Having access to be able to unreserve someone else's temple shared name

LegacyUser

Sue Massey said: I find temple work for others that have been shared with temple and some of those names have been out there for years. It is too bad there is not an easy way to just unreserve these names so others could do them immediately. I see sealings and I have been going to the temple to do sealings and could have gotten them done
very quickly instead of them locked in the temple sharing system. You assume the person who reserved them to the temple does not care who does the ordinance as long as it gets done. - Sue

LegacyUser

JimGreene said: Stay tuned

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: First, welcome to the community-powered feedback forum for FamilySearch. FamilySearch personnel read every discussion thread and may or may not respond as their time permits. We all share an active interest in using the resources of this site and as users, we have various levels of knowledge and experience and do our best to help each other with concerns, issues, and/or questions.

It isn't a case of unreserving names that another has reserved, but being able to acquire a temple-shared ordinance to take to the temple.

Right now, there are several options open:

* Ordinances Ready -- Once the temples are again open for vicarious ordinances, Ordinances Ready will pull from the temple shared ordinances for a patron to take the ordinance to the temple to perform.
* Request the name be transferred -- users can send a request to the person who shared the name be transferred to them. This option has existed for well over a year and most of us are more than happy to transfer any reserved names to another user.
* Request support unreserve a name so that it can be reserved by someone who is active with respect to performing the vicarious work.

Jim's comment has to do with something that we have been told is in the works -- the ability to manually "pull" names / ordinances that have been shared. We don't know what this will involve, whether there will be a time limit (like there is with Ordinances Ready (90 days) or a limit on the number of names/ordinances that can be pulled, but we've been assured it is coming.

The entire temple portion of FamilySearch is in the process of being rewritten. Ordinances Ready is one result of that action. Another is that instead of names being put into individual temple district pools, that there will be a common pool for all temples to pull from. This rewrite will also take care of "stuck" temple-shared names and names will be pulled on a first in (to the shared pool), first out, so the backlog will be reduced.

There is also talk of restricting the number of names any one user can have in their reserved list. Some users are guilty of "hoarding" names and on more than one occasion a user has complained of speed in loading their temple list. Investigation often revealed that they had thousands of names in their list and in more than one case, they were not related to those for whom they had reserved the names. What has become of that (internal) discussion is something that I don't know, since it has been a while since this has come up.

More than one article stressed the importance of reserving no more names than that which the user can complete within a reasonable period of time (two years has been suggested).

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: I am sure that we will not be able to just "unreserve" names another user has reserved and shared, but that we will only be able to pull those names for us to take to the temple. I also suspect that any action on our part to "pull" a name or ordinance will have a time limit and that when the time limit expires, that the name will revert to its original place in the shared system.

LegacyUser

Jordi Kloosterboer said: Ron Tanner said something along the lines of this is an upcoming feature:P

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Yes, Ron talked quite a bit about the rewrite and what it would mean and I think it was he that mentioned the plans either in a Roots Tech talk or in his online "Live" Facebook sessions.