Will LCR be available to YM quorum advisors and specialist?

[steele7]

"You're a computer guy, can't you just fix it?"

You have to tell him you lack the keys and authority to fix it.

He needs to take the issue up with the stake president to take to his presiding authority.

Are you being serious? Lack the keys and authority to fix it? Since when do keys and authority come into play when talking about functionality related to the church's website that should be available to those with callings and its not available to them? And what the crap is the Stake President and/or Area Authority going to do about it. They won't have a clue.

And to say this won't matter in a year? Maybe not, but it certainly matters now when people don't have the tools they need because the church IT department messed up. This needs to be fixed.

[drepouille]

The Church IT department did not mess up. Software requirements and priorities are set by the Church presiding councils. If enough stake presidents and area coordinating councils report this as a problem to the Brethren, it will become a requirement and a priority. This forum is not used for that purpose.

[scgallafent]

Are you being serious? Lack the keys and authority to fix it? Since when do keys and authority come into play when talking about functionality related to the church's website that should be available to those with callings and its not available to them? And what the crap is the Stake President and/or Area Authority going to do about it. They won't have a clue.

And to say this won't matter in a year? Maybe not, but it certainly matters now when people don't have the tools they need because the church IT department messed up. This needs to be fixed.

This might be a good time to review the forum code of conduct.

[russellhltn]

Are you being serious? Lack the keys and authority to fix it? Since when do keys and authority come into play when talking about functionality related to the church's website that should be available to those with callings and its not available to them?

Do you have the passwords and authority to access the church website to make the changes your leaders are asking of you?

What I was suggesting is to communicate back to your leaders that the situation is out of your hands and that as a "computer guy" you don't have the ability (at least not legally) to "just fix it".

And what the crap is the Stake President and/or Area Authority going to do about it. They won't have a clue.

They should know how to escalate an issue to their presiding authority.

Something deeper may be at play here. The term "adviser" suggests that they will be doing just that - advising the quorum - not leading/running it. As such, they would be responsible for training the quorum leaders and not for the individual members. From what I've observed, responsibility for individual members seems to be the key to getting access to member's personal information. That may be a "law of the land" thing.

[scgallafent]

Moderator note: greenwoodkl started a discussion here about the issues with submitting requests related to Church software. Since it isn't on the topic of the current thread, that has been split into its own topic.

[drepouille]

Something deeper may be at play here. The term "adviser" suggests that they will be doing just that - advising the [quorum]- not leading/running it. As such, they would be responsible for training the quorum leaders and not for the individual members. From what I've observed, responsibility for individual members seems to be the key to getting access to member's personal information. That may be a "law of the land" thing.

Russell, I think that is a very pertinent and insightful comment. It may very well be that quorum advisers are only meant to advise the leaders of the Priest, Teacher, and Deacon quorums, and not the members of those quorums. The advisers simply teach the quorum presidencies how to be leaders. If that is true, then it is inappropriate for the bishop or his counselors to expect the quorum advisers to do anything more than that.

[russellhltn]

Not just that, but our friendly developers have been oddly silent about this. They're normally very forthcoming about technical problems.

[lajackson]

Not just that, but our friendly developers have been oddly silent about this. They're normally very forthcoming about technical problems.

But this is not a technical problem. This is a policy decision that is probably in the midst of discussion and change. While those in callings all believe they need the information, who really needs it?

The bishopric: Probably yes. They preside.
The advisors: Are they primarily responsible for the members of their quorums and classes, or are they advisors to the youth quorum and class presidencies?
The youth presidencies: Yes. But there are legal and other reasons that make such access problematic.

I believe that once the decision of access is made, it is probably a simple matter of updating an access table inside the software.

[greenwoodkl]

lajackson beat me to it, but a thought came to me this afternoon, if we are trying to encourage the Young Men to step up and lead, would it not be more useful to enable the quorum presidencies to access their quorum rosters before advisers and specialists who are there to mentor? I'm not sure of the legal or policy implications.

[scgallafent]

Not just that, but our friendly developers have been oddly silent about this. They're normally very forthcoming about technical problems.

There weren't any technical problems. As for whether there has been a policy change relative to advisers (but not specialists), I will leave that to interested users to discover.