New FamilySearch

Discussions around Genealogy technology.
thomasjking
New Member
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:20 pm
Location: englewood,tn 37329

Postby thomasjking » Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:21 pm

we had this problem in our FHC about a "name" on hold ---we called our Temple(Atlanta) and the good sister asked for name,birthday etc. i could hear her going "click.click" on a keyboard when she said the "name" is on hold at the Oakland Temple under this family name file. She said have your member get in touch with the" reserving family" (they were relations) and if they will give permission we will transfer the "family file" to our temple. No work had been done on this "family file" for seven years
any way or member did contact her relations, permission was given and work was done
So calling the Temple has worked well for us

User avatar
mkmurray
Senior Member
Posts: 3241
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:56 pm
Location: Utah
Contact:

Postby mkmurray » Wed Aug 22, 2007 7:17 pm

RussellHltn wrote:Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think what people are asking for is to only reserve names for a year at a time. I don't think anyone is talking about non-renewal of the "hold". Only that it would be released if the submitter was inactive and failed to renew.

Also, Marian, I think the problem trying to be solved has more to do with temple goers passing away, or becoming unable to attend the temple anymore. It would be easy for reservations to be lost forever without some mechanism for releasing the reservations after some period of inactivity. I personally think a year reservation with renewal options sounds the best.

scion-p40
Member
Posts: 259
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 11:56 pm

Postby scion-p40 » Wed Aug 22, 2007 9:58 pm

If these reserved cards are somehow linked to our barcoded recommends, then perhaps they can automatically renew as long as our recommend continues to be used annually (or some other length of time that accommodates those in countries or circumstances that prevent frequent attendance). If renewal is linked to the barcoded recommends, then another arrangement will need to be in place for those with limited-use recommends because they are not currently barcoded.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 29131
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:47 am

scion wrote:If these reserved cards are somehow linked to our barcoded recommends, then perhaps they can automatically renew as long as our recommend continues to be used annually


Or perhaps as long as the nFS user account is logged into annually. Just something to let us know they are still alive and functioning.

However, I still like the idea of them reviewing what they have on hold once a year. I don't see that as too big a burden.

RonaldF-p40
Member
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 7:30 pm
Location: Oakhurst, California

Postby RonaldF-p40 » Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:45 am

scion wrote:If these reserved cards are somehow linked to our barcoded recommends, then perhaps they can automatically renew as long as our recommend continues to be used annually (or some other length of time that accommodates those in countries or circumstances that prevent frequent attendance). If renewal is linked to the barcoded recommends, then another arrangement will need to be in place for those with limited-use recommends because they are not currently barcoded.

Temple recommends should not be tied to any family history work. A member may not be temple worthy but does the family history research for their family. They may reserve certain names for other family members to do. Time limits on ordinance reservations are a fair and simplest solution.

We are dealing with two separate problems. One is tying up the name and associated ordinances by ordinance reservation. The second is tying up the name and associated ordinances when the family name card is printed or the name is sent out to a temple on a temple list. Problem one is easily fixed by time limits. Patrons could maintain the reservation by renewing it manually through FamilySearch.

The second problem is not easily solved. Once the ordinances are printed, either on family name cards or temple lists, the ordinances are locked into the system. If the name is on a family name card, the submitter has sole and total control and responsibility of the ordinance work. That is the reason for only printing a few cards that can be completed by a few trips to the temple. If the name is on a temple list at a temple, then there is nothing that can be done until the temple completes the work. That may take years. Any attempts to circumvent the system will result in ordinance duplication and the waste of some patron’s time. Every duplicated ordinance prevents a non duplicated ordinance from being completed.

The disturbing truth is that there are more names going into the system for ordinances than ordinances being completed. The endowment is the biggest flow restriction. There are not enough attendees to get the flow moving in a balanced manner.

[color=black]Wouldn’t be nice if the temple attendance was so high that in order to attend the temple, you would have to bring your own card![/color]

JDixon16510
New Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 7:38 pm
Location: Houston Texas

Reservations

Postby JDixon16510 » Fri Aug 24, 2007 12:09 pm

The time limit idea is very good for a number of reasons. I think it could be expanded to allow the user the ability to designate a time limit themselves up to a maximum. This gives them the oportunity to have their records released for others to access. This will also remind them that a time limit is set and therefore they need to plan for it.

MarianJohnson
New Member
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 6:48 am

Postby MarianJohnson » Sat Aug 25, 2007 4:37 pm

I think it would be really helpful if the church would prioritize the CLEARED ordinances in the temple file and extraction file and do the oldest ones that people are griping about being in the system for so long - FIRST IN - FIRST OUT. Maybe that would help the frustration level of people who have been waiting for years to see the ordinances done - and help keep people from duplicating ordinances that are in CLEARED status.

RonaldF-p40
Member
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 7:30 pm
Location: Oakhurst, California

Postby RonaldF-p40 » Sat Aug 25, 2007 7:52 pm

Marian JOhnson wrote:I think it would be really helpful if the church would prioritize the CLEARED ordinances in the temple file and extraction file and do the oldest ones that people are griping about being in the system for so long - FIRST IN - FIRST OUT. Maybe that would help the frustration level of people who have been waiting for years to see the ordinances done - and help keep people from duplicating ordinances that are in CLEARED status.

They actually do. There are a lot of other factors that come into play. The ultimate solution is for temple attendance to increase significantly, especially male attendance. When you have more names coming into the system than going out, there becomes a back log that just keeps getting bigger.

JamesAnderson
Senior Member
Posts: 766
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 2:03 pm

Postby JamesAnderson » Sat Aug 25, 2007 9:16 pm

I've heard that the backlog wait time is currently 10 years for male names submitted to the temple and eight years for female names, however that doesn't wash with what one of the FH consultants in my ward said.

She submitted some names to the temple file in November last year via TempleReady, and they were done in November last year.

I've also heard of recent reports of one name having not just one ordinance done but two in sequence on the same day in different temples, some distance apart, and those were sent to the temple file. In other words the baptism was done in one temple, and the endowment was completed in another temple some significant distance away, on the same day, and we found that out via the online IGI when whoever it was that submitted the name checked to see if anything had been done yet.

So what do we really make of the issue of how long member-submitted names sent to the temple file really are in the queue awaiting being sent to the temples?

MarianJohnson
New Member
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 6:48 am

Postby MarianJohnson » Sun Aug 26, 2007 5:28 pm

I wonder if it would be possible for the church to use the new FamilySearch search engine to find the cases in which there are temple file or extraction file ordinances with a CLEARED designation, where the temple work HAS BEEN DONE by members in the meantime, while those extracted or temple file names have been waiting to be done, and remove them from the system.

I cited a case in one of my previous posts where I submitted many German names to the temple file and the baptisms were done, then, because my names were still in Dallas and not in the IGI, the extraction program cleared a lot of the same names again. If the church could locate those types of situations and pull them out of the system, that would reduce the backlog significantly, I think. With the old program where the IGI was on CDs, there was a 4 - year gap between the releases of the CDs where duplication could occur. If there is really an 8 -10 year backlog, identifying those duplicates for which ordinances are still marked CLEARED and removing them from the system could be very helpful in reducing the backlog.


Return to “Family History”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests