Deactivating (Not deleting) E-mail Address

Use this forum to discuss issues that are not found in any of the other clerk and stake technology specialist forums.
Post Reply
New Member
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 11:26 am

Deactivating (Not deleting) E-mail Address


Post by justin.scott »

On occasion our stake presidency will send an email to stake members via "Send a Message" on LCR. These emails contain important information about upcoming events in the stake (i.e. stake conference, etc). Out of the many email addresses that receive these messages, we'll usually get a few replies from members asking to be removed from the email distribution list. The replies are sometimes cordial, and others can be scathing.

Now, we have been taught that we should never delete pertinent member information (including email addresses), but we should never bother someone when they have requested not to be bothered. As far as I can tell, the only way to accomplish both is to keep a separate ongoing list of those who wish not to be emailed. We would then, before sending any message, need to check to ensure the message doesn't get sent to those who have asked not to be contacted. While that is an option, it is inefficient at best. Ideally, there should be some sort of toggle switch on a member's profile that would exclude them from receiving messages through the Church system.

Are there other options to accomplish this other than what I have already mentioned? I'm completely open to suggestions. Thank you in advance!
Community Administrator
Posts: 32097
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Re: Deactivating (Not deleting) E-mail Address


Post by russellhltn »

justin.scott wrote:Now, we have been taught that we should never delete pertinent member information (including email addresses), but we should never bother someone when they have requested not to be bothered.
I'm not sure who is teaching this, but I'd respond back to them that the church isn't providing the tools to help you succeed in that area and can they take the issue up with their presiding authority.

This isn't something decided by developers or mid-level admins. It comes from the upper levels such as the First Presidency or Presiding Bishopric.

Personally, I don't think the setup is an accident, which suggests there may be a "difference of vision" between top-level leaders and the lower levels. A couple critical questions: can members ask to opt out from messages from leadership and still be considered "members"? What content/how often should the local leaders be sending messages?

I doubt if this solves your problem, but with any luck, it might shift the bulk of it to someone else.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
Senior Member
Posts: 2819
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 6:06 pm
Location: Plattsmouth, NE

Re: Deactivating (Not deleting) E-mail Address


Post by drepouille »

We recently received such a response from a less-active brother. Our solution was to remove his "individual" contact details, but leave his "household" contact details in place, since "Send a Message" appears to use only the "individual" email address.
Dana Repouille, Plattsmouth, Nebraska
User avatar
New Member
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 5:46 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Deactivating (Not deleting) E-mail Address


Post by rootbeericecream »

In a local unit, the scenario described was encountered - a member did not want to be included on mass emailings, but did not want to lose contact with ward leadership if the occasion required for a direct email.

In this situation the ward clerk modified their email address, and added the prefix "DoNotUse_", as in ""

From the "send a message" tool, the email is invalid, and bounces, and the member does not receive anything.
Local leaders wanting to send a direct email can simply look up the address in Tools, and remove the prefix and use a personal mail system for sending.
Post Reply

Return to “General Clerk Discussions”