Submissions on New Calendar

[kalnius]

Quick question:

How do members of the ward submit an event on the new calendar for approval? On the old calendar, ward member could submit and event for approval by the administrator (me) and then I would review and approve it, allowing it to appear on the calendar.

I don't see a way for ward members to do this on the new calendar. Do I now have to manually enter all calendar items as the administrator?

Thanks!

[aebrown]

How do members of the ward submit an event on the new calendar for approval? On the old calendar, ward member could submit and event for approval by the administrator (me) and then I would review and approve it, allowing it to appear on the calendar.

I don't see a way for ward members to do this on the new calendar. Do I now have to manually enter all calendar items as the administrator?

This question is answered on the help system at Where's the "Submit Event" button for members who aren't calendar editors?.

I personally don't completely agree with the answer given there, but it is true that distributing event scheduling among multiple editors lessens the impact.

[russellhltn]

The way I see it, the problem with the old system is that most members wouldn't understand the difference between a event that's been approved to appear on the calendar and an event that has been approved by the ward leadership. The website administrator needed to be tight with the bishopric to know if an event had gone through the proper channels or not.

Unless I'm missing something, the new system assumes that the people who will edit the calendar has the authority to update the calendar and will go through the proper channels in getting the event approved by the leadership. There's really no need (that I can see) for the general membership who hold no leadership position to be submitting events.

[kisaac]

The way I see it, the problem with the old system is that most members wouldn't understand the difference between a event that's been approved to appear on the calendar and an event that has been approved by the ward leadership...
There's really no need (that I can see) for the general membership who hold no leadership position to be submitting events.

I agree. Granting access to scheduling "officially sanctioned" events and building resources is a local leadership decision and it should remain as such. A bishop can loosen or restrict who will add calendar events or schedule resources as his inspiration directs, in part by instruction at ward council, and in part by who he places in the callings (default approvers, website admins, etc.) that are granted permissions over the calendar.

[aebrown]

The way I see it, the problem with the old system is that most members wouldn't understand the difference between a event that's been approved to appear on the calendar and an event that has been approved by the ward leadership. The website administrator needed to be tight with the bishopric to know if an event had gone through the proper channels or not.

Unless I'm missing something, the new system assumes that the people who will edit the calendar has the authority to update the calendar and will go through the proper channels in getting the event approved by the leadership.

I agree.

There's really no need (that I can see) for the general membership who hold no leadership position to be submitting events.

I disagree. We've discussed this before (see the thread Beta calendar event submission). That thread gives several valid scenarios where it would be useful for members to submit events. No one is saying that the general membership would submit events that immediately go on the calendar. Clearly, some calendar editor or approver would have to approve the event and add it to the correct calendar. I would also note the fact that this feature is slated to be added (see here) -- if there is no need for the feature, it wouldn't be even considered for being added, let alone specifically mentioned as a feature that will be added.

And lest someone someone think this is purely theoretical, I would note that two days ago -- barely a week into our stake's official use of the new calendar -- this situation came up. A family (a large extended family) wanted to play basketball in one of our buildings for a couple of hours. The building was available. Under the old calendar, they could have submitted a request for the event online, which could then be approved by the building scheduler. Easy and straightforward -- all you needed was access to the Resource calendar, which every member of the stake had. For those who think this feature is totally unnecessary, what would you propose for this family to do under the new calendar? How are they supposed to know what to do? Whom to contact? Such scheduling now requires information outside the website. That's a step backwards.

[jdlessley]

And lest someone someone think this is purely theoretical, I would note that two days ago -- barely a week into our stake's official use of the new calendar -- this situation came up. A family (a large extended family) wanted to play basketball in one of our buildings for a couple of hours. The building was available. Under the old calendar, they could have submitted a request for the event online, which could then be approved by the building scheduler. Easy and straightforward -- all you needed was access to the Resource calendar, which every member of the stake had. For those who think this feature is totally unnecessary, what would you propose for this family to do under the new calendar? How are they supposed to know what to do? Whom to contact? Such scheduling now requires information outside the website. That's a step backwards.

In this situation you describe there is an apparent lack of information for a member to schedule "private" events. With the classic LUWS calendar a member need only contact the website administrator. This was done either by submitting the event on the calendar, by personal email, by telephone, or by email through the feedback system. Now the person has to go to the directory to find out who the website administrator is and then contact them. It can be done but requires a member to be imaginative. It is not direct; and because so, many members will think it is impossible and become frustrated.

Even though a member can contact the website administrator that person may not be the one who is the building scheduler. Does a website administrator have building schduling authority? --It really depends on how the local leadership has defined responsibilities to the callings of website administrator and building scheduler. They may be the same member, and they may be separate. If not the same then addition communication is necessary. Currently it is not possible for a member to find out who the building scheduler is on the website.

[kalnius]

Thanks folks!

It appears that if the members of the ward council are listed as "approvers," then it would be assumed that any events those quorum or auxillary leaders post would have been approved by the bishopric.

In addition, the lead approver could simply keep an eye on the calendar and at the next ward council clarify events on the calendar with all present.

This might reduce the work of the calendar administrator once everybody was on-board and with the groove.

[aebrown]

It appears that if the members of the ward council are listed as "approvers," then it would be assumed that any events those quorum or auxillary leaders post would have been approved by the bishopric.

The whole ward council is not listed as approvers by default. Only the bishopric, clerks, executive secretary, and ward website administrator are full approvers. Any approver can add additional approvers, who have nearly all permissions, except the ability to add additional approvers. Approvers have control over all calendars.

But what will be more typical is for the ward to have several calendars, each with one or more editors. An editor can add or update any events on only those calendars that he or she has been assigned to. An approver makes the assignment of editors.

In addition, the lead approver could simply keep an eye on the calendar and at the next ward council clarify events on the calendar with all present.

The basic philosophy is first-come, first-served, but it's always good to have someone keep an eye on the calendar as a whole.