some patrons need temple cards back.
Comments
-
Emmanuella Christianne A. Koncurat Overstreet said: yes, that is what I also want.0
-
Tom Huber said: Guys, take this to your Priesthood Leadership. Those are the instructions when we have concerns over any practices that come down from the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve.0
-
Brett said: 'Yes', that is correct, your (local) 'Bishop/Branch President' (and/or, Bishopric/Presidency); and, Stake/District President (and/or, Presidency); and, NOT to forget, your (local) 'Temple President' (and/or, Presidency)
But, we still have every right to continue in/with this post, in this Forum, as well.
Just maybe, our "Message" may/might ALSO filter through from the Leaders of "FamilySearch", as well, back to the 'First Presidency'; 'Quorum of the Twelve'; and, 'Temple Committee', from this Forum.
We can always live in hope.0 -
W David Samuelsen said: Emmanuella
when a person is scanning you have to listen for the beep, before you pass it on to the stamping person. If there is not beep, it is not recorded but if it is stamped it looks like it was recorded.
The scanner is VISIBLE, if card is not scanned, the screen will not flash big word SCANNED on full green background on monitor screen. (I should know because I have been there every time.) It is a very simple process.0 -
Erika Campbell said: Just take the cards back to the Temple (any Temple) and the workers at the Family Desk will take care of them. I always check to make sure that all my cards are scanned and ready for the next ordinance or, if completed, filed away.
Erika0 -
W David Samuelsen said: Have anyone bothered to check the prices of paper and ink? Reprinting after each ordinance drive up the cost.
The paper isn't cheaper any longer. Especially white. Ink prices are actually creeping upwards.0 -
W David Samuelsen said: The scanning at completion of each ordinance (baptism/confirmation, initiatory, endowment and sealings are separation steps), requires certifying that the scan is done. Otherwise the temple recorder has to be called in.0
-
Brett said: W David
'Yes', correct.
But, ... Errors/Mistakes ..., are still being; and, will still be, made.
Hence, the reason WHY I want those, supposedly, "Processed"; and, "Completed" CARDS, with the "Tick" and "Date Stamp", back, to retain those CARDS as 'Evidential Proof' that the Work was actually undertaken - and, NOT have to be told (Oh, you will just have) to do it AGAIN.
Brett0 -
Tom Huber said: I agree, there is nothing wrong with using all avenues to object to the new policy. Whether it will do any good is questionable, but concerns should be expressed if, for no other reason, to get them off our minds.
Of course, prayer and listening afterward doesn't hurt, either.0 -
Tom Huber said: I have an old HP 4 laser printer. the cost of a card is less than a penny and that includes the toner.
Modern ink printers are the most expensive to use, despite their very low price. The manufacturers make their money from the ink, not the product itself.0 -
Emmanuella Christianne A. Koncurat Overstreet said: I know that but humans are not perfect. I did find out why they are doing this. It is not just to annoy us, but they are going to re scan all family cards. So that will eliminate errors. But having said that, I am wondering why they don't scan them twice before they gave them back to us.0
-
Brett said: Emmanuella
It would have been nice to have been advised WHY we were not getting the "Cards" back.
And, 'Yes', your thought pattern is like mine.
Mine was partly like yours, "... why they don't scan them twice before they gave them back to us."
As, I would STILL be quite happy to WAIT for the return of the "Processed"; and, "Completed" CARDS, with the "Tick" and "Date Stamp", if need be.
But, my thought pattern ALSO included, WHY don't they ACTUALLY just "Scan" an "Image" of the "Card" during the "Processing" (whether, it be once or twice); so that, they have a "Image" of the "Card" on RECORD/File; and, STILL pass/return the those PHYSICAL, "Processed"; and, "Completed" CARDS, with the "Tick" and "Date Stamp", back, to us?
I am CERTAIN that they would only just DESTROY the "Processed"; and, "Completed" CARDS, with the "Tick" and "Date Stamp", once they have "Processed" them; whether, it be once or twice.
Rather than just DESTROY the "Processed"; and, "Completed" CARDS, with the "Tick" and "Date Stamp", once they have "Processed" them; whether, it be once or twice, GIVE us the option to request the return of the "Cards"; whether, that be at the time; or, to be picked-up/collected later on.
Brett0 -
Carolyn Wheeler said: Brett, I like your idea of scanning an image.0
-
Brett said: And, STILL returning the "Processed"; and, "Completed" CARDS, with the "Tick" and "Date Stamp", back to us0
-
Tom Huber said: W. David, if Salt Lake was using the new system, then you would not have gotten your card back. With the new system, which includes new procedures with respect to scanning the cards, the users will not get their cards returned to them.0
-
Tom Huber said: Without a doubt, errors will occur, but the new system is designed to minimize the human error element. Will cards not be scanned? Perhaps, but the process should reduce that possibility significantly.
Only time will tell.
My local temple (Chicago) is now closed for summer cleaning and renovation. I suspect (but do not know) that the new system will be in place following the renovation.0 -
Tom Huber said: I think the key is that if you take cards to the temple and do not see the completed ordinance message within a day or so, you contact the temple and provide the information that you performed the ordinance(s) and have not seen any message regarding their completion.0
-
Brett said: Tom
And, a lot of good that will do ...
Without the "Completed" CARDS, with the "Tick" and "Date Stamp", in your possession, as 'prima facie', 'Evidential Proof', that the Work was actually undertaken, you will just be 'kindly' told; as, the Work is NOT "Recorded", you will just have to do the Work again.
Of course, you may know the EXACT details of the, WHEN, WHAT; and, WHO (of the Worker); and, be able to provide that; but, somehow I do not think that that will be acceptable; even, if correct, certainly NOT if the WHO cannot recall!
Brett0 -
Christine said: I do not think any cards will be destroyed until the temple workers are certain the work has been recorded. Without the time constraint of waiting patrons there will be greater accuracy. We do not need to worry. I have every confidence this will be good thing.0
-
W David Samuelsen said: The responsibility is delegated to the patrons to do the scanning and recording after ordinance is done. This was started last year according to the supervisor I asked about the increased delegation of responsibilities I've seen lately.0
-
W David Samuelsen said: According to the ordinance secretary (yes there is such a position) in Salt Lake Temple, Salt Lake Temple is considered a tourist temple.0
-
Tom Huber said: Brett, we have been told that the temple will hang onto the cards for a period of time (two weeks has been mentioned). The patron will know whose cards were taken to the temple. They will know what ordinance was performed from the cards. The information is in their Temple list, or, if smart, the PDF they used to print the cards.
You don't need the proof, they will be sitting with the temple for a period of time after the cards were completed.
In essence, it will be the same as it is with temple-shared ordinances. We will become the one to determine if we took the card(s) to the temple and if they were recorded per our record and that has to take place within a few days of completing the ordinance(s).
Again, if you have concerns, take them to your Priesthood leaders. Continuing to argue the concerns and demand that the cards be returned is like asking for the major change made almost a year ago be rolled back.
Finally, FamilySearch, because this was basically decided outside its purview, is not going to change the process. That has to come from the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve.0 -
W David Samuelsen said: Had a very good chat with ordinance secretary at Provo City Center Temple.
The shocker? 6 percent actually picked up their cards. The rest are left and not proceeded.
The responsibility is shifted from the temple workers to patrons to do and pick up promptly same day (carry in and carry out). PCC has file drawers only for next ordinances to do. Completed cards will not be returned unless arrangement had been made with the recorder's office/ordinance secretary.
Salt Lake Temple does NOT have file drawers - no rooms due to sheer number of stakes covered by Salt Lake Temple district (from Elko Nevada all the way to Park City Utah.)
You can get your cards back *IF* you made arrangements with the offices.
And the secretary is very much aware of missed scanning problem and efforts are being ensured in all temples that there be two witnesses at all the time of the scanning and stamping.0 -
Nathan Twyman said: Thank you for sharing this.0
-
Emmanuella Christianne A. Koncurat Overstreet said: I will talk with the recorder on Thursday at the Mt. Timpanogos temple to see what the percentage is there. I think it is larger there.0
-
W David Samuelsen said: Emmanuella, the ordinance secretary who answer to the recorder, said it's 6 percent overall for all 4 in Utah County.0
-
Phil Jeffrey said: I pose another question then. How many of that 6% really are adamant they want the cards back and does that justify the extra work a clerk.recorder will have to do ? I don't know I just ask that question. I would also not count on all clerks returning the cards as the policy was the temples didn't have to return them. Maybe a nice hot apple pie will go a long way but it's up to each temple to decide if they are willing to do something extra.0
-
Emmanuella Christianne A. Koncurat Overstreet said: 6% ? it looks more than that at Mt. Timpanogos. I think maybe only those who really do serious research are anxious to get the cards back.
I will abide with whatever happens. I will find a way. thank you so much for your answers.0 -
Nathan Twyman said: Phil, thanks for engaging on this thread. It is great to hear from someone at FS.
As far as I can tell, no one on here is actually requesting they continue to return all the cards, so I doubt anyone thinks doing so would be justified. It seems a moot point unless I am misunderstanding the question. In my view (assuming I am understanding), the relevant question at this point is "Would returning 6% or less of cards be worth the additional work?"
In my view, the answer to that question is a resounding "yes!" This presumes, of course, that our proposed alternatives are rejected by FS, and physical cards remain the only easily accessible, authoritative record of ordinances paired with identities. The workarounds that have been proposed are fine and I'm planning on using them as necessary, but they all take more time than simply returning any card marked "please return" or something similar.0 -
Nathan Twyman said: On second read, I think your question Phil and mine are essentially the same. My mistake; sorry.0
This discussion has been closed.