Comparing "Administrator" amoung lds.org tools
Posted: Sat Feb 08, 2014 10:41 am
I have been wondering about how the rights and roles compare across the lds.org tools. Particularity: Calendar, Directory, Maps, Newsletter, and Lesson Schedule. More specifically the rights and roles of the ward and stake administrator. In my limited research I recommend that when you talk about specific you should check the help menu and determine how the administrator can be of help to these great tools. In General it might be a correct statement that the administrator has the rights and role to implement, adjust, and oversee these tools, for the enjoyment and benefit for the members of the Stake and Ward. With the exception of the Lesson schedules which only functions on the ward level. (check the help for how this applies to the Stake Administrators)
- 1. Although in the help sections the list of administrators are written differently, for example in the calendar it might say Bishopric second counselor and in the Newsletter it might say 2nd counselor, or something similar, I am quiet sure that over the whole of the tools it is standardized. (Probably Bishopric second counselor) As long as these callings are entered into MLS as standard callings the correct rights should be given. Right?
- 2. If I understand it all correctly all the administrators( within the Stake or Ward) have identical rights in each tool except for the following. The Ward Website Administrator, the Stake website administrator, and the Building Specialist. Rights? did I miss any?
- 3. One should be aware that if he is a ward or stake website administrator his rights maybe just a little less than the rest of the administrators. If he is a building specialist he will only have rights to the Stake Calendar. Right?
- 4. When you begin talking of the rights and roles to Leader resources and Clerk resources it then becomes important to check the access table. The rights and roles to these powerful tools goes hand in hand with the hand books and the ecclesiastical responsibility of the calling. Right?