Metis_LDS Posted November 4, 2019 Posted November 4, 2019 Greetings, I am not a Family Search expert. Hopefully someone is on the Board. I agree with the 110 year barrier for doing Temple work for the dead. The big problem I see coming is that it will tick up slowly. I will try to explain the issue please bear with me. Right now if I find a family wtlh 6 children that are all born before the 110 year barrier I enter all the information and book the Temple work sharing it with the Temple to be done as and when they can. My understanding with ordinances shared with the Temple is that it will get done and does not expire. So I have many many names waiting for the Temple to do, so many that I cannot track them the Temple must do this. So basically book with the Temple and go on to the next families. So what happens when I run out of pre 110 year names. I cannot go to each family and book the next years people as the 110 year window moves. So this is the issue it would be a nightmare to go to each family and book whoever was within the 110 year ban over and over each year. For me this would run into very high numbers each year. I am not angry but this will become an issue.
Calm Posted November 4, 2019 Posted November 4, 2019 (edited) I have been getting names sent to me through fsmilysearch iirc telling me someone is ready to have work done (registered, but not doing work at this time). Perhaps there might be a program in place that notifies people a name previously unavailable due to 110 limit is now available. If so, is this still an issue for you? Not sure what your actual problem is, it seems it is the redundancy of having to ask families for eligible names. Edited November 4, 2019 by Calm
Metis_LDS Posted November 4, 2019 Author Posted November 4, 2019 3 minutes ago, Calm said: I have been getting names sent to me through fsmilysearch iirc telling me someone is ready to have work done (registered, but not doing work at this time). Perhaps there might be a program in place that notifies people a name previously unavailable due to 110 limit is now available. If so, is this still an issue for you? Not sure what your actual problem is, it seems it is the redundancy of having to ask families for eligible names. Family Search already sends me names in my lines that perhaps other people have done, when I get these names I always check them out, I just do not click and reserve Temple work. Part of the issue is that it is never good enough to look at just one person, it is best to look at the family as a whole. This is what I do now in my Family Search work. So yes the program can present us with those that need work as they clear the 110 year barrier but then having to look at the family each year will take more time and effort. I do not think advance booking within the 110 years will be allowed and this would create other problems such as having to lock down the record against changes. Maybe some bright spark somewhere in Church admin knows that the way we operate in Family Search will be greatly changed as we hit the 110 year creeping barrier.
Calm Posted November 4, 2019 Posted November 4, 2019 You might want to contact family search themselves to ask about it.
Metis_LDS Posted November 4, 2019 Author Posted November 4, 2019 4 minutes ago, Calm said: You might want to contact family search themselves to ask about it. Yes I am more looking at the big picture. We are kinda of stuck with this 110 year barrier for general research. I was trying to point out at some point it will have a big impact on how we operate in Family Search. Think about when the 110 year limit hits the baby boom births after the war. Every year we will need to approve ordinances for the same families over and over again.
stemelbow Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 You dont have to wait out the 110 years to do the ordinances if you are the closest living relative or are related and get permission from the closest living. If you are not related, of course, then you shouldn't be submitting the names. So you have options
Jane_Doe Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 Going to break this down: The 110 year for non-immediate family is a very good thing. We want to give living "Bob" the opportunity to serve his deceased mom/dad/sister/brothers first and foremost. Baby boom rush: there are billions and billions of people whom have lived on this Earth. We have so many people to serve, that a baby-boom rush honestly isn't going to make much of a difference. As to options for you to do: if you have done all the records going back as far as you can, then start working on cousin branches. There's also indexing and other opportunities to serve. As for Family Search suggesting things: it's a flawed computer program, working with very flawed information. So yeah, strange things happen sometime. 2
Metis_LDS Posted November 5, 2019 Author Posted November 5, 2019 (edited) 9 hours ago, stemelbow said: You dont have to wait out the 110 years to do the ordinances if you are the closest living relative or are related and get permission from the closest living. If you are not related, of course, then you shouldn't be submitting the names. So you have options This permission thing really works well if you already have a knowledge of the person. In Family Search there is a feature View my Relationship I use this all the time if I am not related I leave the people alone. If View my Relationship says I am related to a 100 year old person and I can not find a death date (this happens a lot) then I am not even sure they are dead. If I do find a death date and try to find the closest living relative (assuming I have even the faintest idea who that is) is to say at the least daunting. So yes permission feature is very good. I have not found it practical for 100 year old persons in general Family Search research as pointed out to me by View my Relationships. Edited November 5, 2019 by Metis_LDS grammar
Metis_LDS Posted November 5, 2019 Author Posted November 5, 2019 (edited) 8 hours ago, Jane_Doe said: Baby boom rush: there are billions and billions of people whom have lived on this Earth. We have so many people to serve, that a baby-boom rush honestly isn't going to make much of a difference. Yes of course you are right. Seeing as this is mostly a North American board I wanted to use an example that could be understood by those in North America. I know what I was trying say did not come out right. One more try. I worry that members in the future will not find Family research as enjoyable when you can only approve ordinances on a yearly of maybe monthly rolling basis. Hey I could be wrong but I thought it would be an interest on the board, I see that I might have been wrong about that. Edited November 5, 2019 by Metis_LDS grammar
stemelbow Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 2 hours ago, Metis_LDS said: This permission thing really works well if you already have a knowledge of the person. In Family Search there is a feature View my Relationship I use this all the time if I am not related I leave the people alone. If View my Relationship says I am related to a 100 year old person and I can not find a death date (this happens a lot) then I am not even sure they are dead. If I do find a death date and try to find the closest living relative (assuming I have even the faintest idea who that is) is to say at the least daunting. So yes permission feature is very good. I have not found it practical for 100 year old persons in general Family Search research as pointed out to me by View my Relationships. If you dont know if they are dead then I'd suggest not considering them for submission. I don't think it a good idea to push the boundaries of these rules. Members have been causing problems on these fronts for along time. If your relation is somewhere around 8th cousin twice removed i think that's pushing these boundaries and would likely make it too difficult for you to find the closest relative. Might as well leave such a person for others or wait a couple decades. But I'd also suggest the rule can help you reach out to extended family and perhaps give opportunity to meet some of them. Consider it an opportunity and not an obstacle. I'm not saying that's easy or a solid solution. This can be a bit nebulous. You can find these distant living relatives through family search by using the communication features. But it's what family history research can amount to sometimes.
Metis_LDS Posted November 5, 2019 Author Posted November 5, 2019 57 minutes ago, stemelbow said: If you dont know if they are dead then I'd suggest not considering them for submission. I don't think it a good idea to push the boundaries of these rules. I will try and explain a different way. The point of my reply to you was to say I do not chase 100 year people in family search for temple work. It is too much trouble. SO yeah I am not pushing the boundaries of any rules.
stemelbow Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 34 minutes ago, Metis_LDS said: I will try and explain a different way. The point of my reply to you was to say I do not chase 100 year people in family search for temple work. It is too much trouble. SO yeah I am not pushing the boundaries of any rules. Good to hear. I apologize, after reading back, I realize I was sounding a little condescending as I tried to explain. I didn't intend that.
Metis_LDS Posted November 5, 2019 Author Posted November 5, 2019 35 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Good to hear. I apologize, after reading back, I realize I was sounding a little condescending as I tried to explain. I didn't intend that. Thank You for saying that. I always have problems explaining myself.
mfbukowski Posted November 7, 2019 Posted November 7, 2019 On 11/4/2019 at 3:03 PM, Metis_LDS said: Yes I am more looking at the big picture. We are kinda of stuck with this 110 year barrier for general research. I was trying to point out at some point it will have a big impact on how we operate in Family Search. Think about when the 110 year limit hits the baby boom births after the war. Every year we will need to approve ordinances for the same families over and over again. Think about the siblings of your grandparents as far back as you can then to down their lines to their kids etc. There are billions of people- you just need to find them 1
Metis_LDS Posted November 7, 2019 Author Posted November 7, 2019 6 hours ago, mfbukowski said: Think about the siblings of your grandparents as far back as you can then to down their lines to their kids etc. There are billions of people- you just need to find them It struck me thinking about what you said that when Temple work is done for someone we can now quantify the time and effort it will take (within a reasonable margin). The research part of finding persons who are dead is much more opened ended as to time and effort. Also failure to get vital information information for peoples Temple work happens a lot from my experience. During the 1000 years of peace that we will use to do the Temple work for all the dead perhaps what will eat up time more than work in the Temples will be finding everyone in the spirit world and in all the records still on earth. You can get estimates of all the people who have every lived on earth from the internet and then project forward some. Take that number of people and run a formula based on numbers of Temples (think thousands) and work out how many years based on six days a week (maybe seven???) it will take to to do the work within the 1000 years. At least it is some sort of number to work with. How do we estimate the research time to get the correct information to supply those thousands of Temples. It is a good thing that the Lord himself will be on the earth at that time because resources of nations will have to be diverted into the task. The Temples will be the top of the structure, the base will have to be massive to support them.
Recommended Posts