New Move-ins not showing up in Membership Directory

Share discussions around the Classic Local Unit Website (LUWS).
User avatar
daddy-o-p40
Member
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 1:22 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

New Move-ins not showing up in Membership Directory

Postby daddy-o-p40 » Mon May 07, 2007 5:27 pm

We have noticed that families which have just moved in are not showing up in the "membership directory" on the ward website as quickly as they did before.

Before the website was 2-3 days behind the records arriving in MLS. We have been watching this since November now and not it is taking a considerably longer amount of time.

I seems that if the families had a prior website registration their records can be delayed as much as six weeks before they show up. Those without website registrations can take two or more weeks.

I have called Membership Support about this and get the proverbial shoulder shrug over the phone.

Does anyone have any tips or remedies for this?

Any help would be appreciated.
"What have I done for someone today?" Thomas Monson

User avatar
thedqs
Community Moderators
Posts: 1038
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:53 am
Location: Redmond, WA
Contact:

Postby thedqs » Mon May 07, 2007 7:19 pm

Seems to be a slight slow down, though I think it is only temporary. Someone who is working on LUWS said in these forums that it should take 1 or 2 weeks for LUWS to get updated.

Could also be that they are increasing times between updates for a transistion to a new LUWS that is global. :D (One can hope)
- David

atticusewig
Member
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:48 am

Postby atticusewig » Tue May 08, 2007 8:25 am

This might be of no help, but there might be two things
to try:

First, check the admin side to see if the records
are there and just have "Don't let anyone see me"
flag active. Doesn't sound like what you describe
(and most people don't activate this flag), but it is
a quick first check.

Second, for the people who are formerly registered
to the prior unit's website, confirm that they have
logged into LUWS and ask which website they are
taken to. This might not help either, but who knows
if it would set an flag somewhere to speed up the
move.

- Atticus Ewig

User avatar
daddy-o-p40
Member
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 1:22 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Postby daddy-o-p40 » Tue May 08, 2007 1:33 pm

atticusewig wrote:This might be of no help, but there might be two things
to try:

First, check the admin side to see if the records
are there and just have "Don't let anyone see me"
flag active. Doesn't sound like what you describe
(and most people don't activate this flag), but it is
a quick first check.

Second, for the people who are formerly registered
to the prior unit's website, confirm that they have
logged into LUWS and ask which website they are
taken to. This might not help either, but who knows
if it would set an flag somewhere to speed up the
move.

- Atticus Ewig


As one of the stake administrators I am aware of that flag. But like you suggested that is not the case.

When these new move-ins log in they are greated with a message like "your stake does not presently subscribe to the online website." It's almost like their registrations are in limbo until some process kicks them off much further down the road.
"What have I done for someone today?" Thomas Monson

atticusewig
Member
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:48 am

Postby atticusewig » Wed May 09, 2007 7:47 am

Okay, I'm probably way off on this one,
but do you happen to know if the families
whose records moved in have "Address Unknown"
listed as their former address ?

If so, that would explain the no-participation message.
It would also explain the slow-down, as the
"Address Unknown" unit would be a super-big
unit, with lots of records in it, much more than
a "real" unit.
There is also rumor that the "Address Unknown"
unit also serves as a place to keep records of
members in areas where Church membership
isn't currently allowed such as Saudi Arabia
or the moon. :D

Now of course, the other possibility is that the
admin of the former unit set to disable their user
account (probably due to bouncing email), and
it is some sort of real-time imposed waiting period.

Of course, this being an official forum - I'm sure
someone can provide an official answer rather
than my floundering attempts to figure out what's
going on.

- Atticus Ewig

User avatar
pbarrus
New Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:47 am
Location: Sacramento, California

Bounced emails

Postby pbarrus » Tue May 22, 2007 8:39 pm

atticusewig wrote:
Now of course, the other possibility is that the
admin of the former unit set to disable their user
account (probably due to bouncing email), and
it is some sort of real-time imposed waiting period.

- Atticus Ewig


As a LAST resort, I have checked off the disable user account box to prevent my email account from receiving a few hundred bounced emails when events are sent out for notification. ...BUT, they still keep coming!!! WHY??:eek:

I have already lost one email account because they thought I was spamming and had to open up another one to "stay in business" as the Stake Web Admin.

atticusewig
Member
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:48 am

Postby atticusewig » Thu May 24, 2007 8:39 am

Phyl wrote:As a LAST resort, I have checked off the disable user account box to prevent my email account from receiving a few hundred bounced emails when events are sent out for notification. ...BUT, they still keep coming!!! WHY??:eek:

I have already lost one email account because they thought I was spamming and had to open up another one to "stay in business" as the Stake Web Admin.


I'm no LUWS designer, but that disable account checkbox could only
prevent signing on to the website, and not affect the email notification
system at all.

If there is a LUWS designer monitoring this forum, PLEASE give the admins
the ability to modify people's email addresses. In the real world, members
just don't update their profiles.

My current workaround to bounced messages is use the
broadcast message feature with the same notification of
the calendar item, get the page that shows all the email addresses,
save the html source, run all sorts of scripts (mainly sed and grep)
on it to remove known emails that have bounced in the past, and
feed the results onto my own bulk e-mail program. I then cancel
the website broadcast message. It takes a few more minutes to
do, but at least I don't get any bounces.

- Atticus Ewig

edwardlalone
New Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 2:17 pm
Location: Orem, UT

Postby edwardlalone » Sat May 26, 2007 12:52 pm

I'm not sure what the problem is here or whether it is global or has been corrected but when I moved to another ward I was able to log into my new Ward's website almost immediately. That is it was less than a week. There has to be something else that affects why certain members or wards are having problems with this because it is not true across the board or at least in my case. Isn't it true that the new ward has to accept the membership record for it to show up in MLS, and then wouldn't they have to export it to LUWS?

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20767
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Sun May 27, 2007 2:15 am

Edward Lalone wrote:Isn't it true that the new ward has to accept the membership record for it to show up in MLS


No. If the old ward sent it to the new ward, the new ward does a send/receive and it shows up. There's no "acceptance" process as far as MLS or any computer is concerned. There's nothing in MLS to notate that the record has been read into the ward.

If the new ward requests the record, then the new ward enters the request into MLS, they do a send/receive and after a suitable length of time, it shows up on a subsequent send/receive.

The only oddities I know of is if the old ward sends the record to "address unknown" or if CHQ can't figure out where to send the record based on the information given. Then some more interesting things can happen.

I have no idea why there should be a delay between MLS and LUWS. Not unless it's a case when MLS only contains the request and the record has not yet been transfered.

User avatar
ShirtsDre
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:53 am
Location: Utah
Contact:

Disabling users blocks them from email broadcast/signin.

Postby ShirtsDre » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:02 am

atticusewig wrote:I'm no LUWS designer, but that disable account checkbox could only
prevent signing on to the website, and not affect the email notification
system at all.

If there is a LUWS designer monitoring this forum, PLEASE give the admins
the ability to modify people's email addresses. In the real world, members
just don't update their profiles.



Please see other thread: http://tech.lds.org/forum/showthread.php?p=4244#post4244
In short, using the disable user in the registered user's list removes the email address from email broadcast lists. It also disables that user's ability to log in. They need to contact the unit admin to reactivate. When this happens, the admin can request that the user update their email address as this was the reason their account was disabled.

This DOES work. If you run into trouble, submit feedback and it will be addressed as time permits.
-- Learn from the past. Prepare for the future. Live in the present. -- President Thomas S. Monson


Return to “Classic Ward & Stake Sites (LUWS)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest