Angie,
Thanks for your response. Your points are well said.
But let's not get side tracked. First of all we need to come
to some sort of understanding about whether we want to file
for the NCGenWeb Service Mark. Later we can concentrate on
whether we would want to go to Trustees, or just let the SC
(at the time) be the person responsible for such things.
Thanks,
Sharon
Angie Rayfield wrote:
At 06:16 PM 02/22/2001 -0800, Leah Sims wrote:
>Perhaps the best way to learn the will of the majority is to take an
>official poll. The results would be available to all the CCs. This seems
>more democratic than having CCs send their opinions to you privately and
>then all of us only getting a summary of the responses you received.
>I support the idea of having trustees, but only if the trustees are
>not the SC, ASCs, or any person holding a position in the Archives for
>North Carolina. We also might consider that since the application is for
>NC, that only individuals who live in NC can be trustees.
I personally wouldn't feel comfortable in saying that only individuals who
live in NC could be trustees. I don't think NCGW is any different from
USGW in that a lot of people have put untold hours and effort into their
pages, without actually living in the area they've adopted. Especially
given that it's an internet project, I don't think a person's location
should be a factor in whether or not they would be a suitable trustee -- I
think their devotion and dedication to the project would be a far more
important issue.
But I agree that the SC and/or ASCs probably shouldn't be a trustee. It's
not that I think that there would necessarily be a conflict of interest, or
that a trustee couldn't be the SC and also be impartial. But I think,
given the past history of our little group <G>, that it would be best to
avoid even the appearance of conflict.
Angie