I don't remember Ordinances Ready ever suggesting an ordinance that had already been printed. I have only seen it suggest ordinances that have been reserved by others, but not yet printed. If I print a card for an ordinance that has already been printed by a member or by the temple, that would be bad, in my opinion.lajackson wrote:I do not believe it is that they have been reserved, but rather that they may have been printed out before.drepouille wrote:I wondered whether printing new cards for ordinances that had already been reserved "counted" on the report.
Discussions around Genealogy technology.
Dana Repouille, Plattsmouth, Nebraska
Good point. Reprints may not count.lajackson wrote:I do not believe it is that they have been reserved, but rather that they may have been prined out before.
Family name cards expire, even if they've already been printed. Have the ones that are showing up in Ordinances Ready expired?
Samuel Bradshaw • If you desire to serve God, you are called to the work.
Ordinances Ready will find ordinances in a variety of places, each with different interaction with the "printed" status:drepouille wrote:I don't remember Ordinances Ready ever suggesting an ordinance that had already been printed. I have only seen it suggest ordinances that have been reserved by others, but not yet printed. If I print a card for an ordinance that has already been printed by a member or by the temple, that would be bad, in my opinion.
- Your own reservation list: If you have one or more reserved ordinances on your own list and you ask for that type of ordinance in Ordinances Ready, you'll get those returned to you first. It doesn't matter whether they have been printed or not -- you'll get those first. If one or more has been printed, you'll be warned that they have been printed.
- Ordinances shared with the temple by others: When another person shares ordinances from their reservation list with the temple, the "printed" status of those ordinances is essentially cleared. They will simply have a "shared" status. It's possible that that other person printed the card before they decided to share it with the temple. In that case, they should be responsible and destroy the card. But this scenario is not "bad" -- if it weren't allowed, then once someone printed a card, they would not be able to share it with the temple, even if they then realized that they just didn't have time or ability to do the ordinances themselves. It's much better to allow people to share ordinances with the temple, since that makes the ordinance available for someone who will actually do the work in a temple.
- Ordinances from Family Tree that are reservable: These are new reservations, so when you receive them via Ordinances Ready, they are in an unprinted status. Once you generate the cards at the end of the Ordinances Ready process, they will change to a Printed status.
- Ordinances shared with the temple and printed by the temple: This can't happen. If a temple has printed an ordinance for a person, that ordinance will never be given to someone who requests ordinances via Ordinances Ready.
Yes. The FHAR only counts your first submission for the year, so it will cause you to be counted as a new submitter only if this is your first submission for the year, but it does count.
Some might think this might lead to double counting. After all, for the person who shared this ordinance with the temple this might have been their first submission of the year, and so the act of sharing this ordinance might very well have caused the sharer to be counted as a submitter on their ward and stake FHARs. And then the person who used Ordinances Ready to print the card could also be counted as a submitter for that action if that was the first ordinance they submitted in the year. So both could conceivably get counted as a submitter for that single ordinance. But this is by design. Remember that the focus is on how many members do submission activities, not how many ordinances might be involved.