BOARD-L Archives

Archiver > BOARD > 2003-06 > 1056133462


From: "Don Kelly" <>
Subject: Re: [BOARD-L] MNIGS
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 11:24:22 -0700
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20030620002500.00a7b4b0@pop.west.cox.net>


I don't like the word, "discipline" when referring to hard working
volunteers and dedicated genealogists............they are volunteers
after all and their behavior is in their hands. A bit of TLC and
patience between volunteers can go far.

Sure there are disruptive volunteers, it seems that a few XXGenWebs have
at least one.

To those who consider themselves disruptive ( and some do), I encourage
them to work on genealogy, develop great looking webpages, and forget
the politics. One thing is abundantly clear, politics and genealogy
don't mix well.

To leaders who must deal with, often forced to deal with, disruptive
members, all I can recommend is be objective, take the personalities out
of your actions, and try not to take things personally.

This is hard I know when one is attacked, but it is important to see
both sides. We as SCs cannot be removing CCs for personal reasons; there
must be a clearly defined rule or set of rules broken as grounds for
NIGS or removal.

Bottom line, if you look at their web pages you see that they work hard
trying to provide resources for researchers. There is now doubt in most
cases that they are dedicated CCs.

All I can say is remain objective and persuasive, honorable in all
dealings, and everyone do the best you can to avoid politics and get
along. I caution that this NIGS thing not get out of hand, when the real
problem was rules were broken.

Don Kelly NW/P SC Rep.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard (Isaiah) Harrison" <>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 12:28 AM
Subject: [BOARD-L] MNIGS-Additional Information


> Roger Swafford made the following post to the DISCUSS list earlier
today:
> ------------------
> Members who have been declared "not in good standing" by either
national or
> state level were the result of some behavior or action by those
members. It
> is a consequence of the offending behavior or action.
>
> I think discussion of the "mnigs" issue without also including other
> possible consequences such as suspension, removal or expulsion is
> not appropriate. Let's face it folks, we are talking about the right
of the
> organization to discipline its members. Discussion of "mnigs" without
also
> considering the entire scope of discipline appears to me an example of
knee
> jerk reaction to hot button issues of the day.
> Roger
> http://home.mchsi.com/~sagitta56/roger03.htm
> --------------------
> Because we are dealing with this issue as informal discussion, we can
> easily broaden it to include the related issues.
>
> -Isaiah
>
>
> ==== BOARD Mailing List ====
> Archives for Board-L are located at:
> http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/board
>


This thread: