--Boundary_(ID_gajx2ZHyx9Zf7+GkSdetug)
Content-type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-55F745D2; charset=us-ascii;
format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
At 11:12 AM 1/31/2003 -0500, Elizabeth Harris wrote:
I agree with Sandy and Carson. We battled through this at length a
couple
of years ago, and we reached a decision that was close only on the issue
of whether the military project was to be considered as one single
project, or a collection of separate projects, each potentially with a
voting member.
Since Derick's proposal was to grant Carson a vote as host of the military
and unknown county pages, if he wanted it, and since it is apparent that
we already voted to do this, why do we need to revisit this issue now?
Sounds reasonable - I think probably most of us had forgotten the result of
the last vote <g>. I know I had! If something should change within the
military project, we can always revisit the topic later, although hopefully
more amicably than the last time.... (When I say change, I'm thinking
something along the lines of, say, a particular portion or effort of the
project that would be so immense that, as a group, we would think it would
justify giving voting privileges to the person involved -- kind of a
recognition of the value & scope of the contribution, if that makes
sense. I actually have a notion in my head; remind me later to go into
detail.)
The issue that was NOT adequately resolved back then was the mechanism
by
which new state-level projects might be created and approved by the
membership, and whether the hosts of any such new projects would also be
eligible to vote if they were not also CCs.
My personal thought on the matter -- the SC should be able to run with
almost any idea (emphasis on almost) for a state-level project if he/she
feels that the need exists, and that the information available justifies
it. In most cases, I would imagine that adding a section to the state page
would accomodate most topical areas, simply by pointing researchers to the
appropriate resources. If the SC determines that the need for a special
project exists, he/she should be able to "annoint" it -- BUT it should be
understood that a "special project" is not a full-fledged voting
member. Before any project would be given voting rights, I think it would
be appropriate for the membership of the project to vote on the
matter. Does that make sense?
Angie
--Boundary_(ID_gajx2ZHyx9Zf7+GkSdetug)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-avg=cert;
x-avg-checked=avg-ok-55F745D2
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-disposition: inline
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (
http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.443 / Virus Database: 248 - Release Date: 1/10/2003
--Boundary_(ID_gajx2ZHyx9Zf7+GkSdetug)--