Give a mission or purpose statement at the top of this feedback forum

LegacyUser

Nathan Twyman said: I suggest including a purpose statement at the top of these forums--perhaps right underneath the "Community-powered support for FamilySearch." I also suggest a permanent, top-of-the-list "sticky" topic that explains expectations to potential posters.

FamilySearch sends mixed messages about the purpose of this forum. A statement and sticky could clear this up and probably prevent a lot of frustration on the part of FamilySearch personnel and new community members like me who misunderstand and have incorrect expectations.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: This site is not under the control of FamilySearch or the Family History Department of the Church. It is an independent site used by a number of companies and institutions.

While the Church has some control over this part of the site (this forum), it is limited. I do not know if being able to add a mission statement is even possible.

Hopefully, someone who works with the site can respond to your request and let you know whether it can be done or not.

LegacyUser

Nathan Twyman said: Surely getsatisfaction allows the contracting organization the ability to have a sticky post and/or to post a description somewhere.

I have taken a moment to propose a baseline description:

"This is a support forum for questions that couldn't be answered by family history consultants or the Help Center on FamilyTree. Software bug reports are welcome.

"You may also submit feature requests. FamilySearch does not currently inform users of features that are upcoming or under consideration. Though your suggestion may not receive a response from FamilySearch, a FamilySearch representative will at least read every request made. Please recognize that although your suggestion may be valuable, FamilySearch must necessarily prioritize new development according to the mission, objectives, and directives under which it operates."

It needs work I know, but its a start. I derived the ideals behind this statement from responses to several relevant threads (see https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea... for an example.) I reiterate that I believe posting something like this could improve user experience and satisfaction by setting expectations up front.

LegacyUser

Nathan Twyman said: I should clarify that this is intended for the "ideas" topic on the site.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: There is a mission statement implied by the heading, "Community-powered support for FamilySearch". This forum is certainly used in that manner.

Besides, most "mission statements" that I have seen have been a bunch of words that sound like they are saying something, but in reality are just noise. They (a management team) usually start with something like what you've suggested and then they take over and mangles the thing into meaningless gibberish (taking a lot of meetings and time to do it). When they are finished and publish the statement, they beam with pride over what they have done.

Simple, in this case, is much better. We, the members of the FamilySearch community, both patrons or employees of the Church or FamilySearch, provide the support as best we can.

We have noted that in some cases, those who represent (in their name identification) FamilySearch often express personal thoughts that can and are seen as pushback to the ideas that are suggested. when in reality, they are just providing what they would do in those situations where concern has been raised.

Finally, Get Satisfaction is used because of the cost of having to dedicate an employee or volunteer (missionary) to the full-time task of moderating this forum. The software is not set up to use "sticky posts" (a discussion thread that stays at the topi of the list), though that would be nice.

All that happens is that any response in a given discussion thread that receives three "good point" posts, is promoted to the top of the responses for that discussion thread..

Back a number of years ago, FamilySearch did use open-source software that had a lot of very nice features. I came close to working with that software in Salt Lake while serving as a missionary, but that was shot down because I would have had to been dedicated to that task alone.

As it was, there was a paid employee who had the enviable task of managing forum membership and moderating everything that went on. Get Satisfaction, an external site not run by FamilySearch or the Church, was chosen because a lot of the duties were handled by the site owners/operators and freed up valuable resources for use elsewhere.

LegacyUser

Nathan Twyman said: Purpose/mission statements can be meaningless gibberish, but they do not have to be. They can genuinely describe what it is all about. They can be a useful communication tool and foundation for understanding.

The one-liner you reference Tom does not sufficiently describe what this forum is about. If it truly is all about support, then why are topics called "ideas" and not "questions?" Clearly this is a feedback forum as well, as is also evidenced by the "feedback" link in Family Tree that directs here. It is also a bug-tracking and resolution forum. Neither of these is expressed in that one liner. Also not expressed is the type of interaction expected--many users come here expecting responses to their sincerely submitted feature requests, only to be ignored. Why not set expectations up front? Simple, in this case, is not better.

Do you actually know sticky posts are not supported in GetSatisfaction forums, or are you just guessing? Even if they aren't, the first page people see is a rank-ordered list of "ideas." Surely moderators can manufacture a post that bubbles to the top of that list. If there is truly no way to describe this forum and no way to communicate its purpose to users, I will change my suggestion to use one of many other 3rd-party forum solutions that do provide these extremely basic functions.

LegacyUser

Nathan Twyman said: Here is one example where a company communicates the purpose of the forum up front: https://feedback.uservoice.com/forums...

Here is another: https://feedback.azure.com/forums/341...

Here is an example of using a separate page to explain expectations: http://pages.ebay.com/services/forum/...

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: You may want to look through the site information: https://getsatisfaction.com/corp/prod...

It is true that I do not know if the features include sticky notes or not, but they are part of a different kind of feedback mechanism and definitely "old school."

What I don't understand is that there are four types of feedback that can be used and FamilySearch uses only two of them. The other two, besides idea and praise, are questions and problems. Those are even more important than idea and praise. I'm not sure that those two are sufficient for the idea of community support. Questions and problems are certainly more appropriate to what is typically posted.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: As far as any mission statement, that's fine for internal stuff, but this forum is not an internal forum or department. And, when it comes to mission statements, long ones are seldom good ones. It should be a statement of mission, not of what is done in the group, such as your second suggested paragraph.

Sorry, but having FamilySearch spend time on this is a huge waste of resources that are better used to improve the site itself.

LegacyUser

Nathan Twyman said: I thought the OP was pretty clear that the statement at the top of this forum was intended to describe what to expect from this forum, not a general mission statement for all of FamilySearch. I'm happy to call it something else if you don't like the terms I initially chose.

No one said it had to be long. See my posted examples and then tell ebay, microsoft, and uservoice that they should get rid of those descriptions, that they are a waste of time when they should be spending that 15 minutes of time to work on improving their products. I highly doubt users of those forums would agree.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: No, it is for this forum, not for FamilySearch. However, it is FamilySearch that will provide the resources to establish a mission statement.

We have been repeatedly told that FamilySearch resources are limited, even to the extent of not being about to provide a weekly summary of "What's New," which, for me is much more important that providing some kind of mission statement for what amounts to being a feedback forum.

LegacyUser

MaureenE said: There is sense in what you say Nathan. Clarification of the purpose of this forum is certainly needed, and I must say that my understanding is different to yours, in that I thought if a person had actual problems they needed to go through the Help Centre. not that they came here after the Help Centre.

However, although this Feedback page says "Share an idea" I would be very surprised if anyone with enough seniority to make changes has any interest in any of the ideas posted. I think the priorities of FamilySearch are rather different to the topics discussed on this feedback page, including your suggestion. As you stated on another topic https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea... you consider FamilySearch's main priority is participation, not accuracy or quality, and I agree with your assessment. I think FamilySearch is willing to spend money on campaigns or marketing, but computer expenditure is down the list, some years ago below the budget for toilet paper, according to this post: https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

Even though I consider your suggestion has merit, realistically I do not think it will even be considered.

LegacyUser

Paul said: I agree. I don't think FamilySearch is remotely interested in engaging with Get Satisfaction to make any enhancements to this site.

Well over a year ago someone complained about that silly "Latest Updates" section at the top right of the Home page - where the "latest update" is now over 4 years old! The reply then (and to other posts) was that the site was not the responsibility of FamilySearch and to get in touch with the Get Satisfaction people with any complaints / suggestions.

I think it is also a matter of concern that there is no "Report abuse" link here - though, again, who would be responsible for dealing with this?

FamilySearch could definitely do more in getting a better service from Get Satisfaction but, as Tom and Maureen have said, it just won't happen.

LegacyUser

Nathan Twyman said: Engage with get satisfaction? Why? All I'm suggesting is to use their existing administrator capacity to add a description to the forums. You can see from https://youtu.be/YQXcFS-NZ-Y?t=9 that a subtitle is allowed for each forum. Log in and add it.

Here is a company who has customized it heavily, including adding a brief description, even though their usage is more straightforward than this one: https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb?topi...

Here is another org that uses get satisfaction: https://getsatisfaction.com/eurotherm. Note the slightly customized message at the top right of the forum.

This is not something that will take away from development or require consultation with a vendor. This should be a 15-minute exercise.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: "This is not something that will take away from development or require consultation with a vendor. This should be a 15-minute exercise."

For one person, maybe, but not with an organization like FamilySearch. Like any large organization, wording has to go through an approval process, but with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, that approval process can take up to six months.

That is also the reason why FamilySearch does not even attempt to produce a user's guide, mostly because the review process takes so long and the result is that the guide is out of date before it is released.

Even the department that produced that worthless "mission statement" that I talked about earlier had fewer than twenty-five people in it. The wording went through revision after revision before everyone involved (management plus shift managers -- a total of six people) was satisfied. It was like pulling hens' teeth.

Now take an organization that has thousands of involved people, not just employees of FamilySearch, but also the Church leadership, and it will take a very long time.

Sorry, but knowing the inner workings of the organization, from when I was in Salt Lake as a missionary involved with producing the first FamilySearch FamilyTree guides, I can tell you that anything that is published (including online) will take months in which meetings are held.

Try as you might, it is very unlikely that this idea will even been pushed up the ladder for consideration. I apologize, but something like this is not straightforward, which is something that we found out when we received permission to develop the first guides.

LegacyUser

Nathan Twyman said: Again disagreed. I regret using the term "mission statement" as clearly a simple description of participation in this forum does not require massive coordination or validation from stakeholders.

It is straightforward. See all the examples I posted. This is not hard. It is industry standard. It is obvious.

LegacyUser

Nathan Twyman said: Of course, we can disagree all we want about how much coordination would be required, but since neither of us really know what the FS policies are, I suppose it is a pointless debate.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: No disagreement, except what you want will require an extensive discussion and time. That is the way the Church works. (My experience, by the way, in Salt Lake with a publication to be published by the Church. I have discussed this with others who have had similar experience with other publications.)

When it comes to the practices, policies, and doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, nothing is ever debatable, like it is in other religions.

This is the Church of Jesus Christ. He is at the head of this work and reveals his will through a living prophet of God (President Russell M. Nelson), something people who are not members of the Church accept as valid. For us, we do not debate. We may discuss, but it is always for further understanding.

The Articles of Faith offer a very condensed synopsis of some of our beliefs. Articles 5 through 9 apply. See https://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/a-...

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: I know that this is a 2-3 year old discussion, but with changes occurring in the system and with the evolution of the new FamilySearch "Community" under the Help menu, I feel it should be revisited.

Although providing a full blown mission statement on GetSatisfaction's forum for FamilySearch may be more than needed, in order to avoid confusion with the other "FamilySearch Community" forums (as found under the Help menu on all pages), the Title used on the top of all FamilySearch Feedback forum pages should minimally have the term "Community" removed from it.

Also, ideally, the term "Feedback" should also be used in the forum name since that is how you always get there (i.e., using the "Feedback" link at the bottom of all FS site pages) and although questions are presented there, the original intended use was for providing both positive and negative feedback to the FS engineers regarding the FS tools and environment.

Many new users are sent to this forum by the FS help desk after they have not been able to help them. They usually don't quite know what to expect, assuming that they will receive an immediate response directly from an FS employee. They also don't know that the are multiple "FamilySearch forums" out there. This minor change could mitigate future confusion as more people use this tool.

See the sub discussion from Tom Huber's first reply in the topic at:
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

LegacyUser

Adrian Bruce said: There is confusion in my mind between the Communities and this - so I stick with what I know (this site).

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: That is my very point!

Just for your reference though, there is a bit of tools feedback in the other community, but a LOT of the stuff over there wouldn't really be appropriate here (e.g., how do I find my 1700 birth grandparent in Germany, etc.). I find that the FamilySearch Places group is really responsive there and so anytime I need a particular location name looked at or corrected, I will post it over there rather than here.

You might wan to just have a look over there and select "Groups" so you can go through and see all of the things that they have. Note that the community is also evolving. Right now they seem to be putting some kind of "Front end" on the community so that they can handle questions and discussions in different languages more easily.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: A couple of thoughts here...

I fully agree that this should have the word "Community" removed, but that might not be something that FamilySearch can dictate for this site.

I also like the idea of a mission statement or more explanation about this site would be helpful especially when support sends users to this Get Satisfaction site. As mentioned, a number of users do not realize they may not get any response from a FamilySearch person, but instead have their questions answered by experienced users who contribute regularly to this discussion forum.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: Yes, and to further exacerbate things, after spending all that time talking to "official" FS help personnel, they come here thinking that they are moving to a higher "tier" and instead find that everyone they are talking to are not even related to the FS organization :-)

Poor souls.

LegacyUser

Adrian Bruce said: Yes, I daren't think what a Business Process Analyst would think of FS Support handing over responsibility for an issue to.... Us?!!! As you say, no wonder some are aggrieved.

LegacyUser

Nathan Twyman said: It took me several years to realize that this forum is really not about helping enact change at FamilySearch--FS isn't about customer-driven priorities like various tech companies are. The getsatisfaction platform is often used by these tech companies to cater to power users' desires--the feedback is integral to their operational plans.

It was naive of me to think that feedback from unpaying customers would be as integral to FSFT--don't know why I had that expectation; obviously not. I still think a lot of people come here with that expectation or something like it. A subtitle or description of some sort would help them understand immediately what took me years to figure out.

I don't realistically expect this change to happen. I know better now.

Is there an alternative? The communities forums allow for a description in each group that can be used to explain the group's purpose and expectations. There is no reason it can't be used to get feedback on the site's functionality. The power users on this getsatisfaction site could put together a communities group designed to accomplish the same goals (minus bug reports).

Having two sites that are primarily community support probably creates a fair bit of confusion anyway.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: Nathan,

As you point out, most of us who've been on this forum for a while took a bit of time to figure out what was REALLY happening. It's not at all like the average person would expect. I do know that serious bugs that are reported here are usually picked up and attacked relatively quickly. I also know that many good suggestions for improvements do get noticed and implemented in some form or another. So there are definite advantages to this forum. But it really is a "Feedback" forum and not so much a "Will an employee of FS please fix this problem for me" type forum.

I did hear from a FS employee somewhere in the past that they would like to replace the Feedback forum on GetSatisfaction.com with a group or groups on the Communities area. GetSatisfaction.com is not owned or completely controlled by FS. But the communities area is. I suspect that once it is more mature that will likely happen. Compared to GetSatisfaction though, even with all its warts, GetSatisfaction is a lot leaner and easier to use IMHO.