Color code change for ordinances already sent to the temple file from green to anything else
Comments
-
gasmodels said: I did not test that but I believe that since you have it reserved for two years you can share with the temple. Let me see if I can verify that0
-
Eric J. said: You still didn't address the question....we're all waiting0
-
Tom Huber said: See Gordon's solution at https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...0
-
Eric J. said: No, I want you, Tom to show us with screenshots since you're so proficient with this0
-
Tom Huber said: Really? You wanted an answer to your initial post. Gordon has a viable solution. There is a problem with the all or nothing, but that is now in its own thread that I created.0
-
Eric J. said: You were so confident in this change, but now no? Can't have it both ways. Sooo...let's see it0
-
Tom Huber said: I never said that everything was perfect. I have opened threads dealing with issues (some of which existed before the change).0
-
JimGreene said: Folks, may I jump in and remind everyone of the Code of Conduct. Let's be kind to one another, please:)0
-
gasmodels said: Eric, I just tested an individual. The person had the endowment assigned to the temple and the sealing to parent open to reserve. the sealing to spouse was also available but I did not reserve it. I clicked on reserve and reserved both the Endowment and sealing to parents. The endowment was a 90 reservation and the sealing to parent was a two year reservation. I then released the endowment (this was sort of backwards may be a bug had to mark the one I wanted saved). I now had just the sealing to parents reserved and I clicked the share and shared it with the temple. I believe this is what you wanted to do. yes there are extra steps but it is possible.0
-
Tom Huber said: Gasmodels, could you provide step-by-step of how you released the endowment and mark the one you wanted to save. I missed something or maybe the problem was quickly addressed that Cherie and I raised as a separate issue.0
-
gasmodels said: I think images work best so I am putting the post at the end of this thread0
-
W David Samuelsen said: Tom, in my case hard to tell the difference unless you click more .0
-
gasmodels said: Here is the sequence I used to only reserve the sealing to parents
The above image shows the endowment and sealing to parent reserved - the endowment was already assigned to the temple so it is a 90 day reservation.
the above image is what appears when I click unreserve. I click on the sealing to parents to unmark so only the endowment remains
This is the final result I only have the sealing to parent reserved for 2 years and if I desire I can share it with the temple. Hope the images make clear what steps I used to do this.0 -
D. Llewelyn said: Before, you could select which ordinances you wanted to reserve and leave the others (green) for someone else to reserve.0
-
Joseph Vernon Leavitt said: I get from this answer that The Lord does want me to continue finding those of my kindred dead who are not yet in the tree, but to not concern myself with ordinance work for those who have already been found. That's okay if true, but wonder if there isn't more than this for the answer.
I can't help but think that deliberately withholding information and purposely making colors to be ambiguous in meaning is consistent with true Christlike discipleship. Alternatives are being earnestly suggested in this forum, Do you intend to be unwilling to consider those that would accomplish the desired objectives and still be helpful to all concerned?0 -
D. Llewelyn said: Hi Jim,
Many of us preferred seeing an overall view without having to do extra work to filter out different things. It was much simpler to simply scroll through one page, and have a quick overview of what I've reserved for my family, what I've printed, what work is complete, what is shared and what the temple has printed (as well as green - meaning nothing has been reserved or shared yet). The changes make it easy for people to grab and go, but more difficult for those of us that take time to research and share. Thank you. Perhaps making it easy for people to grab and go with anything that is shared with the temple, and reverting back to easily identifiable colors with only one meaning would make everyone happy. Working on family history through family search used to be fun and engaging, now it's just frustrating.0 -
Angela Rae Cottrell said: I understand the idea behind the green temple and making names simple for beginners to find. Our family history consultants push the green means "go" concept. However, as mentioned, it does waste time for those who have to keep checking to see if a name has been reserved or not. Would it be possible to use the color green, but change the temple icon once it has already been reserved. The icon could represent reserved, but available. We want experienced dedicated researchers to continue finding names and providing opportunities for beginners to take names to the temple. Finding a solution to help both would be awesome!0
-
Tom Huber said: Thanks. When I did my testing, the unreserve was all or nothing from the person's ordinance page. I didn't think to go to my temple page and unreserve the ordinances there.0
-
Tom Huber said: Wow, Talk about a lot of information. I had problems with the All or nothing from the person's ordinance page, whether I am reserving or unreserving ordinances.
From what gasmodels said (and illustrated), he went to the temple page, to unreserve specific ordinances. I don't know if the All or Nothing Unreserve has been addressed on a person's ordinance page, but I hope it has. I'll be checking on this later.
There are going to be people who will disagree with the changes, but that is not unusual for something of this nature.
In the meantime, thank you so much for providing the view of FamilySearch.0 -
Cherie Ailene Morgan said: You still haven't listened to our feedback.
The Engineers also need to understand how the end-users use the software. There are MANY of us who do the online work and do NOT do the temple ordinance work ourselves. This change is only geared for people who are doing the temple work themselves, and not for those who are doing the research and submitting the names for others to do the work. When those of us who are researchers go through the family trees and see green, that indicates that the work has not been done and we see it as an opportunity to submit it the temple. But now when we click on the ordinance tab, sometimes we find that someone else has already submitted it. But we have no way to know or remember unless we click on that name EACH AND EVERY TIME WE COME ACROSS IT, if the work has already been submitted. There needs to be a better resolution for what you're trying to accomplish.
If your intent is to make it easier for people to reserve names that have already been submitted to the temple by someone else, then making it easier for them shouldn't make it harder for others. All you need to do to resolve this is make some sort of icon where a user can select a record that has already been submitted to the temple. Because right now, you have a color that means TWO things and that defeats the purpose of color coding.
And while we're at it, that doesn't explain why the work that I have requested (which used to be yellow) and the work that I have sent to the Temple, or sent to a friend or family member (which used to be red) is now the same color. Why does BLUE also mean two things? Now I can't easily tell if I've completed both steps. What if I requested the work, but forgot to submit it to the temple? Under this new change, I now have to go to the Temple tab on a regular basis and double check if I have names that are reserved but haven't been shared. Once again, this is creating more work, instead of streamlining our work.
When changes like this are considered, the Engineers need to consider ALL users, and not just a select group. There has to be a resolution that works for everyone.
Please feel free to contact me, I'm more than happy to provide more feedback and suggestions. It's all about getting to the root cause of a problem and solving it to the best outcome for all.0 -
Cherie Ailene Morgan said: And you mention above EXTRA steps that have been added to check filters, numerous extra steps to submit ordinances, etc. Why would the system be made more difficult instead of more user friendly? Why won't the people who design the program listen to the end-users? There is not ONE way to use the site and we all need to be heard!0
-
Tom Huber said: I have just posted a Design Modification Request for the green icon when one uses the descendancy chart. https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea....
You've made a number of complaints but have not proposed a solution. If you have an issue. propose a way to fix the issue.0 -
Tom Huber said: I'm not so sure about that. You could select what ordinances you wanted to print and then unreserve the rest, but I do not remember being able to select just specific ordinances and leave the others.0
-
Tom Huber said: For those using the descendancy chart, I have requested a design modification to include the option to select the "Grab and Go" [to the temple] or a normal reservation (two year-type). The orange icon now indicates that more information is needed on that chart. I do not remember if that was available before or not.0
-
Cherie Ailene Morgan said: Jim, there are still so many of us who have been adversely affected by these changes. The purpose of any upgrade or update should be improvements to the system for ALL its users. Unfortunately, these changes have created aggravating results for so many of us that aren't being heard. Being told to take additional steps as a work around for these changes is not an acceptable answer. There shouldn't be extra steps. And I find it surprising and sad that the inference is that we should be taking all these names to the temple ourselves. What this implies is that for those who don't have a recommend, that they shouldn't be contributing to the temple work. I think that is a reprehensible stance to take. We should ALL be able to contribute to the work, whether we are doing the ordinances ourselves or sharing them for others to do. You say that the temple doesn't need names submitted, so then why is the option still there? Why is it that before the temples were closed that I was getting numerous emails per day of work that was being done around the world for names I had submitted? It seems like this whole approach needs to be reevaluated.0
-
Cherie Ailene Morgan said: I have made several proposals. You apparently have overlooked them.0
-
Tom Huber said: I do not believe the orange icon was displayed before on the descendancy chart, but it is now.0
-
Tom Huber said: Cherie, if you read what Jim wrote, he said "with our directions" just before his statement about the changes not be decided capriciously, but by a council.
This was not a decision made by FamilySearch but likely included the Temple Department (always involved with any Ordinance and Reservation code) and approved by the leadership of the Church. The last I heard, the council was headed by Elder Bednar of the Council of the Twelve.0 -
Cherie Ailene Morgan said: Do you really think other 'directions' haven't been changed before? That's a ridiculous argument.0
-
Tom Huber said: If you have, you have buried them in your complaints. A proposal needs to be headed as a proposal, not buried in a complaint.0
This discussion has been closed.