Page 3 of 6

Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 1:02 pm
by aebrown
lajackson wrote:So, if my LDS Access [sic] e-mail address were to flow to MLS and then LUWS, LDS Access would not be able to get me, either, after the first broadcast on LUWS.
Of course, all we have been told is that e-mail addresses will flow from LDS Account to MLS. Talk of any connection to LUWS is only speculation at this point.

P.S. It's "LDS Account" (not "LDS Access")

Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 3:54 pm
by lajackson
Alan_Brown wrote:Of course, all we have been told is that e-mail addresses will flow from LDS Account to MLS. Talk of any connection to LUWS is only speculation at this point.
Good reminder, thanks. That's why I said that the first time I mentioned the possibility in this thread, but that was a few posts ago. [grin]
Alan_Brown wrote:P.S. It's "LDS Account" (not "LDS Access")
Sigh. Yes, I missed it in two places. Thanks for keeping me straight. It is a good thing we are not keeping tabs on this stuff in the actual MLS messages.

Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 7:13 pm
by russellhltn
Alan_Brown wrote:Of course, all we have been told is that e-mail addresses will flow from LDS Account to MLS. Talk of any connection to LUWS is only speculation at this point.
True, but the statement "update it once and have the changes cascade across all systems, etc" made it sound like it was a plan envisioned to encompass more then just MLS. I think it would be better to have a good plan from the start rather then re-define it as new systems are added.

Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 7:41 pm
by greggo
Alan_Brown wrote:Of course, all we have been told is that e-mail addresses will flow from LDS Account to MLS. Talk of any connection to LUWS is only speculation at this point.
I didn't realize there are two separate addresses.

To me, it doesn't make sense to have the addresses in MLS and LUWS be different.

I also like that we're getting some consistency with the synchronization. But I think it would be better if it was a two-way sync. I know that, technically, it is more difficult, but it would be good if a clerk could update the MLS address and have it be pushed to LUWS as well. This way, one can get rid of those pesky addresses in LUWS that are no longer valid and people never bother to update.

Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 8:14 pm
by russellhltn
Greggo wrote:To me, it doesn't make sense to have the addresses in MLS and LUWS be different.
Larry, being a LUWS admin, makes a case for it. Otherwise his main email gets a ton of rejects each time he sends out a broadcast or notice. Once they fix that, then maybe there's no need. However, different people use their emails differently. So I wouldn't say "never".
Greggo wrote:But I think it would be better if it was a two-way sync. I know that, technically, it is more difficult, but it would be good if a clerk could update the MLS address and have it be pushed to LUWS as well. This way, one can get rid of those pesky addresses in LUWS that are no longer valid and people never bother to update.
I agree with the problem but the inability of the admin to do update was, from what I understand, a deliberate policy issue. Unless that's changed, I don't see a two-way sync happening.

Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 9:44 pm
by aebrown
RussellHltn wrote:...the inability of the admin to do update was, from what I understand, a deliberate policy issue. Unless that's changed, I don't see a two-way sync happening.
It's not just a policy issue; it's a practical issue. The LDS Account system has procedures for verifying new and changed e-mail addresses, which involve sending an e-mail with a confirmation code. So you can be certain that the e-mail address is valid (at least at that moment).

On the other hand, it's easy for a clerk to make a mistake while entering an e-mail address in MLS. I've seen error rates in excess of 5% on clerk data entry. That could really confuse a user and make it more difficult for them to recover their password.

Posted: Fri Dec 25, 2009 12:37 am
by russellhltn
Alan_Brown wrote:It's not just a policy issue; it's a practical issue. The LDS Account system has procedures for verifying new and changed e-mail addresses, which involve sending an e-mail with a confirmation code. So you can be certain that the e-mail address is valid (at least at that moment).
There's that, but somehow I don't think that was the reason when it was first formed. Personally, I suspect it had more to do with making sure that it was the member was in control of how their email address was used. Spam was a real hot topic back then. But that's just speculation on my part.

Posted: Fri Dec 25, 2009 11:38 am
by lajackson
Alan_Brown wrote:The LDS Account system has procedures for verifying new and changed e-mail addresses, which involve sending an e-mail with a confirmation code. So you can be certain that the e-mail address is valid (at least at that moment).
And that is the key. At that moment, my e-mail was valid.

So I say, push it out to the world. My problems are about to go away. But, if you try to contact me with that address, you may be disappointed. [gryn]

Posted: Fri Dec 25, 2009 4:44 pm
by pete_arnett-p40
I have done Stake and Ward e-mail broadcasts from LDS.org for several years. This has shown that there is an issue with several members who have created an LDSAccount with an e-mail address and then they changed their e-mail address and have not updated their LDSAccount and as you know, only a member can update their profile e-mail address

Then they grumbled because they did not get an e-mail about a calendar event being changed etc.

I agree that this is a privacy,security and spam issue and members need to take responsibility to keep their information current

When you now send an e-mail broadcast from LDS.org, the members will get the following addition to your e-mail broadcast (the y,x, and n are my doings):

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You received this email from Xxx Yyyyyy (xxx.yyyyyy@gmail.com) because you registered for notifications on Stake and Ward Websites.

You are currently registered as Yyy Xxxxxt (yyy.xxxxxt@gmail.com). To manage your subscriptions or to remove yourself from Stake and Ward Website Communications, please update your profile: http://lds.org/units/profile?u=1-5-5nnnnn

If you need additional assistance, contact your Stake and Ward Web site Administrator atxx.yyyyyy@gmail.com.

We value your privacy. View our privacy policy: http://lds.org/units/privacy

Stake and Ward Web sites
http://wards.lds.org
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
50 E. North Temple Street
Salt Lake City, UT 84150
© 2009 Intellectual Reserve, Inc


------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted: Fri Dec 25, 2009 8:50 pm
by aebrown
pete_arnett wrote:I have done Stake and Ward e-mail broadcasts from LDS.org for several years. This has shown that there is an issue with several members who have created an LDSAccount with an e-mail address and then they changed their e-mail address and have not updated their LDSAccount and as you know, only a member can update their profile e-mail address
It sounds like you're mixing up the LDS Account and the stake and ward websites on lds.org (LUWS) profile. If you're talking about anything you've done for "several years" then you are clearly talking about the LUWS profile. Until sometime earlier this year, LDS Account had nothing at all to do with LUWS, so you can't really mean LDS Account, unless you are talking about a relatively recent experience.

But the principle is still the same; regardless of whether the e-mail address in the LUWS profile got there from long ago (which could not have used LDS Account), or in the last few months via a new LUWS registration, still the individual user does have to take responsibility for updating any change in e-mail address in the LUWS system. They also have to do the same for LDS Account. And up to this new change in January, they would also have to update their address in MLS by notifying their ward clerk. At least this third step will soon no longer be necessary.