E-mail feature in Beta Directory

[zaneclark]

Glad you like it. If anyone finds a bug in this new release, please let me know.

Not a bug but maybe a request.... The ward missionaries don't have their own group but are included in the Other Callings along with music, library,etc. It would be nice to have a separate group for for email purposes.... I know they have a their own category on the current LUWS.

[jonesrk]

Not a bug but maybe a request.... The ward missionaries don't have their own group but are included in the Other Callings along with music, library,etc. It would be nice to have a separate group for for email purposes.... I know they have a their own category on the current LUWS.

The new directory app is pulling that information from CDOL, which is getting its callings from MLS. So CDOL and MLS would be the place for that if you were to do it by group.

One other option might be to allow a group email to be filtered by position types so that you could send to just a part of a group. For example within the primary you might want to send to just the presidency or to all the teachers, but not all the other callings.

[jdcr256]

One other option might be to allow a group email to be filtered by position types so that you could send to just a part of a group.

Yes, one problem we have is that if you want to use the link to send off a quick message, it dumps the emails for the entire group. If you only mean to send the message to the presidency of the group, you have to manually delete the email addresses you don't want.

We've been discussing this issue already and have some thoughts about ways of filtering the group (e.g. a separate link for just the presidency, etc.). There are a lot of cool things we can do around messaging, and I think we're just getting started.

[kisaac]

One other option might be to allow a group email to be filtered by position types so that you could send to just a part of a group. For example within the primary you might want to send to just the presidency or to all the teachers, but not all the other callings.

Another example of when you might want part of a group is the bishopric. When beta directory sends an email to the bishopric, it sends it to the whole bishopric: including clerks, assistant clerks, secretaries, etc.

The duties of all the clerks and secretaries are so different, I'm thinking that about the only time I'd ever need to email the whole bishopric is to notify them of an expanded bishopric meeting.

Usually, however, the bishop and his counselors are what we think of as "bishopric," are often one in purpose on many items. If I have a question about the ward, its probably only those three that need my email.

[markgnorthcott]

A change from the version previous to this one that I personally think shouldn't have happened...

The leadership positions for stake and other wards turned back to showing the positions only if they've signed into the directory (or have an LDS account?)

It would make it hard to email stake leaders or to other ward groups in the mailing list (ie, my wife is a stake primary secretary and can't see primary leaders in other wards, which i think she should be able to be)

I know there's privacy concerns and all, but i think this is taking things a bit too private, as it makes it nearly useless, and if programs don't work as people need them to it just becomes un-used. there will NEVER be 100% adoption of this program even by leaders. It needs to work for the people who will use it, without being hindered by those who don't.

[aebrown]

A change from the version previous to this one that I personally think shouldn't have happened...

The leadership positions for stake and other wards turned back to showing the positions only if they've signed into the directory (or have an LDS account?)

It would make it hard to email stake leaders or to other ward groups in the mailing list (ie, my wife is a stake primary secretary and can't see primary leaders in other wards, which i think she should be able to be)

I know there's privacy concerns and all, but i think this is taking things a bit too private, as it makes it nearly useless, and if programs don't work as people need them to it just becomes un-used. there will NEVER be 100% adoption of this program even by leaders. It needs to work for the people who will use it, without being hindered by those who don't.

I don't see the same thing you claim you are seeing. No one can see any members or leaders unless they are signed into the beta.lds.org site using their LDS Account. But everyone who is signed in can see all the members and all the leaders in all the wards in their stake. The email feature also works just as you would expect in this regard; if you are in Ward A, you can send mail to the Primary presidency of Ward A or Ward B or Ward C.

This is how it has worked for some time in the beta directory; there is no change that I can see. And I verified that this is how it works for me (an assistant stake clerk) and for my wife (no leadership calling at all).

[markgnorthcott]

You must have signed everyone up in your stake then because I certainly do not see the same result you've posted. The previous version showed all the members of the high council for example, this one only shows those who have signed in with an LDS account, (I know so because I'm sure only one of them has signed into the directory, the other two are family history users)

everything in MY ward shows up with full access, but elsewhere throughout the stake it's like this.

[eblood66]

You must have signed everyone up in your stake then because I certainly do not see the same result you've posted. The previous version showed all the members of the high council for example, this one only shows those who have signed in with an LDS account, (I know so because I'm sure only one of them has signed into the directory, the other two are family history users)

everything in MY ward shows up with full access, but elsewhere throughout the stake it's like this.

This is not how the directory works in the US. I have many people in my stake that I'm sure have not signed onto LDS Account who show up in the leadership directory.

There are, however, different privacy requirements in different countries. There is a Jira entry for the directory that indicates that EU countries require an explicit opt-in in order to display information to the general stake membership. It looks like that change was finally released in the most recent beta update.

It looks like the church's hands are tied by the EU privacy requirements. It's obviously not how the church would like the site to work since the directory uses a more liberal opt-out policy elsewhere.

[aebrown]

You must have signed everyone up in your stake then because I certainly do not see the same result you've posted. The previous version showed all the members of the high council for example, this one only shows those who have signed in with an LDS account, (I know so because I'm sure only one of them has signed into the directory, the other two are family history users)

everything in MY ward shows up with full access, but elsewhere throughout the stake it's like this.

I can't explain the difference. But I guarantee that I can see all sorts of people in my stake who have not signed up with an LDS Account. I work closely with the High Council and I know that there are some of them who have never gotten an LDS Account. Yet all 12 show up.

Besides, the way this whole information flow works has nothing to do with the leadership having an LDS Account. Callings are entered in MLS, then transmitted from there to CDOL. The directory then uses CDOL to look up the people in leadership positions.

I don't know if you have access to CDOL, or can work with someone who does, but it would be interesting to know what the High Council (for example) looks like in your stake on CDOL.

UPDATE: It looks like eblood66 supplied the real answer to the issue:

It looks like the church's hands are tied by the EU privacy requirements. It's obviously not how the church would like the site to work since the directory uses a more liberal opt-out policy elsewhere.

[markgnorthcott]

I accept that as an answer... Looks like i'm going to have to persuade other clerks to get in on this and opt-in the members of other wards. I'm only an assistant ward clerk, but the duties of my calling are one and the same as the ward clerk in our unit.

Due to the specific calling name I cannot access CDOL as it only allows clerks and bishops, not assistant clerks.. even if we have the same duties.

Our stake currently really needs this directory to work without the privacy infringement. Every year we spend hundreds of pounds on printing out the ward directory, and this would save a load of time and money.

I wonder if there's a way that the stake presidency or stake clerks (or a properly called administrator) can click a checkbox then to make all the members of the stake visible. I know privacy concerns would probably not allow this but the program is completely useless in the current opt-in situation. I mean, if we can print out a full stake directory, why can't we do this?

I've really appreciated the help you have given me and apologize if i've been a pain.