BOARD-L Archives

Archiver > BOARD > 1998-09 > 0905462486

From: Nancy Trice <>
Subject: Re: [BOARD-L] KS USGW Archives
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 16:21:26 -0500

Well said Maureen, and the point that I was trying to make earlier. I
would love to see all the states with the same type of partnership. After
all, it's our tax dollars that pay for the libraries, archives, etc. Why
should the USGW project not try to avail ourselves and our researchers of
all resources that are available?

One of the things every one of us has heard at one time or another is the
question about the files remaining free and never being sold. This is
something that the KSGW folks don't hear concerns about with their library
partnership. Linda and Brian have both sworn that they always will be
free. I have no reason to doubt the word of either of them, and I sincerely
appreciate everything that Brian and Karen, and Rootsweb, has done for
USGW. However, that should not preclude us from pursuing other avenues as

Our number one goal should always be what is best for our state projects,
our CCs, and our visitors. If that means that the archives are on another
server and mirrored on RW, what is wrong with that?


At 03:02 PM 9/10/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Pam - this is one of the reasons I thought this discussion should take
>place on the Board list. We are indeed talking about official USGW
>The question is - when we as USGW are presented with 2 options, should
>we not choose the options that offers the most advantages? Just imagine
>the benefit that would inure to USGW if each & every state had an
>arrangement with their official State Library? If each XXGenWeb Project
>was considered a partner with their state government? Can you imagine
>the prestige & stature that would give USGW?
>I am not saying we should "dump" Rootsweb or anything of the sort. I
>personally don't have a problem maintaining text copies of files on the
>ftp server at Rootsweb so it can be part of the future national search
>engine. But the access that the official USGW Archives page provides
>should go to the very best presentation that state has to offer. It's
>better for USGW, it's better for that state, & most of all, it's better
>for the resesarcher! I invite you all to go look at Skyways at
> Go see what they have to offer USGW
>and how this partnership really is the wonderful benefit that the KS
>CC's already know it is!
>Maureen Reed
>Pam Reid wrote:
>> Nancy,
>> I don't disagree with what you say about KS and Blue Skyways.
>> However,
>> I still say that the "official" repository for records donated or
>> submitted to USGW should be the USGW Archives. This does NOT mean
>> that
>> the records should not be in both places---there are good reasons for
>> them to be on both. Also, I never said that records should ONLY be in
>> the "official" USGW Archives. I only said that a copy SHOULD be
>> there.
>> This is the official USGW Archives and many, many people use the
>> archives who never visit county sites. I am sure that just as many
>> visit county sites and never use the archives. Therefore, there are
>> good reasons for the records to reside in BOTH locations and most
>> submitters want as much exposure for their submittals as is possible.
>> --
>> Pam Reid in Virginia
>> mailto:
>> Branches and Roots
>> Tombstone Transcription Project
>> Gloucester County VAGenWeb
>Michael T. & Maureen K. Reed Olathe, KS
>"Do as I say, not as I do" is a hypocrite.
>"Do as I say, not as I did" is a teacher. - Dr. Laura Schlessinger

This thread: