Beta Directory - Admin Rights

Ah. It appears as a STS, I don't have rights to the admin mode (or else it's really hiding). I'm listed in the CDOL, but I don't appear in the beta stake directory.

nutterb wrote:It's under the administrator tools. I see the "coming soon" link when I click on the "Member Photos" section, but you can actually upload the photos from the administrator tools.

Unfortunately those of us at the stake level who serve as stake website administrators may have rights to ward LUWS sites, but we have no rights at all in the new beta directory sites. That seems to be an unfortunate oversight.

A similar decision was made by the developers of the beta-maps.lds.org site as well. Sad.

Alan_Brown wrote:Unfortunately those of us at the stake level who serve as stake website administrators may have rights to ward LUWS sites, but we have no rights at all in the new beta directory sites. That seems to be an unfortunate oversight.

A similar decision was made by the developers of the beta-maps.lds.org site as well. Sad.

Right now there is no Stake Admin role for photos in the directory, as it can all be handled at the ward level. If you have strong use cases for adding this, we can consider them as we continue development on this project.

jdcr256 wrote:Right now there is no Stake Admin role for photos in the directory, as it can all be handled at the ward level. If you have strong use cases for adding this, we can consider them as we continue development on this project.

I think it would prove extremely helpful for Stake Administrators to be able to access the photo upload if for no other reason than training. I know my experience is really a case of n=1, but more and more I find myself training ward members how to use website features over the phone. This involves me sitting at my computer and talking them through the things they want to do on their computer. If the Stake Admins can't see the same thing on their screen, it will be difficult to provide adequate training.

Just my opinion, but I think it'd be quite helpful.

Alan_Brown wrote:Unfortunately those of us at the stake level who serve as stake website administrators may have rights to ward LUWS sites, but we have no rights at all in the new beta directory sites. That seems to be an unfortunate oversight.

A similar decision was made by the developers of the beta-maps.lds.org site as well. Sad.

Is this true even if explicisty set as a Stake Website admin in the stake MLS (like you are)?

I could understand not automatically giving the STS website admin powers if there was a separate postiion that task.

jdcr256 wrote:Right now there is no Stake Admin role for photos in the directory, as it can all be handled at the ward level. If you have strong use cases for adding this, we can consider them as we continue development on this project.

1) In order for the stake person to provide proper training to the ward person, they must have similar access to be able to know what functions are available and how they work. (My experiences with extensive, accurate and up-to-date documentation have been less then faith-promoting. :rolleyes:)

2) I don't think it's any secret that some units are understaffed. Last I checked, Ward website admin is not a mandatory position that must be filled. In fact, it may not even be a high-priority calling. I could easily see a situation where there is no ward person and the stake needs to step in to fulfill a urgent request.

Has meddling stake admins been a problem with LUWS?

jdcr256 wrote:Right now there is no Stake Admin role for photos in the directory, as it can all be handled at the ward level. If you have strong use cases for adding this, we can consider them as we continue development on this project.

This could be handled the same way approvers are handled in the beta calendar. That is to have default admins based on CDOL/MLS standard positions but have them be able to add admins. I would prefer the stake website admin or even STS be set as a removable admin for ward directory admin functions. This way there are at least two callings at stake level that can assist either for training or actual administration if the ward needs this. If the ward feels they do not want a stake admin interfering then they can delete them from the list of admins. This is similar to the current implementation for the LUWS. Some wards never figure out that the stake admins can be removed. Those that do not want stake admins interfering with LUWS administration usually figure out they can remove the stake admins and do so.

jdlessley wrote:Those that do not want stake admins interfering with LUWS administration usually figure out they can remove the stake admins and do so.

Until the stake admins team up and add themselves back.

It seems the direction here is that all callings will be recorded in MLS and the rights flow from that. That sounds like a better idea then allowing admins to add admins where not everyone can see who is a admin.

jdlessley wrote:Those that do not want stake admins interfering with LUWS administration usually figure out they can remove the stake admins and do so.

Which works well until they both manage to send their membership records out of their ward. [grin]

RussellHltn wrote:Until the stake admins team up and add themselves back.

It seems the direction here is that all callings will be recorded in MLS and the rights flow from that. That sounds like a better idea then allowing admins to add admins where not everyone can see who is a admin.

????? Either you do not understand what I was proposing or I do not understand what you are saying. My proposal includes two methods for a stake standard position to become a ward admin for the ward directory to include editing photos. Either one or both of those methods could be used.

The first is to include one or more standard positions, such as either the stake web administrator or the STS, as callings/positions that can be added by the actions of a default ward admin to the position of special ward admin. It is a special admin because this admin can be deleted by a default ward admin. But unlike the current LUWS situation where the stake admins can add themselves back in as an admin if they are deleted they would not have that ability for the new directory. Only a ward admin could add a stake standard position as a special ward admin. Even if a ward admin deleted a special stake admin it could be added again but only by a ward admin.

The second method is essentially the first method only that the special ward admin(s) are included in the list of ward admins initially for a new ward/new stake and now during the beta directory.

I was borrowing the concept now available for adding and deleting "approvers" for the beta calendar. In the beta calendar the default approvers can add other approvers. The only thing these added approvers cannot do is add other approvers. This can only be done by a default approver. Default approvers cannot be deleted.

The purpose for implementing this special ward admin would be to permit those in appropriate callings at the stake level the ability to train ward admins or to assist when needed. Giving the ability for a default ward admin to delete or add a special ward admin would permit the ward to control this admin access as they needed.

lajackson wrote:Which works well until they both manage to send their membership records out of their ward. [grin]

This is why the special ward admin would be tied to a standard position in MLS as I explained in more detail in my previous post. Individuals are not added to the special ward admin but the standard position is added or deleted.

I really don't see why a stake admin can edit any ward profile but not the photo.

jdlessley wrote:

RussellHltn wrote:

jdlessley wrote:Those that do not want stake admins interfering with LUWS administration usually figure out they can remove the stake admins and do so.

Until the stake admins team up and add themselves back.

It seems the direction here is that all callings will be recorded in MLS and the rights flow from that. That sounds like a better idea then allowing admins to add admins where not everyone can see who is a admin.

????? Either you do not understand what I was proposing or I do not understand what you are saying.

The first part refers to how LUWS works now. Stake admins can team up and add themselves back into a ward website that they have been deleted from. BTDT.

The second part is just an observation. The church seems to be moving toward the idea that callings recorded in MLS sets member's rights. One benefit of this idea is that anyone with access to MLS can see who holds admin rights to the website. Currently with LUWS, one has to be an admin to see who the other admins are. That strikes me as limiting the Bishopric's ability to oversee the operations.

Granted the calendars work differently, but I think that's by necessity. There are no pre-determined calenders, so it would be difficult to be able to set in MLS what calender each individual can admin.

As for your proposal, I disagree with it on two counts. First, it gives the ward power over the stake. That's not the order of things. Can you show me any other area of the church where it works that way?

Secondly, to suggest that a new ward admin adds a stake admin so the stake can conduct training strikes me as placing the cart before the horse. How is the ward admin going to know how to do that prior to their training?

jdcr256 wrote:Right now there is no Stake Admin role for photos in the directory, as it can all be handled at the ward level. If you have strong use cases for adding this, we can consider them as we continue development on this project.

I understand that the reason for no Stake Admin role is that because it can be handled at the ward level. Others have made the case that a Stake Admin role is needed to support ward training needs.

Another reason for needing a Stake Admin role is because there is no ward admin support. In the Poole Stake there is a branch on a remote island with just two Melchizedek priesthood holders. As stake clerk they call upon me to perform many admin tasks. Helping them with admin on the new directory and calendar for their branch will benefit the local members without putting more workload on these two diligent leaders.

Alan_Brown wrote:Unfortunately those of us at the stake level who serve as stake website administrators may have rights to ward LUWS sites, but we have no rights at all in the new beta directory sites. That seems to be an unfortunate oversight.

A similar decision was made by the developers of the beta-maps.lds.org site as well. Sad.

A similar matter in reverse. As ward clerk, I have admin rights in beta-maps.lds.org for my ward, but I have not been granted CDOL access rights to view boundary maps of my own ward, or adjacent wards in my stake. Why are my ward boundaries a stake-level secret? When I get a membership for an adjacent ward by mistake, I can't view the boundaries to figure out which ward it should go to.

RussellHltn wrote:As for your proposal, I disagree with it on two counts. First, it gives the ward power over the stake. That's not the order of things. Can you show me any other area of the church where it works that way?

My proposal adds in administrators that the developers are currently going to leave out. They are the ones, as you call it, giving power of the ward over the stake. I am proposing that the stake get back some ability to perform their callings through administrative rights. Granted the ward may decide when that happens but this is more than they are planning to give right now.

RussellHltn wrote:Secondly, to suggest that a new ward admin adds a stake admin so the stake can conduct training strikes me as placing the cart before the horse. How is the ward admin going to know how to do that prior to their training?

A great deal of callings in the Church require the newly called to learn through reading available documentation on the duties and responsibilities for that new calling. Is it too much to ask a new admin to read some on-line help to learn one procedure? If that is placing the cart before the horse then I see a lot of that going on within the Church. We are only talking about admin rights to editing photos here - not admin rights for the entire directory.

The Church developers are not going to include any admins outside the ward. How is a stake admin going to help or train without some sort of admin cabability. One method is to be in front of the computer with the new admin. There are others that are less effective and more time consuming. My proposal was a compromise to permit some sort of training opportunity by having at least some sort of temporary administrative functionality.

jdlessley wrote:I am proposing that the stake get back some ability to perform their callings through administrative rights.

I agree with that, I'm disagreeing about doing via the ward admins.

jdlessley wrote:Is it too much to ask a new admin to read some on-line help to learn one procedure?

It's not too much to ask, but it may be too much to expect. Just the other week I had to guide a High Councilor click by click on how to reset his LDS Account password.

As a member of a student stake, I could see the need to have some level of admin rights at the stake level in order to update stake callings filled by out of unit members, unless their pictures will be managed by their local units. In the case of our student stake, bishoprics and stake leaders are not members of any unit of the stake directly but have to be added as out of unit.

Additionally, and this may warrant its own thread, it would be very nice if the MLS and directory teams could find some solution for YSA/student stakes where we could create more standardized organizations and not lump our hundreds of callings all into "other". Or even disable unused organizations (deactivate/hide Primary, YM/YW, etc...)