Tech Forum Archive

New FamilySearch

44 postsstarted by RonaldF-p40 24,722 viewsoriginal topic

RonaldF-p40
Member
#1
After reviewing the User’s Guide for the new FamilySearch, I see some wonderful benefits of the system besides the obvious one of having all the information in one common place that is accessible to everyone.

In the past, individuals needing help in getting ordinances completed had to coordinate efforts and get the Family Name Cards to those willing to help. Now family members ward members and friends can select a name from FamilySearch, process an ordinance request, take it to the temple, have the card printed, and then do the ordinance.

One troubling issue still exists. If a person “reserves” an ordinance(s) and fails to complete that ordinance due to death, loss of interest, or some other reason, no other relative can complete the ordinance(s). The User’s Guide suggests:

“Reserve ordinances only if you feel reasonably sure that you can get them done.
It is recommended that you reserve only enough ordinances for a few trips to the
temple.” , A User’s Guide to the New FamilySearch

The User’s Guide also states:

“There is no limit on the amount of time that ordinances can be on your reserved
list, but try to get them done in a timely manner.”, A User’s Guide to the New FamilySearch

With that suggestion it would have been nice to have ordinance “reservations” expire after one year. This would free the ordinance for others to do. If the person still wants to reserve the ordinance(s), then the person would have the option to “renew” the ordinance(s) reservation. It would ensure that the ordinance(s) could be completed by relatives in a timely manner in the event that the original “reserver” was unable to complete the ordinance(s).

At our local temple, submissions are checked for possible duplications (we are not on the new FamilySearch). Often we have patrons wanting to do ordinances for their relatives only to find that the ordinance(s) have been “cleared” by another person. I have seen many cases where it has been several years since the submission date or since partial work has been done.
russellhltn
Community Administrator
#2
Currently nFS is only open to members. The member's login it tied to their membership record. In theory, the member's unit would notify the church when that member dies.

Personally, I'd think about making things expire if the user hasn't logged in for a long time. As long as their account is in use, I have no problems with reserving it forever.

Just another thought.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
RonaldF-p40
Member
#3
RussellHltn wrote:Currently nFS is only open to members. The member's login it tied to their membership record. In theory, the member's unit would notify the church when that member dies.

Personally, I'd think about making things expire if the user hasn't logged in for a long time. As long as their account is in use, I have no problems with reserving it forever.

Just another thought.

Yes, that would work also. A related problem is once a person has the cards printed, it locks up the name.(New or old system). The name can not be resubmitted as long as a printed card exists or duplication can occur.
greenwoodkl
Member
#4
As the current "designated researcher" of my family, I would like the option to manage my submission... for example retract reserved names that have not been printed and "reassign" them to another family member that has availability and desire to do more names.
JamesAnderson
Senior Member
#5
Yes that should be in there, especially would be useful in not only the situations you describe, but say for example the family member gets so seriously ill that they can't do the work? Or has to move due to work and that location leaves them nowhere near any temple?

I also thought of something else, is this in there already:

A table showing the submission's contents, showing names, and columns for baptisms, endowments, etc., that would fill in with each ordinance?

Here's a hypothetical, slashes represent divisions between cells in the table and due to what I had to do to create this idea, the temple names were omitted, but assume they follow the dates in each cell. Also, there could be linkage to the name in the pedigree and the FGS page for that person. Having worked with setting up tables and field names, this one is doable, I'm not sure whether one would want to use SQL or use some other data management programming software, but it can be done in most of those.

Name/Baptism/Endowment/Sealing to Parents/Sealed to Spouse

John DOE/ Child/ /3 June 2007/3 June 2007
Robert DOE/29 May 2007/2 June 2007/21 June 2007/21 June 2007
Julie DOE/ / / / (no work done yet)
Ann DOE/29 May 2007/ / / (baptism only completed

That should give you an idea of what could be done, one would not have to open the pedigree, use the barcode number on the printed slip you took to the temple as the tracking number of the submission.

What are your thoughts?
RonaldF-p40
Member
#6
Not having worked with the new FamilySearch, and only going by what is stated in the user's guide, it appears that the secret is not to reserve ordinances except for those that you want to do personally. Friends, family, and ward members can access the "non-reserved" names and do them themselves. I believe you can change the reserve status from "ME" to "TEMPLE" to allow others to do the ordinances. You actually will have a lot of control over the ordinance work. We will need to change how we view the entire process.
russellhltn
Community Administrator
#7
RonaldF wrote:A related problem is once a person has the cards printed, it locks up the name.(New or old system). The name can not be resubmitted as long as a printed card exists or duplication can occur.
Under the old system, wasn't there ways to go ahead and process it if the member hadn't done anything for over a year?
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
rzamor1
New Member
#8
I am curious on how you were able to view the new User's Guide for new Family Search? Is it out there any where we can see it?
RonaldF-p40
Member
#9
RussellHltn wrote:Under the old system, wasn't there ways to go ahead and process it if the member hadn't done anything for over a year?
The current (old) system is easy. TempleReady was last updated in 2000. Anything submitted in the last seven years isn’t checked by TempleReady. If the name did show up in TempleReady, all you would have to do is check “NO” when TempleReady asked if it was the same person being submitted. TempleReady would allow the submission. This would also create the possibility of duplication of ordinances. I’m sure the new system will have similar opportunities for “work arounds”. Good intended patrons will probably use them to complete the work for their relatives. That is why a one year limitation on the “reservation” should be added to the new system. Patrons would know that if someone “reserved” a name, the work would be done in a year or be made available to others to do. Once the cards are printed then the name is “locked” in. Work arounds would have to be used, and duplication would be very likely. I’m not sure what kind of communication capabilities are built in to the new system so others can communicate with the person “reserving” the name. Communication between patrons would help solve many of these problems.
RonaldF-p40
Member
#10
St Louis Temple district is on the new system. It was made available to them. It was also made available to beta testers. I'm not sure when it will be released generally. I saw a copy on the first beta web site.
ClarkeGJ
New Member
#11

Ordinance Reservations

Your comments are greatly appreciation. We are looking at better mechanisms for transfering owndership from one contributor to another in the case of death. Then the new owner could handle the names. Also the issue of expiring reservations is still being considered but no decision has been made yet.
Gordon Clarke
FamilySearch DevNet manager
RonaldF-p40
Member
#12
A time limit on reservations has more advantages or benefits than no time limit. As more and more individuals join the church and start doing family history work, “closer” relatives than the one who reserved the name may want to do the work. I have seen many patrons disappointed to find that their grandfather or great grandmother name is “cleared” but no work has been done in several years. They can not complete the work because the person submitting the name lost interest, lost and forgot about the name, or is no longer worthy to do the work. I personally would like to see a 3 or 6 month limitation on reservations, but I would accept a one year limitation. The User’s Guide suggests that a person should only reserve enough names that can be done in a few trips to the temple. Time limited reservations would be harmonious with that suggestion. The time limit could automatically be reset each time a reserved ordinance is completed. This may also encourage more frequent visits to the temple.

Another feature I would like to see is the ability to reserve names for a unit. Any recommend holder in that unit could access “unit reserved” names to do work. This would enable unit members to assist other unit members in completing their work. A young men president could print all a unit’s “B” and “C” ordinances for a youth baptism trip. Those cards could be printed when the youth arrives at the temple. They would have a greater spiritual experience knowing that the did work for another unit member.
JamesAnderson
Senior Member
#13
That is one of the best ideas yet.

Many times I see index card boxes at the Provo temple, have even stopped and done one for another ward while there. I've wondered if cards ever get lost, and with the new system printing one card for each ordinance, your idea could be taken a step forward, and any member in that unit could come in and do 'unit reserved' names.

Might save alot of other headaches too. Some units right now have a consultant or leader designated by volunteer or assignment to handle cards for members in that unit. Just giving your unit number, and since that is not always known by the member, tying the unit number to the activated recommend (that could be updated when the member moves out of a unit by the new unit he/she moves into), that could save everyone a whole other set of headaches as well.
greenwoodkl
Member
#14
JamesAnderson wrote:That is one of the best ideas yet...tying the unit number to the activated recommend (that could be updated when the member moves out of a unit by the new unit he/she moves into), that could save everyone a whole other set of headaches as well.
I could see the benefit from the barcoded recommends being used to access unit or other designated "reserved" names by scanning the barcode at a "kiosk" or at the family file desk.
MarianJohnson
New Member
#15
Perhaps the thinking should be changed to allow patrons to have a one year expiration, after which they may renew their control of the cards, if they wish. That way, if someone dies, the control reverts back to the temple file at the end of the year. If the patron is actively working on ordinances, but has not been able to complete all of his cards in that time frame, he can renew his control of the cards and continue doing ordinances. The New FamilySearch could provide a reminder when the patron logs in as to how long he has left before the year expires, and a link to a renewal screen if necessary.
RonaldF-p40
Member
#16
Marian JOhnson wrote:Perhaps the thinking should be changed to allow patrons to have a one year expiration, after which they may renew their control of the cards, if they wish. That way, if someone dies, the control reverts back to the temple file at the end of the year. If the patron is actively working on ordinances, but has not been able to complete all of his cards in that time frame, he can renew his control of the cards and continue doing ordinances. The New FamilySearch could provide a reminder when the patron logs in as to how long he has left before the year expires, and a link to a renewal screen if necessary.
That is why I suggested that the time limit be reset whenever an ordinance is completed. As long as they were actively working on the names there would be no problem. They would have 3, 6, or 12 months to complete the next ordinance, depending upon the time limit..

Again, patrons must only reserve those names that they personally want to do, and that they can do in a few trips to the temple.

For years, the only way to get the ordinance completed for a relative was to submit the name. That could be on a Family Name Card or on a Temple list. We must change the way we think about the process. With the new FamilySearch the names are in a public "bank" that anyone can draw from. They will no longer be hidden in private safe deposits (home computers or family group sheets).
thedqs
Community Moderators
#17
You mentioned that only one ordinance would be allowed per card. Does that mean I wouldn't be able to say, print out my great-grandfather and great-grandmother and get all their ordinances done on one card, but would have to print out 4+1 cards each (Bap, Init, End, Seal Par, Seal Spouse only one per couple)?
- David
RonaldF-p40
Member
#18
thedqs wrote:You mentioned that only one ordinance would be allowed per card. Does that mean I wouldn't be able to say, print out my great-grandfather and great-grandmother and get all their ordinances done on one card, but would have to print out 4+1 cards each (Bap, Init, End, Seal Par, Seal Spouse only one per couple)?
The new FamilySearch allows you to choose which ordinances that you want to do for an individual. The ordinances for an individual will be printed on a single name card just as they are under the current system.

From the Users Guide:
“A Family Ordinance Request is a printout from FamilySearch that lists the ordinances
that you have selected to do and the individuals for whom you will do them. You take
this request to the temple, where temple workers will print the family ordinance cards
that you will use while you do the ordinances.”.

If you want to have the youth in your unit do the Baptisms and Confirmations, then you select the individuals and reserve B and C for those individuals. You print the Ordinance Request and give it to the youth leader. The youth leader can take it to the temple when the youth go and have the cards printed. The youth uses those cards to do the work. It is a fantastic system.

If you reserve all the ordinances for an individual, all the ordinances will appear on the Family Name Card for that person. Examples of the Family Name Cards are not shown in the user's guide, but I assume they will be the same as they are now.
MarianJohnson
New Member
#19

Temple Ordinance Cards - will there be an expiration date?

There has been much said about temple cards and expiration dates. There seems to be an attitude that some people are abusing the system and printing out endless cards, for which they never do the ordinances. I posted the following last year on the Google Group - New Family Search, but I think it bears repeating:

Please consider the following scenarios.

1. I submitted over 400 German names to the Temple File in Dallas in 1995 because I lived too far away to do that many myself. After waiting 5 years for the temple dates, I contacted the temple recorder. He told me that when the church changed their system to the new ordinance cards, Salt Lake requested that all the temple file names at the temple be turned in to Salt Lake. Finally, after waiting 10 years, the temple work has been done within the last year. So not all CLEARED notations are the fault of irresponsible patrons. Many of them are Temple File names over which the submitter has no control.

1A. Because the baptisms had been done in 1995 on the above-mentioned names, and later the extraction program picked up many of the same German names, the endowments and sealings were cleared by the extraction program, causing a duplication of listings. This was because the endowments and sealing were still at the Dallas Temple at the time and not included in the IGI. So now, all of those names will be done again when the extraction program gets around to doing them. When I wrote to Salt Lake about them, they just said they couldn't remove the extracted names from the system so they would just have to be done twice. If patrons weren't doing so many duplicate entries, the temple file names and extracted names could be done more efficiently.

2. When my daughter was in Young Women, I consistently prepared batches of names for her and her friends to do at their baptism temple trips. This created a backlog of names for which I have been doing endowments nearly every week. It will take me another year to clear out the backlog. My daughter is now at college, so I don't submit baptisms as often any more. We work with our own personal situations. Why do others feel they have to judge our motives?


3. Last November another daughter submitted to the Houston Temple a batch of German names from my research for her singles ward to perform. In February someone else submitted over 50 of the same names and did the temple work. The names had been in the online IGI since November - that other person did not check the online IGI before submitting names. This is one of the main reasons for duplication in the IGI.

4. My husband and I worked in the baptistry at the Winter Quarters temple, We were sometimes told by the people in the office that they only had a limited quantity of names for the youth to perform baptisms for, so we had to limit the number they could do in order to give everyone a chance to do some. Some of these youth had travelled over 100 miles to do this. One man who works at the temple has been extracting names of his relatives from a book in order to provide the patrons at the temple with more names. One day when my husband and I went there to do some sealings, the sealer told us that it was a good things we had brought our own names, because the temple did not have ANY names to do sealings from. We shared what we had brought with the other patrons in the sealing session.

5. I have found many names listed in the online IGI for my ancestors which were derived from the extraction program. Some have been listed as CLEARED for several years. I will wait for the extraction program to complete the ordinances in order to avoid duplication.


6. My husband's job recently transferred us to a city which is a 2-hour drive from the closest temple. It is not practical for us to go to the temple weekly as we had been doing. That means it is going to take us longer to work through our temple ordinance cards. Unforeseen circumstances change what people are able to accomplish. Will the new FamilySearch deny us the ability to do the temple work on names we already have on temple ordinance cards?


The bottom line here is that there are many issues involved in the submission of names. Ideally it would be nice if people could bring in their own names and do the temple work in 3 months, but practically, there are many many reasons why this just is not possible. The biggest problem is that baptisms and sealings can be done in a few moments, while an endowment takes two hours. There will always be a backlog of names waiting for endowments to be done. The best things we can do are to go to the temple as often as possible and help to clear out the backlog of endowments, especially for male names, which are always further behind, and always check the IGI before submitting names. DO NOT EVER EVER EVER ENCOURAGE PATRONS TO RESUBMIT NAMES LISTED AS CLEARED IN THE IGI!!!!!

I am tired of hearing about people who have a attache case or shoebox full of cards being badmouthed and judged for doing the temple work on their own ancestors. They are probably the most active temple attenders in the church!
russellhltn
Community Administrator
#20
Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think what people are asking for is to only reserve names for a year at a time. I don't think anyone is talking about non-renewal of the "hold". Only that it would be released if the submitter was inactive and failed to renew.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
thomasjking
New Member
#21
we had this problem in our FHC about a "name" on hold ---we called our Temple(Atlanta) and the good sister asked for name,birthday etc. i could hear her going "click.click" on a keyboard when she said the "name" is on hold at the Oakland Temple under this family name file. She said have your member get in touch with the" reserving family" (they were relations) and if they will give permission we will transfer the "family file" to our temple. No work had been done on this "family file" for seven years
any way or member did contact her relations, permission was given and work was done
So calling the Temple has worked well for us
mkmurray
Senior Member
#22
RussellHltn wrote:Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think what people are asking for is to only reserve names for a year at a time. I don't think anyone is talking about non-renewal of the "hold". Only that it would be released if the submitter was inactive and failed to renew.
Also, Marian, I think the problem trying to be solved has more to do with temple goers passing away, or becoming unable to attend the temple anymore. It would be easy for reservations to be lost forever without some mechanism for releasing the reservations after some period of inactivity. I personally think a year reservation with renewal options sounds the best.
scion-p40
Member
#23
If these reserved cards are somehow linked to our barcoded recommends, then perhaps they can automatically renew as long as our recommend continues to be used annually (or some other length of time that accommodates those in countries or circumstances that prevent frequent attendance). If renewal is linked to the barcoded recommends, then another arrangement will need to be in place for those with limited-use recommends because they are not currently barcoded.
russellhltn
Community Administrator
#24
scion wrote:If these reserved cards are somehow linked to our barcoded recommends, then perhaps they can automatically renew as long as our recommend continues to be used annually
Or perhaps as long as the nFS user account is logged into annually. Just something to let us know they are still alive and functioning.

However, I still like the idea of them reviewing what they have on hold once a year. I don't see that as too big a burden.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
RonaldF-p40
Member
#25
scion wrote:If these reserved cards are somehow linked to our barcoded recommends, then perhaps they can automatically renew as long as our recommend continues to be used annually (or some other length of time that accommodates those in countries or circumstances that prevent frequent attendance). If renewal is linked to the barcoded recommends, then another arrangement will need to be in place for those with limited-use recommends because they are not currently barcoded.
Temple recommends should not be tied to any family history work. A member may not be temple worthy but does the family history research for their family. They may reserve certain names for other family members to do. Time limits on ordinance reservations are a fair and simplest solution.

We are dealing with two separate problems. One is tying up the name and associated ordinances by ordinance reservation. The second is tying up the name and associated ordinances when the family name card is printed or the name is sent out to a temple on a temple list. Problem one is easily fixed by time limits. Patrons could maintain the reservation by renewing it manually through FamilySearch.

The second problem is not easily solved. Once the ordinances are printed, either on family name cards or temple lists, the ordinances are locked into the system. If the name is on a family name card, the submitter has sole and total control and responsibility of the ordinance work. That is the reason for only printing a few cards that can be completed by a few trips to the temple. If the name is on a temple list at a temple, then there is nothing that can be done until the temple completes the work. That may take years. Any attempts to circumvent the system will result in ordinance duplication and the waste of some patron’s time. Every duplicated ordinance prevents a non duplicated ordinance from being completed.

The disturbing truth is that there are more names going into the system for ordinances than ordinances being completed. The endowment is the biggest flow restriction. There are not enough attendees to get the flow moving in a balanced manner.

Wouldn’t be nice if the temple attendance was so high that in order to attend the temple, you would have to bring your own card!
JDixon16510
New Member
#26

Reservations

The time limit idea is very good for a number of reasons. I think it could be expanded to allow the user the ability to designate a time limit themselves up to a maximum. This gives them the oportunity to have their records released for others to access. This will also remind them that a time limit is set and therefore they need to plan for it.
MarianJohnson
New Member
#27
I think it would be really helpful if the church would prioritize the CLEARED ordinances in the temple file and extraction file and do the oldest ones that people are griping about being in the system for so long - FIRST IN - FIRST OUT. Maybe that would help the frustration level of people who have been waiting for years to see the ordinances done - and help keep people from duplicating ordinances that are in CLEARED status.
RonaldF-p40
Member
#28
Marian JOhnson wrote:I think it would be really helpful if the church would prioritize the CLEARED ordinances in the temple file and extraction file and do the oldest ones that people are griping about being in the system for so long - FIRST IN - FIRST OUT. Maybe that would help the frustration level of people who have been waiting for years to see the ordinances done - and help keep people from duplicating ordinances that are in CLEARED status.
They actually do. There are a lot of other factors that come into play. The ultimate solution is for temple attendance to increase significantly, especially male attendance. When you have more names coming into the system than going out, there becomes a back log that just keeps getting bigger.
JamesAnderson
Senior Member
#29
I've heard that the backlog wait time is currently 10 years for male names submitted to the temple and eight years for female names, however that doesn't wash with what one of the FH consultants in my ward said.

She submitted some names to the temple file in November last year via TempleReady, and they were done in November last year.

I've also heard of recent reports of one name having not just one ordinance done but two in sequence on the same day in different temples, some distance apart, and those were sent to the temple file. In other words the baptism was done in one temple, and the endowment was completed in another temple some significant distance away, on the same day, and we found that out via the online IGI when whoever it was that submitted the name checked to see if anything had been done yet.

So what do we really make of the issue of how long member-submitted names sent to the temple file really are in the queue awaiting being sent to the temples?
MarianJohnson
New Member
#30
I wonder if it would be possible for the church to use the new FamilySearch search engine to find the cases in which there are temple file or extraction file ordinances with a CLEARED designation, where the temple work HAS BEEN DONE by members in the meantime, while those extracted or temple file names have been waiting to be done, and remove them from the system.

I cited a case in one of my previous posts where I submitted many German names to the temple file and the baptisms were done, then, because my names were still in Dallas and not in the IGI, the extraction program cleared a lot of the same names again. If the church could locate those types of situations and pull them out of the system, that would reduce the backlog significantly, I think. With the old program where the IGI was on CDs, there was a 4 - year gap between the releases of the CDs where duplication could occur. If there is really an 8 -10 year backlog, identifying those duplicates for which ordinances are still marked CLEARED and removing them from the system could be very helpful in reducing the backlog.
RonaldF-p40
Member
#31
Marian JOhnson wrote:I wonder if it would be possible for the church to use the new FamilySearch search engine to find the cases in which there are temple file or extraction file ordinances with a CLEARED designation, where the temple work HAS BEEN DONE by members in the meantime, while those extracted or temple file names have been waiting to be done, and remove them from the system.

I cited a case in one of my previous posts where I submitted many German names to the temple file and the baptisms were done, then, because my names were still in Dallas and not in the IGI, the extraction program cleared a lot of the same names again. If the church could locate those types of situations and pull them out of the system, that would reduce the backlog significantly, I think. With the old program where the IGI was on CDs, there was a 4 - year gap between the releases of the CDs where duplication could occur. If there is really an 8 -10 year backlog, identifying those duplicates for which ordinances are still marked CLEARED and removing them from the system could be very helpful in reducing the backlog.
That would have limited success. If the names were still in the holding file in the temple department, then the duplicates could be identified and removed. Not all duplications are “black and white”. A human would still have to make decisions base on limited information. If the names have been sent to a temple then there is no simple way to retrieve the names. Once they get to the temple they are printed on temple lists (hardcopy) and the lists would have to be manually searched. I don’t mean to be negative, but I’m just trying to point out that this is a very complex problem. The new FamilySearch is just a step in the right direction just as TempleReady was. The church is doing its part to reduce the problem. The solution to the back log of names is very simple – greater temple attendance! If more ordinances are being completed than are entering the system, then the flood waters will subside. We could actually drain the reservoir. The significance of duplications would be a lot less.
russellhltn
Community Administrator
#32
RonaldF wrote:If the names were still in the holding file in the temple department, then the duplicates could be identified and removed. Not all duplications are “black and white”. A human would still have to made decisions base on limited information.


nFS allows members to "combine" people. So that appropriate entries in the IGI, PRF, Church membership records and Ancestral file combined/linked into a single person. If the temple were to look up "their" record, they'd find it combined with another record that shows the ordnances completed.

So, yes, someone will have to use human logic on matching things up, but for the temple department to take advantage of it, it's quite mechanical.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
rmrichesjr
Community Moderators
#33

Java code to process FGR pages from NFS

In case it might be of some use to someone, I have some Java code I wrote that can process Family Group Record pages in HTML saved from the New FamilySearch site. The code modifies the links and such in the HTML to make the page more easily viewable from local disk, including adjusting the links that navigate to the previous and next generation so they will work with local files (assuming the files are named according to the convention the code uses). The code also generates a couple of kinds of pedigree views to facilitate getting to the FGR pages and indexes by first name, last name, and title.

The code is in works-for-me state on LInux using pages from the Spring 2007 NFS beta test.

(Apologies for posting this message in two threads. There doesn't appear to be a cross-posting mechanism in this Forum as there is for Usenet newsgroups.)
thedqs
Community Moderators
#34
rmrichesjr wrote:(Apologies for posting this message in two threads. There doesn't appear to be a cross-posting mechanism in this Forum as there is for Usenet newsgroups.)

You can link to another post or thread. But most people probably look at both threads anyway so a single post is usually fine.
- David
RonaldF-p40
Member
#35

NFS Policy change?

In the past, only members who lived in the Temple districts participating in the NFS were allowed to register and log into the NFS. Has this changed? Are all members being allowed to register and use NFS now?
kennard
New Member
#36

still not Churchwide

It is still only available to members in some temple districts. Not yet for everyone else.

-Doug
rmrichesjr
Community Moderators
#37
dougk wrote:It is still only available to members in some temple districts. Not yet for everyone else.

-Doug
Unless you're founding a genealogy software startup and attended a certain genealogy conference at BYU (or near there). An acquaintance of mine has a login for his business interests.

I'm just glad the commandment in Exodus to not covet doesn't list an NFS login as something we're not supposed to covet. :-)
RonaldF-p40
Member
#38
dougk wrote:It is still only available to members in some temple districts. Not yet for everyone else.

-Doug
Does anyone know the time frame as to the roll out of NFS to a temple district and the registration of the members to NFS?
thedqs
Community Moderators
#39
rmrichesjr wrote:I'm just glad the commandment in Exodus to not covet doesn't list an NFS login as something we're not supposed to covet. :-)

It does say "any thing that is thy neighbor's"

Exodus 20:17
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his butt, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s

But In less than a year everyone should be on NFS hopefully.
- David
rmrichesjr
Community Moderators
#40
thedqs wrote:It does say "any thing that is thy neighbor's"

...


But In less than a year everyone should be on NFS hopefully.
Oops. I guess I had forgotten about the catch-all at the end. :-)

Less than a year, huh? That'll be cool! I had heard end of 2008. Two or three months sooner is great.
thedqs
Community Moderators
#41
In Oregon I am sure you'll get it before us in Utah.
- David
ceburgoyne
New Member
#42

"cleared" dates in the IGI

This concerns me as well. I understand this problem has been considered by the Designers of the new system, but no approval to set a limit has been given. I have a number of ancestors that I would like to have their work done and they have been "cleared" for several years. I am hoping that once the NewFamiilySearch is operational that we will get some reasonable limit set so that the work can move forward.

Charles
RonaldF-p40
Member
#43
ceburgoyne wrote:This concerns me as well. I understand this problem has been considered by the Designers of the new system, but no approval to set a limit has been given. I have a number of ancestors that I would like to have their work done and they have been "cleared" for several years. I am hoping that once the NewFamiilySearch is operational that we will get some reasonable limit set so that the work can move forward.

Charles
The new FamilySearch does not set time limits at this time. The existing system uses TempleReady that has not been up dated for several years. A name that is submitted under the existing "old" system will be cleared by TempleReady if it was previously submitted within the last seven years. That could cause a duplication of ordinances. Unless the local temple checks each submission for duplications, the name would be "cleared" a second time. Only a few temples are checking for duplications. The process depends on the individual submitting the name to check the IGI to see if the name had been submitted previously.
RonaldF-p40
Member
#44
I recently sent the following suggestion to NFS:

Reserving Ordinances should have a one year time limit.
The time limit would be reset by re-reserving the ordinance. Too many ordinances are now "cleared" but have not been done for many years. This would allow others to do the ordinance in case the person reserving the ordinance does not complete the ordinance in one year.

Reply from NFS:

Dear Ronald

There is currently no time limit on how long you can reserve a name for temple work. Nor is there a time limit on how long you can hold onto a Family Ordinance Record after it has been printed. From time to time there are changes and this may one day change.

Sincerely

FamilySearch Support
LHH