This stems from my original post to the board list on Rootsweb on
2/24/2016. All discussion about it was lost when Rootsweb went down, here
is the initial post:
---------------
A constituent has asked for clarification / direction on setting up a
Facebook page for counties they host that would:
- meet whatever criteria National deems necessary
- can show the national logo on
- would be a companion site to the county web site but offer those who want
greater interaction than a mailing list will provide"
What are your opinions?
MaryAlice Schwanke
NWPL-CC Representative for The USGenWeb Project
---------------
MaryAlice Schwanke
NWPL-CC Representative for The USGenWeb Project
The USGenWeb Project is celebrating its 20th Anniversary in 2016!
On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Patrice <genealogy(a)cfl.rr.com> wrote:
Pat, Deloris and Members,
Pat, when RootsWeb went down it was not possible to subscribe those at
Board-L, to the Google Group. RootsWeb was down and we didn't have access
to the subscriber lists.
Deloris, sometimes the only way to get something done is to do it. The
social media discussion began with a CCs request for guidance in February,
if I remember correctly. I am glad there was discussion then and even more
so now. It's past time to provide an answer.
I only want to do what is right for the Project, the CCs and the States.
Rel@ively,
Patrice
At 5/21/2016 01:01 AM, usgenweb-discuss-request(a)rootsweb.com wrote:
> From: Pat Asher
> Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 5:49 PM
> To: Deloris Williams ; usgenweb-discuss(a)rootsweb.com
> Subject: Re: [USGENWEB-DISCUSS] Board Discussion on Social Media
>
> At 06:21 PM 5/20/2016, Deloris Williams via wrote:
> >Thanks for the link Pat. Now, I know this isn???t your fault since you
> >didn???t post the original message, so I am addressing this to the Board.
> >For a proposal like that which affects all of us, shouldn???t this have
> >been presented to the all of the members on a list, such as this
> Discussion
> >List, instead of just on the Board list? If it wasn???t for Mike???s
> >posting a response on this List, most of us wouldn???t have know about
> the
> >proposal. I think that this is something that the entire membership
> should
> >have input on, before presenting it before the Board as a proposal.
> Deloris
> >Williams NCGenWeb -SC
http://www.ncgenweb.us/
>
> Deloris, I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. Any
> member of the USGW Project can subscribe to
> Board-L(a)rootsweb.com in read only mode if they
> care to follow the discussions on Board.
> Unfortunately, because of the RootsWeb server
> failure, most of the posts during the month of
> March when this discussion started were lost from
> the RootsWeb archives. BUT, if you had been
> subscribed to board-L(a)rootsweb.com at the time of
> the RootsWeb server failure, you would have also
> been subscribed to the
googlegroops.com list
> which substituted for board-L(a)rootsweb.com during their problems.
>
> IOW, the choice to follow policy discussions and
> motions of the USGW Advisory Board is yours. You
> choose whether or not to subscribe to the
> national and regional lists that will keep you
> informed about what issues are being considered
> at the national or regional level. If you choose
> not to subscribe to those lists, you can't complain that you were not
> informed.
>
> Pat A.
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Discuss-L" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to discuss-l+unsubscribe(a)googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to discuss-l(a)googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/optout.