|
|
|
FamNet: The New Zealand Family History Network
|
|
|
FamNet, NZGDB, and the NZ Society of Genealogists
Introduction
I am a candidate for election to the council of the NZ Society of Genealogists,
but with a couple of other candidates
I have been attacked in the society's
magazine
without any opportunity to reply. This, and
Richard Stedman's attempt to expel me
and another candidate from the society, can only be interpreted as a blatant
attempt to rig the election.
As the society has not given us any opportunity to balance Richard's published comments
this web page has been set up to set the record straight. It also serves as an FAQ
of the proposals that I have made to the society about
NZGDB/FamNet.
Click here to go to a page that deals with the NZSG
governance issues that have lead to calls for an SGM
A blog facility has been provided to allow you to comment. All comments are the responsibilty
of the person making them.
Click here to go to the blogs page
What's New
Peter's Membership Renewal was refused
A Rule 7 complaint has been made about Jan Gow
A facilitiation meeting was held on the 13th March.
A transcript of this meeting was briefly on the society's web site, but this has now (20th March) been removed.
I have written up some notes on the Quorum issue
The complaint against Ian has been upheld, and he has been expelled. Click here to see his letter
from the society.
The complaint against me has been upheld, and I have been censured.
Click here to see the letter
from the society.
Candidates Pages
An invitation is offered to any candidate to have a page here. Just send me what
you want published, and it will be so, with no censorship or change. You can send
me Word, PDF, or HTML. Ultimately I'd like to have a proper Content Management System
that will allow you to do this yourself without requiring somebody else like me
to act as webmaster, but that's for the future. I have set up a page for myself,
starting with my "500 Word Statement", feel free to adopt this template,
or any other format that you like.
|
Name
|
Candidate for
|
Nominator
|
Seconder
|
|
Robert Barnes
|
Council
|
Leone Bronlund
|
Lynette Dear
|
NZGDB and NZSG - Introduction
Since its inception NZGDB has been the target of a campaign of misinformation and
vilification from an influential faction in the NZ Society of Genealogists, reaching
low points with an allegation of data theft, and most recently the publication of
an editoral attacking me and other candidates in the current NZSG elections. Perhaps
this faction resents the success of NZGDB, which has attracted thousands of users,
many of them society members, while its own Digital Archive has been an utter failure.
No wonder that they fear competition - this site is doing what the society should
be doing. In fact the project was intended from the outset to be a society project,
but our initial approaches were spurned, and the relationship has spiralled downhill
from there. Richard Stedman's attack is only the latest in a long
series.
Richard Stedman's Complaints
Last week I received
this letter
from the NZSG, informing me of a complaint against me by Richard Stedman.
Here is
the post to MemList that he complains about.
Here is
my response to the complaint.
On 19th February I received
this letter
from the society. Basically the complaint has been upheld, and
I have been censured. I wonder what they make of this web site?
Ian also
received a complaint
Here
is Ian's response.
The complaint against Ian has been upheld, and he has been expelled. Click here to see his letter
from the society.
Richard's report in the NZ Genealogist
Ian and
I were attacked in the society's
magazine. As we are
currently candidates it is improper (in my opinion) for such biased reporting to
be distributed to members without giving either of us any right of reply.
Regarding me and FamNet, Richard gets several things wrong that could have been
easily checked - although not without alerting us to his article in advance.
I guess an ambush to skew the election is what Richard wanted.
Here is my response on Memlist,
(slightly edited).
Richard raises two issues as far as I am concerned. Firstly, he mentions
the "... controversy late in 2008, in which data unique to the NZSG website
was alleged to have been found on the NZGDB". This is a clever slur,
creating an implication that we (NZGDB) have taken the society's data.
As Richard well knows, the
facts
of this are very different to his sly innuendos. There is no dispute that
the data in question was, briefly, on NZGDB. But we couldn't possibly
have taken it from the NZSG web site. The only possible explanation is that
somebody (unknown) tried to set a trap for us. Yet to some people our
guilt is undeniable, no matter what the evidence.
Just like the witch in this Monty Python sketch.
The second matter, FamNet, has more substance, but in taking outdated images from
the website and republishing them without permission - somewhat ironic when he has
accused me of being casual about copyright - he draws incorrect conclusions that
a little fact checking would have avoided.
The matter of FamNet is dealt with more completely here
In summary, FamNet a software concept (not an organization) that several of us are
very enthusiastic about and would like to see adopted by the society. It is the
basis of the facilities that I discussed with Lynne and Joe, and could be highly
complementary to the society. However if the society chooses to regard it as hostile
competition, then it will become competition. This would be a wasted opportunity.
Is Richard's opinion private, or the view of Council?
It is claimed that the Council were as surprised as the rest of us when his editorials appeared
, but one would have expected an immediate statement to this effect and some disciplinary action. Perhaps it's still coming. The lack of any immediate and strong action suggests that Council are
quite happy to let this opinion be published, especially with some deniability.
Do I have a Conflict of Interest? Or a Secret Agenda?
I want to make NZGDB very successful: there's no secret about this. I believe that
an association with NZSG for FamNet would be very beneficial to both NZGDB and the
Society.
Do I have a conflict of interest? No more than the Editor, who also seeks payments
for his services. I have no problem with the Society paying it's suppliers, and
I assume that Richard's payments are appropriate for his time and skills. Yes, as
a councillor I will have potential conflicts, but these can be managed. In anything
concerning NZGDB/FamNet I will take the role of advocate, not judge, and withdraw
from discussion and votes where there is a conflict.
Richard obviously has a problem with me.
I am told that was he was one of the leaders in the campaign to damage NZGDB by
taking a complaint to police instead of properly dealing with it through the society's
complaint procedure. Is it a coincidence that this occurred shortly after I'd submitted
a
strategy paper proposing that the magazine's role be downgraded in favour of better Internet facilities
Facilitation meeting, 13th March
A meeting was organized to discuss the issues, and hopefully reach a mediated solution.
However, after asking us (the "signees") to get authority to negotiate, and
to come with legal support, council representatives turned up without neither any authority to negotiate
nor their legal advisors, both of which had been promised. So,
while this was perhaps
useful as a forum to get the issues all documented, it fell far short of our
expectations, and unable to resolve differences, leaving it necessary to go
forward with the SGM's with no common position on any issues..
Click here to read my report of this meeting
Contact me if you would like me to send you a copy of Marianne's notes.
Click here to read Jan Gow's submission to this meeting
Click here to read Ken Baker's submission to this meeting
Click here to read Kapiti Branch's submission to this meeting
Some meetings have subsequently occurred with a "negotiating team" of Clive Palmer and myself for the "signees", and Marianne and Joe for the society, but this has not received any official
(Council) approval, and Joe and Marianne are doing this on their own initiative. Even so, there have been some useful discussions.
Complaint against Jan Gow
A recent development is that a couple of NZSG officers have laid a Rule 7 complaint against Jan Gow. It must be conceded that the council has no discretion: if
a complaint is received, then they must deal with it. It is however incredible that anybody in the society would label Jan "a disgrace to the honour of being a Life Member,"
especially anybody who is aware of her work for the society over the years and her current role in organizing the Family History Fair. To say, as the complainants do,
that the role of a life member should be "to endorse and assist the current council..." makes it clear that only sycophancy is permitted. It is also disgraceful that
the society has now, without discussion with her, arranged for somebody else to teach the Legacy classes that she has successfully run for several years.
The background to the matters on which Jan comments are given elsewhere on this page:-
Click here for the nomination condition and
Click here for Peter's nomination.
With Jan's permission, here is the letter of complaint that she received:-
Jans Complaint Page 1
Jans Complaint Page 2
Jans Complaint Page 3
Hopefully the council will treat this complaint with the contempt that it deserves.
|
Note: Page refresh needed after updates
|
NZ Family History Network
|
|
© Copyright 2009 All rights reserved
|
|
|
|
|