HT/VT Reporting Website Overview

[russellhltn]

Minor point: There is a difference between telling a private website to shutdown and telling leaders that they may not load information into it (effectively preventing leaders from using some of the ones mentioned.)

So I think a more accurate re-phrase of the question is: Why haven't the leaders been told not to use these sites?

One observation I'll make is that we, the tech folks, have been told in this forum not to upload MLS data to any website (or was that just 3rd party website?). However, no such letter has been sent to the leaders. I think that's creating some of the issues here - the leaders and the techs are not on the same page about what's allowed. The leaders are following what's in their manuals and been received on church letterhead and the tech are saying "I read in the forum....."

Worse, stakes whose techs haven't visited this forum don't know about this restriction and are happily going along. /:mad:

[brado426]

One observation I'll make is that we, the tech folks, have been told in this forum not to upload MLS data to any website (or was that just 3rd party website?). However, no such letter has been sent to the leaders.

Worse, stakes whose techs haven't visited this forum don't know about this restriction and are happily going along. /:mad:

The leaders have been sent a letter. This letter appears to be all-inclusive and provides no exceptions whatsoever. This is the clarification that Enrique was looking for in his post in the General Discussion group. Unfortunately, I do not believe anyone has been able to acquire that needed clarification yet.

I agree that if there are other sites that are in violation of that policy, members should not be using them. What is the purpose of having a policy if it doesn't apply to everyone and everything?

I know this is the third time I'm saying this, but uploading data or entering data renders the same result. I strongly believe that the manual entry of data should not be used as a way to bypass the Church's data security policy.

Brad O.

[russellhltn]

The leaders have been sent a letter. This letter appears to be all-inclusive and provides no exceptions whatsoever.

Are you talking about one more recent? The only letter(s) I know of spells out that a unit may not have a website. I don't think it really covered use of a commercial website. The whole thing about uploading/entering member data into a website wasn't really covered except for in this forum. The whole nature of what websites were about has changed since the original letters.

[brado426]

Are you talking about one more recent? The only letter(s) I know of spells out that a unit may not have a website. I don't think it really covered use of a commercial website. The whole thing about uploading/entering member data into a website wasn't really covered except for in this forum. The whole nature of what websites were about has changed since the original letters.

I'm referring to this letter that Enrique was asking about in this thread:

http://tech.lds.org/forum/showthread.php?t=576

It says "No other websites are allowed" which seems to cover pretty much everything including commercial websites.

Brad O.

[JamesAnderson]

There were alot of units that had sites on the free commercial websites, e.g. Tripod.com, Angelfire.com, Xoom.com (defunct), and many others. Almost all of them disappeared after the March 2001 letter.

Most are still around, like Angelfire and Geocities, although others have either disappeared or were folded into the other services. But there is not much difference other than the coding used in some personal sites now than there was in 2001. The only other idfference is they have now have much more storage space than they did then.

There were a few LDS groups that did host unit websites also, such as ldsstakes.com, but that also went down as well.

[russellhltn]

It says "No other websites are allowed" which seems to cover pretty much everything including commercial websites.

OK, I see what you are getting at.

Still, the Church is not going to send a letter to PictureThis, Inc or to the Boy Scouts of America to take down their sites. The church will direct their own leaders to not use those sites.

As for why units use those sites despite "the letter", well, I guess that's one of the mysteries of the kingdom.

[poulsone]

What do you people think about pilot testing the system using only Family1, Family2, Family3, Teacher1, Teacher2, Teacher3, etc? That way we could use it for real data without having any personal data in the system. The teachers would keep a printout to correlate the real names with the web codes, so it wouldn't be as convenient, but it could still be tested in a real environment and provide real value to wards.

Eric

[brado426]

What do you people think about pilot testing the system using only Family1, Family2, Family3, Teacher1, Teacher2, Teacher3, etc? That way we could use it for real data without having any personal data in the system. The teachers would keep a printout to correlate the real names with the web codes, so it wouldn't be as convenient, but it could still be tested in a real environment and provide real value to wards.

Eric

paulsone,

I think that would cause a bit too much confusion for those who are trying to report. The teachers wouldn't know which family they were reporting for. It is hard enough for teachers to hang on to their slip of paper to begin with. I think requiring them to hang onto a slip of paper that just has relationships between real names and fake names would hurt rather than help.

What if we removed all phone numbers and automatically converted all names into initials? I wonder if we could get away with that?

Brad O.

[thedqs]

I am pretty sure that this system will get integrated eventually into LDS.org and we just have to be patient. And I know that all of you think the same thing. As the techies we are used to getting very fast results and resent having to wait for something (dial-up anyone?) but in this case I would want a church seal of approval and also it being hosted on a church site to prevent duplicated personal (public) information.

[brado426]

I just received this letter from my mom's Relief Society President, who was helping test the system. I thought I'd share it with you. I did explain the situation to her. Mickey gave me permission to post this message here on her behalf.

_____________________________________________________

August 25, 2007

To Whom It May Concern:

We in the Hacienda Heights Second Ward in California have had the great opportunity to use the Visiting Teaching Website. It is now closed down and we are disappointed and want to know when we will be able to use it again.

The sisters loved the visiting teaching program and our efforts in managing statistics and reports became more efficient and timely. One advantage was that we were able to get ahold of women for reporting much more easily. Some women were nearly impossible to get hold of and only used cell phones. With the computer program, which included reminders, they found reporting their visits to be extremely easy, and the reminders were appreciated. As a presidency we were so glad to be able to look at a chart before the month was over and see the areas of concern and then be able to do something about them before the month was over. Otherwise, we didn’t know how we did on the previous month until well into the next month.

The best part is that more sisters were visited when we used the program and those who had done the reminder and reporting calls could spend more time on humanitarian efforts. For the last month we used the program our statistics rose and the report was very near 100% visiting teaching!

Please let us know of the status of this program.

Sincerely,
President Mickey Bladh
Hacienda Heights Second Ward
Hacienda Heights, California