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.

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

NCGenWeb again

The below was received as a "comment" but we consider it much more than that, and so is presented here. More people like the below brave soul should speak out. Some USGenWeb leadership believe the way to end corruption within the Project is by sweeping it under the rug. This Blog helps to prove that doing so, means it will come back to haunt you, forever available via a simple Google search.

Mary White


From: Anonymous
Sent: 4/22/2010
Subject: New comment on NCGenWeb Part 5/5

I am a NCGenWeb CC and I was told that I could adopt one of the counties Diane maintained and if I did so that I could copy all of the pages on the site that she has online for it. I couldn't believe that the new State Coordinators would tell me to violate US Copyright Laws, but she (both of them) told me plain as day to copy any page from Diane's site that I wanted to because Tina and Sherri said that it was OK for us to do so.

Can't NC be sued for this? If I was Diane I would hire a lawyer and go after NCGenWeb for violating her copyrights because they are telling us the CC's to copy anything from her sites that we want and that there isn't anything Diane can do, but I read the US Copyright laws and it just isn't true. Diane can sue the pants off anyone that copies her pages and win!

I just can't believe that the National Coordinator is allowing our board to violate United States Laws like that! If the State Coordinators continue to push us CC's to copy Diane's sites I know quite a few of us are going to be quitting the NCGenWeb Project. We have even discussed joining Diane's new project. Looks like she has a nice new one coming along and I am sure she won't push copyright violations, rules or any of the other mess that Katherine and Deloris and especially that Jo Branch is pushing down our throats.

The so called County Site Procedures were voted in in December or January yet every time I go look at them something new has been added or changed without the CC's being made aware of it. I swear the board loves to do stuff behind our backs and we thought it was Diane all along.

Hell, I remember Jo Branch even brought an alias into the NCGenWeb who called themselves IT. Now if some of the CC's didn't put up a stink about that! They kept asking who IT really was and Jo would never say. Well, one person filed a motion to have IT removed so IT quit. Then Jo Branch cussed Diane out for not sticking up for IT. Seems to me since they were after Susan Jones thinking she was an alias that Jo shouldn't have cussed Diane out over IT being an alias does it? Kind of two faced don't you think?

Yes, Diane told me who IT really was after she resigned, and that Jo cussed her out for not sticking up for IT, but little did Jo know, Diane did stick up for IT and had a lot of very nice things to say about IT. But Jo was out to get Diane from day one and any excuse to get on Diane about something she jumped at the chance whether it was true or not.

Jo needs a huge lesson in asking questions first and leaping last. She is such a bitch for the way she did Diane over the IT fiasco!

Looks like the true culprits are really showing their colors now and it wasn't Diane at all! I wish she would have stayed and fought them, there are a lot of us that feel the same way but we are so scared to say anything for fear of being locked out of our sites. You know that is what they were going to do to Diane don't you? Oh yes, they were going to kick her out, take her sites and lock her out of them.

It just isn't fair the way we are being treated or the way she was treated. We are all scared to death to even breathe wrong for fear of being kicked out and locked out of our sites forever since some of them are on "their" server. I wish I had left mine on Rootsweb servers, then I wouldn't have to worry about them getting their hands into my account and locking me out, althought they would probably copy my stuff like they are doing Diane's.

It is bad enough they have the passwords to my accounts which I don't think they should have. Some of us have commented on that, but we are ignored as usual. Just like we were ignored when we spoke up about Diane's term being granfathered in for her regular two year term, we were ignored when we still had questions about the bylaws and they just closed discussions and opened voting. They just LOVE to ignore us!

Shame shame shame on NCGenWeb Board Members! The NCGenWeb Board is a bunch of liars and thieves! Looks like they are laying in the same bed with certain members of the AB! I hope they each get back tenfold what they have dished out. I have even had researchers to email me about how rude the state coordinators have been in replies to emails to them and that they were then blocked so they couldn't respond.

What is the NCGenWeb Board so scared of? Is it the truth? Hmmmm ... kinda makes you think doesn't it?

Mutt & Jeff

So much corruption, so little time

Before we return to continue my last post about Mutt & Jeff, I have just been informed that this Blog now has closer to 300 subscribers than 400. I am not allowed to know exactly how many we have nor who they are. After all, I certainly would not want my posts to be biased. Especially since one of the new subscribers is an official of the Federation of Genealogical Societies (FGS) which the USGenWeb is (currently) allegedly a member of.

Now on to Mutt (Dale 'FraudMan' Grimm) and Jeff 'Fruit Loop' Kemp. But first, the name calling by members of the Advisory Board disclosed in my previous post, is still being permitted on USGenWeb lists by USGenWeb National Coordinator Sherri 'BradyBunch' Bradley with Tina Vickery using the SouthWest Regional list to call Daryl Lytton, "You are a tedious, boring, arrogant and an ignorant individual" much to the delight of Mr. Lytton, who treasures every moment Tina endears him. Tina is the USGenWeb Representive At Large.

Before we get to Mutt & Jeff we have an important announcement to make. We are going to be exposing some USGenWeb corruption at the highest levels. There is so much to tell, we may resort to brief posts here and link them to our associated Web site for more details. This involves the National Coordinator, the Representive At Large, the USGenWeb Grievance Committee, and other prominent members. Welcome to the real USGenWeb, FGS!

In other news, I have received two comments on my NCGenWeb posts, which I thought important enough to Blog about than leave them as comments. They will be presented tomorrow.

Amd now for Dale 'FraudMan' Grimm, the OHGenWeb State Coordinator allowed a seat on the AB even though he does not fit the description of Member In Good Standing, as required by the USGenWeb bylaws to be on the AB. Dale has been informed several time that his OHGenWeb state pages has an altered "OHGenWeb Email Code of Ethics" voted into place by the CCs years ago.

You will no longer find it named "Code of Ethics" because it has been altered by either Dale Grimm, or the previous SC, Sandra Quinn, in an attempt to hide the fact that Quinn broke the "Code of Ethics" when she expelled Daryl from the OHGenWeb. Dale Grimm has so far refused to restore the original version to the OHGenWeb state pages. That's not all of Dale's grim corruption, but how he earned the "FraudMan" title will remain for another post.

As for Jeff "Fruit Loop" Kemp, he is another member of the AB supposedly a MIGS. However, Jeff is also a NCGenWeb CC who has been caught voting to approve NCGenWeb rules which are in conflict with the USGenWeb bylaws. According to the USGenWeb bylaws, states can develop their own rules as long as they do not conflict with the bylaws, and the bylaw duty of the AB is to perform the duties of the bylaws.

Oh what a tangled web we weave, huh Jeff? Speaking of web, Jeff is also the USGenWeb Webmaster. However, he is unable to find the broken link on the USGenWeb Bylaws page although he has been told about it several times. The broken link is to the USGenWeb Project's Official Copyright Policy.

We now say farewell to Dale and Jeff. As is my practice I subscribe people-of-interest to my posts, then un-subscribe them when no longer interesting.

Mary White

AB Corruption

It's bad enough that some members of the Advisory Board mock each other on their Sekrit Sandbox list (Board-Exec), but a real lack of maturity is displayed when they make fun of one AB member who respects the USGenWeb Bylaws and Rights of Members to have fair hearings.

We are speaking of W. David Samuelsen, who today posted a message on the Board list protesting the illegality of a proposed motion under discussion. The motion wants to try and hide corruption within the USGenWeb, by making the entire grievance process confidential.

The motion seeks to amend the Grievance Committee Procedures, by adding confidentiality rules. In two places the motion calls for the parties involved in a grievance to "automatically and immediately lose the grievance," if they talk about the grievance with anyone outside of the Grievance Committee.

Hence the motion is illegal, because both Sturgis and the Bylaws give members the right to a fair hearing. And Sturgis, the USGenWeb parliamentary authority (the AB rule book), states that the rights of members can only be limited in the bylaws. The reason for this is to prevent the AB from what they are currently attempting to do, subvert the authority of the membership who votes into place bylaws and bylaw amendments.

Some members of the AB believe the USGenWeb can be made a better place for the membership, more honorable and more honest, via hiding the corruption of leadership by sweeping it under the rug. Out of sight, out of mind, by making it illegal to talk about and expose crime in the USGenWeb. To say this is anti-American is putting it politely.

So who said what? In reply to David, AB member Dale Grimm wrote, "And water will stop running downhill and giant asteroids will destroy our planet," to which Jeff Kemp added, "I heard Kellogg's is looking for a new mascot for their 'Fruit Loop' cereal box!"

We will have more to say as to why Dale Grimm and Jeff Kemp (aka Mutt & Jeff) are two of the corrupt members of the Advisory Board, later. Meanwhile we suggest both resign from the AB, and join a project more suitable for their maturity, The USGenWeb Kidz Project.

Mary White

NCGenWeb Part 5/5

From: xxxxx
To: mary.emaline.white@gmail.com
Sent: 3/31/2010
Subject: Re: NCGenWeb

Mary,

I thought you might need this for your revelations of NCGenWeb. I have left NCGenWeb because of all the BS that has been going on. I don't like feeling like I've got to look over my shoulder before I upload a cemetery transcription because I might do it wrong. But that is what it had become. I asked Katherine POINT BLANK to give me a reason to stay -- she couldn't. I'd appreciate if you'd remove my name. Also, you will notice that she said there was more bylaws to approve and we needed to get it done quickly, but the next ones did NOT come up for discussion or vote in the nearly three weeks after than. How odd? The bylaws are no longer a priority, because they've forced out some.

xxxxx



From: xxxxx
To: Katherine Benbow
Subject: NCGenWeb
Date: March 8, 2010

I wanted to contact you offlist because I don't want to stir up any more. However, I do have some questions.

I have a problem with the statement that you didn't see this coming. In the last round of bylaws that we voted on, they were very much slanted to either remove someone or have someone new come in. I'm not talking about the change in length of SC term. I am talking about the fact that only the state coordinator has a set amount of time they can be on the board, no other position does. When I was asking questions, discussion was CLOSED so the vote could be done. My personal thought is that if you are going to limit the time an SC can be on the board, you also need to do the same for ALL positions, however, discussion was closed. Maybe others didn't see that, maybe they didn't really care and just want the bylaws finished, I don't know.

It looks to me like you (collectively, the board) knew there was a problem and instead of stating so, you just wanted to get to June so the problem might go away.

I am saying you, but I am not trying to point fingers. I mean you in the collective sense as in the board, not you personally, although you personally may have sensed something as well.

I am having a tough time associating the "Diane" that you say you have been dealing with the "Diane" who helped me learn html and really take on the xxxxx County site. It is no longer the same site I took over. I have changed quite a few things around and added tons of information. And Diane was there every step of the way. When I'd ask her opinion, she was always there. So, I am having a difficult time with connecting the two "Diane"s.

If you could find someway to reassure me, I would appreciate it. I needed to let someone know what I thought and saw and I hope that this will be taken in the way it was meant.

xxxxx



From: Katherine Benbow
To: xxxxx
Subject: Re: NCGenWeb
Date: March 8, 2010

xxxxx, I will be sending an email to the list today, to add a few comments that might be helpful to the CCs. And we're all busier than one-armed paper hangers recovering the sites that Diane stole or damaged.

I can understand that this whole situation has been startling, and unexpected to the CCs. It was not totally unexpected to us that she would resign. She has threatened to do so in the past, but she never did. What did surprise us was the level of insults that she hurled in her good-bye email -- which were full of all kinds of exaggerations, misinterpretations, etc. -- but also the amount of damage that she did, in clear violation of the guidelines and bylaws that she herself backed. She fired CCs for small infractions, but then did what she do? Yes, that was indeed unexpected. We knew she was unhappy with us as her board, because we didn't rubber-stamp things she wanted to do. But we were unhappy with her, too. We are not saying that all was wonderful in the Land of Oz, and then "wham." We all told the truth, whether or not someone can believe it. What else should we do?

We have found numerous indications that she has been planning her exit for over a month or more. She has also invaded and destroyed files on sites which were not hers at anytime recently, and she seemed to target Jo's sites more than anyone else's. She also took information on the CCs that was confidential and only available to the SC.

We struggled at first with how to square all of this with the public persona that Diane like to put forward. I liked her at first, myself, and thought that most of her intended changes sounded like good ideas. But, let me tell you, when she was opposed about the severity and character of those changes, she took on a different persona. She did not like hearing "no" or "please think this over". And her reactions were not pleasant and reasonable and open-minded. They were quite something else. We have literally dozens of emails in our email archives which you would swear came from a different Diane.

Actually, the bylaws are written so that everyone has a set length of term. That is not exclusive to the SC. If the language needs to be cleared up, or you have some questions regarding the way the wording is interpreted, then you should email Jo, or authorize me to share this email with the board, so that the ones who need to respond to that question can do so. I'm not an expert at that kind of thing, and don't want to be. I can assure you that we are not applying that rule only to the SC. There is no point in having elections if the term goes on forever. I know there is another set of bylaws almost ready to come out for discussion and a vote, and perhaps that is addressed in that set. I've been so busy with other issues that I haven't looked at that draft lately. And, frankly, all that stuff starts to sound the same to me after a while. I don't even understand my own insurance policies. I have to call my agent and ask, "What does this actually say?" Discussions weren't closed because you said something. They were closed because there were no further comments coming in, and it was time to move to a vote. The discussion time limits have been shorter for the bylaws for several reasons, including the fact that we want to finish with them. Election time is looming up on the horizon.

What some people are overlooking is the fact that, if the board had told you we didn't want to work with Diane anymore, what would you have done? Seriously? We didn't even have the bylaws in place yet to tell us what to do in that kind of situation. Think about it from our side, and what kind of mayhem would have broken out, with everyone fighting about that.

You and the others have a perfect right to ask questions. We have tried to be guarded because of two things: (1) Someone in NCGenWeb is sharing our list emails with Daryl, and they are being quoted on the internet in his attempts to undermine NCGenWeb. We know that for a fact, and we have suspicions as to who, but no proof yet. So we have to think in terms of the fact that what we say is not truly behind closed doors. I went far, far out on a limb yesterday, but I was tired of being suspected of something other than being careful. (2) We have seen evidence in the last few days that someone in NCGenWeb is also forwarding our emails to Diane. So, would you not want to try to be careful in that situation? We don't know at times who to trust, either. This is against the guidelines and the statement at the bottom of each NCGenWeb posting, so that person or those people just don't care about that.

Hopefully, this will answer some of your questions. I also belong to VAGenWeb, and I enjoy its tranquil and friendly atmosphere. That's what I want for NCGenWeb. But, unfortunately, we will have to go through the fire to get to that far side.

Diane will be working to undermine us and destroy our credibility. I would think that the type of email she sent on Friday would convince people to be open-minded. I'm hoping that people can do what's best for NCGenWeb. The problems are not going to go away in June. Daryl will still be out there, looking for opportunities to get into NCGenWeb. There will still be some people who don't agree on various things. Hopefully, things will be better. From a personal standpoint, yes, I'm looking forward to June, because I don't want to be in the hot seat anymore. I'm a worker bee, not someone who wants to be in the spotlight. I hate that, and I have to make myself write the emails I send to the list. And we have a family wedding coming up, and I'd much rather be thinking about that. Life's short.

Katherine Benbow



Sidebar -- NCGenWeb does not need Diane's help to destroy their credibility, they do a good enough job of that themselves. Daryl does not need to get into NCGenWeb, we now have more spy's in NCGenWeb than ever to help stomp out corruption by exposing it.

Mary White

NCGenWeb Part 4/5

Where have all the flowers gone?

From: Diane
Date: 3/5/2010 4:01:07 AM
To: NCGenWeb-L
Subject: [NCGenWeb] One Final Note

Hi all,

Due to the recent direction that the NCGenWeb Board has decided to take I am resigning as SC of the NCGenWeb Project effective immediately. Since the board has chosen to take a vote (without my knowledge) to change my tenure as your SC from the 2 years I was voted in to 1 year without any discussion with myself or with any of you as well as ignoring the CC's who did say something (then adding it into the bylaws), I don't agree with this practice and I won't back it any longer. In doing so and in speaking up things have gone from bad to worse. I have been told that I had better walk away from being the SC as well as away from the NCGenWeb Project if "I know what is good for me". I have also been told that my sites fail to uphold the standards of the NCGenWeb requirements that they are cookie cutter sites and a disgrace to everyone that comes to visit them and that they are terrible, etc.

Well, in answer to that, I say, at least my sites had no broken links, and they were updated at least monthly, most of them weekly. With 30 sites to maintain it is kind of hard to be on top of every little thing. The NCGenWeb Board has gone in a direction where I am no longer proud to say I am a part of the NCGenWeb Project. They are complaining and plotting about people that don't have their sites on the NCGenWeb servers, they are complaining about people that advertise their sites on Facebook and other blogs and venues. They are trying to turn into a dictatorship and they have already picked the next SC to replace me and I have been told in no uncertain terms to leave the NCGenWeb Project so that this person can take over.

Oh, I am sure they will tell you this is all lies, but please, watch yourselves and keep your eyes and ears open.

I am also resigning as CC from the NCGenWeb Project and I have moved all 30 of my sites to another server and will continue to maintain them. I have also deleted all of them from the NCGenWeb servers. I am going to miss some of you, we have grown close in our contact that we have had and I hope it does continue. I am still just a phone call or an email away. That will not change. If you need me, I will be here.

Diane
NCGenWeb SC
NCGenWeb CC
NCGenWeb Special Projects


But wait, that's not all you get ... AFTER Diane resigned, THEN the NCGenWeb Board voted to remove her. This action by NCGenWeb violated two USGenWeb rules. First, all members have the right to a fair hearing before punishment. Second, elected officers can be removed only by the authority that elected them, which in this case was the NCGenWeb membership not the Board.

NCGenWeb, Inc., does not appear willing to play by the rules of the USGenWeb. So why are they a part of the USGenWeb? Recently the NCGenWeb CCs have voted into place some rules which conflict with the USGenWeb bylaws, a violation of Bylaw XII E, "State projects are empowered to develop/adopt any additional rules/bylaws and guidelines, as appropriate, for their state so long as they do not conflict with these bylaws."

To make a bad situation worse USGenWeb Advisory Board member Jeff Kemp, is one of the NCGenWeb CCs who have voted to approve the NCGenWeb rules that conflict with the USGenWeb bylaws.

Tomorrow will be Part 5/4 of this saga, but that isn't the end of the story. A new section of our companion Web site will be opened with further information and proof, including what appears to be an attempt at extortion (as defined by the Hobbs Act) by the NCGenWeb, Inc. Board. We will post a message here when the new section is open.

Mary White

NCGenWeb Part 3/5

We do not know how many years Derick Hartshorn has been making accusations of secret, invisible CCs in the NCGenWeb using aliases. We do know that even a deceased former CC had been accused of being alive and using an alias. This was proved untrue however, when I emailed the deceased CC asking them to contact my 7gr-grandmother and find out the names of her parents. I received no reply.

This alias (or was it alien?) conspiracy theory of Derick was passed off as a personality defect, a delusion. Now we find Derick is owed an apology, as the below proves beyond any reasonable doubt that NCGenWeb has had in reality at least one CC acting as an alias, Derick himself.

Mary White


> From: Diane
> To: Mary White
> Sent: March 25, 2010
> Subject: Fw: letter to CCs
>
> Here is the email where Derick sent me the email to
> send that letter last year to the CC's that you have
> posted on the blog. Here is the proof that I didn't
> really write that email.
>
> Diane
>
> > -------Original Message-------
> > From: Derick Hartshorn
> > Date: 9/10/2009 6:16:13 PM
> > To: Diane Siniard
> > Subject: letter to CCs
> >
> > Diane,
> >
> > I tried not to sound like me and to make the letter
> > personal.
> >
> > Here are my suggestions:
> >
> > 1. Send this to EACH CC individually. I know this is
> > a lot of work but I think that it is necessary. Include
> > it to Warren, Elizabeth and anyone who is no longer
> > on the List as of 7-1-09.
> >
> > 2. Edit (or use it) as you choose. This is only a
> > suggestion. I tried to make it sound like you but it
> > probably needs some tweaking.
> >
> > Good luck,
> >
> > --Derick

Dear _____

It is now just over short two months since I was elected State Coordinator and a lot has transpired since then. The reason I ran for State Coordinator was because I love the USGenWeb Project and believe in the concept of free Internet genealogy. I love the state of North Carolina and that is where I proudly reside with my family. You may reside in No0rth Carolina or not. Anyway, your decision to sponsor a county here should be a source of personal pride.

When I first explored the possibilities of running for SC, I thought about the many USGenWeb responsibilities I already had in North Carolina, Missouri and elsewhere. I already have over 15,000 web pages that require constant attention and my husband was beginning to question my sanity. Even with a busy family life and young children, I decided that it was worth the added burden if I could help make the NCGenWeb Project the very best of the USGenWeb Projects. And that is why I decided to run for office.

After these past few months, I’m sure you have been subject to a great deal of confusion about our Project and the requirements for being a County Coordinator (or Assistant CC). I know that some of our page hosts, many of whom have been with the Project for a long time, have serious and legitimate concerns. I would like to take a few moments to try and explain where we came from, where we are and where I hope that our NCGenWeb Project will look like in the future.

First off, I knew that I could never perform as your State Coordinator without a good deal of help. For that reason, I have sought the help of folks who have been in the Project for a while. These folks share my goals for excellence. We have formed a Board with a solid structure of contributors. I hope to not only make your goals and tasks easy, it is my firm belief that we share that same sense of responsibility to the Project. I know that you seek the opportunity to share the pride that will result because of our joint contributions and I want to help.

Several folks have expressed suggestions for making the NCGenWeb Project the very best in our national organization. I would like to express their thoughts and include some of my own. These thoughts represent many of the concerns that you, the “front-line troops” have expressed. Let me deal with some of them now.

YOUR INDIVIDUAL PAGE INDEPENDENCE
The pages you now host were probably your own creation and the content was done by you. In the event that you inherited your site, you still have a “pride of ownership.” With that ownership goes the responsibility of maintaining your site, ensuring that it is productive and up-to-date. The USGenWeb Project requires us to be in compliance with their by-laws. In order to do that, you should be adding material to your site as opportunities arise. Rather than impose any time limits to adding material, you should recognize your responsibility to make your pages as attractive as you would want them to be if you were depending on somebody else’s pages for research material.

Any dead links should either be re-established or the link discontinued. “Last-updated” notices should appear on all pages so that web users know the page isn’t dead. The copyright statement, to protect both you and the Project, should be the present year or the date of origination or the inclusion of the statement, “to present.” As an example, “2004-to present.” Search engines can be added, most all of them are free. All pages should have a search engine

NCGenWeb LOGOS
The NCGenWeb Project was established in 1996, shortly after the Project was first established. Since then, we have used a variety of state logos. The first ones were 320 X 240. We need to provide a unique identification of our Project. We all recognize corporate logos like GE and Coke. They use a single visual image to project their corporate identity. Today, the NCGWP uses no less than twelve logos. I strongly believe that we need to make a selection of a single image to represent our Project. I will be happy to receive feedback on whether our membership is comfortable with the board selecting a logo or whether you feel the membership should be a part of this selection process. Please let me know via the ncgenweb@ncgenweb.us list.

WEB SITE HOUSING
As a Project, we addressed the concerns of page owners who were concerned with potential intellectual property conflicts with RootsWeb/Ancestry.com. Nola Duffy provided private web space for all Projects within the NCGenWeb Project. This substantial expense was borne by her with no expectation of recognition or support. To her, we owe a great deal of gratitude for her selfless gestures. Some CCs continue to house their pages on the RootsWeb/Ancestry.com server as is their right. We will continue to support their housing needs, whatever hosts they choose. Likewise, NCGenWeb Project members will always be welcome to move their pages to our dedicated server, should they choose

NCGenWeb INCORPORATION
A good deal has been said about incorporating our project. Each USGenWeb Project member has been free to remain unincorporated or to take a legal step to protect their name and identity. Early in our Project history, some individuals, hostile to the intent of the NCGWP, sought to take over our Project for their own selfish reasons. Before they could be accomplish this scheme, several were expelled from our Project because of fraudulent dealings and their attempt to host county pages under a variety of aliases. Sharon Williamson helped us protect our logo by obtaining trade mark protection several years back. In 2007, we learned that the same hostile individuals who tried to infiltrate our Project earlier were intent on incorporating our name and identity. In order to forestall that attempt, Nola Duffy stepped forward to preempt that attempt. Some have pointed out that we are a non-member corporation. That provision was made to simply indicate that no individual person owns the NCGenWeb Project. Our incorporation was not made public for the reasons stated above. The only reason that this issue came to light was that a former Project member, in an attempt to incorporate our Project, discovered that we had already been incorporated. Our Project has benefited from legal protection without any fanfare. Our incorporation in no way diminishes the rights of any Project member.

NCGenWeb BYLAWS
When it was learned that the NCGenWeb Project had been incorporated, some said that the Project was operating outside the bounds of an incorporated entity. In order to head off any controversy, your Board has carefully composed a set of by-laws so that we will be in full compliance with all North Carolina incorporation laws. These by-laws are nothing secret but an attempt to formulate the guide lines we need to operate by. When completed, they will be presented to the membership for approval.

REGIONAL COORDINATORS
Regardless of how the division of support is defined, the Board found it necessary to subordinate the responsibilities of the SC and ASCs. It was felt that assistance should be provided to all County Coordinators in order to help them find ways to make a more positive web presence. We are still in the formative process of helping our page hosts. We will continue to do whatever is necessary to provide the assistance they need. Further information on this process will be made as soon as we formalize it.

Some folks may interpret the assignment of Regional Coordinators as a threat. I would like to assure you that the decision to appoint these folks has been taken in order to assist, and not to constrain. They have been chosen for their desire to help in the region they chose to serve. They are certainly not “page police” but helpful folks whose desire is to work with each CC in their region. If you receive an email from them, please interpret it as a helping hand.

It’s no secret that several County Coordinators have chosen to leave the Project. Each and every one of your Board members truly regret their choice to leave. We don’t take these actions lightly and have tried to do all in our power to support all of our members. We will continue to help them to be a part of what we believe to be the best Project in the USGWP. In order to do that, we must insist on adhering to standards that not only comply with the USGWP but to serve as goals for the entire Project.

In my estimation, we are not insisting on unachievable standards. As the leading Internet genealogical destination, the USGenWeb Project must be held to a higher standard. As members of the NCGenWeb Project, we should all exhibit pride in our Project. Without you and your fellow Project members, we will never achieve the high goals we must achieve.

If you have had any concerns for the newly elected leadership team, this should be of particular interest to you. I want to reassure you that every decision I made has been done with consultation with the Board. While adhering to USGenWeb Project bylaws, I am trying to best understand the needs of our membership. Please don’t think of me as being dictatorial. My leadership style may be different than my predecessors but I have the best interests of our Project and its members foremost.

I want to be someone you can always feel free to write to with any of your concerns. I maintain County sites just like you do. So do the members of our Board. We all share the same goal of seeing the NCGenWeb Project achieving the top spot in our national organization. I hope that you will join with us in making that a reality.

Sincerly,

[Derick misspelling 'sincerely' was a Freudian slip --mw]

NCGenWeb Part 2/5

Intrigued with Diane's first message, we asked for more details ...

and the beat goes on ...

"I joined NCGenWeb back in 2005. At first I was left alone to work the Duplin site. Then I began to adopt more sites and Denise and Nola began to take notice on how much information I was adding to them and began to be friendly with me, especially Nola. I then asked about adding Military sites and a cemetery site. Denise didn't really want me to but she reluctantly agreed to it. Once I got those up and running and they began to take off Nola really became my friend and started chatting me up more and more. She then started confiding things in me and we started working on a set of bylaws with Denise's help, basically the 3 of us were running NCGenWeb.

"Then Nola said Denise wasn't going to run for another term for SC and asked me to run. She said we needed someone strong and trustworthy to be the SC and that I would be perfect and there was no way I would lose. I didn't want to at first because she had just talked me into running for the GC and I was accepted. Then Dorman had quit and I was elected GC Chair and didn't know my head from my elbow about being the chair because we didn't have anything to go by as far as what the chair was supposed to do, rules to go by or anything so I had to wing everything. Hell, I didn't even know I was supposed to turn in Quarterly Reviews until I was hounded to turn one in and then I was berated by Tina on the AB's mailing list for stating the facts in it!

"Needless to say, Nola kept riding and hounding me until I finally agreed to run for SC. When June rolled around and it was time for nominations Ron Dailey was also nominated which was a shock and surprise to us all. I was honestly hoping he would win so I could just remain a CC and work on my sites and be left alone, but luck would have it I won by 2 votes.

"Once I won I was told in no uncertain terms by Nola and Derick Hartshorn that I had to take Ron Dailey as my ASC. Well, I had already planned on asking someone else and had sent them an email asking them. So, I had to send an email to Ron thanking him for a tight race and ask him to be my ASC. He hemmed and hawed around for almost 2 weeks before finally accepting the position.

"Needless to say, Ron resigned I think it was a month or 2 later. I was also informed by Nola and Derick that I needed to pick a second ASC. Again I wanted to have one of my choice, but oh no, once again they told me who to choose, so again I was told to get Katherine Benbow. Then I was told to choose Taneya Koonce as webmaster, as she had applied for the ASC job, Nola and Derick didn't know her that well but knew her web site skills were excellent and told me to put her as webmaster, so I did. During this time I fired Sandy Bolick for causing so many problems between herself and other CCs. Then Elizabeth Harris resigned and I was told in no uncertain terms to get her back by Nola. Well, I tried and it didn't work and Nola was upset with me to put it mildly.

"So we went along, Ron resigned. Warren Bagley called me some names on the mailing list for all the rules and threatened me, and quit. Little did he know that everything that was set out to the mailing list was dictated by either Nola and/or Derick. I was even sent an email from Derick that I had to send to the CC's to catch them up on what all had gone on when I had been in office for 6 months. I believe you wrote about it in one of your blogs. Stating some of the CC's thought it was a resignation letter. Well, guess what? Derick Hartshorn wrote that letter and I have the email to prove it! So we continued to carry on, I was told what to say and when, the CC's continued to blame me for everything, even though I had no say in any of it because I was vetoed on all of it.

"Katherine started stressing and wanting more help so again Nola and Derick told me we needed more help so we decided on Regional Coordinators. I sent out an email to the Business list. Dee Gibson-Roles, Sue Ashby, Katy Hestead Susan Jones all applied. Again Derick and Nola told me to choose Dee and Sue. They told me Katy was nothing but trouble, Susan is an alias and that she (Susan) is Daryl Lytton and so again I followed what Derick and Nola said and chose Dee and Sue.

"Then one day Nola up and informed me she wanted Jo Branch to join NCGenWeb and told me to let her adopt Sampson County. I really didn't want to give up Sampson County as that was one of the counties some of my ancestors had lived in, but Nola wouldn't hear of it because HER ancestors had lived there and she wanted Jo in NCGenWeb. So, I had to give up Sampson County so Jo Branch could join NCGenWeb. Well, it wasn't long before Jo was a Regional Coordinator. Next thing I knew Jo was redoing the County Site Procedures that I had already redone, that were tweaked from the same ones we had since the inception of the NCGenWeb. She was then rewriting the bylaws that Nola, Denise and I had worked almost 2 years on and that I had worked even more on and had gotten approved by a lawyer.

"Jo said that everyone was outraged by them and in an uproar. Once this all started even more CC's started to quit because of all the rules and blaming me. I had not a single say so in any of the County Site Procedures nor the new bylaws yet I was being blamed for the changes and all of the rules being implemented by everyone. I was being called a Nazi. A dictator, and some not so nice things as well. To top that off there was not a damn thing I could do to defend myself against them!

"Then in November I had knee surgery. I was out with the exception of 30 minutes to an hour here and there until around the end of January. During that time the board decided to vote to change my term as SC from 2 years to 1 year with discussing it with me or the CC's who voted me into office. I would send them emails asking what was going on, what had been discussed, etc and would receive no replies. I was totally ignored. When Jo sent the set of bylaws to the board that had the change of my term in there I called her out on it. She simply stated that is what the board told me. I told her no, I was voted in for 2 years like every other SC in every other state and sent her the email that had the final results from the election as well as the dates of my term as SC. Jo stated she would get that changed ASAP.

"Then Katherine piped up and sent an email stating that the board had discussed it and decided and voted to change my term to 1 year. I told her they couldn't do that because the CC's had voted me into office and only the CC's could change my term. Again I was ignored. Discussion was opened for the bylaws and a few CC's had excellent questions. A couple of them were ignored and I had to resend them through the list and say something to get them noticed. Then discussion was closed before their questions were fully answered. That made the CC's VERY upset.

"So, when it was time to vote on that set of bylaws I voted no and added: Due to the fact that the SC term has been changed from 2 years to 1 year in the middle of my term without discussing it with me or the CC's who voted me into office. I did send the original email to the bylaws committee who said they would change the wording and the wording was not changed. Therefore I vote NO.

"A couple others voted no as well, one even stated the bylaws were against the USGenWeb bylaws and procedures, which the ignored. Then a few CC's spoke up and stated that my term as SC should be grand fathered in and they were also ignored.

"Then I received an email from Jo Branch telling me how horrible my sites were, that they were cookie cutter, broken links, a disgrace, etc. She also told me that I needed to walk away now if I knew what was good for me. I also received another email stating that she was going to be the next SC that the board had already decided it and that I needed to walk away as CC and SC if I knew what was best for me before the June election and I got hurt.

"I continued to try and get the board to tell me what was going on but not one single one of them would talk to me. A grievance was filed against me. I opted to settle and let the person return. Boy did they get pissed off with me! I was called sick, stupid, you name it! However, when this person failed to stick with the rules, I again removed them and got the board to vote on the removal after I removed them and I was called down by Katherine Benbow for doing that! I was damned either way I turned with those people. I could do nothing right. They called me names and berated me for bringing the person back and then berated me for removing them again. I just couldn't win for losing and basically I had had enough.

"So, I talked at length with my husband, spoke with my researchers and told them all what was going on and they all told me to pack up my sites and leave and take all their contributions with me. Yes, they told me to take their contributions! They didn't want NCGenWeb to have them!

"So, I spoke with Rootsweb, got the server space, downloaded all of my sites to my computer, and on Friday March 5, 2010 I started deleting my sites from the NCGenWeb servers and wrote my resignation and sent it to the NCGenWeb Business list and walked away from the NCGenWeb forever. When I hit send to send that email I swear it felt like a 20 ton weight had been lifted from my shoulders and that I was finally free!

"I am now with Trails to the Past and I have never been happier! I have time to spend with my family, my husband and I are getting to spend some much needed quality time together, and did I mention I am finally FREE and happy?

"Now, since leaving the NCGenWeb I have learned that they were plotting and planning to remove me as SC. Now I have also found out that they have been copying files from my Duplin County site as well as my Pender County site. I wrote letters to the AB and the GC about it, but it seems that Tina Vickery has a vendetta to only try and find fault with me instead of looking at the real problem with is NCGenWeb copying files from my sites without permission.

"I have an email from one researcher that Nola Duffy sent asking if they could copy her contributions. She told them no and if they did there would be trouble. Well, guess what? They did it anyway! Another ladies files were also copied and I have an email from her stating they never contacted and asked her and she wants them removed as well. Also, the copied files from my transcribers and their emails are not on the site anywhere to even ask their permission. That is in the USGenWeb bylaws as well as NCGenWeb rules as well as the US Copyright Laws. You have to have written confirmation before you can copy someone else's work.

"Guess the NCGenWeb thinks they are above the law and it looks like the AB isn't going to do a damn thing about it. You can see the emails I sent to the AB here:"
[coming soon. -mw]
"I will let you know if they copy anything else.

"Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or need clarification.

"Diane"