Please REINSTATE the post of "Share" by "Jimmy Lee Mitchell", from a few Hours ago; because, it was

LegacyUser

Brett said: Lynne VanWagenen

Please REINSTATE the post of "Share" ( https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea... ) by "Jimmy Lee Mitchell" (https://getsatisfaction.com/people/ji... ), from a few Hours ago; because, it was NOT inappropriate.

That post was NOT "Commercial" in nature (it was not "Selling or promotion of products or services."), it was advice that "Hope Chest" may be going to disappear - in fact, very informative; and, HELPFUL to those Member Users/Patrons who have used/still use "Hope Chest" in conjunction with "Family Tree".

"Hope Chest" has been used by MANY Users/Patrons over the years.

And, in fact, you yourself, once promoted the use of "Hope Chest".
[ https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea... ]

A quick search reveals that there are a number of previous posts in the "FamilySearch" ("GetSatisfaction") 'Feedback' Forum (alone) that reference "Hope Chest".

Here are some previous posts regarding "Hope Chest":

Use of Hope Chest ... [ 2014 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Pandora's Hope Chest - What's the Deal with it? ... [ 2014 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Why is the Wiki endorsing Pandora's Hope Chest ... [ 2014 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Keeping the old format still accessible on Family Search! ... [ 2015 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Preventing one from accidentally thinking "unreserve" means "unshare" with the Temple, and losing their reserved ancestors ... [ 2017 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Expand Entire Tree in Decendency View ... [ 2018 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Severe abuse of Family Tree by users of Take-a-Name app ... [ 2017 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Please format the instructions in Red. ... [ 2014 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

"Temple Ready" Check and Return program to facilitate faster name searching ... [ 2014 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Finding Relationships in the Tree ... [ 2015 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Please add search functionality to find ancestors and decedents that need temple work! ... [ 2017 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

THIS IS A COMPLAINT: ... [ 2014 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

ORDINANCES on the Match-Merge feature ... [ 2014 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Ordinance Sorting ... [ 2016 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Software to help identify family members and descendants needing temple ordinances. ... [ 2017 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

The hints in the Family Tree descendancy view beta are great ... [ 2014 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Relationship path and names list ... [ 2014 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

I want to see how I'm related ... [ 2015 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

I may just be lazy, but I would like my computer to be able to find needed temple ordinances ... [ 2015 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Temple Work ... [ 2014 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Can FS check for private space records before executing 110 year rule ordinance requests ... [ 2014 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

LOSING TEMPLE RESERVATIONS ... [ 2016 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Improvement of Family History and/or - Investigator to Convert Report ... [ 2018 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Temple Today - Chasing Green Temple Icons ... [ 2018 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Where did TreeSeek go? ... [ 2018 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

An Infinite Loop Example - 9 people are grandparents of themselves ... [ 2018 ]
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Not to mention that the use of "Hope Chest" is discussed (and, offered as a 'lesson') in a number (at least, x2) on the "FamilySearch' Wiki pages of "Family History Centres" of the Church.

I am in NO way promoting the use of "Hope Chest".

And, in fact, I have never used "Hope Chest".

But, I reiterate, the post of "Share" by "Jimmy Lee Mitchell", from a few Hours ago; because, was NOT inappropriate, it was NOT "Commercial" in nature (it was not "Selling or promotion of products or services."), it was advice that "Hope Chest" may be going to disappear - in fact, very informative; and, HELPFUL to those Member Users/Patrons who have used/still use "Hope Chest" in conjunction with "Family Tree".

The arbitrary "Removal" of posts, without due diligence (just because a User/Patron considers the post may be 'Commercial' in nature), is not helpful.

'Thank you' in advance.

Brett

.

LegacyUser

A van Helsdingen said: The post was seeking a buyer of that company/website. That is definitely commercial. If the post had only advised of the imminent closure of that service, it would have been suitable.

LegacyUser

Brett said: A van Helsdingen

I viewed the post last night before I went to bed, I consider that the post was NOT "Commercial" in nature (it was not "Selling or promotion of products or services."), it was advice that "Hope Chest" may be going to disappear - in fact, very informative; and, HELPFUL to those Member Users/Patrons who have used/still use "Hope Chest" in conjunction with "Family Tree".

Actually, I consider that the post was advising about the likelihood of the imminent closure of "Hope Chest"; and, not so much about "seeking a buyer".

As far as I can ascertain from the list of posts I provided, the poster of the post was NOT connected to "Hope Chest", just a 'lowly' User/Patron of the product (as evidenced in some of the listed posts), a product which has been used by MANY Member Users/Patrons.

This morning, I was very disappointed to see that that post was "Removed".

Many of us are not articulate - I myself being one of those.

Perhaps, the "Wording" could have been different; but, in context, the INTENT of the post was was NOT "Commercial" in nature; and, I am certain not considered so by most Member Users/Patrons.

I do not dispute that there is always a fine line as to what is considered "Commercial" in nature.

But, that post was NOT, as close to the line, as MANY other post in this Forum, that I have seen.

Does that mean that ALL of the other posts that reference "Hope Chest" should be "Removed", I think not.

Again, that post was was NOT "Commercial" in nature (it was not "Selling or promotion of products or services."), it was advice that "Hope Chest" may be going to disappear - in fact, very informative; and, HELPFUL to those Member Users/Patrons who have used/still use "Hope Chest" in conjunction with "Family Tree".

Brett

.

LegacyUser

Cousin David said: It is not your decision as to whether the post was commercial or not. The staff at FS has a Much broader view of the Code of Conduct than anyone else.

The Get Satisfaction site has become less and less useful because of the domination by certain individuals; the crass and “in your face” tone of many comments and the individual issues that are not
‘system” Issues which are much more easily resolved by initiating a case with Hq (and thereby both correcting the problem and providing individual training on a case-by-case basis).

LegacyUser

Cousin David said: Simply argumentative and a prime reason I am so disappointed in the opportunities on this site where certain patrons have to be “right” rather than cooperative.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Hi Brett,

I didn't see the original comments, but a number of years ago the same user brought up problems with Hope Chest and was told (by Joe Martel) at that time that it was not a FamiySearch program.

If Hope Chest software was central to the discussion (I don't know if it was or not), then any further discussion (including this one) would be redundant, and reason to delete it.

Any discussion of any third party app (which would include Hope Chest) that is not in the Solutions Gallery (I just looked and could not find Hope Chest) would be inappropriate, and could be considered to be an advertisement for the product. In some cases, even negative comments could cause the curious (like me) to look for the product...

Just my thoughts on the matter.

LegacyUser

Brett said: Tom

'Thank You' for joining in on this post of mine.

'Yes', I know from some of the previous post, in this Forum, that "Hope Chest" was considered by some, to be one of those 'Web Crawler Bots', when it comes to "Ordinances", rather than one that seriously looked through you Ancestral lines.

I am in NO way promoting the use of "Hope Chest", nor, in fact, have I ever used "Hope Chest".

Both, you and I, have jumped in 'boots and all' when a post definitely 'crossed the line' in regard to being "Commercial" in nature - and, all of those post were almost immediately "Removed".

As I have already indicated, in this instance, for that particular post in question, I consider that the INTENT of that post was NOT "Commercial" in nature (it was not "Selling or promotion of products or services."), it was really advice that "Hope Chest" may be going to disappear - in fact, very informative; and, HELPFUL to those Member Users/Patrons who have used/still use "Hope Chest" in conjunction with "Family Tree".

Of course, the "Wording" could have been different; but, certainly, in context, the INTENT of that post was was NOT "Commercial" in nature; and, I am certain not considered so by most Member Users/Patrons.

My concern regarding the "Removal", of the post in question, was that the foreknowledge, that "Hope Chest" may be going away very soon, was something that is "Very" IMPORTANT to ALL those User/Patrons who still use "Hope Chest" in conjunction with "Family Tree" for "Temple Work" - most would have 'glossed over' any "Commercial" nature of the post; and, not even taken that into consideration.

I am certain that many Members may STILL use the FREE version of "Hope Chest" to assist them in the "Temple" Work; whereas, many Members may also use the PAID version.

The 'silence' on the matter of reinstating the post in question is 'deafening'.

Just my thoughts.

Brett

ps: I am not try to be argumentative; but, I do feel that the post was, unnecessarily "Removed", in undue haste; and, was not shown due diligence.

.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Thanks for the response, Brett. I understand your position and I'm entering this discussion rather blind because I did not see the now deleted discussion. There is nothing related to the add-on under discussion that indicates that it is going away, but it is also not certified for use with the site. Developer requirements are rather stringent -- see https://www.familysearch.org/developers/ and the Getting Started section. There may be other factors involved that preclude even the mention of that add-on. -- my speculation.

LegacyUser

Paul said: Cousin David

Without wishing to turn this into a personal "slanging match", your comments here are really not helping in creating the type of conduct to which you seem to suggest we should all conform. I feel you are being very insulting here to those who you describe "dominating" this site. True, some of them (including me, I freely admit) can be somewhat "direct" in our responses at times. However, if you have particular individuals in mind, I suggest you click under their names to produce a full history of their posts in this forum. For the most part they offer extremely constructive advice, for which they regularly receive thanks and "gold stars" from other participants.

As to your suggestion of raising issues by initiating a case (with Support), many of us gave up on that some time ago. The individuals who deal with these matters often provide "copy and paste" responses, leading us to believe it is far better to come here and obtain advice from our more experienced fellow users.

For me, this remains by far the best place to obtain advice on problems (especially those rarely encountered) and where I hope I have helped many others of less experience. Brett and several others are shining examples of performing the latter service.

Please don't take this as an insult, but try to understand we are all human, have differing qualities and certainly have our "off days" whatever the nature of our character, As an example, in another thread I offered a personal opinion relating to a suggestion of yours. Yes, looking back, I could have worded it in a slightly less "face on" manner, but it was a matter on which I strongly disagreed with your argument. Sadly, your response was not, I felt, particularly polite, so I regretted giving what I sincerely believed to be reasonable advice.

In spite of all this I genuinely hope we can both share participation in future threads without any animosity - making our contributions in the genuine desire to help (and to be helped by) others.

Best wishes, Paul

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Thank you for commenting about seeking a buyer -- yes, that definitely falls into the category that is not permitted.

LegacyUser

Brett said: Tom

The post was NOT from ANYONE in "Hope Chest", seeking a buyer.

The post was from a CONCERNED Member User/Patron of, both, "Family Tree" of "FamilySearch"; and, "Hope Chest", who suggested or was advising that it appears that "Hope Chest" would be going away or disappearing some time very soon, if someone did not take over the reins.

As I have indicated, the INTENT of the post was was NOT "Commercial" in nature; and, I am certain not considered so by most Member Users/Patrons.

Like yourself, I would have been one of the first ones to 'jump up and down', if I considered the INTENT of post to have been "Commercial" in nature - it was not.

Brett

.

LegacyUser

Paul said: Brett

I wonder if you went to the Change Log and clicked on "Dispute this change". Obviously Jimmy Lee Mitchell might also have done this, primarily to see if it would produce a more detailed personal response (perhaps from Lynne) as to the reasoning behind its removal.

Personally, I'm afraid I do have to go along with its removal for "commercial" reasons. Whatever the good intentions behind Jimmy's post (which I have absolutely no reason to doubt) it still advertised the intended sale of the product. Worded in a different way - just highlighting the potential loss to FamilySearch users at the demise of this product - would probably have allowed the post to remain on the site.

LegacyUser

Brett said: Paul

Answer: 'Yes', no response, as of yet.

As I did see the post in question before its removal, like 'Tom" (and, a number of others), I would have been one of the first ones to 'jump up and down', if I even considered the INTENT of post to have been "Commercial" in nature - it was not.

Such posts that border on being "Commercial" in nature also occur in the "Community.FamilySearch", I recently suggested to the poster in one such post that their post really did 'bordered' on being,
• Commercial Use of the content.
• Selling or Promotion of Products or Services.
I suggested that we need to very mindful of how we "Word" posts so that they do not reflect being "Commercial" in nature.
Whereas, again, I do not consider the INTENT on being "Commercial" in nature.

But, I certainly fell short of asking for the post to be removed.

The post that is the subject of this particular matter, fell well short of being as "Commercial" in nature as the one in the other Forum.

And, I have seen worse, that were/have NOT been "Removed".

Brett

.

LegacyUser

Brett said: FamilySearch

There seems to be a questionable standard here ...

You "Remove" the post "Share" ( https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea... ) by "Jimmy Lee Mitchell" of 19 to 20 Days ago.

Yet, you ALLOW these responses (ie. "Replies"), in a post, to REMAIN, which are more so "Commercial" in nature, promoting EXTERNAL "Products", than the former:

https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

in this post:

Collaboration and Timeline Tabs missing from Mobile App.
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Those responses (ie. "Replies") have NO bearing on "FamilySearch" whatsoever, unlike the post of "Share".

Please be fair and reasonable.

Brett

.

LegacyUser

A van Helsdingen said: The spam post by Arman Walter has only been up for an hour. Be fair and reasonable in giving FS enough time to make decisions about deleting inappropriate comments.

LegacyUser

Brett said: A van Helsdingen

'Yes', that particular response (ie. "Reply") has ONLY been up for a relatively short while.

But ...
That said ....

What about the previous two (x2) responses (ie. "Replies") ...

They seem to have been missed ...

I am being fair and reasonable!

Brett

.

LegacyUser

FamilySearch Moderator said: Thanks. The spam posts are removed.

LegacyUser

Brett said: FamilySearch Moderator
(Lynne VanWagenen)

There has been no, acknowledgement; or, response, on the dispute lodged on the post in question.

Brett

.

LegacyUser

FamilySearch Moderator said: This has been reviewed and the necessary actions have been taken.