Beginning March 2nd, 2020 the Mailing Lists functionality on RootsWeb will be discontinued. Users will no longer be able to send outgoing emails or accept incoming emails. Additionally, administration tools will no longer be available to list administrators and mailing lists will be put into an archival state.
Administrators may save the emails in their list prior to March 2nd. After that, mailing list archives will remain available and searchable on RootsWeb
Because the majority of the committee voted for the proposed revision.
And the plain English speaking minority was defeated.
Sigh.
Ellen-
>From: "Shari Milks" <2skeeter(a)charter.net>
>Reply-To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
>To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
>Subject: Re: [WIGEN-L] Re: UsGenWeb - copyright
>Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 23:20:28 -0700
>
>"the coordinator is equal to a
>volunteer subscriber or researcher that submits data to the site. Everyone
>is considered a contributor and has the right to have their data removed if
>they request. Coordinators do not have the right to take all that belongs
>to other submitters and leave the project an empty shell.
>
>The bylaw revision also does not prevent the coordinator from taking a copy
>with them for their own use."
>
>Then why not just word it in these terms exactly so everyone can understand
>what it says? Much more readable and understandable. It doesn't have to
>sound like a lawyer wrote it. (Most of us are normal)<G>
>Shari Milks
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Ellen- (Genealogy)" <jeanealogist(a)hotmail.com>
>To: <WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
>Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 9:06 PM
>Subject: Re: [WIGEN-L] Re: UsGenWeb - copyright
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >What is the issue and what is the change is that now
> > >the BRC wants to tell the members that work that they
> > >contribute - whether it be a book they authored - that
> > >they MUST leave a copy for the Project when they depart.
> > >
> >
> > This is an incorrect statement.
> >
> > What the bylaw revisions states is that the coordinator is equal to a
> > volunteer subscriber or researcher that submits data to the site.
>Everyone
> > is considered a contributor and has the right to have their data removed
>if
> > they request. Coordinators do not have the right to take all that
>belongs
> > to other submitters and leave the project an empty shell.
> >
> > The bylaw revision also does not prevent the coordinator from taking a
>copy
> > with them for their own use.
> >
> > Ellen- R.
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
> >
> >
> > ==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
> > Celebrate Wisconsin!
> > Visit the Trempealeau County WIGenWeb Project Pages
> > http://www.rootsweb.com/~witrempe/
> >
>
>
>==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
>Celebrate Wisconsin!
>Visit the Waukesha County WIGenWeb Project Pages
>http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwaukes/indice.html
>
_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>What is the issue and what is the change is that now
>the BRC wants to tell the members that work that they
>contribute - whether it be a book they authored - that
>they MUST leave a copy for the Project when they depart.
>
This is an incorrect statement.
What the bylaw revisions states is that the coordinator is equal to a
volunteer subscriber or researcher that submits data to the site. Everyone
is considered a contributor and has the right to have their data removed if
they request. Coordinators do not have the right to take all that belongs
to other submitters and leave the project an empty shell.
The bylaw revision also does not prevent the coordinator from taking a copy
with them for their own use.
Ellen- R.
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Many states have found their own servers and the entire state project
resides on that independent server.
Ellen-
>From: "Shari Milks" <2skeeter(a)charter.net>
>Reply-To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
>To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
>Subject: Re: [WIGEN-L] Know the facts first
>Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 11:31:46 -0700
>
>I think that its pretty myopic of the USGW hierarchy to rely on rootsweb
>for
>their server space. Their time would be well spent to find a friendly
>server
>or get their own in light of Ancestry's track record. Our whole project is
>in jeopardy and many don't seem to understand that. In two years time (more
>or less) we'll be ancient history. Just a "do you remember USGW?" They used
>to be a free gen. site. Our lawyers can fight any breach of contract, but
>by
>the time it works its way through the courts, any breach of contract will
>be
>a moot question, as Ancestry will be charging for all of our hard work all
>that time, and since USGW will no longer exist, the researchers who used
>our
>sites will be their customers.
>Shari Milks
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "RMN" <ocontogal2000(a)yahoo.com>
>To: <WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
>Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 9:29 AM
>Subject: [WIGEN-L] Know the facts first
>
>
> > Craig,
> > Sounds like you are the one crying, instead of caring enough to find
>ways
>to
> > work this out. Just because it is century 21 doesn't mean we dump all
>values,
> > and give up totally to commercialism.
> >
> > We are not in competition with companies. We are not in competition with
>anyone!
> > We fully believe in, and are dedicated to helping others free of charge
>and only
> > want to be able to do it...without a struggle for independence and
>control. We
> > just want promises and agreements kept, not suddenly changed at will by
> > companies or organization leadership. The County Coordinators in
>general
>are
> > keeping our end of theses agreements up admirably.
> >
> > Each cooordinator must respect the right (yes copyright) of a
>contributor
>to
> > withdraw permission on the site for posting their material. US GenWeb
>ALSO
>must
> > respect the right (yes copyright) of volunteer coordinators to withdraw
> > permission for the posting of their own site materials. It is a fact of
>life,
> > and no amount of rule changing is going to affect it. Rather than trying
>to grab
> > control over the information, it would be much better to find ways of
>strongly
> > supporting and working with the people who are posting it...free.
> >
> > Ancestry never was free. It has ALWAYS been a for-profit outfit. It is
> > relatively new to the industry and has taken over essentially all it's
> > for-profit competition in record time. Incidently Ancestry now owns
> > Genealogy.com (recently quietly purchased from the History Channel),
> > Rootsweb.com, and GenConnect. Ancestry keeps the original company names
>and most
> > folks don't realize that all the information and money goes to them.
>There
>is no
> > healthy commercial competition (maybe Heritage to a small degree).
>Ancestry
> > also now owns the only system available for free, large scale volunteer
>access
> > posting... Rootsweb. No one that I have read, has a problem with
>commercial
> > sites. That is their business. People pay for services and information.
>simple
> > and direct. But when it begins to eat away and undermine the ability of
> > volunteers from free access sites, then it is everyone's business and
>deserves
> > to be discussed. And here is a little history on each, no crying
>Craig,
>just
> > years of facts!
> >
> > Rootsweb.com - Began with the Ran McNally Publisher's employees as a
>free
> > exchange of gen information, then went public but still free labor and
>access.
> > Became independent and was made a for-profit venture selling individual
>family
> > website space in order to host it's free access gen information and
>volunteer
> > sites such as XXGenWeb. Rootsweb remained prmarily volunteer. Costs from
> > tremendous growth, constant new equipment demands, and general expenses
>of
> > keeping the system going were too great and they accepted sponsorship of
>one
> > company which went under, then was sold to Ancestry.com. The people who
>ran it
> > gave valiantly and struggled for years to keep open access information
>on
>line
> > through volunteer help.
> >
> > GenConnect:: Initially in an effort to assist with the many types and
>large
> > volumes of information that was being gathered by XXGenWeb volunteers,
>and
>to
> > have a common storage and access place available with the (then)
>modern
>site
> > search engine features, Rootsweb came up with the GenConnect system
>where
> > volunteers, most from the XXGenWeb counties, became the hosts and
>entered
> > obituaries, birth, death, marriage, probate, estate, and whatever else
>that
> > they researched and was sent in by contributors. They also offered
>message
> > boards for each county, hosted by a volunteer, often XXGenWeb county
>site
> > coordinators. Participation was optional but it sounded like a good
>idea,
>and
> > was, until Ancestry bought Rootsweb with promises of not changing or
>tampering
> > with the frees access volunteer information. And soon afterward, took
>complete
> > control of all information on GenConnect and the Message boards, telling
>the
> > county volunteers they no longer had any claims to the work they spent
>several
> > years doing. It was now all the property of Ancestry. The message boards
>may say
> > Rootsweb, but Ancestry is where all information is held and boards are
>overseen.
> > Ask Rootsweb a question about the boards and you are told to go to
>Ancestry for
> > the answers.
> >
> > XXGenWeb's agreement was originally with the Rootsweb people. They are
>no
>longer
> > there. The rules for our internet support are now with Ancestry in a one
>year
> > committment. Ancestry has given XXGenWeb fress internet access within
>that
> > agreement guidlines. The actual infomation on the county sites belongs
>to
>the
> > contributors alone, they give only pernission to post it. Posting work
>and
> > format of each page belongs to the site coordinator who produced them,
>and
>that
> > person has the obligation to maintain the quality and growth of site
>material.
> >
> > Graig, I'd say your grip was slipping. Now I will go back and add more
>for
>the
> > county site, volunteers and contributors I am dedicated to. Rita -
>Oconto
> > County
> >
> >
> > Craig Moore wrote:
> >
> > > You folks make me sick. What a bunch of crybabies! Yes Ancestry.com
>isn't
> > > free any more. How else can they afford to put census collections on
>line?
> > > Do you think it doesn't cost anything to transcribe all that
>information?
> > > I'm willing to bet that within ten years even GenWeb will no longer be
>free;
> > > it costs money to host a site, don't you know.
> > >
> > > I thought the idea was to help people find their families, not worry
>about
> > > whether or not "our" information is free or if someone has to pay to
>view
> > > it. Get a grip; this is the 21st century.
> > >
> > > Craig
> > >
> > > ==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
> > > Celebrate Wisconsin!
> > > Visit the Washington County WIGenWeb Project Pages
> > > http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwashin/
> >
> >
> > ==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
> > Celebrate Wisconsin!
> > Visit the Taylor County WIGenWeb Project Pages
> > http://www.rootsweb.com/~witaylor/
> >
>
>
>==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
>Celebrate Wisconsin!
>Visit the Walworth County WIGenWeb Project Pages
>http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwalwor/
>
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
At 11:31 AM 7/30/03 -0700, Shari Milks wrote:
>I think that its pretty myopic of the USGW hierarchy to rely on rootsweb for
>their server space. Their time would be well spent to find a friendly server
>or get their own in light of Ancestry's track record. Our whole project is
>in jeopardy and many don't seem to understand that. In two years time (more
>or less) we'll be ancient history. Just a "do you remember USGW?" They used
>to be a free gen. site. Our lawyers can fight any breach of contract, but by
>the time it works its way through the courts, any breach of contract will be
>a moot question, as Ancestry will be charging for all of our hard work all
>that time, and since USGW will no longer exist, the researchers who used our
>sites will be their customers.
>Shari Milks
Actually we are already a front door for Ancestry* - we are bait as it were,
here's some free stuff but if you want more, open your wallet.
* That's another story.
Tim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Stowell" <tstowell(a)chattanooga.net>
> Actually in reading the proposed change - it wouldn't matter if
> you host it on Rootsweb or not - it says the site - not where it
> is located.
[Sure, this would work, you put up the skeleton site and then link to a
non-usgw website. Welcome - you've just entered JansDigs, in no way
affiliated with the USGW Project!]
> Perhaps a stepping stone started when the NC signed a hosting
> agreement with Rootsweb - which he knew about in October and
> finally decided to let the AB know about it in April.
>
> I doubt that the powers that be will listen to visitors,
> since they don't listen to the rank and file now.
[I'll concede to that point!] <grin>
Jan
Hi all, hate to interrupt, but...
I haven't been able to upload pages all day, keep getting "connection
failed users.rootsweb.com". Anybody else having trouble or is it just
me?
Lori of Columbia Co.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Craig,
Sounds like you are the one crying, instead of caring enough to find ways to
work this out. Just because it is century 21 doesn't mean we dump all values,
and give up totally to commercialism.
We are not in competition with companies. We are not in competition with anyone!
We fully believe in, and are dedicated to helping others free of charge and only
want to be able to do it...without a struggle for independence and control. We
just want promises and agreements kept, not suddenly changed at will by
companies or organization leadership. The County Coordinators in general are
keeping our end of theses agreements up admirably.
Each cooordinator must respect the right (yes copyright) of a contributor to
withdraw permission on the site for posting their material. US GenWeb ALSO must
respect the right (yes copyright) of volunteer coordinators to withdraw
permission for the posting of their own site materials. It is a fact of life,
and no amount of rule changing is going to affect it. Rather than trying to grab
control over the information, it would be much better to find ways of strongly
supporting and working with the people who are posting it...free.
Ancestry never was free. It has ALWAYS been a for-profit outfit. It is
relatively new to the industry and has taken over essentially all it's
for-profit competition in record time. Incidently Ancestry now owns
Genealogy.com (recently quietly purchased from the History Channel),
Rootsweb.com, and GenConnect. Ancestry keeps the original company names and most
folks don't realize that all the information and money goes to them. There is no
healthy commercial competition (maybe Heritage to a small degree). Ancestry
also now owns the only system available for free, large scale volunteer access
posting... Rootsweb. No one that I have read, has a problem with commercial
sites. That is their business. People pay for services and information. simple
and direct. But when it begins to eat away and undermine the ability of
volunteers from free access sites, then it is everyone's business and deserves
to be discussed. And here is a little history on each, no crying Craig, just
years of facts!
Rootsweb.com - Began with the Ran McNally Publisher's employees as a free
exchange of gen information, then went public but still free labor and access.
Became independent and was made a for-profit venture selling individual family
website space in order to host it's free access gen information and volunteer
sites such as XXGenWeb. Rootsweb remained prmarily volunteer. Costs from
tremendous growth, constant new equipment demands, and general expenses of
keeping the system going were too great and they accepted sponsorship of one
company which went under, then was sold to Ancestry.com. The people who ran it
gave valiantly and struggled for years to keep open access information on line
through volunteer help.
GenConnect:: Initially in an effort to assist with the many types and large
volumes of information that was being gathered by XXGenWeb volunteers, and to
have a common storage and access place available with the (then) modern site
search engine features, Rootsweb came up with the GenConnect system where
volunteers, most from the XXGenWeb counties, became the hosts and entered
obituaries, birth, death, marriage, probate, estate, and whatever else that
they researched and was sent in by contributors. They also offered message
boards for each county, hosted by a volunteer, often XXGenWeb county site
coordinators. Participation was optional but it sounded like a good idea, and
was, until Ancestry bought Rootsweb with promises of not changing or tampering
with the frees access volunteer information. And soon afterward, took complete
control of all information on GenConnect and the Message boards, telling the
county volunteers they no longer had any claims to the work they spent several
years doing. It was now all the property of Ancestry. The message boards may say
Rootsweb, but Ancestry is where all information is held and boards are overseen.
Ask Rootsweb a question about the boards and you are told to go to Ancestry for
the answers.
XXGenWeb's agreement was originally with the Rootsweb people. They are no longer
there. The rules for our internet support are now with Ancestry in a one year
committment. Ancestry has given XXGenWeb fress internet access within that
agreement guidlines. The actual infomation on the county sites belongs to the
contributors alone, they give only pernission to post it. Posting work and
format of each page belongs to the site coordinator who produced them, and that
person has the obligation to maintain the quality and growth of site material.
Graig, I'd say your grip was slipping. Now I will go back and add more for the
county site, volunteers and contributors I am dedicated to. Rita - Oconto
County
Craig Moore wrote:
> You folks make me sick. What a bunch of crybabies! Yes Ancestry.com isn't
> free any more. How else can they afford to put census collections on line?
> Do you think it doesn't cost anything to transcribe all that information?
> I'm willing to bet that within ten years even GenWeb will no longer be free;
> it costs money to host a site, don't you know.
>
> I thought the idea was to help people find their families, not worry about
> whether or not "our" information is free or if someone has to pay to view
> it. Get a grip; this is the 21st century.
>
> Craig
>
> ==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
> Celebrate Wisconsin!
> Visit the Washington County WIGenWeb Project Pages
> http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwashin/
What we need to do is get every bit of our information off of
rootsweb and house it elsewhere. We set up a skeleton USGW
page and then move into a link to our copyrighted pages to
ourselves and our volunteers, stating very bluntly up front
that it is *NOT* a part of USGW.
I have noticed over the course of the last year that more and
more rights are asked by the AB to be taken away from us,
even the signing of contracts to new CC's and retroactive
giving them rights to what we have.
This my friends does not smack of a volunteer organization,
but, of one big huge grab at our hard work.
We need notes on our pages asking the visitors to protest and
let them know what is happening, because in the end it will
all be swallowed up by ancestry, if this is allowed to
continue.
Jan
In a message dated 7/30/2003 7:52:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
eaglewiz(a)newnorth.net writes:
> You folks make me sick. What a bunch of crybabies! Yes Ancestry.com isn't
> free any more. How else can they afford to put census collections on line?
> Do you think it doesn't cost anything to transcribe all that information?
> I'm willing to bet that within ten years even GenWeb will no longer be free;
> it costs money to host a site, don't you know.
>
> I thought the idea was to help people find their families, not worry about
> whether or not "our" information is free or if someone has to pay to view
> it. Get a grip; this is the 21st century.
>
> Craig
Morning Craig,
I'm not sure if you understand where you are coming from per your remarks, so
I'll explain it to you clearly. I work HOURS for FREE each day typing,
retyping, etc. data that people have spent days walking each cemetery for FREE, I
spend my own money to acquire & maintain the ability to post this data for FREE,
and I shouldn't worry that someone who isn't even into genealogy research can
make $$$ from my FREE site....BTW, what if one of our largest groups of
researchers (elderly and disabled) can't afford the PAY sites??? I happen to fall
into that group and FREE Internet access to everyone is why I do what I do for
HOURS at a time. If you notice, "the crybabies" seem to have the sites with
the most time and effort spent on them....Shawano County has over 500 visitors
each week -- and they aren't there to look for addresses for people to mail
letters to...I list whole cemeteries -- about 30+ at present, with the ability
to list the ENTIRE county, thanks to FREE volunteers, I post PLAT MAPS that I
index so the surnames are searchable through search engines...for FREE, I have
posted over 5000 obituaries for FREE.... I could keep listing the items on
my site, but it's a drop in the bucket compared to what some of the "other
crybabies" have on their pages....you'll find more in Waupaca, Manitowoc &
Oconto's GenWeb sites than if you drove to the county and spent a week looking
through archives....I know that because I'm in those sites searching for my families
for FREE. I know there are more CC's that have the same well organized and
over-flowing databases in their web pages...I just haven't searched them
yet....
And Ancestry...the subscription rates keep increasing and I am STILL waiting
for the 1930 Langlade Census to be fully functional for each township. How
many times over do you think the 1930 census has been paid for through
subscriptions? Ancestry.com isn't hurting! I PERSONALLY worked on extracting the 1880
Federal Census Project for FREE online use at familysearch.org -- I know what
it involves and we extracted each page's data, not just took image pictures
to post so please don't think about telling me how expensive transcribing
census data really is....we did ours manually -- they have software now that reads
handwriting.
And I did just turn over a county to a new co-ordinator --- and she is free
to use my past data posted...but if she chooses not to, that's fine too as I
would contribute it to the GenWeb ARCHIVES and it would still be available for
FREE use. I don't feel we need to be told every move to make or how to make
it.
I know, we crybabies just should sit back and NOT ask questions.... had my
ancestors had the same "go-with-the-flow" idealism, I'd be drinking
English-taxed tea this morning! I think "crybabies" might just have a little more
backbone, don't you think?
Just my two bits....this morning was not a good day to refer to me a
crybaby...
Anne
Shawano CC
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And my current projects are:
<A HREF="http://www.rootsweb.com/~wishawan/">WELCOME to SHAWANO CO. WIGenWeb</A>
<A HREF="http://www.rootsweb.com/~nhcgilma">WELCOME TO THE GILMANTON NH ANCESTORS SITE</A>
<A HREF="http://www.rootsweb.com/~ctbiog/">CONNECTICUT BIOGRAPHIES PROJECT</A>
<A HREF="http://www.rootsweb.com/~wishabio/">Shawano County Wisconsin Biographies</A>
<A HREF="http://www.rootsweb.com/~wilanbio/">Langlade County Wisconsin Biographies</A>
The Obituary Daily Times - Tagname "ATCz"
Genie-Angels ~ Random Acts of Genealogical Kindness
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ellen,
Most of the people who have contributed to my site have done so because
I've assured them their records will NOT be housed on a RootsWeb server for
the very reasons others have already stated........they seem to imply the
right to promote what is on their servers and as I mentioned last night, we
found out the rights they claim are irrevocable. Once they have your
information, they will not purge it from their system upon request. So,
what happens if the new CC decides to move the remaining site onto the RW
server and dishonor the requests of the original contributors? Some may no
longer be in a position to request removal.........and even if they were, my
experience says they won't be able to get it off. It will remain in the
archives of Ancestry.com and always be in jeopardy of being moved to their
pay for view site. I honestly believe things have worked best when the
organization has not claimed ownership of the individual sites and as I
mentioned last night, I'm not even sure that would even be legal. But, if
we go on the premise that it is, then, who is going to handle the legal
ramifications down the line. What will happen if my grandchild wants to
resurrect my work (which the organization has claimed) and post it
independently on the internet? Does the organization truly need to get into
all of those problems? I can't see that they way it has been handled has
crippled the growth of the project. As Shari said, "If it ain't broke, why
fix it?"
Janet
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ellen- (Genealogy)" <jeanealogist(a)hotmail.com>
To: <WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 8:05 AM
Subject: RE: [WIGEN-L] Wrong! VERY Wrong!!
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for your input. What county are you from?
>
> I, as do all the bylaws committee appreciate the input we have been
getting
> thus far on this section. Positive or negative, we can't revise bylaws
for
> the people if the people have nothing to say about it.
>
> Now to your point, Craig...the concern as to what happens if Ancestry
takes
> over is a very valid concern. Most of us volunteered for this project for
> various reasons, bottom line however is that we don't want researchers to
> have to pay for the data that we have painstakingly put on the websites.
>
> I personally do not want to see researchers paying for the thousands of
> hours of work I personally and freely contributed to my site. I am not in
> this for the money and no one else should monitarily benefit from my work.
>
> Some of us don't have money to spend on research fees and the like, Craig.
> This may be the 21st century but that doesn't mean kindess and generosity
> can't be given out for free. It doesn't mean someone else should benefit
> from someone else's generosity.
>
> I believe much of what has been posted in regards to this bylaw revision
is
> speculation. It put a lot of whatifs into the scenerio that were not in
the
> original intention of the proposed revision, which is a good thing. This
> section will have to be reviewed again before the final vote is taken.
>
> Keep in mind though folks...this is only one portion of the bylaws and it
> has to be read in its entirely to get the full benefit of the meaning.
You
> can't take something out of context and expect to understand the jist of
> meaning.
>
> Information staying with the website does not mean that USGW is handing it
> over to Ancestry. What it means is USGW is trying to protect your work so
> that others don't take it away.
>
> How would you feel if you had to step down from being coordinator and the
> new CC that came in removed everything that you had placed on the site?
> Without the bylaw there would be nothing preventing them from doing that.
>
> Also, keep in mind, it doesn't say in the bylaws that you can't keep a
copy
> with you for your own use. The website design and layout of the content
on
> your site is still yours. Actually it is important that you keep a back
up
> of your site off your own premises. (in the case of fire etc). Nothing on
> the internet prevents you from putting up your own site. If you leave the
> project, just put up your site somewhere else so that the data remains
free
> as well as whatever happens to it in the USGW. Or if you are the
submitter
> of the majority of the data, just ask to have your portion of the data
> removed and then put up your own site.
>
> Although the USGW name offers credibility, one does not need the USGW name
> to put up a website. I have proved that with my Milwaukee site, my Spanish
> American War site and Shari and my Marine site.
>
> I disagree with Shari in that the USGW has given her nothing. It has
given
> her credibility and it has given her support by being a nationwide
project.
> I would have never found my ancestors if it had not been for the
connection
> provided to her through the USGW (I found the Wisconsin link first off of
> the USGW main site and travelled down to to the county level). If I
hadn't
> see what a valuable resource Shari was providing, I would have never
started
> in on the county I live in or any neighboring counties.
>
> We cannot predict what is going to happen 3, 5 or 10 years from now.
Change
> happens and we have to expect that what we do now will not be the same 10
> years from now. We need to be prepared for all the scenerios present.
Bad
> good and ugly.
>
> Ellen-
> Waukesha County
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: "Craig Moore" <eaglewiz(a)newnorth.net>
> >Reply-To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
> >To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
> >Subject: RE: [WIGEN-L] Wrong! VERY Wrong!!
> >Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 06:48:53 -0500
> >
> >
> >You folks make me sick. What a bunch of crybabies! Yes Ancestry.com isn't
> >free any more. How else can they afford to put census collections on
line?
> >Do you think it doesn't cost anything to transcribe all that information?
> >I'm willing to bet that within ten years even GenWeb will no longer be
> >free;
> >it costs money to host a site, don't you know.
> >
> >I thought the idea was to help people find their families, not worry
about
> >whether or not "our" information is free or if someone has to pay to view
> >it. Get a grip; this is the 21st century.
> >
> >Craig
> >
> >
> >
> >==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
> >Celebrate Wisconsin!
> >Visit the Washington County WIGenWeb Project Pages
> >http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwashin/
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>
> ==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
> Celebrate Wisconsin!
> Visit the Trempealeau County WIGenWeb Project Pages
> http://www.rootsweb.com/~witrempe/
>
Janet - Just my thoughts below, but I think you need
to re-read the ammendment - and not read so much into
it.
All it is saying is that when a CC (webmaster) steps
down, they cannot take the material with them. That
is will remain at the site - That is what you are
trying to do. Keep the information with the site -
It is not putting restrictions on where it is
residing.
What often happens far too often, is a CC leaves and
takes all the information with them - since the
information was contributed to the site - it should
remain there and the next CC build on it. The way it
is now, if a CC leaves, they can take all the
information and leave the county barren - that is not
fair to anyone of us who work so hard to keep WIGenWeb
a viable project.
USGenWeb is separate project from Rootsweb and from
Ancestory - some people elect to have their
information on the rootsweb server and some do not -
that is not a requirement. When Rootsweb was
purchased a contract was made to allow USGenWeb to
remain as a FREE service. That cannot be compromised
without a legal battle.
Joint pages mean that the contributors are electing to
put their information at each of the joint sites - so
the information is being contributed to both USGenWeb
and ALHN in your case -
If you leave the project now - do you plan to take all
the information down? I am saddened by your decision
and hope you reconsider.
R/S MAK
--- Janet <Schwarze(a)Charter.net> wrote:
> They are depending on us to keep this information
free of other copy-right claims and I'm afraid if we
wait to see if these changes arerealized, we'll be too
locked in.
=====
MAKTranscriber -
http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwoodhttp://www.rootsweb.com/~wiportaghttp://www.rootsweb.com/~wimonroe
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Hi,
Thanks for your input. What county are you from?
I, as do all the bylaws committee appreciate the input we have been getting
thus far on this section. Positive or negative, we can't revise bylaws for
the people if the people have nothing to say about it.
Now to your point, Craig...the concern as to what happens if Ancestry takes
over is a very valid concern. Most of us volunteered for this project for
various reasons, bottom line however is that we don't want researchers to
have to pay for the data that we have painstakingly put on the websites.
I personally do not want to see researchers paying for the thousands of
hours of work I personally and freely contributed to my site. I am not in
this for the money and no one else should monitarily benefit from my work.
Some of us don't have money to spend on research fees and the like, Craig.
This may be the 21st century but that doesn't mean kindess and generosity
can't be given out for free. It doesn't mean someone else should benefit
from someone else's generosity.
I believe much of what has been posted in regards to this bylaw revision is
speculation. It put a lot of whatifs into the scenerio that were not in the
original intention of the proposed revision, which is a good thing. This
section will have to be reviewed again before the final vote is taken.
Keep in mind though folks...this is only one portion of the bylaws and it
has to be read in its entirely to get the full benefit of the meaning. You
can't take something out of context and expect to understand the jist of
meaning.
Information staying with the website does not mean that USGW is handing it
over to Ancestry. What it means is USGW is trying to protect your work so
that others don't take it away.
How would you feel if you had to step down from being coordinator and the
new CC that came in removed everything that you had placed on the site?
Without the bylaw there would be nothing preventing them from doing that.
Also, keep in mind, it doesn't say in the bylaws that you can't keep a copy
with you for your own use. The website design and layout of the content on
your site is still yours. Actually it is important that you keep a back up
of your site off your own premises. (in the case of fire etc). Nothing on
the internet prevents you from putting up your own site. If you leave the
project, just put up your site somewhere else so that the data remains free
as well as whatever happens to it in the USGW. Or if you are the submitter
of the majority of the data, just ask to have your portion of the data
removed and then put up your own site.
Although the USGW name offers credibility, one does not need the USGW name
to put up a website. I have proved that with my Milwaukee site, my Spanish
American War site and Shari and my Marine site.
I disagree with Shari in that the USGW has given her nothing. It has given
her credibility and it has given her support by being a nationwide project.
I would have never found my ancestors if it had not been for the connection
provided to her through the USGW (I found the Wisconsin link first off of
the USGW main site and travelled down to to the county level). If I hadn't
see what a valuable resource Shari was providing, I would have never started
in on the county I live in or any neighboring counties.
We cannot predict what is going to happen 3, 5 or 10 years from now. Change
happens and we have to expect that what we do now will not be the same 10
years from now. We need to be prepared for all the scenerios present. Bad
good and ugly.
Ellen-
Waukesha County
>From: "Craig Moore" <eaglewiz(a)newnorth.net>
>Reply-To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
>To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
>Subject: RE: [WIGEN-L] Wrong! VERY Wrong!!
>Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 06:48:53 -0500
>
>
>You folks make me sick. What a bunch of crybabies! Yes Ancestry.com isn't
>free any more. How else can they afford to put census collections on line?
>Do you think it doesn't cost anything to transcribe all that information?
>I'm willing to bet that within ten years even GenWeb will no longer be
>free;
>it costs money to host a site, don't you know.
>
>I thought the idea was to help people find their families, not worry about
>whether or not "our" information is free or if someone has to pay to view
>it. Get a grip; this is the 21st century.
>
>Craig
>
>
>
>==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
>Celebrate Wisconsin!
>Visit the Washington County WIGenWeb Project Pages
>http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwashin/
>
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
The Bylaws Revision Committee (BRC) has completed a first
draft revision of Section 4 of Article X. Local Projects.
Section 4. If a Local Coordinator can no longer perform their
duties for any reason, (including, but not limited to,
abandonment of the
site, resignation or dismissal for valid cause), content of the website
submitted by contributors shall remain with the website, unless the
contributor(s) otherwise request.
All revision drafts may be viewed at http://home.mchsi.com/~sagitta56/
Members are encouraged to send comments or questions related to this or
other revision drafts.
Roger Swafford
BRC - Chairman
====================================
The Discuss list and other lists have exploded yesterday (7/29) regarding
this issue.
Some folks (the revisionists and some others) seem to think that anything
you contribute to your county site - that when you leave this Project, that
you must leave your work as part of the site. While you can take a copy
with you - these folks are saying you MUST leave a copy with the USGenWeb
Project.
The policy thus far has been that when a person leaves they are free to
take the items they have contributed to the site, if they so desire - while
leaving the queries or other material contributed by others to the site.
Also the policy thus far has been that if you adopt x site that if the
former coordinator gives their site and its entire contents to the Project
that the new coordinator would leave the previous person's work - modify
the contact information, but leave the data as is.
I do not support the proposed policy change.
Tim
That is exactly the intention of the bylaw.
Thanks for your comments, Jenny.
Ellen-
Waukesha County
Member Bylaws Revision Committee
>From: "Jenny" <outagamie_cc(a)bethurem.com>
>Reply-To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
>To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
>Subject: [WIGEN-L] Bylaws Revision
>Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 21:47:50 -0500
>
> When I was a part of the IAGenWeb as a CC and also as Welcome Hostess
>we occasionally had problems with entire county sites, along with all of
>their contributed data, up and vanish overnight. Sometimes this was
>because
>a server went down or changed domains or sometimes it was because the CC
>was
>mad and decided to take everything out of spite. What ever the reason the
>result was the same, the county site was gone and had to be rebuilt from
>scratch. All of the contributed information was gone.
> I believe the bylaws are meant to protect against someone purposely
>removing all of the contributed data from a GenWeb site. It also prevents
>a
>new cc from removing all of the "old" data to make way for the "new and
>improved" data. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the current bylaw and the
>proposed revision, but I think they're there with the best of intentions.
>I
>don't necessarily agree with the bylaws entirely but I don't believe
>USGenWeb or Ancestry is trying to take over everything.
>
>I just thought I'd throw out a different way of looking at it.
>
>Jenny
>Outagamie Co.
>
>
>==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
>Celebrate Wisconsin!
>Visit the Trempealeau County WIGenWeb Project Pages
>http://www.rootsweb.com/~witrempe/
>
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
I have just had the chance to get back to the computer tonight had WOW there
are over 100 messages about this suject. This is a very good email Janet and
I think this voices not only your feelings but many of the other county
coordinators.
Paula
WaupacaCC
>From: "Janet" <Schwarze(a)Charter.net>
>Reply-To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
>To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
>Subject: Re: [WIGEN-L] If....
>Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 16:49:40 -0500
>
>It truly troubles me to think the organization would control the database
>and could simple change the password and ace me out of the picture. That
>is
>*exactly* why we now refuse to post ANY of our personal records on the
>RootsWeb server. I thought that was protection enough......now, to hear
>Roger say it will belong to the organization, no matter where it is hosted
>really rubs me the wrong way!!! Fortunately, the president of USGenNet
>told
>me this morning that they'd NEVER release the information from our site
>short of a Court order which I seriously doubt would ever be given. I'm
>also troubled how Ellen Pack states that posters think they are
>contributing
>to GenWeb because I know how hard I have to work to treat people just right
>and build up a core of volunteers. Even Stan and I haven't thought we were
>contributing our private database to the organization for them to claim
>should anything happen to us. If I wanted to insure that, I'd put it in
>the
>GenWeb Archives. I think Ellen is off-base in believing people are giving
>their info to GenWeb. People let us display it because they DON'T think
>GenWeb will make any claim to it. They DON'T think we are like RootsWeb
>and
>Ancestry.com and THAT is why they choose to give it to us. I've always
>thought that was the advantage GenWeb had over Ancestry/MyFamily. Why not
>leave things as they are and only accept material on behalf of the
>organization's permanent database if it is given by the submitter with that
>stipulation. Why assume they would want us to continue to display it
>forever unless they tell us not too? Why not assume it is our privilege to
>use their work and not our right? Can't we let the submitter decide if it
>should be a permanent arrangement which would stand regardless of who the
>webmaster may be? I think people are more willing to contribute if we
>DON'T
>put any claims on their copyright whatsoever. As I said, the option of
>donating one's work to the Archives for lasting preservation is always
>available. Let's not over-step our bounds and become clones of the
>commercial entities.
>All the best,
>Janet
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "RMN" <ocontogal2000(a)yahoo.com>
>To: <WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
>Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 4:23 PM
>Subject: [WIGEN-L] If....
>
>
> > Pray for a non-commercial, non-governmental sponsor for the independent
>XXGenWeb
> > organization. There has to be someone with big bucks somewhere that
>believes in,
> > and would support, what we are doing independently. Right?? Maybe? I
>hope?
>Rita
> >
> > Paula Vaughan wrote:
> >
> > > My main concern is - it was presented in one way and now it appears it
>is
> > > changing mid - stream. My concern is - if the decision is made to no
>longer
> > > present this material for FREE - I should be able to keep my
>information
>and
> > > move it else where. I feel this way - as it was presently to me in
>this
> > > matter when I became the Waupaca it should remain that way.
> > >
> > > I want to continue to insure that the information I work hard to
>present
>for
> > > FREE - remains FREE. How can I be assured this will happen?
> > >
> > > Paula
> > >
> > > >From: RMN <ocontogal2000(a)yahoo.com>
> > > >Reply-To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
> > > >To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
> > > >Subject: [WIGEN-L] Wrong! VERY Wrong!!
> > > >Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 16:18:49 -0400
> > > >
> > > >These are my comments in response to discussion on this revision
>notice
> > > >and your really uninformed letter! The original section does not
>need
> > > >any revision. Your judgement is frightening and not to be trusted,
> > > >especially reading your personal proclaimation on the role of the
>county
> > > >coordinator and ownership. Twisted, totally incorrect and
>disrespectful
> > > >to all who have given so much.. Who rattled your cage and made you
> > > >king? Rita - Oconto County WIGenWeb Webmaster, CC, LC or whatever
>you
> > > >choose for name of the week!
> > > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > >In addition to Paula's concerns on Section 4, I have two of my own.
> > > >1. Is this proclaimation expected to cover what has already been
>posted
> > > >to the
> > > >sites under a totally different set of rules? My understanding upon
> > > >taking the
> > > >site was that the information/format belonged to the website
> > > >owner/webmaster....me.
> > > >
> > > >2. The volunteers and contributors have given me written permission
>for
> > > >their
> > > >posted material with the understanding that I would use them in a
>very
> > > >specified
> > > >manner, and in turn I agreed to follow the rules of the USGenWeb. Do
> > > >these
> > > >county sites now suddenly belong to the US GenWeb??
> > > >I am not comfortable with this at all!
> > > >Rita - Oconto County
> > > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > >What Janet says here makes tremendous sense. I've watched Ancestry
> > > >devour once
> > > >noble Rootsweb and GenConnect and knew that they were working toward
>our
> > > >XX
> > > >GENWEB sites. This is a blatant ploy at boldly restating the
>"generally
> > > >accepted" working policies, weakening the system and breaking down
>the
> > > >group. I
> > > >am now justifiably suspicious of those on these committees, and their
> > > >loyalties. This proposed ruling hands it right over to them. GenWeb
> > > >needs to
> > > >make a break from Ancestry, now, to survive the cancer. Rita -
>Oconto
> > > >County
> > > >
> > > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > >I strongly beg to differ with Roger....it has NOT " commonly accepted
> > > >that whenever a change in CC's (Local
> > > > > Coordinators) occurs, material contributed to the website remains
>with
> > > >the
> > > > > associated website (regardless of where hosted). The task of being
>a
> > > >CC is
> > > > > to provide the means of "free access" to those materials on behalf
>of
> > > >the
> > > > > project and to add to those materials whenever possible.
>Therefore,
> > > >the CC
> > > > > (Local Coordinator) is also a contributor. It is reasonable to
>expect
> > > >that
> > > > > all contributions to a project website remain part of the website
> > > >regardless"
> > > >Rita - Oconto County
> > > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > >ARTICLE X. COPYRIGHT
> > > >
> > > >Section 1. In The USGenWeb Project, copyright of websites resides
>solely
> > > >
> > > >with the creator of the web page(s). Their inclusion as part of The
> > > >USGenWeb
> > > >Project does not give any irrevocable right, implied or otherwise, to
> > > >The
> > > >USGenWeb Project to permanently use the material.
> > > >Section 2. In The USGenWeb Project, copyright to queries and any
>other
> > > >data
> > > >submitted to any state or local websites resides with the submitter.
>The
> > > >
> > > >submission of queries and other data to The USGenWeb Project implies
> > > >that
> > > >The USGenWeb Project may continue to post the material until/if such
> > > >time
> > > >the submitter requests removal.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > (**Please forward to all appropriate project lists**)
> > > > >
> > > > > First I wish to thank everyone who has sent comments and
>suggestions
> > > > > regarding the latest revision draft. I'm confident that some
>rewording
> > > >and
> > > > > grammar changes will be made during final review.
> > > > >
> > > > > Our project consists of volunteers with a common purpose. To
>provide
> > > >"free
> > > > > access" information. Project members are those who maintain a
>website
> > > >as a
> > > > > component part of the project or a XXGenWeb project, and abides by
>the
> > > >
> > > >basic
> > > > > requirements for those websites, such as the display of the logo.
>It
> > > >follows
> > > > > then that when the bylaws refer to websites it means those which
>are
> > > > > associated with The USGenWeb Project.
> > > > >
> > > > > It has been commonly accepted that whenever a change in CC's
>(Local
> > > > > Coordinators) occurs, material contributed to the website remains
>with
> > > >the
> > > > > associated website (regardless of where hosted). The task of being
>a
> > > >CC is
> > > > > to provide the means of "free access" to those materials on behalf
>of
> > > >the
> > > > > project and to add to those materials whenever possible.
>Therefore,
> > > >the CC
> > > > > (Local Coordinator) is also a contributor. It is reasonable to
>expect
> > > >that
> > > > > all contributions to a project website remain part of the website
> > > >regardless
> > > > > of who the coordinator is or where the site is hosted.
> > > > > The draft revision contains "shall remain with the website, unless
>the
> > > >
> > > > > contributor(s) otherwise request." Very often contributors can't
>be
> > > > > contacted to obtain permission to continue use or to move to
>another
> > > >host.
> > > > > Therefore all contributions should be considered as for permanent
>use
> > > >by
> > > >The
> > > > > USGenWeb Project as long as the material is available for "free
> > > >access".
> > > > > The purpose of the project and the spirit of volunteerism in
>providing
> > > >
> > > >free
> > > > > access material is best served by XXGenWeb county websites which
> > > >continue
> > > >to
> > > > > grow and remain intact. Members who depart are entitled to keep
>copies
> > > >of
> > > > > their own work and are expected to provide copies for continued
>use
>by
> > > >the
> > > > > project.
> > > > >
> > > > > Roger
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
> > > >Celebrate Wisconsin!
> > > >Visit the Waukesha County WIGenWeb Project Pages
> > > >http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwaukes/indice.html
> > > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
> > > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
> > >
> > > ==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
> > > Celebrate Wisconsin!
> > > Visit the Waupaca County WIGenWeb Project Pages
> > > http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwaupac/index.htm
> >
> >
> > ==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
> > Celebrate Wisconsin!
> > Visit the Washburn County WIGenWeb Project Pages
> > http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwashbu/
> >
>
>
>==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
>Celebrate Wisconsin!
>Visit the Washington County WIGenWeb Project Pages
>http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwashin/
>
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
When I was a part of the IAGenWeb as a CC and also as Welcome Hostess
we occasionally had problems with entire county sites, along with all of
their contributed data, up and vanish overnight. Sometimes this was because
a server went down or changed domains or sometimes it was because the CC was
mad and decided to take everything out of spite. What ever the reason the
result was the same, the county site was gone and had to be rebuilt from
scratch. All of the contributed information was gone.
I believe the bylaws are meant to protect against someone purposely
removing all of the contributed data from a GenWeb site. It also prevents a
new cc from removing all of the "old" data to make way for the "new and
improved" data. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the current bylaw and the
proposed revision, but I think they're there with the best of intentions. I
don't necessarily agree with the bylaws entirely but I don't believe
USGenWeb or Ancestry is trying to take over everything.
I just thought I'd throw out a different way of looking at it.
Jenny
Outagamie Co.
Tina:
You resubbed me under my new email, unfortunately my old one is still active
till the end of the year when Comcast shuts it down for good. Could you please
unsub mrsgrinnin(a)attbi.com. I am getting 2 emails from every post to the list
and with the recent animated discussion I had 92 emails in my inbox, 99% from
this list. HELP!!!!!
As to my 2 bits on the discussion, I have contributed 90% of the materials
available to the Pierce County site with my own time and money. That makes ME
the owner of these materials, not the GenWeb project, Rootsweb or any of their
parent affiliates. Inclusion on the Pierce County WIGenWeb project is at my
discretion as owner of those materials. If Rootsweb wishes to reimburse me for
my expenses, then they can claim ownership. I'll be sure to send them an
itemized bill.
Debbie Barrett
Pierce County WIGenWeb project
It truly troubles me to think the organization would control the database
and could simple change the password and ace me out of the picture. That is
*exactly* why we now refuse to post ANY of our personal records on the
RootsWeb server. I thought that was protection enough......now, to hear
Roger say it will belong to the organization, no matter where it is hosted
really rubs me the wrong way!!! Fortunately, the president of USGenNet told
me this morning that they'd NEVER release the information from our site
short of a Court order which I seriously doubt would ever be given. I'm
also troubled how Ellen Pack states that posters think they are contributing
to GenWeb because I know how hard I have to work to treat people just right
and build up a core of volunteers. Even Stan and I haven't thought we were
contributing our private database to the organization for them to claim
should anything happen to us. If I wanted to insure that, I'd put it in the
GenWeb Archives. I think Ellen is off-base in believing people are giving
their info to GenWeb. People let us display it because they DON'T think
GenWeb will make any claim to it. They DON'T think we are like RootsWeb and
Ancestry.com and THAT is why they choose to give it to us. I've always
thought that was the advantage GenWeb had over Ancestry/MyFamily. Why not
leave things as they are and only accept material on behalf of the
organization's permanent database if it is given by the submitter with that
stipulation. Why assume they would want us to continue to display it
forever unless they tell us not too? Why not assume it is our privilege to
use their work and not our right? Can't we let the submitter decide if it
should be a permanent arrangement which would stand regardless of who the
webmaster may be? I think people are more willing to contribute if we DON'T
put any claims on their copyright whatsoever. As I said, the option of
donating one's work to the Archives for lasting preservation is always
available. Let's not over-step our bounds and become clones of the
commercial entities.
All the best,
Janet
----- Original Message -----
From: "RMN" <ocontogal2000(a)yahoo.com>
To: <WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 4:23 PM
Subject: [WIGEN-L] If....
> Pray for a non-commercial, non-governmental sponsor for the independent
XXGenWeb
> organization. There has to be someone with big bucks somewhere that
believes in,
> and would support, what we are doing independently. Right?? Maybe? I hope?
Rita
>
> Paula Vaughan wrote:
>
> > My main concern is - it was presented in one way and now it appears it
is
> > changing mid - stream. My concern is - if the decision is made to no
longer
> > present this material for FREE - I should be able to keep my information
and
> > move it else where. I feel this way - as it was presently to me in this
> > matter when I became the Waupaca it should remain that way.
> >
> > I want to continue to insure that the information I work hard to present
for
> > FREE - remains FREE. How can I be assured this will happen?
> >
> > Paula
> >
> > >From: RMN <ocontogal2000(a)yahoo.com>
> > >Reply-To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
> > >To: WIGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
> > >Subject: [WIGEN-L] Wrong! VERY Wrong!!
> > >Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 16:18:49 -0400
> > >
> > >These are my comments in response to discussion on this revision notice
> > >and your really uninformed letter! The original section does not need
> > >any revision. Your judgement is frightening and not to be trusted,
> > >especially reading your personal proclaimation on the role of the
county
> > >coordinator and ownership. Twisted, totally incorrect and disrespectful
> > >to all who have given so much.. Who rattled your cage and made you
> > >king? Rita - Oconto County WIGenWeb Webmaster, CC, LC or whatever you
> > >choose for name of the week!
> > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >In addition to Paula's concerns on Section 4, I have two of my own.
> > >1. Is this proclaimation expected to cover what has already been posted
> > >to the
> > >sites under a totally different set of rules? My understanding upon
> > >taking the
> > >site was that the information/format belonged to the website
> > >owner/webmaster....me.
> > >
> > >2. The volunteers and contributors have given me written permission for
> > >their
> > >posted material with the understanding that I would use them in a very
> > >specified
> > >manner, and in turn I agreed to follow the rules of the USGenWeb. Do
> > >these
> > >county sites now suddenly belong to the US GenWeb??
> > >I am not comfortable with this at all!
> > >Rita - Oconto County
> > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >What Janet says here makes tremendous sense. I've watched Ancestry
> > >devour once
> > >noble Rootsweb and GenConnect and knew that they were working toward
our
> > >XX
> > >GENWEB sites. This is a blatant ploy at boldly restating the "generally
> > >accepted" working policies, weakening the system and breaking down the
> > >group. I
> > >am now justifiably suspicious of those on these committees, and their
> > >loyalties. This proposed ruling hands it right over to them. GenWeb
> > >needs to
> > >make a break from Ancestry, now, to survive the cancer. Rita - Oconto
> > >County
> > >
> > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >I strongly beg to differ with Roger....it has NOT " commonly accepted
> > >that whenever a change in CC's (Local
> > > > Coordinators) occurs, material contributed to the website remains
with
> > >the
> > > > associated website (regardless of where hosted). The task of being a
> > >CC is
> > > > to provide the means of "free access" to those materials on behalf
of
> > >the
> > > > project and to add to those materials whenever possible. Therefore,
> > >the CC
> > > > (Local Coordinator) is also a contributor. It is reasonable to
expect
> > >that
> > > > all contributions to a project website remain part of the website
> > >regardless"
> > >Rita - Oconto County
> > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >ARTICLE X. COPYRIGHT
> > >
> > >Section 1. In The USGenWeb Project, copyright of websites resides
solely
> > >
> > >with the creator of the web page(s). Their inclusion as part of The
> > >USGenWeb
> > >Project does not give any irrevocable right, implied or otherwise, to
> > >The
> > >USGenWeb Project to permanently use the material.
> > >Section 2. In The USGenWeb Project, copyright to queries and any other
> > >data
> > >submitted to any state or local websites resides with the submitter.
The
> > >
> > >submission of queries and other data to The USGenWeb Project implies
> > >that
> > >The USGenWeb Project may continue to post the material until/if such
> > >time
> > >the submitter requests removal.
> > >
> > >
> > > > (**Please forward to all appropriate project lists**)
> > > >
> > > > First I wish to thank everyone who has sent comments and suggestions
> > > > regarding the latest revision draft. I'm confident that some
rewording
> > >and
> > > > grammar changes will be made during final review.
> > > >
> > > > Our project consists of volunteers with a common purpose. To provide
> > >"free
> > > > access" information. Project members are those who maintain a
website
> > >as a
> > > > component part of the project or a XXGenWeb project, and abides by
the
> > >
> > >basic
> > > > requirements for those websites, such as the display of the logo. It
> > >follows
> > > > then that when the bylaws refer to websites it means those which are
> > > > associated with The USGenWeb Project.
> > > >
> > > > It has been commonly accepted that whenever a change in CC's (Local
> > > > Coordinators) occurs, material contributed to the website remains
with
> > >the
> > > > associated website (regardless of where hosted). The task of being a
> > >CC is
> > > > to provide the means of "free access" to those materials on behalf
of
> > >the
> > > > project and to add to those materials whenever possible. Therefore,
> > >the CC
> > > > (Local Coordinator) is also a contributor. It is reasonable to
expect
> > >that
> > > > all contributions to a project website remain part of the website
> > >regardless
> > > > of who the coordinator is or where the site is hosted.
> > > > The draft revision contains "shall remain with the website, unless
the
> > >
> > > > contributor(s) otherwise request." Very often contributors can't be
> > > > contacted to obtain permission to continue use or to move to another
> > >host.
> > > > Therefore all contributions should be considered as for permanent
use
> > >by
> > >The
> > > > USGenWeb Project as long as the material is available for "free
> > >access".
> > > > The purpose of the project and the spirit of volunteerism in
providing
> > >
> > >free
> > > > access material is best served by XXGenWeb county websites which
> > >continue
> > >to
> > > > grow and remain intact. Members who depart are entitled to keep
copies
> > >of
> > > > their own work and are expected to provide copies for continued use
by
> > >the
> > > > project.
> > > >
> > > > Roger
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
> > >Celebrate Wisconsin!
> > >Visit the Waukesha County WIGenWeb Project Pages
> > >http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwaukes/indice.html
> > >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
> > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
> >
> > ==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
> > Celebrate Wisconsin!
> > Visit the Waupaca County WIGenWeb Project Pages
> > http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwaupac/index.htm
>
>
> ==== WIGEN Mailing List ====
> Celebrate Wisconsin!
> Visit the Washburn County WIGenWeb Project Pages
> http://www.rootsweb.com/~wiwashbu/
>
In a message dated 7/29/2003 4:33:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
ocontogal2000(a)yahoo.com writes:
> That last one from me was sent directly to Roger, and I neglected to
> take the WIGenWeb address the reply off in my flustered haste. I
> apologize for the error. Ahhhh, back to my cave. Rita - Oconto County
> " Chief Cook and Bottle Washer"
Rita,
"You go, girl!"..... <chuckle> Personally, I think you said it quite
nicely.... very clear.... to the point... I like that!!!
Anne
That last one from me was sent directly to Roger, and I neglected to
take the WIGenWeb address the reply off in my flustered haste. I
apologize for the error. Ahhhh, back to my cave. Rita - Oconto County
" Chief Cook and Bottle Washer"