jla59 wrote:Just to clarify, I can access most members privacy settings, but on some I get this error message.
"Sorry, data is temporarily not available for this application. Please try again later."
Do these less-active families have non-member spouses? The symptoms you describe match my experience in trying to edit household profiles that have spurious non-member spouses listed in the directory. See this thread
. In my experience in such cases, the "Sorry, data is temporarily not available for this application. Please try again later" error message is wrong in these cases, and has nothing to do with the cause of the problem. Profiles of these records are never available for editing.
In these particular cases -- about 10 percent of the households in my ward are affected -- the underlying problem is that the non-member names apparently are being harvested from the member's own confidential membership-detail record and are being published on the website without permission. These names do not appear in the MLS directory or in the "classic" website directory.
Non-members, of course, have no ability to log in and "opt out" of the directory. The member spouse -- as well as leaders and clerks with administrative privilege -- can log in, but are offered no abilty to suppress just the non-member's name, only the entire household. Even that doesn't work. That member or administrator cannot edit that houshold profile at all. As you have discovered, trying to do so always gets the misleading error message above.
In the web service that feeds the directory site, there is a non-confidential numeric "individualId" for members and households, which should be unique. But these non-member spouses all have an individualId of -1. I suspect that this condition triggers the editing error, which falls through to an error message written for some other error state entirely.
These issues have been reported through multiple channels, but I am unaware of any resolution. Since no one will even affirm that publishing the non-member names without permission at all is now happening as a matter of new policy, my working assumption is that their inclusion is a bug, the root cause of all these issues. But no one has acknowledged that, either.