Let's clear something up.
Last week several messages were exchanged on the
State Coordinator's list relating to the fact that
occasionally a CC will become disenchanted with the
XXGenWeb and will leave the project, cleaning out
the county site on their way out.
Several SCs had contributed input about the subject.
At some point the National Coordinator posed a question
to the SCs, asking if we would be willing to pass on
the names of CCs who had behaved badly. In response to
the question posed by Tim, I wrote the following message:
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
Hi,
I think it is a good idea to have a means for sharing information about who has
been serious problems in one state or another. However, it seems to me that it
could also get us in some real hot water if we were not careful about how we
carry it off.
Rather than being really public about exposing the names, maybe we could have
one person who would be the "keeper of the list". As SCs we could simply send
that "keeper" the name of anyone who causes serious problems, especially that
of destroying site information.
Then, when a SC is about to accept a new CC for their state, they could simply
run the proposed name by the "keeper of the list". The "keeper" would
respond
with a simple "yes, on the list" or "no, not on the list". No details
would
be exchanged about "why". That would make it hard for anyone to claim slander.
Maybe each state could have a process as to what would constitute someone's
name being sent to "the list".
Just my thoughts.
Sharon
NCGenWeb SC
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Now, in response to the above message that I had sent to the State Coordinator's
list, Ron Eason posted the message below to the NCDiscuss list:
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
Ron Eason wrote:
Sharon,
I'm really ticked off right now so I will ask a simple question
without saying anything more about it until I get cooled off a little.
You are asking to be re-elected and yet on the STATE COORD.
list you are advocating creating a secret black list for problem CC's,
that you and the others feel should be kept from getting a county
based entirely on how you feel about any particular individual.
Is the address here what you wrote and why?
http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/ifetch2?/u1/textindices/S/STATE-COO...
I just can't believe it.
Ron
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
In response to Ron's message, I posted the following to the Discuss list:
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
Ron,
I do not have to justify that message to you. Obviously, you feel quiet
sure that I wrote the message or you would not have asked me publicly
about it. It is clear that you are attempting to cause me problems over
it.
There was a whole group of messages that had been exchanged on that list
before I added my comments. In fact, as seen on the message, my comments
were a response to a question asked by our National Coordinator.
Until you have sat where I have sat, and dealt with the right down nasty
attitudes that I have dealt with, and had folks trashing GenWeb pages out
of hatefulness and spite, don't judge me.
I don't think brainstorming messages are something to be taken too seriously.
What would be your thoughts on how people should be handled that have
destroyed county web pages? Just let them float on to the next state to do
another site the same way when it suited them?
My thoughts were simply aimed at handling things in such a way that we at
USGenWeb and XXGenWeb states would be able to avoid unnecessary hardship from
people who have nothing better to do than to destroy web sites and cause strife.
All we would need to do would be too open about misbehaving and end up getting
sued for slander.
The very essence of my message was aimed at providing SCs with enough information
to make an informed decision, without causing unnecessary publicity for the
CC who had misbehaved.
Sharon
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Several SCs continued the general discussion. (If you want
more of their messages, you should be able to do a search
on the State-Coord list.)
It seemed to me that I was being misunderstood, so I wrote
another message to the State-Coord list, which follows:
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
From: Sharon Williamson <Watauga(a)att.net>
Sat 11:49 PM
Subject: Re: [STATE-COORD-L] Question
To: STATE-COORD-L(a)rootsweb.com
I do wish people would get a grip. I never
suggested a black list. I took what Tim had
said and made some suggestions that would
better protect the privacy of any CCs that
might be involved.
It is hard to justify how a person can come
into a county with a well set up research
center, and just a few months later decide
to leave the project and take all the page
contents with them. It doesn't matter what
has happened to make them want to leave.
There is NO justification for them to trash
the site on the way out. Everyone loses!
I challenge anyone to show where I made a
MOTION that we start a black list!
I just was simply stating that at times it
would be good to have some sort of insight
into potential problem CCs. I never suggested
that a person would be so foolish as to base
their whole decision on any list reports.
For what it is worth, we are all subject to
just such a set up all the time. I would
like to see any of us get moving traffic
violations repeatedly and not end up with
our names having a few "black" marks beside
them.
The bottom line is that no matter what we do
as we go about our lives, there are times we
will suffer consequences from our actions.
Sometimes it might be points on our driving
record, and sometimes it might be that others
don't want to "play" with us because we don't
"behave well" on the "play-ground".
That's life.
Sharon
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Below is a message that came through on the Discuss list
tonight. The message used only a very small bit of my
original statements, and I don't believe the jest of
my thoughts are correctly portrayed in those small tid-bits.
This is why I have included all the messages that I have
above.
I will now respond to the message below.
The question mentioned was rhetorical in nature.
I just want to make it clear that I have no desire to
publicly humiliate anyone, no matter how wrong I feel they
may have been. If you will carefully read my messages to
the State-Coord list and NCDiscuss list, I don't see how
anyone can fairly believe that it was ever my intention to
make a public display of anyone, no matter how upset I may
be at them.
To make a web page that has the details of disagreements
would not be a wise thing to do. We are not the Democrats
and Republicans here. We will not use our NCGenWeb name to
make people miserable. Public stocks and throwing tomatoes
and such have long been a thing of the past, and we at NCGenWeb
will not resurrect them.
However, I do feel we have a responsibility to honestly respond to
anyone who might contact us asking about a particular CC who they
may be considering for their own state project. As I was meaning
to say in the original message to Tim, I believe any such response
should be short and to the point, without going into details that
might come back to haunt us in the form of a slander accusation.
I do feel however, that to post details of such differences on a
web page would not be fair to the CC, and in the long run would
not ba a wise thing for us at NCGenWeb to do.
I will gladly lead in the way that the CCs want to go, but I just
want to make it clear that as far as I am concerned, there will
be NO web page posted with less than friendly remarks about past
or present CCs.
I do apologize for the length and probable confusion of this
message.
Sharon
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
sweetpotato wrote:
My comments to Sharon's question are below Debi's response to Sharon's
question.
----- Original Message -----
From: <FetherTail(a)aol.com>
To: <NCGENWEB-DISCUSS-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2001 1:51 AM
Subject: Re: [NCGENWEB-DISCUSS] Brainstorming
>
> Watauga(a)att.net writes:
>
>
> >
> > What would be your thoughts on how people should be handled that have
> > destroyed county web pages? Just let them float on to the next state to
do
> > another site the same way when it suited them?
>
>
> Since I adopted a site that was at least partially trashed by a former CC
I
> think I understand the problem that is being discussed on the SC-Coord
list.
In real life, a person's reputation speaks about them to others.
Formalized, credit reports do this function, in part. How about if we keep
histories of people who come in and out of N.C. genweb? If they trash a
site, as happened to the one Debi took, then that should be what their
history says about them.
The person who had Rockingham County, is a good example of what the problem
is and I am glad to see it is being dealt with; or, at least, is being
recognized as a problem and being discussed. I remember the situation well
because I took over the county after it was trashed and started rebuilding
it from scratch, for about a month before Debi came in to take it
permanently. That person who did the trashing, came into NCGenWeb right
before our election and left right after it, trashing the county site on her
way out.
As far as I am concerned, if we don't keep some kind of history or record of
people who do things like that, and things like those Paul cited, we deserve
what we get -- it's that simple.
Diana H. F.