Search This Blog

Popular Posts

Follow by Email

Stalking The Truth

Stalking The Truth

April 28, 2010

Massacre Part 1/4


Saturday Night Massacre
-- Part 1

Donated by
http://usgenweb-cc.org/index.html

First is presented an introduction from the Web master. The remainder is composed of notes from the Web master or Diane, followed by evidence. Everything was received by the Web master from Diane in a series of emails, designated as "Email #1" and etc. Email #1 is Diane's introduction.

Mary White


========================================

The Saga of the
Saturday Night Massacre in the USGenWeb

Saturday, April 24 2010

In a shocking move, Diane Siniard reported on the CC Genealogy Discuss list (and from other sources) some not-so-nice proceedings in USGenWeb (USGW). Diane was a respected member of the Grievance Committee of USGW when these emails were generated. The politics got too much for her. She resigned and joined another genealogy project. It was reported that her current posts were not printed on any official USGW email list even though she remained a CC for that project.

Some of what follows may need an explanation. We will add an explanation sparingly when needed for clarity's sake. Note: Some spacing changes were made to the emails to fit this format and ease of reading. The webmaster of this web site cannot confirm any statements made in the following emails. They are reported as events. The following emails are numbered only for ease of identifying them herein. As you read, you may conclude the Advisory Board is more interested in finding ways to crush a volunteer than to give him or her a fair and impartial hearing based on the rule of law. Others may conclude the AB has a right to do anything it wishes. That is the reader's choice.

Note: this email list = is merely an old list that is used today by the Advisory Board (AB). The name of it has no current meaning.

========================================

(Begin)

Email #1

Diane wrote on 4/24/2010 at 12:13 PM

Hi all,

As some of you know I used to be the NCGenWeb State Coordinator but due to the directions the board was heading and the decisions that were being made behind my back as well as behind the backs of the CC's I chose to resign after due pressure from some of the board members. I removed all of my sites from their servers, moved them to the Rootsweb servers, sent my resignation letter to the NCGenWeb Business list and resigned. Katherine Benbow then proceeded to start an email writing campaign slandering me to all of the SC's in the USGWP and Nola started one with the researchers telling them I had stolen the information, it would no longer be available online, I was not a real person, etc. Little does Nola know that most of the people she sent the emails to I had met in person, are a relative of mine or we have had extensive phone conversations and we have exchanged family photographs, histories, etc. Boy was she made a fool of!

I then started receiving harassing phone calls and emails from members of the board as well as one of the "honorary board members". They also started posting some not so nice messages on mailing lists and message boards and researchers were not very happy about this.

Some of them wrote an email and asked me to forward to the NCGenWeb Board which I did with a note stating forward as requested. I was then attacked by a pack of wolves called the NCGenWeb Board as well as their "honorary board member". They were relentless in their attacks until I said some things back and then told them the conversation was over I wanted nothing more to do with them. I received a couple more phone calls afterwards. Then nothing further. A few days later I received an email from a researcher that my sites were being copied by NCGenWeb and that some of their information had been copied even though they had been emailed by one Nola Duffy and she told Nola in no uncertain terms that her work had better not be copied or there would be trouble. Nola wrote back and said she respected that and they wouldn't copy it. Well, as you would expect NCGenWeb did in fact copy this person’s work as well as many other researchers information. I received a lot of emails of complaints about it. I told them I would take care of it. So, I wrote to each member of the AB and explained to them about the copyright violations, sent them copies of the emails from Nola Duffy and this researcher where she had plainly stated do not copy my information, as well as an email from another researcher stating the same thing and links to ever page that had been copied as well as the link to the original page on my site.

Well, needless to say later that same day I found another entire site copied by the Co-State Coordinator Deloris Williams. She copied the whole site page by page up to and including photographs which we all know are completely covered by copyright laws to the photographer or the person that owns the photographs.

So, again I wrote to the entire AB to let them know this. Sherri wrote me back stating they would need more than 24 hours to make a decision.

Meanwhile Tina Vickery started Emailing me demanding that I send her all of the emails that I received from researchers stating I could have their work posted on my sites. There was no way in hell I was going to send these to her for NCGenWeb to be able to get the email addresses of all of my researchers to contact them and spread more lies than what they had already done. So I ignored every single one of Tina's emails because I had already spoken with the researchers and had their permission to have the information on the sites no matter where the sites were housed.

Then Sherri and Tina came back and said that NCGenWeb had permission to copy any and all pages from any of my sites that they so desired.

Well, needless to say I was very po'd. I pulled the United States Copyright Laws Title 17 and copied each one pertaining to me and the sites and emailed them to Tina, Sherri and each member of the NCGenWeb Board stating that they are breaking United States Copyright Laws and I once again demand that my information be removed from every single one of the NCGenWeb county sites up to and including graphics and backgrounds that I use on my sites and how I compile the information.

Needless to say I have never heard a word back from any of them because they all know they are guilty as hell. The laws can be found here:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/

Now, I can still visit various sites within the NCGenWeb and still see some of my pages used on their county sites so they are still breaking the US Copyright Laws and obviously they are being backed by the National Coodinator and the Representative at Large.

This is why the USGWP has earned such a horrible reputation, because they will break their own bylaws of copyright as well as those of the United States of America.

I do have the email from Sherri stating NCGenWeb can copy my information if anyone needs it for further proofs. You can also check the NCGenWeb Pender County site, Lenoir County site, Wayne County site, Craven County site, and I am sure there are others and match them up to mine hosted on Rootsweb and located here:
http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~nctttp/countylist.htm
to see the blatant copyright violations.

I hereby demand the resignation of Sherri Bradley and Tina Vickery on the grounds of them breaking the USGWP copyright bylaws as well as the US Copyright Laws Title 17.

Yes, Tina I do still have some projects within USGW. Much to your surprise I must say because you blatantly stated I resigned from all of my projects which is another blatant lie on your part.

Diane Siniard

========================================

Email #2

[Explaination: This is a copy of an email reportedly created by the NationaL Coordinator (NC) of USGW. It shows that the NC may have been engaged in a violation of USGW operating procedures involving a CC (volunteer) and member of the Advisory Board (AB). Specifically, the AB is forbidden to involve itself in grievance procedures.)

(begin)

From: Sherri
Date: 1/30/2010 9:23:01 PM
To: 'Mike & Diane'
Subject: RE: Grievance 2009-10-15

I personally think she'd be very good as long as the grievance doesn't involve Colleen, Gail Kilgore or David Samuelsen.

Sherri

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike & Diane
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2010 8:19 PM
To: Sherri
Subject: RE: Grievance 2009-10-15

Just FYI, Vikki Gray just volunteered to be a mediator / arbitrator so we have her now as well. She is a paralegal in real life. Her email:

Hi Diane. Having recently been involved in a grievance I realize the importance of this volunteer. I would be willing to serve on the grievance board in the future. I have a background in law (I am not a lawyer - more like a paralegal). If you want help, give me a holler.

Thanks,

Vikki Gray
Alaska State Coordinator
NCGenWeb SC
NCGenWeb CC
NCGenWeb Special Projects

========================================

Email #3

(begin)

1:04 PM

As you can see, Tina was putting her 2 cents into GC discussions when she was the NC which is a serious violation of the GC rules and procedures. Also, she is a member of the state that the GC was discussing, therefore, she should have let us know so we could have removed her from the mailing list.

Another violation of GC rules and procedures.

We had to bring it to the attention of Tina and Scott Burow to get Tina to turn the mailing list over to the GC as it should have been done in the first place. The NC is supposed to be on read only status, but they sure do discuss the grievances with the GC.

See the GC rules and Procedures:
http://gc.usgenweb.org/procedures.html

Section 2 - Committee Business:
The second list will not be archived, and is considered strictly confidential. Only Committee members will be subscribed to this list. Any questions or concerns related to specific grievances will be raised ONLY on the confidential list. The confidential list may NOT be used for public business, or in an effort to avoid public disclosure. To avoid the appearance of conflict of interest or impropriety in the case of an appeal of the Grievance Committee decision to the Advisory Board, the National Coordinator will not be subscribed to the confidential list or be eligible to vote on matters related to specific grievances. The National Coordinator will have full voting participation in other Grievance Committee business.

Notice it says the NC will NOT be subscribed to the confidential list. Hmmmm

Sherri is subbed now and Tina was when she was NC. They are blatantly breaking the Procedural rules aren't they? Shame on you Tina and Sherri!

Also, here is the proof of where she told me to not use someone as a volunteer for the GC.

Now once again I demand the resignation of Tina Vickery. I have proofs of Sherri Bradley breaking these some procedures which I will be forwarding shortly.

See the NC and RAL aren't as honest as they want you to believe are they?

Diane Siniard

-------Original Message-------
From: Tina S. Vickery
Date: 3/6/2009 11:01:25 PM
To: Mike & Diane
Subject: Re: [GC] Mediator

Diane,

I don't know how to say this so I am just going to. I have it on very good authority/suspicion that Jenny Walker is an alias for Esse Frye/Sarah Hughes. I have been struggling with this all day. I realize that the GC has the ability to choose arbitrators and mediators on a case by case basis but I can't in good conscience sub a suspected alias to the GC list for arbitration of a grievance. Did you get any information from Jenny as to her qualifications to serve in this role and her positions within the project?

As NC, I am the chair of the Advisory Board.

Tina

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike & Diane"
To:
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 10:45 PM
Subject: Re: [GC] Mediator

Tina,

We do not have a mediator at this point in time. We had one but they were called away to outside obligations, another is part of XXGenWeb so cannot mediate in this particular grievance.

Diane
NCGenWeb CC
NCGenWeb Special Projects

-------Original Message-------
From: Tina S. Vickery
Date: 3/6/2009 10:41:17 PM
To: campaign98@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: [GC] Broken Links

What happened to the mediation step .. That is before arbritration isn't it?

Tina

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike & Diane"
To: ;
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 10:33 PM
Subject: Re: [GC] Broken Links

Robert,

We are going to go ahead and move this grievance into arbitration. I have contacted Tina to subscribe the 2 volunteers that are willing to arbitrate for us and as soon as I hear from her that they are subscribed I will send them all of the documentation, summations, etc so they will have all of the evidence for this grievance. They will then come up with a resolution, send it to me and we will discuss it and let (names removed to protect confidentiality of participants of grievance) know of the outcome of the arbitration.

Diane
NCGenWeb CC
NCGenWeb Special Projects

========================================

Email #4

[Explanation: This shows the NC excludes members of the AB from discussions of various issues. This may not be proper according to parliamentary rules]

(begin)

-------Original Message-------
From: Sherri
Date: 11/17/2009 1:53:49 PM
To: 'Mike & Diane'
Subject: RE: Fw: Grievance

The confidentiality issue has been brought to the AB members EXCEPT Colleen & Gail (kicked them out while it's discussed). I'll let you know within the next 72 hrs - that's the time limit I set to start with (had to give them a length of time to be 'legal').

I'll email [name removed to protect confidentiality] in a minute and reiterate exactly what you sent - don't know if it will make any difference or not though.

Sherri

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike & Diane
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:39 PM
To: Sherri Bradley
Subject: RE: Fw: Grievance

If we are going to get [name removed to protect confidentiality] on the confidentiality issues then we might Not need to. Totally up to you, might not be a bad idea, I am sure we will Need one for mine as well...joy joy.

Between the 3 of these I am about ready to drive to wherever they live and Shake the crap out of them smack them across the face and say wake up and Read can't you see that it plainly states you can't say anything during the Process or after?! LOL Before fine and dandy talk all you want but after it Is accepted or it is rejected or whatever then you can't say squat. I guess Some people just don't get it.

NCGenWeb SC
NCGenWeb CC
NCGenWeb Special Projects

-------Original Message-------
From: Sherri
Date: 11/17/2009 1:34:22 PM
To: 'Mike & Diane'
Subject: RE: Fw: Grievance

Do you need me to set up another mail list for this grievance?

Sherri

========================================

Email #5

(begin)

1:21 PM

[Diane notes: Sherri again breaking GC rules and procedures.]

-------Original Message-------
From: Sherri
Date: 3/6/2010 5:16:55 AM
To: campaign98@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: [GC] Fw: Resubmittal of grievance

What am I missing? Is he saying that he's previously submitted this grievance? I don't remember seeing anything about it - did it get this far?

This also needs to be assigned a grievance number and to be posted on the Status page.

Sherri

-----Original Message-----
From: campaign98-bounces@rootsweb.com
On Behalf Of Mike & Diane
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 6:50 PM
To: campaign98@rootsweb.com
Subject: [GC] Fw: Resubmittal of grievance

Hi all,

Here is another grievance that has been received.

Diane

========================================

Email #6

(begin)

1:35 PM

[Diane notes: Now they have removed me from the Discuss list for not being a member of the USGWP even though I still maintain a site within the USGWP. They think they know all but little do they know a member of the AB still has me in their state!]

Betsy, please resub me as I am still in the Project.

Tina,

I think I had every right to respond to the vindictiveness of the email that you sent through earlier and the inferences you made towards me that were totally uncalled for and very rude. I for one would like an apology for the uncalled for attack. I have never not once posted anything directly towards you on any public mailing list until today after your vicious comments.

Yes, your Gates County WWII info was an oversight, and I did remove it, but the rest of the material is not yours to tell me what to do with and I notice you are linking to my site even though it is offline. I see you went in and copied it from the server even though I had it offline. Isn't that still called copyright violations? I changed every single page on that website before it was ever moved. Not one single page was as you had left it It was all compilations of my own doings.

Hmmm sounds like another Title 17 to me.

-------Original Message-------
From: Tina S. Vickery
Date: 4/24/2010 4:10:41 PM
To: usgenweb-discuss@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: [USGENWEB-DISCUSS]

[Diane notes: Speaking of copyright violations well, needless to say I was very po'd. I pulled the United States Copyright Laws Title 17 and copied each one pertaining to me and the sites and emailed them to Tina, Sherri and each member of the NCGenWeb Board stating that they are breaking United States Copyright Laws and I once again demand that my information be removed from every single one of the NCGenWeb county sites up to and including graphics and backgrounds that I use on my sites and how I compile the information. Needless to say I have never heard a word back from any of them because they all know they are guilty as hell.]

Diane I never recived your email so I am sorry you are po'ed. What I do remember is asking you quite politely if I recall to remove the Gates County NCGenWeb Project pages that clearly was copied lock stock and Barrel to TTTP, not only was my name on them when they were absconded over to TTTP, but they had my copyrighted material (WWII military enlistment list Duly featured.) You very courteously dealt with my specific Gates County issues and actually stated it was an oversight, in fact you took Gates County totally off-line. your parting gift to NCGenWeb Project that you lead so lovingly lead was to take off-line many county sites. I not only intervened on my own behalf but the behalf of the NCGenWeb Project in my role as Representative At Large of the project.

I have and can provide the emails if you wish to refute what I have said. I will be happy to supply them to you or to this list, whichever you and/or the List administrators allow. I will not debate with you Diane, I wish you well in your future endeavors.

As an aside, I am surprised you have posted to -Discuss, are you still a member of USGenWeb?

Tina

========================================

Email #7

(begin)

1:39 PM

[Diane notes: I do believe I have enough ammunition against Sherri sticking her nose into some of the grievances to raise everyone's eyebrows about her and probably enough to get her removed from office for breaking confidentiality as well as being involved in grievances when she shouldn't have been. I did swear to a vow of confidentiality when I joined the GC and I have always stood by my word so I will try not to break it even now but I will pass along information to all of you that will show you that Sherri was knee deep to a giraffe standing on top of his head in the grievances as well as basically telling us in which direction we should go. As far as whether or not she was involved in the mediations and arbitrations that I do not know. I was never involved with those, was not privy to any of the emails or information discussed during them I was only told of the final outcomes. Now, I do know for fact that Sherri set up the mailing lists so I am sure she probably read every single email that went thru and more than likely emailed Pat and told her what to say when and how to proceed. (if my instincts are right). I can send you proof of her setting up the mailing lists, I asked her to do so and that won't break any rules or confidences. Matter of fact here is one such example:]

-------Original Message-------
From: Sherri
Date: 12/22/2009 9:46:13 PM
To: 'Mike & Diane'; 'Sherri'
Subject: Mediations Mail list

Hi Diane,

I’ve created the private mail list for the mediation phase of grievance 2009-10-15. It’s a yahoo group, the group’s name is grievance_2009_10_15.

To subscribe, the parties and the mediator will need to send a message to
grievance_2009_10_15-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.

Once I get the subscription requests, I’ll approve the members and then the mediation can begin. I’ll also send the info to Pat when I get back to the other computer. I don’t have her email address on this one.

Sherri

[Diane notes: Here is where she stuck her nose into a grievance that we were getting ready to discuss that she shouldn't have been involved with. The NC is supposed to be subbed but not participate in any of our discussions.]

-------Original Message-------
From: Mike & Diane
Date: 3/6/2010 12:21:46 PM
To: campaign98@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: [GC] Fw: Resubmittal of grievance

He had submitted it to me and left a blank in where it says bylaws broken so I asked him to fill that in and send it back to me. It will be Grievance 2010/03/01

Diane

-------Original Message-------
From: Sherri
Date: 3/6/2010 5:16:55 AM
To: campaign98@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: [GC] Fw: Resubmittal of grievance

What am I missing? Is he saying that he's previously submitted this Grievance? I don't remember seeing anything about it - did it get this far? This also needs to be assigned a grievance number and to be posted on the status page.

========================================

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

So the question on everyone's mind is, what is the AB going to do about all this mess? It's as if the AB has gone into silent mode on the issue, except for one who has been bantering back and forth with a member in a childish public display of petty barbs and insults on a project list. Members are always told by the AB and a very select few to not fret, trust us, everything is working just fine, don't worry yourself, everything is secret and hidden for a good reason, we know what's best for you, don't question committees, etc. etc...and then all of a sudden members find things are NOT exactly working as they should and as they had been told. It's rather ironic all this came out while the AB was working on, of all things .... you guessed it - secrecy issues and the punishment of those who break confidentiality.

Anonymous said...

After reading the posts (4 of 4), this is a mess and black-eye to the USGWP and state projects. Folks need to get it together and seriously elect folks that they trust or run themselves. Who cares if you have never done it before, get your name out there election time and run. I'm tired of seeing the same folks year after year getting the same positions over and over. Vote for someone new and clean up the USGWP! This type of stuff should NOT be happening and folks need to grow up!

Anonymous said...

Those that have broken confidentiality should be MINGS........are they? Nope! They are just unsubbed from a list as a time-out then back in, way to enforce bylaws and rules, AB!