Tech Forum

I have noticed inaccuracies on the "Clerk Resources - Temple Recommend Status Report".

In my unit (Copper Creek 1st Ward (364835) Fort Herriman Utah Stake (452424)), there are a number of people who's recommends expired a lot more than 2 years ago, who are still shown as "Expiring"

For example, (as of right now -- today's date 05/31/2013), some people with the following expiration dates are showing as expiring and not expired:

• Jan 2009
• Feb 2009
• Aug 2009
• Sep 2009
• Apr 2010
• Aug 2010
• Sep 2010
• Jan 2011
• Apr 2011
• May 2011
• Oct 2011
• Jan 2012
• Mar 2012
• Aug 2012
• Sep 2012
• Oct 2012
• Dec 2012

Have you reported this through the LDS.org feedback link? We can discuss it here, but the official method to report issues is through the feedback link.

I have just reported it through the feedback link. I suppose I was wondering if anyone else can reproduce(see) this problem in their unit.

Jester3141 wrote:...there are a number of people who's recommends expired a lot more than 2 years ago, who are still shown as "Expiring"

I can confirm this. It's interesting to note that on my ward's report there are recommends with an expiration date as recent as March 2013 that are listed as "Expired," when there are recommends as far back as 2010 that are listed as "Expiring."

I wonder if this is a problem where the database field backing the expiration date is a string and it works/doesnt't work based on the format that the date was put in?

Jester3141 wrote:I wonder if this is a problem where the database field backing the expiration date is a string and it works/doesnt't work based on the format that the date was put in?

I really doubt that, since various operations clearly work in a way that there must be an understanding of the actual date value of that field.

But I just did some more research, which suggests an alternate theory. I sorted the list by the "Expires" column and found that (with minor exceptions I'll mention later) all the Expired recommends have expiration dates through a cutoff date, and then all the Expiring recommends are listed, followed by the Active recommends.

Two interesting points that become apparent when you sort by "Expires":

• The boundary date between the Expired and Expiring sections of the sorted list varies from ward to ward. For one ward it is in early 2008, and for another it is in early 2009; for yet another it is in early 2010. That's really strange. At first I thought that the cutoff date might just be off by two years (meaning that a programmer misinterpreted the "Expires" date as the "Issued" date). But that can't be the case.
• In most wards, there are one or two outliers -- recommends listed as Expired that are significantly later than that boundary date. I can see no pattern in these; some are listed for months in which other members have Expiring recommends. But there are very few of these (8 in my whole stake) and all but one are in March or April 2013.

But in any case, it doesn't work correctly, so thank you for submitting feedback.

aebrown wrote:

Jester3141 wrote:...there are a number of people who's recommends expired a lot more than 2 years ago, who are still shown as "Expiring"

I can confirm this. It's interesting to note that on my ward's report there are recommends with an expiration date as recent as March 2013 that are listed as "Expired," when there are recommends as far back as 2010 that are listed as "Expiring."

Prior to today's release of the clerk and leader resources I was seeing the same problem but now it looks correct again.

eblood66 wrote:Prior to today's release of the clerk and leader resources I was seeing the same problem but now it looks correct again.

Agreed. Thanks for pointing that out. All recommends with expiration dates prior to June 2013 are listed as Expired, those expiring in June and July 2013 are listed as Expiring, and those after that are Active. That's how it should be.

The issue I had described belongs under this thread https://tech.lds.org/forum/viewtopic.ph ... rt#p111626, so I have moved the post there.

wiseman13 wrote:We are seeing the same issue, but with a twist in that I have people with a Jun 2013 expiration where some are on the list and some are not.

I don't think your issue is the same. This thread was discussing a bug in the Temple Recommend Status report itself--one which seems to have been fixed. Unless I'm reading your post wrong, what you describe is an error in the Unit Statistics report and sub-reports. That bug is being discussed in a separate thread.