USGENWEB-ALL-L Archives

Archiver > USGENWEB-ALL > 2008-09 > 1221657231


From: Larry Flesher <>
Subject: Re: [ABChat] Website maintenance / website host issues
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 06:13:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <96A004BE87FA4AC89729EA2DE54A26EA@TinaSVickeryPC>


I think this call has all the necessary elements, and can be used again. While I believe that an Assistant WM should be included, I'm not sure it should be mandated.

Larry Flesher
SWSC SC Rep


--- On Wed, 9/17/08, Tina S. Vickery <> wrote:

> From: Tina S. Vickery <>
> Subject: Re: [ABChat] Website maintenance / website host issues
> To:
> Date: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 12:00 AM
> Cyndie, if I understand you correctly, (please correct me if
> I
> haven't), you are suggesting a Standard Procedure for
> the
> USGenWeb Project to have both a web master and an assistant
> web
> master? If so, do you have a draft procedure to share with
> the
> Board for discussion?
>
> The web master call that I posted here a few days ago has
> received no comment. Are there comments from either you or
> other Board members on the content of that call?
>
> http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/USGENWEB-ALL/2008-09/1221406071
>
> Tina
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cyndie" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 1:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [ABChat] Website maintenance / website host
> issues
>
>
> > We have had an assistant some years and not had one
> others, so future AB's
> > may opt not to have one based on past precedent. I
> think it is a good
> > idea
> > to have an assistant and having a Standard Procedure
> that specifies it
> > will
> > help encourage future AB's to have one (unless, of
> course, they change the
> > procedure or there are no volunteers).
> >
> > I think we need to be consistent in putting out calls
> for volunteers. We
> > reappointed the secretary and discuss list folks by
> asking if they wanted
> > to
> > continue to serve and since they did, we did not put
> out a call.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Cyndie
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:
> > [mailto:] On Behalf
> Of Scott Burow
> > Sent: Sunday, September 14, 2008 2:13 PM
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: [ABChat] Website maintenance / website
> host issues
> >
> > Perhaps the wisest thing to do at this juncture would
> be to place a call
> > to
> > the membership for interested parties who would like
> to volunteer for the
> > webmaster and assistant webmaster positions.
> >
> > There is precedent for having an assistant webmaster,
> so no additional
> > special rules or standing rules would need to be
> adjusted or amended to
> > provide for such a position.
> >
> > In that way, we're fair to all members who may
> wish to volunteer for the
> > positions, as well as have the greatest pool of
> interested members to draw
> > from.
> >
> > Then once selecting those to fill the positions, we
> would benefit from
> > their
> > input relating to a job description (rather than a
> procedure) for the
> > positions.
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Cyndie"
> <>
> > To: <>
> > Sent: Sunday, September 14, 2008 6:43 AM
> > Subject: Re: [ABChat] Website maintenance / website
> host issues
> >
> >
> >> I'm mostly in agreement with Mike.
> >>
> >> I think developing a Standard Procedure related to
> the Webmaster's
> >> responsibilities and evaluating our goals for the
> long term regarding
> >> webhosting could be done by a few of the AB
> members while we move on to
> >> other items. #1 could possibly be taken care of
> by monitoring the logs,
> >> tracking any reports of trouble and performing
> routine maintenance (such
> >> as
> >> link checks) as part of a Standard Procedure.
> >>
> >> Cyndie
> >> SP Rep.
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From:
> >> [mailto:] On
> Behalf Of Mike St. Clair/ST
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 6:37 PM
> >> To:
> >> Subject: Re: [ABChat] Website maintenance /
> website host issues
> >>
> >> I think there are really four discrete but closely
> related issues that we
> >> should talk about, which I have listed below in
> the order I think they
> >> would
> >> best be discussed. Then we should take action on
> any of these where the
> >> majority of the board feel action is called for. I
> acknowledge that this
> >> is
> >> just one way this subject could be divided; a
> division that makes sense
> >> to
> >> me. I will certainly listen to any other suggested
> ways to divide this
> >> set
> >> of issues.
> >>
> >> I think that subissue #1 can be quickly decided by
> the entire board and
> >> that
> >> subissue #2 should be discussed by the entire
> board. I suggest that a
> >> small
> >> subset of volunteers from within the AB (perhaps
> 3) should discuss and
> >> investigate subissues #3 and #4 (in that order),
> presenting the results
> >> to
> >> the AB for discussion and confirmation. As part of
> the work on both, I
> >> suggest that small surveys be done to gather
> information on what other
> >> similar organizations are doing. In the case of
> #4, I suggest that we
> >> survey
> >> the states and USGENWEB members about the web
> hosting providers they are
> >> using and their satisfaction with those providers.
> This would provide a
> >> starting point for the subset of the many such
> available providers that
> >> would be examined in deciding whether we would be
> best served by moving,
> >> or
> >> staying with our current provider.
> >>
> >> My breakdown of these issues into four separate
> subissues follows:
> >>
> >> 1 -- Performance and Capabilities of the current
> web hosting provider, IX
> >>
> >> I and some others, including our webmaster,
> encountered serious
> >> performance
> >> problems at times with our current provider from
> the time our website
> >> moved
> >> until sometime in August. As Cyndie mentioned,
> there has recently been a
> >> noticeable improvement. Since I noticed the same
> sorts of problems during
> >> the same period with the server used by ILGenWeb
> (also from IX) I was
> >> concerned this was much broader than our server. I
> took the time to do a
> >> little research and found many other complaints
> from IX account holders,
> >> most of them appearing during the past year. It
> may be coincident, but IX
> >> made a major data center move in 2007, and I
> noticed many of the
> >> complaints
> >> were concurrent with that move and the following
> months.
> >>
> >> Based on the significant improvements that started
> in late August,
> >> however,
> >> I think we could probably take this part of the
> combined webhosting
> >> issues
> >> and drop it's priority, unless the former
> problems return. As long as
> >> that
> >> doesn't happen, I suggest we just let item #4
> address comparing IX with
> >> other potential web host providers, and helping us
> decide whether we
> >> should
> >> stay or whether we would be better served by
> moving to another
> >> alternative
> >> in the long run.
> >>
> >> 2 -- What portion of the web maintenance
> responsibility belongs to the NC
> >> and what portion belongs to the Advisory Board.
> >>
> >> The only mentions of website maintenance and
> webmaster appointment
> >> appearing
> >> in the bylaws refer to the AB, not the NC. But it
> appears that this has
> >> traditionally left to the NC, perhaps under their
> operational duties
> >> role.
> >> I'd like us to discuss, decide and document,
> how this is really to
> >> operate
> >> while remaining in line with what the bylaws call
> for.
> >> Perhaps deciding this would help in deciding
> subissue #3. On the other
> >> hand,
> >> discussing and deciding subissue #3 might help
> with this one. I tend to
> >> think #2 should come before #3, but I will listen
> to what the rest of you
> >> have to say about it.
> >>
> >> 3 -- Webmaster responsibilities: What should they
> be? Who should assist
> >> (e.g. should there be an assistant webmaster)? Who
> should provide
> >> oversight,
> >> support, and assistance from within the AB?
> >>
> >> I understand that Phyllis Rippee started drafting
> something, but I
> >> haven't
> >> seen that. Has anyone? If that exists, it might be
> a starting point for
> >> discussion. In any event, I think discussion and
> documentation of a
> >> formal
> >> list of responsibilities in the form of a position
> description would help
> >> us
> >> resolve the obvious differences that appeared
> during earlier discussion;
> >> differences between various conceptions held by
> board and project members
> >> of
> >> what a webmaster should be doing. Our target
> should be a documented list
> >> that the majority of the board can sign off on.
> Then we should give the
> >> webmaster the capability and responsibility to so
> perform and ask for
> >> regular reports back on problems, accomplishments,
> suggested
> >> improvements,
> >> etc. I'm suggesting that the same subset of
> the AB to address subissue
> >> #4
> >> be tasked to address this one also, with the final
> decision to be made by
> >> the full board, of course.
> >>
> >> 4 -- Long Term, what should our arrangments be
> for: web hosting, domain
> >> registration, and DNS.
> >>
> >> After many years at Rootsweb, we made a quick move
> to another option for
> >> webhosting. I think a more organized evaluation of
> the options available
> >> would be useful before we decide to confirm that
> quick decision for the
> >> longer term. The other two items I mention are
> perhaps less crucial, but
> >> they are related and I think could be readily
> examined at the same time.
> >> This examination should include comparisons of the
> best options, ideas of
> >> how to pay the bills, etc.
> >>
> >> Mike St. Clair
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Tina S. Vickery wrote:
> >>> This agenda item is carried over as Old
> business. As Chair, I re-open
> >>> the
> >> discussion of this item.
> >>>
> >>> Tina Vickery
> >>> National Coordinator
> >>> USGenWeb Project
> >>
> >> -------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email
> to
> >> with the word
> 'unsubscribe' without the
> >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
> >>
> >>
> >> -------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email
> to
> >> with the word
> 'unsubscribe' without the
> >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> > with the word
> 'unsubscribe' without the
> > quotes in the subject and the body of the message
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> > with the word
> 'unsubscribe' without the
> > quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word
> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and
> the body of the message




This thread: