Beta Directory - Admin Rights

Discussions about the Directory Tool on lds.org. Questions about the Directory on the classic site should be posted in the LUWS forum.
russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20723
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Beta Directory - Admin Rights

Postby russellhltn » Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:35 am

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.
Have you searched the Wiki?
Try using a Google search by adding "site:tech.lds.org/wiki" to the search criteria.

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 14685
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:48 am

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.

jdcr256
Church Employee
Church Employee
Posts: 557
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:53 pm
Location: Riverton, Utah

Postby jdcr256 » Thu Feb 18, 2010 11:24 am

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.

nutterb
Member
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 7:06 am
Location: Shaker Heights, OH, USA

Postby nutterb » Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:20 pm

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.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20723
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:33 pm

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.
Have you searched the Wiki?

Try using a Google search by adding "site:tech.lds.org/wiki" to the search criteria.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20723
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:43 pm

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?
Have you searched the Wiki?

Try using a Google search by adding "site:tech.lds.org/wiki" to the search criteria.

jdlessley
Community Moderators
Posts: 6522
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 11:30 pm
Location: USA, TX

Postby jdlessley » Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:19 pm

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.
JD Lessley
Have you tried finding your answer on the LDS.org Help Center page or the LDSTech wiki?

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20723
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Thu Feb 18, 2010 4:37 pm

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.
Have you searched the Wiki?

Try using a Google search by adding "site:tech.lds.org/wiki" to the search criteria.

lajackson
Community Moderators
Posts: 6128
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:27 pm
Location: US

Postby lajackson » Thu Feb 18, 2010 9:30 pm

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]

jdlessley
Community Moderators
Posts: 6522
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 11:30 pm
Location: USA, TX

Postby jdlessley » Thu Feb 18, 2010 11:05 pm

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.
JD Lessley
Have you tried finding your answer on the LDS.org Help Center page or the LDSTech wiki?


Return to “Directory”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest