BOARD-L Archives

Archiver > BOARD > 2005-03 > 1110691675


From: "Don Kelly" <>
Subject: Re: [BOARD-L] Getting it done: Data Repository Policy Statement
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 21:27:55 -0800
References: <PCEDIGLJFHKFCNAGDACICELGMDAA.srh@tyaskin.com>


Not so. Jan and Gail and I and most everyone on the board have thousands of
pages of accumulated databases on our websites.....and there is not a shell
page in the bunch.

Furthermore, a very large percentage of CCs of the USGenWeb have a little to
a lot of data on their websites, six to sixty pages is not unusual..

Therefore I suspect 95% of the coordinators will support my point of view,
and perhaps as many as 5% will steadfastly support shell sites.

So who is in the minority here, proponents of onsite data or supporters of
empty shell sites?

As proof of the pudding, show me one bylaw that supports shell sites. If you
can't show me just one, then you have no case and no room for further
arguement. Name just one.

Don Kelly

----- Original Message -----
From: "Shari Handley" <>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2005 7:40 PM
Subject: RE: [BOARD-L] Getting it done: Data Repository Policy Statement


>
> *>
> *> 1. No state will require its CC/LCs to place data on the county/local
> *> site instead of the Archives.
> *--------------------
> *This is already required by bylaws on the books. It requires
> *no input by the
> *SC.
> *--------------------
>
> Apparantly, not everyone agrees with you on this one, Don. Yours may
> actually be the minority opinion, in fact, from what I've been reading.
>
> Shari
>
>
>
>
> ==== BOARD Mailing List ====
> Archives for Board-L are located at:
> http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/board
>
>
>


This thread: