Page 3 of 3

Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:52 pm
by scion-p40
Another twist: This system will continue to generate a growing backlog of "reserved" work by those who lack family members of the opposite gender to complete ordinances.

Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 4:59 am
by aebrown
scion wrote:Another twist: This system will continue to generate a growing backlog of "reserved" work by those who lack family members of the opposite gender to complete ordinances.


As my family has performed ordinances for our ancestors, we have sometimes been short a few people, especially to perform sealing ordinances. Rather than seeing this as a problem, we have found it to be an opportunity to reach out to members of our ward or other friends to join with us to help. I have always been able to find members who are willing and anxious to help, and we have had some great experiences with them.

So I don't think the new system necessarily will create a backlog -- we can perform the work for whole families at a time by extending invitations to help with ordinance work beyond our immediate family members.

Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:36 am
by scion-p40
Hearing some of the retorts to divorced and part member families would make your hair curl. Not every ward is accepting of all members.

Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:12 am
by Mikerowaved
scion wrote:Hearing some of the retorts to divorced and part member families would make your hair curl. Not every ward is accepting of all members.

Unfortunately, this may still be the case in some areas, but this is probably not the best place to discuss these types of issues. Your local leaders are always there to help.

Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 10:49 am
by scion-p40
These are local leaders. Others follow their examples.

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2009 7:35 am
by scion-p40
Not all wards operate like that.

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2009 8:24 am
by garysturn
We also have the option to assign individuals to the Temple to do the work. In nFS family file names assigned to the Temple are given first priority and are done quit fast compared to the old method of assigning family names to the Temple. With the new system we can also assign just certain ordinances to the Temple and reserve others for ourself. So you could do the baptisms and assign the Endowments to the Temple.

Producing cards for youth baptismal trips

Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 10:21 pm
by stclairm
Kathryn wrote:While clearing names for our upcoming Youth temple trip . . . .

1. When providing names for Youth baptisms, I like to give them cards cleared for only the baptism and confirmation. That way, if the cards are lost or misplaced, I can still print cards for the additional ordinances without being concerned about duplicates. However, the new approach makes that impossible.


It's actually not hard to do this. Assign the I, E, and SP to the "temple", then you can print the cards with just the B & C. No temple will grab those names as they will remain unavailable until the other ordinances are completed. Then if you want to do the rest of the ordinances yourself, change the assignment from the temple to yourself once you've created the FOR for the youth baptismal trip.

One caution. I've noticed that if the Seal to Spouse are assigned to the temple, they are immediately printed by some temple somewhere. I thought the intention was for us not to do that ordinance until both parties in the couple had their endowments completed. That is not how it is working under NFS.

Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 11:29 pm
by scion-p40
I have also heard that there are additional problems with this reservation system. For example, somebody does research & prepares individual names to take to the temple. Perhaps they go to the temple the following day, or maybe a month or two later. When they hand the barcoded printout over to be scanned, the cards won't print and the patron is told there is an error. No message seems to explain what that error is, but it seems to relate to reservations. Meanwhile, if another person actually goes to nFS & merges someone on that barcoded sheet & makes a change that affects that list, it is not automatically corrected, nor does it offer an option to print all cards other than the affected individual. The whole batch is rejected. The person needs to leave the temple to figure out & resolve the problem, then print out the new barcoded request. This will particularly impact those who travel to attend the temple and those who are attending in behalf of another living individual, but don't know their friend's research data.

Another problem

Posted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 9:41 am
by KathrynGZ
Found a somewhat humorous error the other night resulting from this new process. An ancestor was married several times. I added one wife and printed their FOR.

Later, I added another wife and printed the FOR their sealing. It forced the already-printed sealing of the first wife to be added to the FOR. (I actually didn't notice this at the time.) When I took the FOR to the temple to be printed, a warning came up on the screen saying there was a duplicate.

It took us a while to figure out that the first sealing had been forced onto the second FOR, then designated (correctly) as a duplicate printing :)