mailing labels: apparent bugs

Use this forum to discuss issues that are not found in any of the other clerk and stake technology specialist forums.
russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 34417
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Re: mailing labels: apparent bugs

#11

Post by russellhltn »

adamu wrote: Mon Dec 19, 2022 3:25 pm No, M. Russell Ballard would become M. Ballard.
I used a familiar name. If his preferred name wasn't recorded, the full name would be Melvin Russell Ballard, which would be changed to just Melvin Ballard.

My point was that while using the full name can less than desirable, using just the first name has issues as well. One needs to choose the lesser of two issues.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
lajackson
Community Moderators
Posts: 11460
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:27 pm
Location: US

Re: mailing labels: apparent bugs

#12

Post by lajackson »

russellhltn wrote: Mon Dec 19, 2022 2:39 pm It's been a long time, but I thought that some printouts wouldn't print the second line, creating problems.
True, but the data is still there to access using his process.
rmrichesjr
Community Moderators
Posts: 3827
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:32 am
Location: Dundee, Oregon, USA

Re: mailing labels: apparent bugs

#13

Post by rmrichesjr »

adamu wrote: Mon Dec 19, 2022 1:29 pm Yes, I saw the deceased members names in the list of printed records. I found that this was due to the preferred name for the household. Changing that fixed the issue.

...
By "preferred name for the household", do you mean the field that is set by the 'Edit Household Name' button when looking at a member profile and selecting the Household tab? Or, do you mean something different? If something different, please inform where you found a field to edit that solves the problem.

For the two widows in my ward whose deceased husbands show up on the labels, the household name is set to simply the shared surname of both spouses, only one word per profile. LCR will not allow me to make that field empty.

I did discover that if I leave the default "Head of Household Name -> First Last" selected rather than manually clicking on "Household Name -> First Last", I don't get the deceased husband's name.
russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 34417
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Re: mailing labels: apparent bugs

#14

Post by russellhltn »

lajackson wrote: Mon Dec 19, 2022 5:25 pm True, but the data is still there to access using his process.
Yes, but if you standardize ward addresses by putting the apartment number on the second line, what report/print-outs are now missing the apartment number?

A quick glance at Pub 28 from the USPS seems to indicate that they're fine with the apartment number on the same line as the street address as long as there's space for it.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
lajackson
Community Moderators
Posts: 11460
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:27 pm
Location: US

Re: mailing labels: apparent bugs

#15

Post by lajackson »

russellhltn wrote: Mon Dec 19, 2022 5:44 pm Yes, but if you standardize ward addresses by putting the apartment number on the second line, what report/print-outs are now missing the apartment number?
I am not familiar enough with LCR to know which reports/print-outs do not include address 2. But you are correct. There are a number of them.

Since I am not using adamu's system, I would leave the apartment number in address 1 so it would not be lost. As you indicate, the USPS is perfectly happy with that format. For him, it is better if the apartment number is in address 2.
adamu
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2021 12:10 pm

Re: mailing labels: apparent bugs

#16

Post by adamu »

Actually, the address validator that the church uses moves the apartment number to the second line. When you make a new record or make an address update the validator will provide a recommendation, and it has always had the apartment number on the second line.
adamu
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2021 12:10 pm

Re: mailing labels: apparent bugs

#17

Post by adamu »

russellhltn wrote: Mon Dec 19, 2022 4:26 pm My point was that while using the full name can less than desirable, using just the first name has issues as well. One needs to choose the lesser of two issues.
Actually, you can add a very specific household name and use it as well.

Image
Attachments
Screenshot 2022-12-21 112619.png
adamu
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2021 12:10 pm

Re: mailing labels: apparent bugs

#18

Post by adamu »

rmrichesjr wrote: Mon Dec 19, 2022 5:41 pm By "preferred name for the household", do you mean the field that is set by the 'Edit Household Name' button when looking at a member profile and selecting the Household tab? Or, do you mean something different? If something different, please inform where you found a field to edit that solves the problem.
Yes, in my reverse engineering the labels, I believe that they use the Household Name first, then fall back to Preferred Name if not set, then finally fall back to Given Name + Family Name when Preferred Name is not set.
adamu
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2021 12:10 pm

Re: mailing labels: apparent bugs

#19

Post by adamu »

lajackson wrote: Mon Dec 19, 2022 7:56 pm I am not familiar enough with LCR to know which reports/print-outs do not include address 2. But you are correct. There are a number of them.
There are addresses listed in the following standard reports, and they all show address 2 in them if it is not blank.
* Ministering reports
* members moved in and moved out
* member list (household view)

If you have custom reports that do not include address 2, then yes, those would have to be updated.

The reason that address 2 is necessary is that in many areas, the street names can be quite long. If you live in Utah, you have the grid system which keeps your address 1 line to less than 20 chars, plenty of room to add a comma and an apartment number. Most addresses in the Seattle area have a 5 digit number plus a numeric based street, like my address: 11821 SE 282nd St. If you understand our grid, you know that I live 118 blocks East and 282 blocks south of 1st avenue and main street in downtown Seattle.

But we also have many roads that are not on a grid that connect various towns, such as Bellevue Redmond Rd, or Graham Kapowsin Hwy, Pacific Highway S. In my specific area, we have Kent - Kangley Road and Auburn Black Diamond Road. Adding an apartment number at the end of the line can cause it to be truncated.

The default mailing labels as provided aren't well designed.
* They don't use state abbreviations.
* They are center aligned rather than left aligned.
* There is no field that allows you to specify the addressee name to be used.
* Even worse, they pull data incorrectly based on marriage and do not take into account people who are widowed, which could be traumatic if not caught.

With a few tweaks, what they provide would be great.
Post Reply

Return to “General Clerk Discussions”