Multiple Cell Phone Support in MLS?

Discussions around using and interfacing with the Church MLS program.
User avatar
bhofmann
Member
Posts: 272
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 9:47 am
Location: Tulsa, OK
Contact:

#11

Post by bhofmann »

thedqs wrote:Thing is how often do people check there email? Email isn't very useful for instant communication that cell phones or radios can provide.
I agree. We are in the wake of the ice storm that passed through the mid west. We have more people without power than with and it has been difficult to track everyone down. Many of the ward members went out of town or even out of state to friends and relatives that have heat and electricity. We are realizing how inadequate our emergency plan is and I wish I had everyone's cell phone. Unfortunately most people don't have email and those that do are more worried about providing food and shelter to their families than checking their email.

I realize we are speaking in general terms in this thread and not in an extreme situation but I sure would like to have everyone's cell phone right now.
User avatar
childsdj
Member
Posts: 258
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:51 am

#12

Post by childsdj »

I hope all is well out there. We are working to get this functionality. I agree that as we are becoming more and more a wireless society. I agree that this functionality should be in MLS.
User avatar
daddy-o-p40
Member
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 1:22 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Individual Phone #'s and Emails gets my vote too!!!

#13

Post by daddy-o-p40 »

Two numbers per household is not enough anymore.

Individual phone numbers gets my support too. While we are at it let's add individual email addresses also.
"What have I done for someone today?" Thomas Monson
geek
Member
Posts: 100
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 6:27 pm
Location: United States

#14

Post by geek »

Just a suggestion for dealing with the combinations of landlines, multiple cell phones, etc.

1. If there is a landline, put it as the primary, and put the wife's cell phone as the secondary.
2. If there is no landline, put the wife's cell as the primary and the husband's as the secondary.

I know a lot of people put the husband's cell as the primary, but I would guess that most calls to a family from the ward are for the wife or children. If the mom is a SAHM, her contact should be listed first.
Former membership clerk under 3 bishops, now on 2nd stint as executive secretary. Can I go back to teaching priesthood now?
scion-p40
Member
Posts: 259
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:56 am

#15

Post by scion-p40 »

geek wrote:Just a suggestion for dealing with the combinations of landlines, multiple cell phones, etc.

1. If there is a landline, put it as the primary, and put the wife's cell phone as the secondary.
2. If there is no landline, put the wife's cell as the primary and the husband's as the secondary.

I know a lot of people put the husband's cell as the primary, but I would guess that most calls to a family from the ward are for the wife or children. If the mom is a SAHM, her contact should be listed first.
This is the primary reason that I don't even give out my landline. It's there only because the internet company (not dial-up) requires it. Telemarketers use it in spite of the "no call" thing. I don't bother paying for voicemail on that line. It only gets answered because it's annoying. I do occassionally send faxes from it. My teenagers and college student and I each have a cell phone. Like others in our family ward, we did not change our area codes when we moved.

I asked my teenagers how their ward leaders keep in touch with them directly: text, email, or cell phone. Having callings in YW or YM in our information age seems extra complicated. Perhaps having a preferred contact method for each person would be helpful. However, that would be a feature for the ward website so each individual can update his/her info.
User avatar
mkmurray
Senior Member
Posts: 3266
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:56 pm
Location: Utah
Contact:

#16

Post by mkmurray »

geek wrote:2. If there is no landline, put the wife's cell as the primary and the husband's as the secondary.

I know a lot of people put the husband's cell as the primary, but I would guess that most calls to a family from the ward are for the wife or children. If the mom is a SAHM, her contact should be listed first.
Boy I have to disagree with this. It seems to me that most of the calls are for the husband. This is the exact problem we are having right now with our Elders' Quorum; they all put their wife's cell phone down as the primary number and it becomes impossible to contact the husbands for anything (including Home Teaching).

I guess it goes to show that you really need individual phone numbers for everyone. I'm not quite sure how to resolve this primary number issue. It appears each individual family needs to make the decision, or at least each individual ward.
russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 34490
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

#17

Post by russellhltn »

geek wrote:If the mom is a SAHM, her contact should be listed first.
SAHM?? Single Adult Home Maker?
User avatar
mkmurray
Senior Member
Posts: 3266
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:56 pm
Location: Utah
Contact:

#18

Post by mkmurray »

RussellHltn wrote:SAHM?? Single Adult Home Maker?
Stay-at-Home-Mom, you silly...
geek
Member
Posts: 100
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 6:27 pm
Location: United States

#19

Post by geek »

My teenagers and college student and I each have a cell phone. Like others in our family ward, we did not change our area codes when we moved.

Not speaking as a clerk, but speaking as an individual -- people need to have at least one local number when they move to a new ward. Not everyone has a cell phone (or even wants to use it), and it's tremendously bothersome to a lot of people when they are asked to pay long-distance charges to call someone who moved in three blocks away.

I seem to see this a lot recently with 801 area codes.

Until the word is truly flooded with cell phones with unlimited long-distance, members should provide wards with a local contact number.

Just my opinion.
Former membership clerk under 3 bishops, now on 2nd stint as executive secretary. Can I go back to teaching priesthood now?
geek
Member
Posts: 100
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 6:27 pm
Location: United States

#20

Post by geek »

mkmurray wrote:Boy I have to disagree with this. It seems to me that most of the calls are for the husband. This is the exact problem we are having right now with our Elders' Quorum; they all put their wife's cell phone down as the primary number and it becomes impossible to contact the husbands for anything (including Home Teaching).

I guess it goes to show that you really need individual phone numbers for everyone. I'm not quite sure how to resolve this primary number issue. It appears each individual family needs to make the decision, or at least each individual ward.


I'll bet you find that if you start using email more frequently, you'll have a better response. I give my cell phone to the families I home teach, but that's it. But, I'll respond to an email at almost any waking hour -- and most priesthood holders I know are that way.

The trend (at least in North Texas) is that you can reach priesthood holders with email, and RS sisters with either email or cell phone.

Plenty of wards nowadays have 95-98% internet access. The faster that wards embrace the internet, the easier their lives will become. (Our ward no longer prints membership lists; instead, we push everyone to lds.org. We email out the bulletin.)

It boils down to being able to register a phone and email address for each family member (you could make it default to a single email/phone for the whole family if that's what they prefer).
Former membership clerk under 3 bishops, now on 2nd stint as executive secretary. Can I go back to teaching priesthood now?
Locked

Return to “MLS Support, Help, and Feedback”