Please be aware that not all countries have the telephone option. There is certainly not a number available for those in the United Kingdom.
See https://www.familysearch.org/en/help/helpcenter/article/contact-us for contact options by area / country.
@John Empoliti yes that is a good idea. I like the idea of having a higher authority be there for timely responses for technical issues. That is lacking. One thing though, wouldnt an [offical interpretation or a declaration of the Project Manager and or data owners' desired action] just be another set of Project Instructions? We have those already and im a little confused at what would make those new interpretations different from these ones. Or am i understanding what you meant incorrectly?
@Colin Yamamoto_1 .
I'm not sure that we are currently getting THE answer from the Project Managers when we have a difference of opinion on the interpretation of a project instruction among very experienced Indexers or when project instructions appear to conflict.
I'm not looking for a consensus of opinions among the Moderators (with all due respect). I'm looking for someone - a contact - a Special Moderator who can go right to the top and tell us what the Project Manager (perhaps in consultation with the Data Owners) wishes to be done in that hopefully rare "fuzzy" situation.
And, I'd like this to happen in a timely manner and would like to hear from the Special Moderator that the issue has been raised at the highest levels and an answer is coming soon. I don't want to be wondering if it will happen. I want to know that an answer is coming soon.
Moderators have access to authorities when we need them. Often the answers are in the Project Instructions, Field Help or the Help articles so there is no need to go further. Hope that clarifies some questions?
@annewandering, I'm not referring to a routine situation. I'm thinking of the cases where someone like @Melissa S Himes has scoured the Project Instructions and still has a question because the instructions (i.e., all components taken together) are not conclusive on an issue or even conflict. She might have an opinion but acknowledges that there is room for interpretation. In a case like that, I think she would like to know whom to contact to ensure that an investigation is underway with an authoritative answer to follow quickly.
Right now, we need to trust that an experienced Moderator has seen the post and is handling it expeditiously and appropriately. A step in the right direction would be to acknowledge the question has caught the attention of the Moderator Team and indicate that action will follow.
IDEA: Perhaps the Community Admin could create a generic @Moderator tag to flag the Moderator Team and draw attention to the comment. That would give me some comfort in situations like those I described above.
Although I am not an indexer, I would consider it very important that there is a means of conveying problems to project managers - or perhaps even an individual who supervises them.
For example, I recently found 5 out of 5 collections, which are the subject of ongoing projects, that are associated with serious errors. The worst problem found is where records that belong in completely different projects / collections are being indexed under a wrong heading. There are Durham (Anglican) records being indexed as part of the Northumberland Non-conformist project and records for other counties being indexed under the Lancashire Non-conformist project. Sadly, there seems no way to get this message through to the right people so this practice can be stopped.
Surely it is unacceptable that indexers and others have no means (direct or indirect) of communicating with project managers on important issues that are currently affecting the quality / usefulness of indexing?