Helen Radkey and name submissions

[rongo]

Just now, USU78 said:

Unless a member who gets disciplined narcs himself out, how would we ever know?

Well, in this day of running to the press when there is discipline, I'm thinking this would be a news story. Complete with cell phone recorded audio . . .  

[Rain]

27 minutes ago, rongo said:

I might be ignorant about this, but can anyone enter anybody's name they want. I thought that you had to a) have good information, and b) be a descendant or family member. 

So, could I go in and enter the names of two high school kids who died at my high school last year? If so, that is news to me. 

The controversy, as I understand it, isn't any longer that ordinances are being performed, but that historical figures' and celebrities' names are being added, even though the Church said that they wouldn't allow that. If there is no way to stop people from doing it, then why has the Church insisted that it is stopping them?

My understanding is that the church doesn't allow ordinances to be done, not that you can't have names in the database.  There are many people who use the database who are not members and have no desire for the ordinances to be done.  

The controversy here is that the ordinances may be done some time in the future.  The title of the article is "Mormons May Consider 4 Jewish Shooting Victims For Controversial Baptism Rite". So really there is no news here, but the title is meant to make you believe there is. 

[rpn]

It wouldn't have to be a hacker.   A few months ago, Ms.Radkey said she found out by using the id of a non-believing church member.   I can see a disaffect person doing it to set up the church (maybe even a really gullible believer?): after all disaffected members and former members loan their TR or make fake ones for others.

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

I might be ignorant about this, but can anyone enter anybody's name they want. I thought that you had to a) have good information, and b) be a descendant or family member. 

So, could I go in and enter the names of two high school kids who died at my high school last year? If so, that is news to me. 

The controversy, as I understand it, isn't any longer that ordinances are being performed, but that historical figures' and celebrities' names are being added, even though the Church said that they wouldn't allow that. If there is no way to stop people from doing it, then why has the Church insisted that it is stopping them?

The LDS Church is only preventing ordinances from being performed for certain classes of people, and they do so very effectively.  Entering names and data into family trees is something people do regularly, and no one is really monitoring that.  This applies to a wide array of systems, Family Search, Ancestry.com, etc.  One can enter false information, just as one can make mistakes, but why would someone do that?

[Robert F. Smith]

57 minutes ago, rpn said:

It wouldn't have to be a hacker.   A few months ago, Ms.Radkey said she found out by using the id of a non-believing church member.   I can see a disaffect person doing it to set up the church (maybe even a really gullible believer?): after all disaffected members and former members loan their TR or make fake ones for others.

Agents provocateurs could indeed create problems on purpose, with or without the cooperation of Helen Radkey, but they could probably be traced and prosecuted for conspiracy, and they might not want to go to jail.  For example, recall the Jews who have been caught putting swastikas on synagogues in order to falsely create a hue and cry against the Nazis.  Could be very embarrassing at best, and mean jail time at worst.

[cdowis]

5 hours ago, rongo said:

I'm wondering if anyone can help me wrap my mind around something. For decades, Helen Radkey has pointed out submissions of names and baptisms for Holocaust victims and celebrities. While I wouldn't put it past Mormons who would love to "do the work" for Mick Jagger or whomever,  it seems to me (from my experience) that it is impossible to just submit random people for ordinances. It is possible to submit and do ordinances for names that are already in the system, but this requires one to lie on the checkbox forms and claim to be a direct descendant.

I have reported this to familysearch support.  After an investigation, they will disable the account that submitted the names if appropriate.

Case 04375500

Edited February 20, 2018 by cdowis

[clarkgoble]

You can with permission submit names you aren't related to. My dad did all his as far back as possible and then from those ancestors as far forward as possible. So he got permission to start doing the work for various family friends who had passed along more than 50 years ago. (None Jewish) He's actually been doing  the work for most of a small town on the border of Alberta / Montana (now sadly a ghost town due to increased security due to 9/11).

Back in the 90's things were much more open. I'd submitted and done the temple work for a slew of relatives. (For several years all the names at the Cardston Temple were names my dad and I had submitted) I'd then actually gone through and collected a lot of scientists names who were more obscure (to most people) but had clearly strived to discover the truth of religion. Gauss in particular sticks with me. I'd submitted his name and vaguely recall doing some of the work for him, although I might be mistaken on that. Gauss is truly a hero of mine in both science, religion, but also for making a place for women in science at a time it was far, far from accepted.

[Jane_Doe]

8 hours ago, rongo said:

Most recently, Helen Radkey has pointed out four Jewish victims in last weeks shooting in Florida have had their baptisms performed. (I can't open the link, but here it is):

So... let me get this straight: crazy person shoots up a school, kills a bunch of people, and absolute tragedy... Ms Radkey want to spend time griping about a few people voluntarily getting dunked?  

Priorities.  

Then again, where are my priorities wasting time thinking of this??...

[Calm]

6 hours ago, Rain said:

Just to clarify - I don't think that it was done by the IT people. I just thought of that as a possibility. With trying to put my uncle in and failing I can't see how any average member could do it with or without permission. 

After reading Robert's post I re-read: 

"The names of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School students Jaime Guttenberg, Alyssa Alhadeff, and Alex Schachter, and teacher Scott Beigel, were submitted into the FamilySearch Family Trees database....

Hopefully this will lead people to the Wikipedia (if not FamilySearch.org itself) which states:

"In the search section of familysearch.org anyone can search for records of an ancestor. Use of the Family Tree section requires a (free) registered account. The Family Tree section allows users to collaborate on a single, shared, worldwide family tree (currently with about a billion names in it).

The resource is maintained to support the process of obtaining names and other genealogical information so that Latter-day Saints can perform temple ordinances for their kindred dead."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FamilySearch

What is suspicious to me is only Jewish names are mentioned when there were nonJewish victims.  Anyone simply submitting names for the database or even in hopes they would be approved for baptism would have included all the victims....so why were just four Jewish names flagged?

Edited February 21, 2018 by Calm

[Calm]

5 hours ago, rongo said:

Well, in this day of running to the press when there is discipline, I'm thinking this would be a news story. Complete with cell phone recorded audio . . .  

Someone admitting they were banned from using the database to improperly submit names?  I suppose they might go public if they were hoping to make the Church look good.

[cdowis]

32 minutes ago, Calm said:

What is suspicious to me is only Jewish names are mentioned when there were nonJewish victims.  Anyone simply submitting names for the database or even in hopes they would be approved for baptism would have included all the victims....so why were just four Jewish names flagged?

This is Radkey's weapon of choice since the Jews (and the church) are very sensitive on this issue.  It has her signature all over this as the perpetrator. 

Edited February 21, 2018 by cdowis

[Calm]

20 minutes ago, cdowis said:

This is Radkey's weapon of choice since the Jews (and the church) are very sensitive on this issue.  It has her signature all over this as the perpetrator. 

I think one needs to establish that these were the only four names submitted first to go there.

It may be Radkey only cares about Jewish names or only uses them because they are the ones that draw the most attention.

[Robert F. Smith]

7 hours ago, rongo said:

I might be ignorant about this, but can anyone enter anybody's name they want. I thought that you had to a) have good information, and b) be a descendant or family member.

Most people who do genealogy and add names to the database have good info, and are related to the family members being added, but that is not always the case.

7 hours ago, rongo said:

So, could I go in and enter the names of two high school kids who died at my high school last year? If so, that is news to me. 

The controversy, as I understand it, isn't any longer that ordinances are being performed, but that historical figures' and celebrities' names are being added, even though the Church said that they wouldn't allow that. If there is no way to stop people from doing it, then why has the Church insisted that it is stopping them?

You are misinformed.  The LDS Church has never said that people's names would not be added to the database.  Thousands of names are added daily to the database by the Family Search computers, and they are very useful to genealogists both in and out of the Church throughout the world.  Records of births, deaths, marriages, censuses, and other info is constantly gathered by the Church and added to the massive database.  Jews, Blacks, and other non-LDS groups worldwide find that very helpful in constructing their own family trees.  With the 110-year rule, the Church makes long-dead names available to the temples on a continuous basis.  The only restrictions apply to Jews and celebrities who are not related to a Mormon.

[mfbukowski]

12 hours ago, rongo said:

I'm wondering if anyone can help me wrap my mind around something. For decades, Helen Radkey has pointed out submissions of names and baptisms for Holocaust victims and celebrities. While I wouldn't put it past Mormons who would love to "do the work" for Mick Jagger or whomever,  it seems to me (from my experience) that it is impossible to just submit random people for ordinances. It is possible to submit and do ordinances for names that are already in the system, but this requires one to lie on the checkbox forms and claim to be a direct descendant. But for Holocaust victims, celebrities, etc., I don't see how it's even possible, but I'm not tech-savvy. 

Most recently, Helen Radkey has pointed out four Jewish victims in last weeks shooting in Florida have had their baptisms performed. (I can't open the link, but here it is):

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/forward.com/fast-forward/394758/mormons-consider-4-jewish-shooting-victims-for-baptism-rite/%3fgamp

This doesn't even seem possible to me, even if some Mormon somewhere wanted to do the baptisms for them.

Can someone explain how it is that people keep submitting names for ordinances that they aren't supposed to? And why the Church can't seem to stop these submissions?

Thanks!

I am not able to imagine programmable criteria for doing that.

Suppose a non-member child tells his parents he wants to join the church, gets killed, and someone asks to do the ordinances.  I am not saying that was the case here.

[stemelbow]

23 hours ago, rongo said:

I'm wondering if anyone can help me wrap my mind around something. For decades, Helen Radkey has pointed out submissions of names and baptisms for Holocaust victims and celebrities. While I wouldn't put it past Mormons who would love to "do the work" for Mick Jagger or whomever,  it seems to me (from my experience) that it is impossible to just submit random people for ordinances. It is possible to submit and do ordinances for names that are already in the system, but this requires one to lie on the checkbox forms and claim to be a direct descendant. But for Holocaust victims, celebrities, etc., I don't see how it's even possible, but I'm not tech-savvy. 

Most recently, Helen Radkey has pointed out four Jewish victims in last weeks shooting in Florida have had their baptisms performed. (I can't open the link, but here it is):

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/forward.com/fast-forward/394758/mormons-consider-4-jewish-shooting-victims-for-baptism-rite/%3fgamp

This doesn't even seem possible to me, even if some Mormon somewhere wanted to do the baptisms for them.

Can someone explain how it is that people keep submitting names for ordinances that they aren't supposed to? And why the Church can't seem to stop these submissions?

Thanks!

I think the work around submission would be easy.  Create a person, put a death date a year earlier than it happened, tie that person into a descendant on the tree and submit the name (which you don't really have to do, I believe).  When the notice comes up to say you have to have permission, you can check yes, and voila, submission.  I know a couple that live near me who do this kind of thing when it comes to names they've uncovered from descendants of their ancestry in Europe.  They basically say the rules are silly and ignore them at every chance, throw in false data all the time so they can work the system.  I don't know if anyone ever has checked their stuff or has tried to get them to stop, and I imagine they do this as learned from others.  

 

But with that said, if anyone does that, the Church has the info to find out from which account it's happening.  It'd be easy to find that out.  The problem might be some random member's account was hacked and someone else is doing it from outside.  Possible, I suppose.  Possible that a dummy member account was created somehow.  The Church can't track down any member with that dummy account and has it closed.  The next time a new dummy member account is created and they start again.  

2 distinct plausible possibilities.  The second seems less likely to me.  

 

[rongo]

15 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I think the work around submission would be easy.  Create a person, put a death date a year earlier than it happened, tie that person into a descendant on the tree and submit the name (which you don't really have to do, I believe).  When the notice comes up to say you have to have permission, you can check yes, and voila, submission.  I know a couple that live near me who do this kind of thing when it comes to names they've uncovered from descendants of their ancestry in Europe.  They basically say the rules are silly and ignore them at every chance, throw in false data all the time so they can work the system.  I don't know if anyone ever has checked their stuff or has tried to get them to stop, and I imagine they do this as learned from others.  

I don't understand what some people are thinking. If you believe that the work is real (that there really is a spirit world, and that the Church really was restored), how could you put in fake dates and fudge other things to "get around the system" so that you can "do their work for them" and think that it's valid or okay? A basic tenet from Joseph Smith's revelations is that the records are vitally important and need to be correct. I believe that God will "wink at our ignorance," and that he will compensate for us doing our best (i.e., honest errors will be corrected), but when these errors are blatant and intentional to game the system? What do people think they are gaining by that?

It seems a lot to me like lying about big things to get a temple recommend, but believing that ordinances so gotten will be ratified by the Holy Spirit of Promise.

I really don't get what goes through some people's minds . . . 

[stemelbow]

11 minutes ago, rongo said:

I don't understand what some people are thinking. If you believe that the work is real (that there really is a spirit world, and that the Church really was restored), how could you put in fake dates and fudge other things to "get around the system" so that you can "do their work for them" and think that it's valid or okay? A basic tenet from Joseph Smith's revelations is that the records are vitally important and need to be correct. I believe that God will "wink at our ignorance," and that he will compensate for us doing our best (i.e., honest errors will be corrected), but when these errors are blatant and intentional to game the system? What do people think they are gaining by that?

It seems a lot to me like lying about big things to get a temple recommend, but believing that ordinances so gotten will be ratified by the Holy Spirit of Promise.

I really don't get what goes through some people's minds . . . 

Perhaps some people think it doesn't matter so much, because God is in charge and he'll take care of it.  But what is important to them is that they get ordinances done for people no matter what.  SOmetimes, in some family's trees, I think people are having a hard time to find new names.  

Also, the Church encourages estimating in order for people to submit names.  So members see that, I assume, and think it's not important to have it all accurate or accountable.  

Or as I said, since most member's don't have familysearch accounts, there are millions of membership ID numbers a hacker can choose from, use, and discard.  It's possible, and I wouldn't put it past some folks (take the new name noah guy, who did something similar to get into temples, for instance).  

 

[Jeanne]

I promise...I am not being snarky on this LDS board...I would like to know if anyone but me believes that any and/or all of this said Temple work is absolutely necessary to be with your family?  I don't want a fight or argue or anything.

[Calm]

Jeanne, Do you mean the ordinances need to be in place for people to be able to function on a Celestial and then exalted level, acting under the direction of God to fulfill his Work and Glory?

If so, yes.  I believe that.  Ordinances are part of God's covenant making.  I don't know why he insists upon them (I suspect they have power to affect us in ways we don't understand; think more of building a house for yourself rather than just having someone else build it for you even if the plans are provided by others, not only does living in the house become a different experience, but the process of building includes learning how to build, what works, what doesn't, what adds beauty, what detract, we become informed about what goes on underneath the superficial structure), I do believe he does.  Making contracts, promises, bonds seemed to me to be natural to humanity and when one lives in a way that fulfills such things, their lives seem more balanced and functional to me.  Covenants are to me the highest form of promisemaking.

Edited February 21, 2018 by Calm

[Thinking]

The Church is in an impossible situation. On the one hand it is trusting its members to follow the guidelines, but we all know people who think they are the exception to the rules. There is no way that the Church's IT department can keep track of everybody who has recently died so that their (sorry Scott) work is processed correctly. I think that the only way to fix this problem is to administer church discipline to those who are caught submitting names of non-ancestors.

[The Nehor]

4 minutes ago, Thinking said:

The Church is in an impossible situation. On the one hand it is trusting its members to follow the guidelines, but we all know people who think they are the exception to the rules. There is no way that the Church's IT department can keep track of everybody who has recently died so that their (sorry Scott) work is processed correctly. I think that the only way to fix this problem is to administer church discipline to those who are caught submitting names of non-ancestors.

So if this goes like church discipline has recently we will end up with a 70 year old woman tape recording a conversation with her bishop explaining why she wrongfully listed her parakeet Snookums as her great great grandmother to ensure the bird exaltation.

That sounds amazing. I support this plan.

[Calm]

8 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

So if this goes like church discipline has recently we will end up with a 70 year old woman tape recording a conversation with her bishop explaining why she wrongfully listed her parakeet Snookums as her great great grandmother to ensure the bird exaltation.

That sounds amazing. I support this plan.

Okay, that would be pretty impressive...even if quite wrong on various levels.

[ttribe]

16 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

So if this goes like church discipline has recently we will end up with a 70 year old woman tape recording a conversation with her bishop explaining why she wrongfully listed her parakeet Snookums as her great great grandmother to ensure the bird exaltation.

That sounds amazing. I support this plan.

I declare The Nehor the winner of this thread!

[The Nehor]

15 minutes ago, Calm said:

Okay, that would be pretty impressive...even if quite wrong on various levels.

I got asked way too many time on my mission to baptize someone’s pet. Some of the requests were from members. 

[USU78]

26 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

So if this goes like church discipline has recently we will end up with a 70 year old woman tape recording a conversation with her bishop explaining why she wrongfully listed her parakeet Snookums as her great great grandmother to ensure the bird exaltation.

That sounds amazing. I support this plan.