LDSToronto Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 I've heard mixed reports from around the globe regarding the reading of this letter in Sacrament meetings today:http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/first-presidency-issues-direction-members-names-ordinancesWhat happened in your wards today? Was the letter read from the pulpit or in other meetings?H. Link to comment
Bob Crockett Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 (edited) I've heard mixed reports from around the globe regarding the reading of this letter in Sacrament meetings today:http://www.mormonnew...ames-ordinancesWhat happened in your wards today? Was the letter read from the pulpit or in other meetings?H.Aren't you one of the persons who submitted Holocaust victims' names to the Church, recently, and then posted a boast about it? I'm fascinated to know whether you oppose the Church's ban on such submissions? And how you circumvented the software bar? Edited March 4, 2012 by Bob Crockett 2 Link to comment
LDSToronto Posted March 4, 2012 Author Share Posted March 4, 2012 Aren't you one of the persons who submitted Holocaust victims' names to the Church, recently, and then posted a boast about it? I'm fascinated to know whether you oppose the Church's ban on such submissions? And how you circumvented the software bar?The mods told me not boast about it. I didn't think I was boasting, but I'm not about to argue that point. If there is sufficient interest, I actually wrote the whole procedure up with screenshots and posted it online. However, I will note ahead of time, I am only going to link to the post if requested, so that I am not accused of boastful behaviour.H. Link to comment
divinenature Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 It was not read in my ward today.Would you please share your link with us? I would like to see the screenshots. TIA Link to comment
Duncan Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 we had every other announcement but not this one, I bet though they probably mailed it out and so it may get here next week Link to comment
Stargazer Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 Not here. Olympia, Washington. Link to comment
Buzzard Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 I was at another ward for a baby blessing in SLC, and they read it. Along with the letter about attending the political caucuses in UT on the 13th and 15th. When that letter came up a few nights ago, it was noted that cancelling church activites on the 13th, the night of the Democratic caucuses, was kind of silly. I'd be surpirsed if we have five Dems in our ward. North Utah County and all that. The bishop just chuckled and said to cancel YM/YW anyway. Link to comment
LDSToronto Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 It was not read in my ward today.Would you please share your link with us? I would like to see the screenshots. TIAOK, I am only doing this because you asked:MormonSlidesH. Link to comment
Duncan Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 OK, I am only doing this because you asked:MormonSlidesH.how would they detect someone who died or even survived the holocaust? Link to comment
LDSToronto Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 how would they detect someone who died or even survived the holocaust?There are extensive records available. H. Link to comment
divinenature Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 OK, I am only doing this because you asked:MormonSlidesH.Wow. Thanks! It has been awhile since I submitted any names to temple ready so I didn't remember what the different boxes/pages said during the process. I knew I didn't remember there being a warning about Holocaust names.This is a very simple system. I've been working with it as long as it's been out in my area and as a volunteer in the Family History Center. I see how easy it is to abuse all the time. Link to comment
sjdawg Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I think it is a pretty tough line for the Church to walk. They have to make attempts to protect people who don't wish to be Baptized but at the same time they have to have a system that is user friendly and easy enough for common people who aren't computer experts to use. At some point you just have to trust the membership to do the right thing. Link to comment
LDSToronto Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 I think it is a pretty tough line for the Church to walk. They have to make attempts to protect people who don't wish to be Baptized but at the same time they have to have a system that is user friendly and easy enough for common people who aren't computer experts to use. At some point you just have to trust the membership to do the right thing.This isn't an 'or' scenario. FamilySearch can be easy to use for genealogists of all stripes AND prevent restricted submissions. It's not an unsolvable problem.H. Link to comment
Duncan Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 There are extensive records available.H.it would seem that the system should kick out names of holocaust victims, unless you were a relative but I am not computer savvy enough to figure that out! Link to comment
sjdawg Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 This isn't an 'or' scenario. FamilySearch can be easy to use for genealogists of all stripes AND prevent restricted submissions. It's not an unsolvable problem.H.I'm sure that is true but I certainly don't have enough expertise to recommend a better solution. Link to comment
mfbukowski Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) deleted Edited March 5, 2012 by mfbukowski 1 Link to comment
Pahoran Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 The mods told me not boast about it. I didn't think I was boasting, but I'm not about to argue that point. If there is sufficient interest, I actually wrote the whole procedure up with screenshots and posted it online.However, I will note ahead of time, I am only going to link to the post if requested, so that I am not accused of boastful behaviour.H.I notice you avoided part of Bob's question. Do you, or do you not, oppose the Church's stand on inappropriate submissions such as the one you are obviously so very proud of?So proud, in fact, that you created your own "Inappropriate Name Submissions for Dummies" website.The sort of thing someone would do if they were trying to encourage others to do such things.Regards,Pahoran Link to comment
divinenature Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I think it is clear by the screencaps that any "dummy" is capable of submitting any name they desire without a step-by-step manual. Link to comment
wenglund Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 OK, I am only doing this because you asked:MormonSlidesH.Just because an idea may be well intended doesn't make it banal proof or immune from counter-productivity. Case in point...Thanks, -Wade Englund- Link to comment
LDSToronto Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 I notice you avoided part of Bob's question. Do you, or do you not, oppose the Church's stand on inappropriate submissions such as the one you are obviously so very proud of?So proud, in fact, that you created your own "Inappropriate Name Submissions for Dummies" website.The sort of thing someone would do if they were trying to encourage others to do such things.Regards,PahoranI do believe the church should do something to respect the families of Holocaust victims and survivors. I do not support the notion that the members should be threatened with disciplinary action if they violate policy. H. Link to comment
LDSToronto Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) The fact that Toronto managed it supports your conclusion.Regards,PahoranLOL! I agree! Edited March 5, 2012 by LDSToronto Link to comment
LDSToronto Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 Just because an idea may be well intended doesn't make it banal proof or immune from counter-productivity. Case in point...Thanks, -Wade Englund-I don't understand what you are saying. Please clarify.H. Link to comment
Popular Post Pahoran Posted March 5, 2012 Popular Post Share Posted March 5, 2012 I do believe the church should do something to respect the families of Holocaust victims and survivors. I do not support the notion that the members should be threatened with disciplinary action if they violate policy.H.So you pay lip service to the idea that the Church "should do something," but you want those who do not respect the name submission system and who do not hold the Temple and its ordinances sacred to be free to go on abusing the system for their own idle entertainment.Name submission is based upon honesty. I understand why you might feel particularly threatened by the notion that the honesty of dishonest submitters might be brought under scrutiny. I suggest you deal with it.Regards,Pahoran 5 Link to comment
Recommended Posts