Tech Forum

boomerbubba wrote:If LDS Account authentication cannot be trusted in this simple situation, that implies deeper problems going forward with lots of online applications.

Keep in mind mkmurray's post that indicates that there's some permission problems in the current beta.

Alan_Brown wrote:In your e-mail did you mention that you were a clerk? The download is available to all members, so I can understand a reluctance to include the MRN in general. There would have to be a separate code path that includes the MRN for clerks and leaders, but not for regular members.

Yes, it was clear that I am an assistant ward clerk for finance, that the application correctly authenticated me and that it allowed me to download the "confidential" data elements. The issue is what fields are, in fact, included in that file.

It seems to be a policy call, but maybe there are issues specific to the beta that I don't understand. I just hope it is not a generalized and permanent decision.

Actually, for my immediate purpose -- evaluating the quality of the geocoding -- I can work around this. But in the long run local leaders would want the MRNs, and I can't see why they can't get them.

boomerbubba wrote:Yes, it was clear that I am an assistant ward clerk for finance, that the application correctly authenticated me and that it allowed me to download the "confidential" data elements. The issue is what fields are, in fact, included in that file.

It seems to be a policy call, but maybe there are issues specific to the beta that I don't understand. I just hope it is not a generalized and permanent decision.

Actually, for my immediate purpose -- evaluating the quality of the geocoding -- I can work around this. But in the long run local leaders would want the MRNs, and I can't see why they can't get them.

I don't know what you are seeing, but a regular member sees the following fields in the downloaded CSV file:

1. Longitude
2. Latitude
3. Household (with full names, not preferred names)
4. Address-1
5. Address-2
6. Address-3
7. Address-4
8. Phone
9. E-mail (household e-mail)
10. Location-Status (Unverified, Unmapped, ?)
11. Group

The fields clearly come from MLS, not from LUWS.

You referred to "confidential data elements." With your verified calling as a clerk, do you see something different from this set of fields?

Alan_Brown wrote:I don't know what you are seeing, but a regular member sees the following fields in the downloaded CSV file:

1. Longitude
2. Latitude
3. Household (with full names, not preferred names)
4. Address-1
5. Address-2
6. Address-3
7. Address-4
8. Phone
9. E-mail (household e-mail)
10. Location-Status (Unverified, Unmapped, ?)
11. Group

The fields clearly come from MLS, not from LUWS.

You referred to "confidential data elements." With your verified calling as a clerk, do you see something different from this set of fields?

Yes, there are some additional confidential fields, mostly related to emergency prep. MRN was supposed to be among them. But at least for now, that design has been changed to omit the MRN.

jbh001 wrote:I've got one address that is within city limits in Oklahoma, yet is being mapped to somewhere in Houston, Texas. Betas are fun!

Yes, I believe there is a known issue in the beta related to the timing of updates. Geocodes are not immediately updated when addresses change. So the address that is displayed for a household may be current but the geocode is really for the previous address, which may be in a distant location.

I noticed several such examples for recently moved members, both local moves and move-ins.

A similar anomaly occurs in the mapping function of the dev Member Directory at labs.lds.org, which I surmise is sharing geocoded data from LDSmaps. When I reported that several days ago I got a response stating that the issue is being worked on.

OK, so I've started playing a little with the "Special Needs" area for each member on the map. I have put in for one household in our ward that they are part-members under "Special Needs." I then logged in as my wife (who does not have a leadership calling) and I didn't see any notes or anything for the family (which I think is perfect). My question is, though, can the leadership see these notes? I haven't taken the time to have one of our ward leaders log into the system to see. Has anyone had the chance to see this? So, basically what I think would be great is that as a clerk myself, I can go in and mark the households that are part-member, YSA, etc. and leaders can see those notes. Then, if needed, priesthood and RS leaders can give that information to VT/HT. Does this make sense? I do know that this is still in beta and many features will probably show up later, so I'm not worried about that. I just don't know how this feature works.

pbhanney wrote:OK, so I've started playing a little with the "Special Needs" area for each member on the map. I have put in for one household in our ward that they are part-members under "Special Needs." I then logged in as my wife (who does not have a leadership calling) and I didn't see any notes or anything for the family (which I think is perfect). My question is, though, can the leadership see these notes? I haven't taken the time to have one of our ward leaders log into the system to see. Has anyone had the chance to see this? So, basically what I think would be great is that as a clerk myself, I can go in and mark the households that are part-member, YSA, etc. and leaders can see those notes. Then, if needed, priesthood and RS leaders can give that information to VT/HT. Does this make sense? I do know that this is still in beta and many features will probably show up later, so I'm not worried about that. I just don't know how this feature works.

I can't verify this for you (as I'm still waiting for my membership clerk bug fix), but I have a guess as to how it works. I imagine that any bishopric member (clerks and exec. secretary included) can see and set up the notes and groupings as you describe, but that no other member of the ward can even see the notes or groupings. I'm guessing this latter group includes EQ Presidents, RS Presidents, etc.

pbhanney wrote: So, basically what I think would be great is that as a clerk myself, I can go in and mark the households that are part-member, YSA, etc. and leaders can see those notes. Then, if needed, priesthood and RS leaders can give that information to VT/HT. Does this make sense?

As I understand the instructions for clerks and leaders, using the categories for general notes as you describe would be a misuse of these fields, which are provided purely for purposes of emergency preparedness. See the relevant Help file, which says:

Emergency response categories should be used only for ward, stake, and regional emergency response planning.

Comments included in the category of emergency response leaders should provide enough information to help leaders respond in an emergency.

I think a "special need" might be some relevant fact like "wheelchair-bound" or "visually impaired."

If the Church wanted to give clerks a place to take general notes about members, no doubt that would be built into MLS itself. Notably, no such note-taking capability exists, which I think is no accident.

p.s. YSAs and part-member families do not need free-form notes in MLS to flag them. MLS can already identify these particular classes of members, as well as home-teaching routes, etc. For mapping, the trick is to relate all that information to the points captured in LDSmaps. For now, at least, that seems to require export to an external application.

What is the plan for stake level use of the tool? For instance, stake presidencies often use these types of tools to help with the creation of new units and modifying existing unit boundaries. Yes, the ward clerks are responsible for the member's information, but there is still a need to access, review and possibly manipulate it on a stake level, too.

The stake capabilities are included in the product roadmap and will come later.