Page 1 of 2

LDS Tools

Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 8:06 am
by philiptootill
I am running Android 2.2 on a HTC Desire. I cannot understand why LDS Tools will not display any Ward members other than myself and my wife. It displays other wards in the Stake and shows a large number of names, addresses etc., but not my own ward. Can anyone help?

Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 8:23 am
by aebrown
philiptootill wrote:I am running Android 2.2 on a HTC Desire. I cannot understand why LDS Tools will not display any Ward members other than myself and my wife. It displays other wards in the Stake and shows a large number of names, addresses etc., but not my own ward. Can anyone help?
When you look at your directory on lds.org (http://lds.org/directory), do you see the same thing? The data sources are similar.

You didn't mention where you are located. In the European Union, privacy laws restrict information from being displayed unless members opt in. If your stake is in the EU, it could be that other wards in your stake have encouraged members to opt in, but your ward has not.

Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 8:30 am
by philiptootill
Yes I am in the EU and yes all I see at lds.org/directory are the two of us. Others in the ward can see more people and one even sees the entire ward, but he is on the Bishopric.

Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:22 am
by russellhltn
philiptootill wrote:Others in the ward can see more people and one even sees the entire ward, but he is on the Bishopric.

Are these "Others" in a leadership position as well? The directory knows your calling and displays the appropriate information. From what you describe, I think no one in your ward has "opted in".

Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:35 am
by philiptootill
Yes the "others" are in leadership positions but so am I. If no one has opted-in how can two personal friends of mine see loads of other people? The strange thing is that I see many people in other wards within the Stake, just not my own.

Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:59 am
by aebrown
philiptootill wrote:Yes the "others" are in leadership positions but so am I. If no one has opted-in how can two personal friends of mine see loads of other people? The strange thing is that I see many people in other wards within the Stake, just not my own.
Well, not all leadership positions are created equal. The basic principle in the EU is that all those who don't have special viewing permissions because of their specific callings can see only those members who have opted in on allowing their information to be displayed.

Regarding callings, the first thing to check is that your calling is entered properly in MLS and has propagated to CDOL as a standard calling. If you don't have permissions to check those things, your ward clerk can check it. If those appear to be correct, then the next question is whether the Directory application considers your calling one that should be able to view all members. It's unfortunately tough to know the answer to that, outside of obvious callings like bishopric members, ward clerk, and executive secretary.

Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:20 am
by apbunting
I'm having the same problem. I'm the Elders Quorum President for my branch and I would like to be able to move from Ward Tools to LDS Tools. Is there any plan to revise the callings that have access to non-opted in members information. Most ward set up access to MLS for the Elders Quorum Presidency so that they can organise and record home teaching so it seems a bit bizarre to say that they can't have access via the web/mobile tools.

Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:49 am
by aebrown
apbunting wrote:I'm having the same problem. I'm the Elders Quorum President for my branch and I would like to be able to move from Ward Tools to LDS Tools. Is there any plan to revise the callings that have access to non-opted in members information. Most ward set up access to MLS for the Elders Quorum Presidency so that they can organise and record home teaching so it seems a bit bizarre to say that they can't have access via the web/mobile tools.
Since LDS Tools doesn't have any support for home teaching at this point, and the reason the EQ Presidency has access to MLS is for home teaching, I don't see how it is "bizarre" that LDS Tools doesn't give the EQ presidency any special access to LDS Tools.

When home teaching gets added to LDS Tools, then the underlying web services that gather data will be extended to include home teaching data, and access to those will be extended to people with callings who need access. Until then, I don't see what's wrong with the current implementation.

Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:57 am
by eblood66
aebrown wrote:Since LDS Tools doesn't have any support for home teaching at this point, and the reason the EQ Presidency has access to MLS is for home teaching, I don't see how it is "bizarre" that LDS Tools doesn't give the EQ presidency any special access to LDS Tools.

When home teaching gets added to LDS Tools, then the underlying web services that gather data will be extended to include home teaching data, and access to those will be extended to people with callings who need access. Until then, I don't see what's wrong with the current implementation.

I was about to post a very similar message to this when I realized that apbunting is talking about access to non-opted in member information. It is true that bishopric and clerks have access to that information in LDS Tools (since it is based on the same web services used for the directory portion of lds.org). I can see why an Elder Quorum presidency would feel they need access to that information. I would have wanted it when I was EQ secretary.

I have not heard of any plan to expand the leaders who have access to the non-opted in member information. It may be that privacy laws require this access be very restricted but it couldn't hurt to submit feedback on lds.org requesting access for quorum and auxiliary presidencies (or at least presidents).

Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 10:09 am
by apbunting
Having read back through my post I can see why it was thought that I wanted access to Home Teaching information, but eblood66 is correct in saying that what I meant was that it would be good to have access to contact information.