export households from ward directory?

[aebrown]

I have been asked to post the following statement, approved by a manager at Church headquarters with responsibility for products such as the Directory on LDS.org. I hope this will help clear up some of the questions that have been raised in this discussion.

The Church has to be careful about following privacy laws in many different jurisdictions. Because of this, the Directory on LDS.org has been changed so that only clerks, bishopric members, and stake presidencies can access the Export Households functionality. The issue is that once data is exported, the Church no longer controls the data. The Church then becomes legally liable when it has provided a way for data to be exported. Similar data export changes are also being made in LDS Maps and MLS. When other ward and stake leaders need access to lists of members for their callings, they should contact their ward or stake clerk.

[russellhltn]

I'd also add that the Meetinghouse Technology Policy that came out this month says "4.8.3 The use of MLS data and membership information in third party software is prohibited."

Third-party software is defined as "3.10 Third Party Software: Any computer software program that was not created by the Church or is not approved for use on Church computers."

You're probably OK with MS Office/OpenOffice, but that doesn't give much leeway for other programs.

[RossEvans]

I'd also add that the Meetinghouse Technology Policy that came out this month says "4.8.3 The use of MLS data and membership information in third party software is prohibited."

Third-party software is defined as "3.10 Third Party Software: Any computer software program that was not created by the Church or is not approved for use on Church computers."

You're probably OK with MS Office/OpenOffice, but that doesn't give much leeway for other programs.

The scope of that policy is expressly limited to meetinghouse computers:

Scope

2.1 Worldwide: The meetinghouse technology policies defined in this document apply to all meetinghouses worldwide unless otherwise stated.

The policy does not dictate what software leaders may or may not use on their own computers to crunch membership data they might have download from lds.org or exported from MLS. But note that there is a firm prohibition about storing any membership data in the cloud:

4.8.4 The use of cloud-based services for storing and/or backing up MLS or any membership related data is prohibited.

[aebrown]

The scope of that policy is expressly limited to meetinghouse computers:

Scope

2.1 Worldwide: The meetinghouse technology policies defined in this document apply to all meetinghouses worldwide unless otherwise stated.

The policy does not dictate what software leaders may or may not use on their own computers to crunch membership data they might have download from lds.org or exported from MLS.

That's a rather narrow reading of that section. Since the data originates on a meetinghouse computer, I would say that it is still within the published scope to specify what may be done with that data. So it seems clear enough to me that the restriction on using MLS data with third-party software includes any such software on any device.

[RossEvans]

The scope of that policy is expressly limited to meetinghouse computers:

Scope

2.1 Worldwide: The meetinghouse technology policies defined in this document apply to all meetinghouses worldwide unless otherwise stated.

The policy does not dictate what software leaders may or may not use on their own computers to crunch membership data they might have download from lds.org or exported from MLS.

That's a rather narrow reading of that section. Since the data originates on a meetinghouse computer, I would say that it is still within the published scope to specify what may be done with that data. So it seems clear enough to me that the restriction on using MLS data with third-party software includes any such software on any device.

I disagree, obviously. I think the scope means exactly what it says, no more and no less. The the entire document is about "meetinghouse" technology policy, the scope definition says "meetinghouses," and the very definition of "third party software" expressly references software "not approved for use on Church computers." When the policy expands beyond that to regulate use of the cloud, it does so expressly, and if the authors meant to include the scope to include our own computers, they could easily have done so with a few unambiguous words.

I think we should avoid overgeneralizing from the written policy by our own imputation to create unauthorized "policy" that is nothing more than forum folklore. In any case, no one on the forum can settle this question of interpretation because we lack that authority. The policy itself tells us who can interpret it for us:

Meetinghouse Technology Roles and Responsibilities

...
6. Stake President

6.1 Oversees proper use of technology within a stake

6.2 Understands and enforces meetinghouse technology policy

So for my part, I have called my bishop's attention to the new policy, and he can take the matter to the stake president if he needs clarification.

[aebrown]

I think we should avoid overgeneralizing from the written policy by our own imputation to create unauthorized "policy" that is nothing more than forum folklore.

I think we should avoid UNDERgeneralizing from the written policy by our own imputation to create unauthorized "policy" that is nothing more than forum folklore.

I certainly wasn't trying to start an argument. I just wanted to let it be known that there is a different reasonable interpretation of the policy than the one you put forth.

In any case, no one on the forum can settle this question of interpretation because we lack that authority.

The policy itself tells us who can interpret it for us...

On that point, I'll agree with you 100%.

[eblood66]

In any case, no one on the forum can settle this question of interpretation because we lack that authority.

The policy itself tells us who can interpret it for us...

On that point, I'll agree with you 100%.

The policy also indicates that inquiries may be made to the Meetinghouse Technology Coordination Team (mht@ldschurch.org). Doing so might elicit an edit to clarify the intent.

[russellhltn]

The scope of that policy is expressly limited to meetinghouse computers:

I understand your angle, but the question is why would they prohibit use of church data on third party apps on church computers, but be perfectly fine with using it on third party apps on member's machines where they have even less control?

Note that they did not limit the restriction to just "MLS data" but included "membership information". So I don't see how any claim that the directory download isn't covered is going to fly.

I"ll note 4.13.2: "Only Church-approved, licensed software is permitted for installation on Church computers." So in the case of church computers, you can't even have any such software installed much less use it on membership data. So either 4.8.3 is just repeated for emphasis or it was intended to have a broader reach. I suspect the latter. But you raise an interesting loophole that probably should be pointed out to TPTB.

[RossEvans]

The scope of that policy is expressly limited to meetinghouse computers:

I understand your angle, but the question is why would they prohibit use of church data on third party apps on church computers, but be perfectly fine with using it on third party apps on member's machines where they have even less control?

I think the more pertinent question is why, if the authors meant to regulate software used on our private computers in a document all about Meetinghouse Technology Policy, they did not say so. It is a hugely speculative leap to assume that more expansive meaning.

Further, if there is policy meant to apply so generally to members' and leaders' private computers, a document about "meetinghouse technology" is not where I would expect to find it. Such generally applicable policies are more likely to be communicated in the handbook or a letter to unit priesthood leaders.

And in the case of lds.org directory downloads (now for leaders only), that policy would be expected to be stated in the website terms and conditions or the popup dialog that precedes every such export and states the conditions of the download. I just looked at the dialog from the directory download. And, even though the directory website was recently reprogrammed to implement the new, more restrictive download policy policy and the verbiage was changed to say the data "must only by used by Church officers for official Church purposes," there was no mention whatsoever of what software I am allowed to used to consume the exported file. And BTW, I was nowhere near my "meetinghouse" when I accessed the website.

[russellhltn]

Further, if there is policy meant to apply so generally to members' and leaders' private computers, a document about "meetinghouse technology" is not where I would expect to find it.

I agree, but it's not like its never happened before. Check out points 11, 12 and 13 on the 2009 Policies and Guidelines for Computers Used by Clerks for Church Record Keeping.

Edit: asking the STS to enforce it wouldn't be so bad - if the policy was posted somewhere more logical. But I think that document is the only place it's found.