Color code change for ordinances already sent to the temple file from green to anything else
Comments
-
Tom Huber said: Not my argument. Take that up with Jim Greene but he is likely to pass you off to the council, or more probably, your Stake President. What it does indicate is that FamilySearch did not initiate this change.
In all cases involving temple reservations and ordinances, the instructions do not originate with FamilySearch, despite claims to the contrary. FamilySearch is an semi-independent entity that started as a Church-sponsored Genealogical Society of Utah in 1894.
FamilySearch International (the full name) has its own management hierarchy and executive officers who are not part of the ecclesiastical hierarchy in the Church. Steve Rockwood is the current President and CEO of the orgainization. It is closely connected to the Family History Department of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.0 -
Cherie Ailene Morgan said: And you are not a moderator nor a problem solver.0
-
Eric J. said: I did find that works, but...I thought this update was to "simplify" things?0
-
Eric J. said: I found another bug (currently looking at LB2W-J7H). When I pull up a person by ID number in the "find" option, click on the name, and look at the ordinances, all excluding SS are blue, but when I hover over them, they say "shared with the temple by sonja"...shouldn't that be green? Once I go into that person either in their ordinance page or click on their name, it IS green,and again states that it's shared.
I'd send screenshots but I'm not sure how to when hovering over things
Can we please send this back to the committee to rethink it?0 -
W David Samuelsen said: Tom, yes it was before. Not common in my case because I always make sure missing information is listed, reducing the number of orange hits, but they did exist before.0
-
W David Samuelsen said: depending on PC layout, hold down Fn key and hit "Print Screen". then go to your photo editor and edit to save the part you want to show.
Then go here, in a new post (not "comment" post), write what you are talking about then add Image (select image and upload), save the post/reply.0 -
W David Samuelsen said: Since I have a good friend in Temple Department, he's one of area managers. He said anything to do with FamilyTree ordinance process, does not involve Temple Department at all. It's FamilySearch's responsibility. Temple Department is responsible for how to carry out the ordinances within the Temples. Nothing more or less.0
-
W David Samuelsen said: Eric,
I see the problem, the trouble with sharing with the temples, some languishing long time waiting for baptisms.
I know because I've been doing a lot of baptisms last year, just about every week, some times 2 times and I see first hand the problem.
Lately most of the patrons bring their own baptism cards, so little from temple lists in very busy temples (Salt Lake, Jordan River, Mount Timpanogos, Provo, Bountiful, Ogden, and Logan, I've been witness and involved. Stark differences. In order for the baptisms that are shared with temples, there was no way to get them without asking the person who held them in reservation. Now we can help move more quickly.
BUT there has to be a different color for that! Green this, green that, green that, does not help one bit since it requires extra steps. I got cousin in Germany and he got plenty but couldn't get them done since at least 2017. I can't grab them now because temples are closed and the notice say to do it within 90 days. Really!0 -
W David Samuelsen said: Not closely connected, it is part of FamilySearch Department, public face arm to be exact.0
-
Joseph Vernon Leavitt said: No, the Icon should not be green, because the ordinance had been shared with the temple. I very earnestly hope there will be a design change, in such cases, to show an Icon with a different color -- to indicate that the ordinance is available though previously shared with the temple.0
-
JimGreene said: David, please have your Temple Department friend check out his statement, FamilySearch works very closely with the temple department on all things temple related. Maybe he is just not aware. We may make the recommendations, but they are all ratified.0
-
JimGreene said: You are correct Eric, this does seem to be a bug, I will pass this along. Thank you!0
-
D. Llewelyn said: I think a great solution would be to revert back to the previous color system. Most everyone was used to this and understood that each color only had ONE meaning. And then just add a way for anyone to grab any ordinances that people have shared to take to the temple. This would keep those happy that spend hours on a daily/weekly basis researching and those who just want a quick way to find a name to take to the temple. Maybe keep the bright green for grab and go with something that has been shared and have a white icon (black temple outline) to indicate that no work has been reserved or shared for a particular person (kind of like a blank white slate - which would let people know this is someone they can get to work on).0
-
Eric J. said: From my experience I've heard/witnessed the same, that Family Search is spearheading the majority of things and that the temple department is not as heavily involved as one would think0
-
W David Samuelsen said: He has been there several years already.0
-
Samuel Ted Clement said: This is a great idea, as long as the outline would be more color-blind-friendly than the green/orange colors now used. It creates a lot more work seeing if people need ordinances completed with only the green color. It's a lot of clicks, and any update should try to get rid of clicks.0
-
Cassie Roundy said: I can see that you want to display the ordinances that have been shared with the temple so that people can easily find relatives for whom to do temple work rather than just picking up a name at the temple.
But, there is another set of people, me, that you have just made the system incredibly harder to function. My goal is to do work for relatives, as mentioned above. However, I want to find relatives that have never been found and are not on anyone's list or in the temple system. In the old system before you turned the Shared with Temple icons green, In a few hours at night and on weekends I could find as many as 150 baptisms to do each week, and 15 to 25 Endowments that ultimately lead to Sealing to Spouse. I could do that many in a week. Then every few months I could go to a temple where they would accommodate me and do 300 to 500 sealings, both SP and SS, in 2 or 3 12 hour days. I am a single male so I Shared the female names to the Temple System since I can't do them and have no near relatives with the time to.
Now with the Temple System icons in the same green as the never been found people it takes me 10 to 50 times longer to find the names I want to take to the temple. Yes, it may to 5 years for the names I Shared with the Temple to get done, but at least they are in the system and will eventually be done. But the "Lost Sheep", the relatives that have never been found, are incredibly harder to find.
Please, please, please make the two icons a different color or shape so that I can continue to find names that have never been found.0 -
Tom Huber said: See Jim Greene's lengthy response from 20 days ago, especially the 5th point.
Descendancy research is performed by those who are not Church members so they do not see any temple icons.
I have my own descendancy research methodology that does not even use FamilySearch.
The choice is up to the user how they approach descendancy research. Please be aware that the directions (despite claims by non-FS persons that state otherwise) for all things regarding the temple sections in FamilySearch do not originate with the Family History Department. There are minor tweaks that are made by FS, such as deepening the blue color for the in process icon, since it was too close to the blue hint icon.
One of the suggestions that has been passed back to the council (led by Elder Bednar) involves developing two green shades (green has always meant available for ordinances), one would indicate that there are unreserved ordinances and the other would indicate that all ordinances have been shared with the temple list. That would also apply to the individual ordinances that are displayed on the summary card.0 -
Keegan Marie Montero said: Agreed, is there any new updates on this or is it not going to change...just feeling frustrated...and I LOVE this work!!0
-
Keegan Marie Montero said: Is there any updates on the colors? Would also LOVE a color change....0
-
Keegan Marie Montero said: Hi!
I'm the FHC Director for our Ward and have concerns with the NEW Temple ICON COLORS. I do this work on a regular basis, almost daily and find my time is being wasted by the FALSE GREEN TEMPLE ICON COLORS.
In the past, I could easily see that names were SHARED to the Temples by the orange color Icon. Can you please give the SHARED names a different color or shade of GREEN? It is very frustrating when I go to the GREEN Icon and find the names are already shared to the Temple. I DO LIKE that we can print from others lists, so the Work can be done faster, but really would LOVE a NEW Color Icon for SHARED names.
These FALSE GREEN Temples are not only TIME CONSUMING, to click all the way through and then find them already shared, BUT will also be CONFUSING to the NEW members who I am teaching.
I've always told them to look for "Green Temples" to share to the Temple and now when explaining it to new familysearch users they are more frustrated, as am I.
Is there any updates coming out that can FIX this PROBLEM?? Wish the "SHARED BUT ALSO AVAILABLE" to print can be a DIFFERENT COLOR then the LIGHT GREEN names that are WAITING and READY TO TAKE TO THE TEMPLE.
THANKS FOR ALL YOU DO!!!! I do LOVE THIS WORK and the progress you have made over the years!! This is my 1 SUGGESTION moving forward to think about updating....
I don't want to confuse the members I'm teaching:)
Hugs,
Keegan0 -
JimGreene said: The decision is still being made, everything is being weighed. I personally hope that it does not come down to having to decide which group of users gets what they want and which don't, but it is shaping up that way. Those that like the ease of taking family names to the temple without having to contact an unknown relative, who may or may not reply and release the name; or those who use the green temple to share names with the temple for various reasons. I am not on the council that makes the decision, but I have provided my input. We are waiting to see what is decided. I do believe that everyone's feelings and arguments have been received and passed along in a very fair manner. I do not have an estimate on when, nor do I believe that there are any deadlines to make the decision. I do trust the process completely. Just so there is no doubt, my recommendation is for some way (whether that is 2 colors or a badge or a hover) to distinguish between 90-day and 2-year reservations. It may be a short-term fix, and it may be ignored, but I felt you all needed to know where I stand--again, not that I carry any great weight:)0
-
Eric J. said: Why are you making them mutually exclusive? You can leave the function of requesting a name from someone else w/o contacting them, just change the color if it's been submitted to the temple, that's it. Why is this becoming more difficult than it needs to be?
Lighter green = no one has done anything with it ordinance wise/requested pending print/submittal to the temple file
Darker green = someone has submitted to the temple file, but "green means go" to take from them and print (keeping the "ease of taking family names to the temple without having to contact an unknown relative, who may or may not reply and release the name" function)
That's a minor coding fix, green can still mean go, AND it helps distinguish where in the pipeline it may or may not be without spending endless hours checking names one by one. How this wouldn't be a win for literally everyone (with exception to a very very few who might be color blind and can't tell between the 2...then find a shade of green that works for them) doesn't make sense.0 -
W David Samuelsen said: Jim,
Eric has good points about the color shades and the problem with color-blindness.
The other problem - 2 years or 90 days. I had to check EACH in order to find which one is 90 days, to avoid taking them because there's a catch behind it - do it within 90 days, regardless of the fact temples are CLOSED. This increase the need for a different color identifying the 90 days. If the name had been reserved by me, and shared with temple, it shows 2 years. If the name had been reserved by other and shared with temple, it shows 90 days. Same color. Insanity.
It boils down to 3.
1. Name not reserved by anyone
2. Name reserved by "me" - with 2 years
3. Name reserved by "other" - 90 days (shows up as shared with Temple)
That meant 3 different color shades of green but color-blindness is another issue.0 -
Tom Huber said: Jim has said that the decision is still being made. This is not a FamilySearch decision, but one that will be made by the council led by Elder Bednar.
I would love to see two shades of green also. So the best I or anyone else can do is to pray for that to happen. A third color is not necessary. The names you have reserved are on your "My Reservations" page.0
This discussion has been closed.