APG-L ArchivesArchiver > APG > 2007-12 > 1196891803
From: "Elissa Scalise Powell, CG" <>
Subject: Re: [APG] Ethical Membership
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 16:56:43 -0500
I like your example by example post and I would like to take up the next
"If a well respected author wrote an article for the APGQ and it was pulled
after months of work - after typesetting -because the EC didn't like it,
what would you think?"
I know as a past author for the APGQ that Matt is receptive to ideas that
concern our APG community and authors, without a having been previously
published, can be published. When the manuscript is submitted it goes
through an editing process with some back and forth to make sure that any
editing is a collaborative *agreement* between author and editorial
committee. In this "hypothetical" this was done and the article was typeset
and ready to go. So what would we think about an EC that would pull it at
this point? What could be so controversial from a "well respected author"?
Doesn't the membership have a right to see it and judge for themselves? Does
this border on censorship? Or "invisible micromanagement"? Remember, the
editor and author and other committee members have already seen it and it
was ready to print.
I see nothing in the by-laws giving the EC override authority over the
committees unless it is in 2 "A. The Executive Committee shall be the
managerial and operating body of the Association and shall maintain the
Can 4 people of the EC override a well-oiled publications committee at such
a late stage in the process? Let's assume they knew about this article at
its inception and at the last minute decided to pull it.
What do we think?
Elissa Scalise Powell, CG
CG and Certified Genealogist are Service Marks of the Board for
Certification of Genealogists used under license after periodic evaluations
by the Board. http://www.BCGcertification.org/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: apg On Behalf Of Kathy Cortez
> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 3:22 PM
> Should we accept invisible micromanagement? No we should not. I hope
> that the actual events mentioned can be illuminated. I don't want to
> make decisions based on speculation. I assume from Melinde's
> credentials that she must be ethical, thorough, thoughtful, and
> dedicated. The items she mentions are serious and I trust that she
> does not make accusations lightly.