Calendar Default Approvers: All get emails...

Discussions about the Calendar Tool at lds.org. Questions about the calendar on the classic site should be posted in the LUWS forum.
kisaac
Community Moderators
Posts: 1170
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:04 am
Location: Utah, united states

Calendar Default Approvers: All get emails...

Postby kisaac » Wed Dec 15, 2010 4:03 pm

on the new calendar, the entire extended bishopric are "default approvers." (see below)

Problem: In the case of admin emails, like "Calendar Waiting For Approval," it appears all default approvers get these emails. This is less than ideal.

This is the suggestion given on the email that arrives:
To unsubscribe from system e-mail notifications only, set a rule in your inbox to filter messages from this address into another folder.

My Ward Assist clerk - finance, recently asked if he could be taken off the list of people who get the calendar administration emails, because his job has nothing to do with the calendar administration. With have four other Assistant clerks who have very detailed job functions that do nothing with calendar administration. The bishop and counselors also would not need these notifications in our ward as we have called a website admin to handle these details.

Of course, the email it suggests to filter is my email, I assume because I am website admin, and we as a bishopric exchange a lot of emails and they really can't filter out mine separately. Anyone found a solution to this, as we probably all are (or soon will) be confronting it? What am I missing?

Default approvers for ward calendars include the following:
Wards


  • Bishop
  • Acting ward leader
  • Bishopric first counselor
  • Bishopric second counselor
  • Ward executive secretary
  • Ward clerk
  • Ward assistant clerk
  • Ward assistant clerk - finance
  • Ward assistant clerk - membership
  • Website administrator



lajackson
Community Moderators
Posts: 6137
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:27 pm
Location: US

Postby lajackson » Wed Dec 15, 2010 4:13 pm

To unsubscribe from system e-mail notifications only, set a rule in your inbox to filter messages from this address into another folder.


Wow! Number 1. This is not unsubscribing. This is a very poor workaround. Number 2. Some folks do not have filtering capability.

If this were to happen to me, someone would get very tired very quickly of my return e-mails until the problem was solved.

kisaac
Community Moderators
Posts: 1170
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:04 am
Location: Utah, united states

Postby kisaac » Wed Dec 15, 2010 5:13 pm

lajackson wrote:Wow! Number 1. This is not unsubscribing. This is a very poor workaround. Number 2. Some folks do not have filtering capability.


Glad to hear I wasn't the only one that thought this was "to techy" to be a real solution...

lajackson wrote:If this were to happen to me, someone would get very tired very quickly of my return e-mails until the problem was solved.


I think that was the message from my Finance Clerk....

jdlessley
Community Moderators
Posts: 6526
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 11:30 pm
Location: USA, TX

Postby jdlessley » Wed Dec 15, 2010 5:25 pm

kisaac wrote:Problem: In the case of admin emails, like "Calendar Waiting For Approval," it appears all default approvers get these emails. This is less than ideal.
An implementation similar to the classic calendar which has a designated web administrator the one to receive the e-mail messages would solve this (maybe they are working on it). But instead of only one approver, or default approver, receiving the messages all could have that option to be either active or inactive. Of course there would always have to be at least one active to receive the messages.
JD Lessley
Have you tried finding your answer on the LDS.org Help Center page or the LDSTech wiki?

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 14690
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Wed Dec 15, 2010 5:29 pm

kisaac wrote:Problem: In the case of admin emails, like "Calendar Waiting For Approval," it appears all default approvers get these emails. This is less than ideal.


I certainly agree that it is not a good implementation to send such emails to all the default approvers, and it should be fixed.

However, I wonder how big a deal this really is. You mentioned admin emails, like "Calendar Waiting for Approval." Are there other such messages? Most administrative tasks go straight to appropriate individuals. If this is the only such message, it should be quite rare -- people won't add whole calendars very often.

Personally, I find it hard to understand why this functionality was added -- I would have put that feature way down on the priority list. I can think of dozens of features that are much more useful and much more common. On the rare occasions when a new calendar is added, someone can contact a calendar admin and ask them to add it -- we don't need a feature for that.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.

kisaac
Community Moderators
Posts: 1170
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:04 am
Location: Utah, united states

Solution: Website admin should recieve emails

Postby kisaac » Thu Dec 16, 2010 8:38 am

Alan_Brown wrote:I certainly agree that it is not a good implementation to send such emails to all the default approvers, and it should be fixed.

However, I wonder how big a deal this really is. You mentioned admin emails, like "Calendar Waiting for Approval." Are there other such messages?


Apparently it was a big enough deal for him to seek me out and discuss it.

A notice goes out each time we add or delete a calendar, and once we get settled, the notices probably will calm down. A notice also goes out when you add or delete an individual as an editor, but that one may just go to that person, and it may have gone to him. During set-up we've approved nine calendars and deleted two, so over the last two weeks a flurry of "admin messages" would have gone to all these individuals, with only one person actually needing them.

Additionally, he may have his calendar notifications (from within the calendar itself) set to notify him by email of new calendars, which may have given him an additional nine emails of new calendars. This he can uncheck, of course, as this is a calendar subscriber preference and not an admin one

Originally Posted by Alan_Brown
Personally, I find it hard to understand why this functionality was added --
Trying to remember...
I think as the directory and the first tools came online, they were tied to just a single calling. I, as ward clerk, was the admin in charge of photo approval for the directory, but only myself. The questions were immediatly raised: Does that mean all ward clerks now must have a computer to be called as a ward clerk, or your ward will not be able to have photos in your directory? What if the bishop wanted the exec secretary to perform those duties? Why tie it to a priesthood calling (Clerk or assistant clerk) when a sister could function as a website admin equally as well or better and perform as the administrator? What if a bishopric member needed oversight or more administrative control?

As updates and revisions continued, the rights were expanded and the Website administrator calling was also added as one that had administrative abilities in tools on lds.org, (and not just over LUWS) but this came after the original implementation of these tools, if I remember.

Once the website admin was granted this ability, the default approvers no longer needed to recieve admin emails, as jdlessley correctly states:
An implementation similar to classic calendar which has a designated web administrator the one to receive the e-mail messages would solve this (maybe they are working on it). But instead of only one approver, or default approver, receiving the messages all could have that option to be either active or inactive. Of course there would always have to be at least one active to receive the messages.
I've sent this in as feedback.

eblood66
Senior Member
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:17 am
Location: Cumming, GA, USA

Postby eblood66 » Thu Dec 16, 2010 9:00 am

kisaac wrote:Trying to remember...
I think as the directory and the first tools came online, they were tied to just a single calling. I, as ward clerk, was the admin in charge of photo approval for the directory, but only myself. The questions were immediatly raised: Does that mean all ward clerks now must have a computer to be called as a ward clerk, or your ward will not be able to have photos in your directory? What if the bishop wanted the exec secretary to perform those duties? Why tie it to a priesthood calling (Clerk or assistant clerk) when a sister could function as a website admin equally as well or better and perform as the administrator? What if a bishopric member needed oversight or more administrative control?

As updates and revisions continued, the rights were expanded and the Website administrator calling was also added as one that had administrative abilities in tools on lds.org, (and not just over LUWS) but this came after the original implementation of these tools, if I remember.


That's incorrect. From the beginning all bishopric members, clerks and assistant clerks and the website administrator were supposed to have rights in the directory. That was obvious from the source code at the start. There were just some bugs that took a while to work out that prevented some of the callings from having access rights.

Of course, the "Leader and Clerk Resources" section was limited to Bishops and Ward Clerks at the start but that's a different application.

kisaac
Community Moderators
Posts: 1170
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:04 am
Location: Utah, united states

Postby kisaac » Thu Dec 16, 2010 9:48 am

eblood66 wrote:That's incorrect.
..... That was obvious from the source code at the start.


kisaac wrote:...if I remember.


Ok-

I'll admit that I was not checking the "source code" ever - it was never obvious to me, it was a "learn as you go process" as the help files came later. Challenging and fun- I liked it!

Our discussions about all those questions in our ward council and bishopric meetings and with the stake (which DID happen) may have been pointless then- we just didn't understand! Hey, it was in beta...

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 14690
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Thu Dec 16, 2010 10:04 am

kisaac wrote:Apparently it was a big enough deal for him to seek me out and discuss it.

A notice goes out each time we add or delete a calendar, and once we get settled, the notices probably will calm down. ... During set-up we've approved nine calendars and deleted two, so over the last two weeks a flurry of "admin messages" would have gone to all these individuals, with only one person actually needing them.


We've never approved a single calendar in our stake -- every calendar was added manually by me. And maybe it's because I'm the one who has been doing the adding and deleting, but I've never gotten any notification of an added or deleted calendar. Perhaps the other default approvers have been notified, and just haven't mentioned it to me.

kisaac wrote:A notice also goes out when you add or delete an individual as an editor, but that one may just go to that person, and it may have gone to him.


That's true, and I think that's a good thing. Yes, it adds to the set of notifications a person receives, but you really do need to know if you have become an editor, and especially if you are no longer an editor for a calendar.

kisaac wrote:
Alan_Brown wrote:Personally, I find it hard to understand why this functionality was added


Trying to remember...
I think as the directory and the first tools came online, they were tied to just a single calling.


The "functionality" I was talking about was the ability for members to propose a new calendar, but you responded to a different topic. Looking back at my message, I can see that I didn't make it totally clear what I meant by "this functionality", so it's understandable that you could think I meant something else.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.

tomjohnson1492-p40
Church Employee
Church Employee
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:30 am
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Contact:

Postby tomjohnson1492-p40 » Thu Dec 16, 2010 10:17 am

About that message ... I realize it's less than ideal. There's a functionality limitation that prevents people from unsubscribing from system email messages. I'm sure this will be fixed sometime in the future. For the present, I figured it was better to give people a workaround than to simply tell them that they cannot unsubscribe from system email notifications. Re the filter, perhaps filtering by subject title rather than by message sender would work.

Calendar notifications is a big deal when it comes to broadcasting information about events. Most people don't check the calendar daily to see if an event is scheduled for the day. With the current notifications, you can inform people about upcoming events by sending a reminder. Hence notifications in general was implemented. Notifications about new calendars awaiting approval is just one aspect of the notifications.


Return to “Calendar”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest