Member Listed Online But Not in MLS

I'm sure this has been asked before but I'm not thinking of any unique terms to search for it with......

We have a member that lists as a member of our ward in the online directory but their membership is not in our MLS database. This person does live in our ward boundaries. I'm trying to get their membership in our MLS database. The person is a hard DNC and I don't have their birthday.

First off, in case it's something we did wrong, how does the online database and MLS database get out of sync?

How do fix this?

Thanks
Calvin

ckmcdonald wrote:We have a member that lists as a member of our ward in the online directory but their membership is not in our MLS database. This person does live in our ward boundaries. I'm trying to get their membership in our MLS database. The person is a hard DNC and I don't have their birthday.

First off, in case it's something we did wrong, how does the online database and MLS database get out of sync?

I don't know how those two get out of sync, but it does occasionally happen. It certainly can happen when a new membership arrives according to the CHQ membership database, but the record hasn't been received in MLS. But that is clearly not the case here, since you seem to have a long-standing familiarity with the person's record.

You may not have their birthday in MLS, but if you have the membership record in the online directory, then I would think that the membership record would also be available online via Clerk and Leader Resources on lds.org. So you could get the birthday and MRN. I'm guessing you mentioned that you didn't have the birthday because you wanted to request the record through MLS. I suppose that's worth a try, but it seems likely that CHQ will think you already have the record and thus see no reason to send it to you.

The other option is to do a data refresh -- after all, the CHQ data is correct and the purpose of a refresh is to make your MLS records match those at CHQ.

You didn't say which on-line directory you were looking at. I seem to remember that MLS and the various on-line directories differ in the way they handle members with different last names then the HoH. I know the classic LUWS tended to lump everyone under the HoH's last name. Any chance that the record IS in your ward, just not where you're looking?

I didn't realize as the WC that I had access to membership records online. The particular member in question appears both in the standard online directory of members and the Clerk and Leader Resources directory. Yes, I mentioned birthday because I thought maybe requesting the membership again that that might correct the problem.

Thanks for the help ... I now have a birthday and MRN so I can request the membership, although as pointed out, that may not work.

Since my original post I have reviewed each member in the online and MLS databases looking for other discrepancies and have found two others. I also note others on the list demonstrate what RussellHltn mentions, that the lists differ a bit by last name usage. But this isn't the problem with my discrepancies. They are completely missing in MLS, but online they are listed, complete with non-member spouse.

I think I'll call LUS today and chat about this because I'm interested how/why these lists get out of sync.

I'll report here what I learn.

aebrown wrote:The other option is to do a data refresh -- after all, the CHQ data is correct and the purpose of a refresh is to make your MLS records match those at CHQ.

This is how this same issue was corrected for me in the past with the old LUWS directory.

I wonder if anyone did a restore in MLS for some reason. I'm guessing that the send/receive only works on changes to the membership. If something (like a database rollback) drops the new record, then it will be out of sync and will remain that way until a refresh.

LUS recommended doing a File -> Refresh of our membership data. They had no explanation for how these databases get out of sync. Before I ran down to the clerk's office to do a membership Refresh, I printed the persons membership off the Clerk Resources -> Membership List online.

I was told by LUS to indicate I wanted a membership Refresh, do a Send/Receive, wait one hour, then do a second Send/Receive to get the update. I requested the Refresh and did the first Send/Receive. With it came some generic membership changes, so I printed them. Among them was a report stating the the person in questions membership had been printed. I found this interesting, that it reported to MLS that the membership had been printed online (at my home). It was also interesting that it was saying this about a membership is didn't have - at least it didn't just before I did the Send/Receive.

This made me suspicious so I looked and the person in question was now in the MLS database - long before the Refresh occurred. In fact, I haven't been down to Send/Receive the second time yet so the Refresh hasn't even happened yet. Apparently the act of printing this person's membership online caused the membership to appear in MLS. Huh?

I'm pretty sure no one did a Restore.

ckmcdonald wrote: In fact, I haven't been down to Send/Receive the second time yet so the Refresh hasn't even happened yet. Apparently the act of printing this person's membership online caused the membership to appear in MLS. Huh?

Printing a record online can't possibly cause the membership record to appear in MLS, but it is conceivable that printing the MR did trigger something so that when you did your first Send/Receive, you actually received the membership record then (even though that was the S/R that sent the data refresh request to CHQ).

The report that printed out didn't say it was a new incoming membership. It just said "Membership record printed".

I suppose it's also possible that something done by LUS when I was on the phone with them caused the membership to "appear" in MLS after the first Send/Receive. I would actually be more suspicious of this than the printing of the membership online. If so, he never said anything to suggest that was the case.

Another possibility (although perhaps not the best one) is that printing the record did trigger a message to MLS. When MLS got a request that it couldn't match with it's database, requested a refresh for that record.