Sharing names with the temple, instead of reserving the names.
Answers
-
"Yes, I could share all my sealings with the temple to do for me and get my Reservation list under 300, but since I hear that the temples are 15 years behind on the shared sealings they already need to do, why would I subject my ancestors to the wait, when I can go the next day after their endowment gets done, which I shared with the temple, to complete their sealings?"
This statement is the key misunderstanding that so many people have with this new policy.
You are upset because you can now only have 300 lines in your reservation list but do not want to share the excess with the temple because they will not get done for 15 years. You are missing an extremely important point!
All this means is that if you share all of your reservations with the temple so that they are on your Shared-with-the temple list, they will sit there, just like they currently do on your My Reservations list, until you pull them back to your My Reservation list and complete them.
The Shared-with-the Temple list functions exactly like your My-Reservations list with two minor differences: 1) You have to pull ordinances back to your My Reservation list before you print them and 2) there is the opportunity for a relative of yours to pull some ordinances via Ordinances Ready and complete them before you get around to doing the ordinances yourself.
Absolutely nothing about the new policy should have any effect on anyone's research or anyone's opportunity to reserve ordinances. All it does is shift ordinances from being only accessible to the person who reserved them to being accessible to that person at any time and to other relatives via Ordinances Ready.
As soon as you get notified that an endowment is done, then find that person on your Shared-with-the temple-list, pull it back to your My Reservations list, print the card and get the sealing done, just as you do now.
In fact, this new policy makes certain things easier. If your My Reservations list is completely empty, as endowments are completed, pull the sealings back to that list. When you have sufficient sealing for one session, click the box at the top of the page to choose all of them, print three cards per page without needing to search through an extended list and fighting with the fact that check boxes disappear if you go to a different page of ordinance, and go do the sealings.
1 -
I have always printed all the marriage sealing cards as soon as I reserved them, in case the internet goes down or there is a record loss, as has happened before. (That is why there are some ordinances with a date recorded, but no temple attached.) As soon as an endowment is preformed, I print 2 copies of the sealing to parents, in case the temple loses the card at the temple and the ordinance has to be done again, because it never got recorded. That has happened to me once already since Phase 3 has started at the temples. I waited a week, called the temple 3 times, and after a week, just gave up, and did the ordinance again. I have to assume that my card got shredded very quickly in the new processing of cards, which are not returned to patrons. Or, the people working in the office do not have the time to go searching for a card that has not already been shredded.
The other reason I print the cards immediately is that so far I can afford new printer cartridges, but if my current equipment stops working, the supply chain for cartridges fails, or social security goes broke, I will not be able to print my own cards anymore. If we are in phase 3 at that time, the temples will not be printing cards for us. The policy changes on printing cards regularly, so I do not want to depend on the temple to print cards for me. I believe in food storage and temple card storage for emergencies. I used to volunteer in a temple office. I know that errors happen on a regular basis.
1 -
@CarolWelty1 , so you don't have any problem at all and only have to make two minor modifications to your current process.
Printed cards never expire.
So continue to do exactly as you do now. Then after you have printed a card, share that name with the temple. The card is still valid and according to what you have heard, you have 15 years to take the card to the temple yourself. On the day you are going to take a set of cards to the temple and do sealings, take a few minutes to double check that the ordinances have not been already taken care of. It takes about three seconds to type in the last three characters of a person's ID number and see if that person is still on your shared-with-the-temple list.
If so, keep that card. If not, just discard both cards instead of just your spare second copy.
Thinking of the slowest typist I know, that person should be able to check about 4 cards per minute or 120 cards per half hour. I assume you don't do more than that in one sealing session. So this extra step really won't slow you down at all.
0 -
what if you want to share with the temple cards that have already been printed?
0 -
Just share them and tear up the printed cards.
0 -
If you have printed names from your reservation list, do they need to be unreserved to erase them from your reservation list? If you do unreserve them, and they have already been printed, wouldn't the work be subject to being done twice?
0 -
If you want to share them with the temple, just share them. You do not need to unreserve them first
If you do not want to share them and do not want to keep them on your list, then unreserve them.
In either case, tear up the printed cards so you don’t accidentally do the work twice.
0 -
Pat
I am just another 'lowly' User/Patron ...
[ And, I happen to be a Member of the Church ... ]
Just in passing ...
Your Question:
If you have printed names from your reservation list, do they need to be unreserved to erase them from your reservation list?
Short Answer: 'No'.
As, when, "Share[d] with the Temple System", that should AUTOMATICALLY, "Move" that Work, from Your 'List" of "My Reservations", to Your "List" of "Shared with Temple".
Your Question:
If you do unreserve them, and they have already been printed, wouldn't the work be subject to being done twice?
Short Answer: ONLY, if you DO NOT, "Destroy", the "Printed" Cards, that you hold/have on hand; AND, actually proceed, to DO the work; IF, a "Temple", has ALREADY "Printed" a "Name", for that/those particular "Ordinance(s)".
[ And, it happens ... ]
So ...
That Said ...
It is really SIMPLE ...
IF, you have "Printed", ANY Cards, for Work, that you have "Share[d] with the Temple System"; THEN ... IMMEDIATELY ... "Destroy" those particular Cards; thus, REMOVING any temptation, from DOING the Work; and, REDUCING any chance, of the Work being, UNNECESSARILY, "Duplicated".
Just my thoughts.
Brett
0 -
I very much appreciate all that I have learned on this thread. I understand and accept the 300 limit despite having to work through it myself. I would only echo what some others have said here. It would be good if a new found ancestor could be directly shared with the temple without reserving it (which you can't do when you are at the limit). This avoids a lot of extra steps. This new feature would not violate the intent or desires of the new limit policy.
Thanks.
0 -
BTW, I have been caught between a rock and a hard place with the changes in the last few years.
1) When ordinance ready came out I was very excited and shared all my names to the temple.
2) When Family Groups came out I was even more excited and moved all my temple shared names to my family group where I have dozens of family members to help me.
3) When the 300 limit came out I got stuck. I can only find and reserve names as fast as my extended family can do all ordinances for an individual. This is because I cannot re-share with the temple.
This is why I would like to be able to directly share to the temple and skip the reservation part.
0 -
I have been frustrated at the "perform next" feature as well. I have personally spoken with Ron Tanner who is over family search and let him know of this issue. He calls it the "double filtering" issue and they are going to be working on it. The "perform next" will show those who need baptisms even if you select the "initiatory" or "sealing to parent" only on the "shared with temple" tab.
They realize this is an issue and are working to change it so it works as intended on the "shared with temple" filter.
They also made a few tweaks to the other filters to help in some of the other related issues with it.
So, just know that they are aware of it and are working on a fix.
It has NEVER worked like this in the 4-5 + years I have been trying to use it to find "MALES" who have their endowment completed but still awaiting their SP ordinance (which is what I wanted to use the filter for), since it's about a 5-7 year wait for MALE endowments to be completed by the temple.
Not enough men are attending the temple to get the work done in a timely manner. Female endowments are usually done in 1-2 years by "temple" in my experience. Similar things with baptisms. Females used to get done in 1-3 months, while male baptisms would take 12 months or more.
0 -
Kent,
Thank you for raising this issue. I too, have been a bit frustrated at the 300 Personal list. I have spoken to some of the top leaders in Family Search who work on the system. I currently have about 5,500+ ordinances that I have "shared with temple" right now. The FS leadership says a "high contributor" is anyone who contributes over 500+ with the temple file, so we are in a very unique "high contributor" group. They want to make the experience good for all include the high contributor group and are working on some filtering and other enhancements to improve the experience.
I have also made the FS team aware that the 300+ limit also applies to "shared with group" feature and they are aware of that, and it is "by design". It is because they want someone to have "ownership" of the group and the names they share with the group (to make sure they don't get missed or work doesn't get completed in a timely manner presumably). As a Software Engineer with 25+ years of experience I can understand why they would want to do that. However, it would seem that they could consider designing the system so that the 300+ limit doesn't apply to groups, but they have either: a) chosen not to do that, or b) are considering doing that in the future as they prioritize new work, bug fixes, and keeping the system operational.
What I do is to "share with temple" all my names first and foremost. When I am pretty sure my research is as good as it can get and no duplication and sources attached, etc. I "reserve them" (in my personal list) then immediately change it to "share with temple". I usually leave a 15-20 person buffer (so like max of 270-285 people in my personal and group list). Then, I can always reserve a person at a time, share with the temple and it doesn't count against in my 300 once it's "shared with temple".
The problem is that this limits my ability to share a significant # of ordinances with more than about 10-15 people. If I give 10 people 10 ordinances each that is 100 people. I try to only share at most 5-6 ordinances with each person, then when they have completed the work, my 300 max will go down and they can come and ask me to put more in my group list.
The confusing thing is that you have to click the "shared with group" tab to see them in your list after a group member prints them because they sort of "disappear" out of the default selections of "shared with group" without clicking anything.
Also, I am finding that the "ordinances ready" feature is pretty good because anything in your "shared with temple" list is one list that it can pull from for people to do work from. So, if you "share with the temple" and a friend or group member uses that feature they may get some of the work you have shared with temple there too. But I think it selects for you work to do that is your "closest" relative and then extends out from there.
Also, by "sharing with temple" you can have people do work in temples outside your district, worldwide. The default is to pull names from your temple district when the temple prints the cards. So, by using the "ordinances ready" it can get names from outside your temple district that others have shared with the temple.
It can be frustrating not to be able to "share with large groups of people" from your list, but I wouldn't focus too much on that limitation and just encourage people to attend the temple more often, with or without you providing cards for them. They will eventually be doing your work you share with the temple this way and other family members also get done by sharing with the temple too.
0
