facebook indexing application

[ldsaaronb]

Just as long as it doesn't become "Numbers is job 1".

What you are talking about is impossible to ensure. You cannot force intent. People will choose what motivates them regardless of the performance measurement (although it is wise to choose a measurement that is in line with the end goal). This is the exact same issue that every mission president and missionary deals with. Should they count baptisms and risk the missionaries becoming corrupted in their pursuit of a number, or should they not count baptisms and risk the missionaries losing motivation. The bottom line is it is up to the individual.

I would caution that the risk of it becoming all about numbers is probably not as big of a deal as it is with baptisms. Indexing is not an ordinance...it is a task that must be done in mass-numbers...as quickly as possible. Yes, it is still spiritual and quality is important, but it is not as sacred as the actual temple ordinances. When it comes to indexing, quantity is the name of the game and this seems to be readily apparent by the challenges that stakes and wards are continually putting out to their members to churn out a certain number of indexes by a certain time.

[atticusewig]

Atticus, it seems you are just mocking the concept. Do you have any relevant data to suggest that facebook would not be a good place to have an indexing application, or is your purpose to simply express your assumptions about the potential utility of facebook?

I'm not mocking your idea, just illustrating that the application would be
affected by where it was hosted. A Facebook App might expose the church
to legal liability (the records indexed are sometimes based on complicated
contracts that limit distribution), could be impersonated by detractors of the
church - imagine a fake indexing App that is malware in disguise targeting
church members, or could be technically limiting.

I'm sure that if those hurdles are cleared, a Facebook App could help reach
the many Facebook users who for some reason wouldn't otherwise use the
current indexing software.

If such an App were to be created, it shouldn't just duplicate the indexing
process, but rather leverage the social aspects of Facebook by allowing
members to tag the records with comments like "Hey, Melvin VanHorn is my
great grandfather and he was a blacksmith, anyone else have blacksmith
ancestors from this time period?" and allow Facebook users to have
ancestorial "friends". Facebook could provide a structure for descendants to
find one another and share their research, rather than just copy the current
indexing process.


-Atticus

[russellhltn]

What you are talking about is impossible to ensure.

Agreed. But the environment will play a large part in either promoting or minimizing the problem. For example, if on FB, the app showed the numbers to everyone, then it would be a major enticement to "race" for higher numbers as opposed only the user sees their numbers and the % completion to a goal.

When it comes to indexing, quantity is the name of the game and this seems to be readily apparent by the challenges that stakes and wards are continually putting out to their members to churn out a certain number of indexes by a certain time.

As long as the resulting quality is usable. If it goes too low, it defeats the purpose of the project.

[ldsaaronb]

I'm not mocking your idea, just illustrating that the application would be
affected by where it was hosted. A Facebook App might expose the church
to legal liability (the records indexed are sometimes based on complicated
contracts that limit distribution), could be impersonated by detractors of the
church - imagine a fake indexing App that is malware in disguise targeting
church members, or could be technically limiting.

Understood, good point. I'm sure you have a better understanding of those contracts and relationships. I'm unfamiliar with those things.

I'm sure that if those hurdles are cleared, a Facebook App could help reach
the many Facebook users who for some reason wouldn't otherwise use the
current indexing software.

Agreed, and in my opinion there are many who would be much more willing to engage in a friendly environment (like facebook) than to take the time to download an app or learn a new website...especially among the youth.

If such an App were to be created, it shouldn't just duplicate the indexing
process, but rather leverage the social aspects of Facebook by allowing
members to tag the records with comments like "Hey, Melvin VanHorn is my
great grandfather and he was a blacksmith, anyone else have blacksmith
ancestors from this time period?" and allow Facebook users to have
ancestorial "friends". Facebook could provide a structure for descendants to
find one another and share their research, rather than just copy the current
indexing process.

I completely agree!! We are probably missing out on some amazing potential for geneological research and networking on facebook. I love this concept and feel it is absolutely worth exploring.

[ldsaaronb]

Agreed. But the environment will play a large part in either promoting or minimizing the problem. For example, if on FB, the app showed the numbers to everyone, then it would be a major enticement to "race" for higher numbers as opposed only the user sees their numbers and the % completion to a goal.

I see what you are saying, there is a balance here. It will probably take testing and time to ensure it's nailed just right.

As long as the resulting quality is usable. If it goes too low, it defeats the purpose of the project.

Yup, agreed. Again, this will probably be a process of testing.

[lajackson]

What aspect of facebook's guidelines would be contrary to an indexing app and all of the privacy that the church would require? I am familiar with the guidelines and do not see an issue here:

http://developers.facebook.com/policy/

I believe that the Family History Department would require things of Facebook that Facebook would not be willing to comply with. And there are a couple of items under Policies II and III that I think may not be compatible. I cannot speak for the church, of course.

As far as the program being converted to an app, you said,

Agreed, it would have to be redeveloped/redesigned

I do not believe the Family History Department would be willing to maintain two different programs, particularly due to the complexity of the existing program now.

I know that many wards and stakes challenge their members to reach a certain number of indexes in a specified time. Why not allow friends to challenge one another with a measurable goal?

While challenges and goals have a place and time, we have been asked not to do this in our area, so this is not something in which we would be able to participate locally.

[ldsaaronb]

I believe that the Family History Department would require things of Facebook that Facebook would not be willing to comply with. And there are a couple of items under Policies II and III that I think may not be compatible. I cannot speak for the church, of course.

Which items...I'm not seeing any issue at all...can you be specific?

I do not believe the Family History Department would be willing to maintain two different programs, particularly due to the complexity of the existing program now.

It's all about the ROI...if enough work was getting done to justify the resources spent they would do it...no question.

While challenges and goals have a place and time, we have been asked not to do this in our area, so this is not something in which we would be able to participate locally.

I'm not sure I understand....your local Stake or Ward leadership has specifically asked its members to not challenge anybody with indexing goals? Did I get that right?

I don't see how that is relevant. If the church came out with an application that incorporated goals on facebook then that would supersede local leadership policies would it not?

[lajackson]

Which items...I'm not seeing any issue at all...can you be specific?

Three items. But, because I cannot speak for the Church, I will not.

It's all about the ROI...if enough work was getting done to justify the resources spent they would do it...no question.

In most cases, yes. Sometimes ROI does not govern decisions because other forces and principles are at work.

I'm not sure I understand....your local Stake or Ward leadership has specifically asked its members to not challenge anybody with indexing goals? Did I get that right?

Not quite. Higher level, and change "not challenge anybody" to "not challenge members to compete with each other" and you would be fairly close.

I don't see how that is relevant. If the church came out with an application that incorporated goals on facebook then that would supersede local leadership policies would it not?

Of course it would. But I do not see that as relevant, either. You and I are talking about different principles and objectives. I agree that the objectives you envision are worthwhile. I do not see the Church going in that direction, however.

I may be wrong, of course. Quite likely, actually. [grin]

[aarastas]

Great Idea...I'd say start basic and build the social aspects as you go.

Simply posting indexing stats from the current application with a link to the indexing page is a fantastic idea that would get people excited about it. (i.e. the way nikerunning.com will allow you to post your run statistics on facebook or twitter.)

Then any facebook app developed could simply add the "competition" aspect to it. It'd only have to do a little math on the stats already provided from the indexing application.