The new procedure tat allows patrons to select shared names so that they can do ordinances is an out

LegacyUser

LegacyUser

Cherie Ailene Morgan said: The new ordinance colors are not helpful and create MORE work for the end-user. The purpose of improvements to the software should be to make our work easier, not to complicate our work.

There are SIX different variables, for which you have now only created FOUR colors. This contradicts the whole purpose of having a color code system. Why have colors if they’ll mean more than one thing?

The six options:
Work that has not been submitted
Work that someone else has requested
Work that I have requested
Work that I have sent to the Temple, or sent to a friend or family member
Work that has been completed
Work that cannot be completed

The problem now:

Green = hasn't been submitted AND someone else has already requested - there needs to be distinction between the two

Blue = I have requested the name AND I have submitted the name to the temple - there needs to be distinction between the two

Using the same color for TWO different reasons is confusing and creates more work.

Example #1: When I see green on a person's name, I click the Ordinances tab to submit their name. Only now to find that someone else has already submitted it. So I took an extra step that I didn't have to.

This may not seem significant, but when I spend the majority of my day working on this site, extra page clicks just adds to my work load. Now I can't double check my work properly, because each I see the green I click on it to submit the name and I now have no way of knowing if I've checked it before. So the process of double checking goes on ad nauseum.

Example #2: Now when I see blue on the Ordinance tab, I don't know at a glance if I have only requested the name, or if I have already submitted the name to the temple. I can't tell at a glance if I forgot the second step. Please keep in mind that not every user is doing their own temple work. Being able to know that the names have been submitted to the temple without second guessing ourselves because of erroneous colors is crucial.

The entire reason for color coding is to show distinction between different levels of work that has been done or needs to be done. That has been erased with this new policy.

If the justification for doing this is that text has been added below the ordinances, then there is not a true purpose for having the color coding. Why use colors to clarify ordinances, if we only have to keep digging to double check the text? This doesn't make any sense and creates more work and confusion for the people for whom this site has been created - the end-user.

LegacyUser

Samuel Ted Clement said: I totally agree with Cherie. While I understand the idea of simplifying the colors (so many people who are new to the site seem to really struggle with all the colors we had-- but they get used to it eventually), there NEEDS to be a way, to, at a glance, tell if I have reserved the ordinances and NOT shared them, or to see someone else has reserved the ordinances. I have only discovered this update today, but it has already made my very limited time a lot more tedious-- I now have to click on any green icon to see if it needs work, mostly to find that someone else has already requested it and shared with the temple. It is a surprising amount of extra clicks and loading pages. Before, I could just click the name to get the information I needed. PLEASE give at least one more color showing the ordinances are shared with the temple (as a side note, the green and orange colors you chose are hard for me to distinguish due to color-blindness...).

On a positive note, it is nice to directly request work that has been shared with the temple.

LegacyUser

Arthur Sheen said: The filter tool that now comes with Reserved ordinances makes it so easy to determine exactly what ordinances are available/reserved/printed/done without the need for coloured icons.
The greatest advantage of the new procedure is that previously shared ordinances can now be selected and completed by anyone, not just the person who shared them. This is THE best feature of the new process.
Many times I find a name that requires just one ordinance to be done but that ordinance is shared and was previously not available for anyone to do. This often necessitates a wait of several years til that name is done in a temple somewhere.
As I said, this is the BEST!

LegacyUser

TManning said: Wonderful enhancement