I seem to remember, way back when I was a newbie genealogist, that we abbreviated county names if they were long. Usually 4 letters, often leaving out the vowels. This may be an abbreviation of England's equivelant of a county. Looking at my mother-in-law's Book of Remembrance, she has some family group sheets copyrighted 1972, with a separate column for county that is very, very small. There are also group sheets copyrighted 1941 which has one column for city and county, and a separate column for state or country. Alice Allen Oakhurst Ward Family History Consultant Vancouver WA Stake Portland OR Temple District *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 4/14/2009 at 5:33 AM slandersen51@att.net wrote: >A web search shows this info at this site > >http://www.webpak.net/~cdm2/kimball/pafg75.htm Perhaps you can get in >touch with this person and see if they know what or where "Spsm" is.  I >wonder if it might be a battle field. > >Susan Andersen, Lancaster, Ohio >  >

One reason I see a need for time limits on family files for names is the number of new converts in my ward who are working on their family history. For the most part, they are coming in singly (either because they are single, once again single, and/or their children are adult and in different households, although a few convert members who've been in longer came in without their spouses.) None of us knows how long we've got here on earth before we graduate from the school of life and move forward to other responsibilities. If any of my flock of single new members die, what happens to the unfinished names that they've begun? (Some of them can not yet do the endowment work themselves because they haven't been in the Church long enough.) The unfinished work will hang indefinitely, if there is not a reasonable time limit before names can again be released to the general membership for other, perhaps more distant, relatives to find and finish. Karen **************Why pay full price? Check out this month's deals on the new AOL Shopping. (http://shopping.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntinstor00000001)

Kathy wrote: As a consultant who is in the process of starting members, old and new, off onto nFS, would it be a wise thing, when the moment arises, to suggest to them that they limit the number of their requests for doing the ordinance work? Following are the current instructions in New FamilySearch: Guidelines for Reserving Ordinances As you reserve ordinances, be aware of a few guidelines. * Reserve ordinances only if you feel reasonably sure that you can get them done. It is recommended that you reserve only enough ordinances for a few trips to the temple. * Before you reserve ordinances for individuals who were born in the last 95 years, please get permission from the closest living relative. The closest living relatives are, in this order: spouse, then children, then parents, then siblings. * There is no limit on the amount of time that ordinances can be on your reserved list, but try to get them done in a timely manner. * If you have many ancestors who need ordinances, we recommend that you do not print large numbers of family ordinance cards to give to others. It is very easy for cards to be lost. And even though you can reprint lost cards, there is a risk that the ordinances will be done again if the original cards are found. Instead, we recommend that you add your ancestors to FamilySearch. Do not reserve the ordinances. Encourage your relatives to use FamilySearch to select and reserve the ordinances that they would like to do. Note: You can still print cards and give them to others, but we recommend that you print only small numbers to use in situations like these: o The people who help you with ordinances do not use the Internet. o The people who help you with ordinances live in a temple district where FamilySearch is not yet available. o People will help you with ordinances only if you give them cards. o If you reserve ordinances and then find that you cannot do them, please use FamilySearch to request that the temple provide the proxies for you. Hope this is helpful, Jill Crandell

The Ancestry Insider's blog this morning has a widget he has created which lists all the records the church has put online through the FamilySearch Indexing program; and links right to them. Much easier than going through Labs or FamilySearch.org. http://ancestryinsider.blogspot.com/2009/04/latest-record-search-collections.html<http://ancestryinsider.blogspot.com/2009/04/latest-record-search-collections.html> It also has a similar list of all the records at ancestry.com. I really enjoy the blog. If you don't subscribe, you might want to check it out. Doris Bateman

Doris, You can go right to Record search at: pilot.familysearch.org Then you can click on the region you would like to search. The ones with red stars are new collections or additions to a collection. Kathy Portland, OR On 4/14/09, DORIS BATEMAN <Jenealogist66@msn.com> wrote: > > The Ancestry Insider's blog this morning has a widget he has created which > lists all the records the church has put online through the FamilySearch > Indexing program; and links right to them. Much easier than going through > Labs or FamilySearch.org. > > > http://ancestryinsider.blogspot.com/2009/04/latest-record-search-collections.html > < > http://ancestryinsider.blogspot.com/2009/04/latest-record-search-collections.html > > > > It also has a similar list of all the records at ancestry.com. I really > enjoy the blog. If you don't subscribe, you might want to check it out. > > Doris Bateman >

The one with "spms" is Philip Despenser, titled Baron Despenser, born about 1365 of Nettleshead, Suffolk, England. The "spms" is in the death place field. The one with "spm" is Robert Tiptoft, titled Baron Tybotot, born about 1340 also of Nettleshead. The "spm" is in the death place field. I looked them both up in nFS, and amongst the many combinations, both abbreviations show, so that means that it must have come from AF or PRF, right? Does this help? Joan in NC On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Jorge Todeschini < jorgetodeschini@hotmail.com> wrote: > Maybe the Latin is not "out to lunch." Who put the abbreviations there? > They > might not have known what it meant, either, and just assumed it might be a > place. Or they might have known, but could not think of another place to > put > (such as source or notes). > > I think it boils down to "where did this information come from?" > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Peter" <Family.History.Research@shaw.ca> > Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 1:27 PM > To: <lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com> > Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] ReDo: Help with abbreviations > > > At 07:51 AM 13/04/2009, you wrote: > >>OK everyone; this is open again - With the abbreviations in place name > >>fields then the Latin is out to lunch. Personally I have no idea what > >>place SPMS or SPM might be. > >> David, San Diego District > >> > >>---- Joan Raney <joanie13@gmail.com> wrote: > >>Does anyone know what the following abbreviations mean? > >> > > SPMS > >> > > SPM > >>and later ---- Joan Raney <joanie13@gmail.com> wrote: > >> They are in place name fields in some PAF data I'm looking at. It > >> doesn't look like any place abbreviations I've seen before, so that's > why > >> I asked the list. Sorry I didn't clarify where I saw the abbreviations. > >> Joan in NC > > > > Joan, maybe if you let us know the surnames and other places for this > > family maybe that will provide clues or at least will narrow down the > > possibilities? > > > > > > Groetjes > > Peter > > > > "Dutch Indians wear wooden moccasins" > > - Fred J. Eaglesmith > > > > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

--- On Tue, 4/14/09, Marian Mallder <mcm410@msn.com> wrote: << I think we need to take into consideration that some are part member families or widows/widowers, and when we clear names we get those whom weknow aren't gonig to be done in a timely matter. I have handfulls of male names who are waiting for some kind soul in my ward to help, but no one is willing. ... I have always supported the youth temple trips by supplying names therefore I have lots waiting for the rest of the ordinances to be completed. >> One of the things I like best about NFS is that I can have the youth do all the baptisms, save a few ordinances for me and my husband, then have the remainder go to other temples.  The work is completed in a timely manner and I have the satisfaction of having helped our youth and my family. This feature has been especially helpful for older widowed or single members of my ward.  Carol Riner Everett  Cary, NC

I think we need to take into consideration that some are part member families or widows/widowers, and when we clear names we get those whom we know aren't gonig to be done in a timely matter. I have handfulls of male names who are waiting for some kind soul in my ward to help, but no one is willing. I have always supported the youth temple trips by supplying names therefore I have lots waiting for the rest of the ordinances to be completed. I'll keep doing it a family at a time, or picking up those dangling people. I am 3 1/2 hrs from my temple, and also a missionary, so my personal time to do ordinances is at a standstill at this time. It's great when you have a large family who are members, but a lot of us don't have that blessing and we struggle to get the work done, having it started is worth a lot for us. Marian in iowa ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jill N. Crandell" <jncrandell@broadweave.net> To: <lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 9:28 PM Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] stealing names thought > Michele wrote: > I do think there should be a time limit on these names.....I have quite a > few in my own families and I'm not unhappy someone else has submitted > them, > but I think it's unfair to submit names and let them sit, half completed > for years. Not fair to the deceased!! > Jill Crandell > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Joan, Now that you give the names, I recognize those abbreviations because that is part of my family, too. It is from Ancestral File. The submitter is: MEDIEVAL FAMILIES Microfilm: NONE C/O FAMILY HISTORY DEPARTMENT 50 E NORTH TEMPLE STREET SALT LAKE CITY, UT Submission: AF89-101516 USA 84150 I think I heard what it meant but don't remember. You could check with the Medieval Unit in Salt Lake and they would know. Kathy Taylor Portland, OR The one with "spms" is Philip Despenser, titled Baron Despenser, born about 1365 of Nettleshead, Suffolk, England. The "spms" is in the death place field. The one with "spm" is Robert Tiptoft, titled Baron Tybotot, born about 1340 also of Nettleshead. The "spm" is in the death place field.

  Maybe the Citation here might shed some light on where Philip died.  Sir Philip Le Despenser M, b. circa 1365, d. 20 June 1424      He married Elizabeth De Tibetot.1 Philip was born circa 1365.1 Philip died on 20 June 1424.1 Child of Sir Philip Le Despenser and Elizabeth De Tibetot * Margery Despenser+ d. c 1478 Citations 1. [S39] Frederick Lewis Weis and Jr. assisted by: David Faris with additions and Corrections by: Walter Lee Sheppard, Ancestral Roots of Sixty Colonists~who came to New England between 1623 and 1650 The lineage of Alfred the Great, Charlemagne, Malcolm of Scotland, Robert the Strong, and some of their Descendants , pg 165. ________________________________ From: Joan Raney <joanie13@gmail.com> To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 8:20:51 AM Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] ReDo: Help with abbreviations The one with "spms" is Philip Despenser, titled Baron Despenser, born about 1365 of Nettleshead, Suffolk, England.  The "spms" is in the death place field. The one with "spm" is Robert Tiptoft, titled Baron Tybotot, born about 1340 also of Nettleshead.  The "spm" is in the death place field. I looked them both up in nFS, and amongst the many combinations, both abbreviations show, so that means that it must have come from AF or PRF, right? Does this help? Joan in NC On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Jorge Todeschini < jorgetodeschini@hotmail.com> wrote: > Maybe the Latin is not "out to lunch." Who put the abbreviations there? > They > might not have known what it meant, either, and just assumed it might be a > place. Or they might have known, but could not think of another place to > put > (such as source or notes). > > I think it boils down to "where did this information come from?" > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Peter" <Family.History.Research@shaw.ca> > Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 1:27 PM > To: <lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com> > Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] ReDo:  Help with abbreviations > >  > At 07:51 AM 13/04/2009, you wrote: > >>OK everyone; this is open again - With the abbreviations in place name > >>fields then the Latin is out to lunch. Personally I have no idea what > >>place SPMS or SPM might be. > >>      David, San Diego District > >> > >>---- Joan Raney <joanie13@gmail.com> wrote: > >>Does anyone know what the following abbreviations mean? > >> > > SPMS > >> > > SPM > >>and later ---- Joan Raney <joanie13@gmail.com> wrote: > >>      They are in place name fields in some PAF data I'm looking at.  It > >> doesn't look like any place abbreviations I've seen before, so that's > why > >> I asked the list.  Sorry I didn't clarify where I saw the abbreviations. > >>      Joan in NC > > > > Joan, maybe if you let us know the surnames and other places for this > > family maybe that will provide clues or at least will narrow down the > > possibilities? > > > > > > Groetjes > > Peter > > > >                                  "Dutch Indians wear wooden moccasins" > >                                                - Fred J. Eaglesmith > > > > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

A web search shows this info at this site http://www.webpak.net/~cdm2/kimball/pafg75.htm Perhaps you can get in touch with this person and see if they know what or where "Spsm" is.  I wonder if it might be a battle field. Susan Andersen, Lancaster, Ohio   ________________________________ From: Joan Raney <joanie13@gmail.com> To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 8:20:51 AM Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] ReDo: Help with abbreviations The one with "spms" is Philip Despenser, titled Baron Despenser, born about 1365 of Nettleshead, Suffolk, England.  The "spms" is in the death place field. The one with "spm" is Robert Tiptoft, titled Baron Tybotot, born about 1340 also of Nettleshead.  The "spm" is in the death place field. I looked them both up in nFS, and amongst the many combinations, both abbreviations show, so that means that it must have come from AF or PRF, right? Does this help? Joan in NC On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Jorge Todeschini < jorgetodeschini@hotmail.com> wrote: > Maybe the Latin is not "out to lunch." Who put the abbreviations there? > They > might not have known what it meant, either, and just assumed it might be a > place. Or they might have known, but could not think of another place to > put > (such as source or notes). > > I think it boils down to "where did this information come from?" > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Peter" <Family.History.Research@shaw.ca> > Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 1:27 PM > To: <lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com> > Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] ReDo:  Help with abbreviations > >  > At 07:51 AM 13/04/2009, you wrote: > >>OK everyone; this is open again - With the abbreviations in place name > >>fields then the Latin is out to lunch. Personally I have no idea what > >>place SPMS or SPM might be. > >>      David, San Diego District > >> > >>---- Joan Raney <joanie13@gmail.com> wrote: > >>Does anyone know what the following abbreviations mean? > >> > > SPMS > >> > > SPM > >>and later ---- Joan Raney <joanie13@gmail.com> wrote: > >>      They are in place name fields in some PAF data I'm looking at.  It > >> doesn't look like any place abbreviations I've seen before, so that's > why > >> I asked the list.  Sorry I didn't clarify where I saw the abbreviations. > >>      Joan in NC > > > > Joan, maybe if you let us know the surnames and other places for this > > family maybe that will provide clues or at least will narrow down the > > possibilities? > > > > > > Groetjes > > Peter > > > >                                  "Dutch Indians wear wooden moccasins" > >                                                - Fred J. Eaglesmith > > > > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

That makes sense. Thank you for sharing. Wish there was some official or public way they could get these FAQ answered for us rather than randomly through lists like this. Michele In a message dated 4/13/2009 10:45:56 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Jenealogist66@msn.com writes: In regards to the recent discussion about a time limit for names, I attended a Family History Conference Saturday, March 7th in Bountiful. The keynote speaker was Don R Anderson, who is the head of the Family History Library and Family History support. I also took 2 other classes taught by him. In one of the classes, he was asked this very question, if the church would ever set a time limit when cards people hold would "expire" and become available for some one else to do. He answered that this had been discussed at length by the church, that they were aware of the problem, and that they knew that something had to be done to solve it. He said that the problem of what a reasonable time limit might be is very different in different areas of the world. On the Wasatch Front it might be a year or two, in the Philippines that if a member saved all his income that was not essential to sustain life, he could only expect to get to the temple every six years. He said that they ha! d pretty much decided to have a time limit and that it would be set by the temple involved according to the needs of the members in that district; but it would be a while before we hear more about it, as this is not the top priority right now; the rollout problems are the top priority. Doris Bateman ----- Original Message ----- From: W. David Samuelsen<mailto:dsam52@sampubco.com> To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com<mailto:lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 10:13 PM Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] Time limit JCBrooks@aol.com<mailto:JCBrooks@aol.com> wrote: Not sure how many of > the Brethren have actually used NFS recently...and especially since it > hasn't been rolled out in SLC!! Every one of the Brethren already has access, much like the consultants were called in earlier than the rollouts. > For instance, didn't we recently hear that the initiation of NFS came when > Pres. Hinckley heard about all the duplications from his HP Group Leader > and went to the office and said "Fix it?" Pres. Hinckley became aware of the problem going back to late 1980s when there was a huge rush to have ordinances done without checking the IGI. I can tell you there were hundreds of my ancestors getting theirs ordinances done twice or more in just that 10 year span from 1983 to 1995. But this time limit one seems to be generally overlooked. They didn't overlook this one. It was brought up during the beta testing when I asked about this problem, this was 1 year before the rollout to first 5 temple districts. > I still don't think it's wrong to suggest that there should be a time > limit. Heck, some of my names were baptized in 1996 and are still sitting. > I'm sure the name slips are long lost. There really should be a method for > the computer in the sky to find names that have been sitting 5-10 years and > move them to "ready" in NFS. The serious problem right now is the conversions of family names in the rolled in temple districts. My friend has more than 150 of them in Oakland Temple. Once converted from old system, they can not be purged if duplicates are found in nFS and merged. Just STUCK in in that limbo. I am looking at the reprinted cards from that "Reprint Family Ordinance Requests and Family Ordinance Cards" and am seeing a lot that dated way before 2004. The hope is that the engineers have a way to dislodge them once reported instead of dragging. This is different from the FamilySearch Extraction Program where there are literally thousands of them slowly meandering through different temples as the backlogs are caught up until the rollout is complete and the gates open for the families to retrieve the extracted entries earlier to finish. W. David Samuelsen Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM<mailto:LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB. COM> ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com<mailto:LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message **************Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar! (http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000002)

I had 1200. 700 were in "ready" and I resubmitted them. 500 are "in progress" with no method to get them to move forward that I know. Michele In a message dated 4/13/2009 9:13:37 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, dsam52@sampubco.com writes: The serious problem right now is the conversions of family names in the rolled in temple districts. My friend has more than 150 of them in Oakland Temple. Once converted from old system, they can not be purged if duplicates are found in nFS and merged. Just STUCK in in that limbo. I am looking at the reprinted cards from that "Reprint Family Ordinance Requests and Family Ordinance Cards" and am seeing a lot that dated way before 2004. The hope is that the engineers have a way to dislodge them once reported instead of dragging. **************Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar! (http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000002)

David , does that mean if you find a duplicate after x number of years, that could show the completion of the Temple ordinances? Kathy ----- Original Message ----- From: "W. David Samuelsen" <dsam52@sampubco.com> To: <lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 10:52 PM Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] stealing names thought > start looking for duplicates, you might be very surprised. > > I did, and found them in my lines. > > David Samuelsen > > JCBrooks@aol.com wrote: >> I agree that if ordinances are in progress, we should leave them >> alone...but what about those ordinances that have been idle for 5+ years? >> I always >> envision pink and blue slips in the temple suitcases of dead people... >> >> I do think there should be a time limit on these names.....I have quite a >> few in my own families and I'm not unhappy someone else has submitted >> them, >> but I think it's unfair to submit names and let them sit, half completed >> for years. Not fair to the deceased!! >> >> Michele >> >> >> In a message dated 4/13/2009 12:40:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, >> jncrandell@broadweave.net writes: >> >> "mining" the IGI and completing ordinances that someone else had >> researched >> and submitted. >> >> **************Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on >> the >> web. Get the Radio Toolbar! >> (http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000002) >> >> Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to >> LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Jill, my response was not to your message which I found very sound, but Patricia's message which was also very sound....we need to be honest and doing this work is another opportunity for being just that. As consultants we need to be saying the right things to those we help that they can see the rules are important. It is a well known fact that we should not be encroaching on anyone else's direct lineage within the time limit and the importance of it is highlighted in a discussion such as this. Great! Kathy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jill N. Crandell" <jncrandell@broadweave.net> To: <lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 8:39 PM Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] stealing names thought > Thank you all for your responses, but I believe I need to clarify my > comments from this morning. I agree with all that has been said about > feeling possessive of our ancestors and remembering that these are God's > children. I absolutely agree. If I was not clear this morning, this was > not > what I was referring to. I have never resented finding other family > members > contributing to the work. I think that's wonderful! I have never resented > finding work done through extraction. Sometimes that extracted record is > what helps me move through to the next step. > > Realize, I don't have hundreds of names at a time to submit. I come from a > long line of LDS members, as does my husband. It can take me years of work > to locate a handful of ordinances that need to be completed. At that > point, > yes, I want the blessing that is predicated upon the sacrifice. I don't > think that's wrong. What I was describing was a family member who, rather > than doing research in order to provide ordinances for their family, was > "mining" the IGI and completing ordinances that someone else had > researched > and submitted. You'll have a hard time convincing me that that practice is > appropriate. If our family members' work is in progress, we celebrate and > move the work forward for additional family members. I can't think of any > circumstance that it would be loving, kind, honest, or selfless to hurry > quick and do the ordinances for a family member when the work is already > in > process. That is why this experience of mine triggered in my mind in > association with Gay's email question. The cousin was trying to hurry up > and > do ordinance work before the daughter had a chance--the daughter who is > the > nearest living relative and should be doing the work for her own mother. > > My situation was not a close relative, and honestly, I don't resent the > people who did the ordinance work I had cleared. I was sad that I had lost > that opportunity, but I deleted the ordinances left on my cards and moved > on > with more research. I only shared this so that we can all continue to > teach > our hearts out as we train our ward members. We need to teach and respect > the guidelines, and we need to do this work in love for our > families--living > and dead. That's the bottom line, and I hope I wasn't misunderstood > earlier > today. I'm not a resentful person. :-) > > Jill Crandell > > Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

In regards to the recent discussion about a time limit for names, I attended a Family History Conference Saturday, March 7th in Bountiful. The keynote speaker was Don R Anderson, who is the head of the Family History Library and Family History support. I also took 2 other classes taught by him. In one of the classes, he was asked this very question, if the church would ever set a time limit when cards people hold would "expire" and become available for some one else to do. He answered that this had been discussed at length by the church, that they were aware of the problem, and that they knew that something had to be done to solve it. He said that the problem of what a reasonable time limit might be is very different in different areas of the world. On the Wasatch Front it might be a year or two, in the Philippines that if a member saved all his income that was not essential to sustain life, he could only expect to get to the temple every six years. He said that they had pretty much decided to have a time limit and that it would be set by the temple involved according to the needs of the members in that district; but it would be a while before we hear more about it, as this is not the top priority right now; the rollout problems are the top priority. Doris Bateman ----- Original Message ----- From: W. David Samuelsen<mailto:dsam52@sampubco.com> To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com<mailto:lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 10:13 PM Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] Time limit JCBrooks@aol.com<mailto:JCBrooks@aol.com> wrote: Not sure how many of > the Brethren have actually used NFS recently...and especially since it > hasn't been rolled out in SLC!! Every one of the Brethren already has access, much like the consultants were called in earlier than the rollouts. > For instance, didn't we recently hear that the initiation of NFS came when > Pres. Hinckley heard about all the duplications from his HP Group Leader > and went to the office and said "Fix it?" Pres. Hinckley became aware of the problem going back to late 1980s when there was a huge rush to have ordinances done without checking the IGI. I can tell you there were hundreds of my ancestors getting theirs ordinances done twice or more in just that 10 year span from 1983 to 1995. But this time limit one seems to be generally overlooked. They didn't overlook this one. It was brought up during the beta testing when I asked about this problem, this was 1 year before the rollout to first 5 temple districts. > I still don't think it's wrong to suggest that there should be a time > limit. Heck, some of my names were baptized in 1996 and are still sitting. > I'm sure the name slips are long lost. There really should be a method for > the computer in the sky to find names that have been sitting 5-10 years and > move them to "ready" in NFS. The serious problem right now is the conversions of family names in the rolled in temple districts. My friend has more than 150 of them in Oakland Temple. Once converted from old system, they can not be purged if duplicates are found in nFS and merged. Just STUCK in in that limbo. I am looking at the reprinted cards from that "Reprint Family Ordinance Requests and Family Ordinance Cards" and am seeing a lot that dated way before 2004. The hope is that the engineers have a way to dislodge them once reported instead of dragging. This is different from the FamilySearch Extraction Program where there are literally thousands of them slowly meandering through different temples as the backlogs are caught up until the rollout is complete and the gates open for the families to retrieve the extracted entries earlier to finish. W. David Samuelsen Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM<mailto:LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM> ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com<mailto:LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

This is a good reason. However, why in the world did they leave the year 2000 IGI database in place for TempleReady and create almost ten years of duplications? And I assume TR is still using that very same database. That could certainly have solved a lot of unneeded work. Did they discuss that? Michele In a message dated 4/13/2009 8:37:23 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jncrandell@broadweave.net writes: I suspect a big portion of the delay in putting a time limit in place is because of the kinks in the system where work has been done but is not showing. If a time limit were to be put in place, all of those ordinances not showing would automatically be put through the system and duplicated. A major concern is not to create more duplication, so until the kinks are worked out, I don't expect to see a time limit. **************Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar! (http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000002)

Priesthood leaders cannot be aware of every issue without being told. When my husband served as a bishop (several times) and in two stake presidencies, he often commented that "we can only do our best with the information that is given us. It is important for the ward/stake members to let us know and not assume that we already know what the needs are." Sometimes the revelations and inspirations come as other faithful members bring things to our attention....I think we have to assume that it is important for us to give strong feedback on needs such as this...in a nice way of course. It's the same thing as the Lord working through individuals to answer the prayers of the faithful. Unfortunately, there are so many things going on right now with the development of all these programs and trying to bring out new ones that the fine tuning for issues like time limits consistently gets put on a back burner. Michele In a message dated 4/13/2009 8:18:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jncrandell@broadweave.net writes: I still believe that those who are responsible to oversee these things have the stewardship to receive inspiration and revelation to resolve the issues within their stewardship. The question of a time limit has been asked many times, so I believe that there are reasons why no limit has been placed. **************Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar! (http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000002)

Great idea, Jill. I've already forwarded your idea to Katherine. I think from what we've found looking at the lineage, that the connection is probably through one of her husbands and not on the maternal line. But it's sure worth exploring, because she'd really like to do the work, and is as entitled as anybody is...and is certainly closer related to her if it is a connection through one of the husbands (forget if there was two or three...poor woman had a lot of losses in her life.) Karen In a message dated 4/13/2009 10:06:03 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jncrandell@broadweave.net writes: Karen, I just had a thought when I read this email. The Family Tree has a descendant function that works rather nicely. Could you go to the grandmother who was submitted by JSBerry, possibly a generation or two further back, and then follow down the descendancy lines until you see where the Berry family connects? I'm thinking that if you were able to find a Berry descendant, you could look at the current submitters in the Berry line. It's possible that someone from that branch of the family might know who JSBerry is, and they might be able to tell you if he/she is deceased or put you in touch with him/her. It's a thought, Jill Crandell -----Original Message----- From: Sahara346@aol.com [mailto:Sahara346@aol.com] Sent: Monday, April 13, 2009 8:28 PM To: lds-ward-consultant@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LDS-WC] Reserving Mother's Name? This is something similar to my ward member's situation, except it's her grandmother, and we haven't been able to locate the person who cleared the grandmother's name for temple work. Whoever it is, probably is related to one of her husbands, but is NOT doing the work. It's been cleared for a year now, and nothing has been done, and we've tried several things--including writing to the Church Membership Office to try to identify JSBerry (whoever it is) to see if they'll release the name for Katherine to do her grandmother's work. Katherine will be going to get her own endowment done in a month and a half, and would love to seal her mother to her grandmother & grandfather--but that will have to be on hold until we can come up with another way around the situation. I know there was talk of having areas that are relatively close to a temple (US, Canada, maybe Britain) be able to keep a name cleared for only a couple years without progress being made on it and then opening it up again. I hope they do that. If JSBerry, whoever it is, has passed away, then Katherine's grandparents will sit in limbo for who knows how long--til the millenium? While she'd like to have her grandfather done as well, it would mean so much to her to do her grandmother's work. Whoever it is, they're not closely enough related to have been known to her growing up, or now. Karen Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message **************Why pay full price? Check out this month's deals on the new AOL Shopping. (http://shopping.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntinstor00000001)

I generally agree with the principle of obedience in these matters, however to assign the "no time limit" idea to "the Brethren" may be far reaching. "The Brethren," as in the prophet and apostles, give only general guidelines that are interpreted by the worker bees (who are doing their best). Often the Apostles and 70's who oversee this work understand it more on a general level as needs are brought to their attention. Not sure how many of the Brethren have actually used NFS recently...and especially since it hasn't been rolled out in SLC!! For instance, didn't we recently hear that the initiation of NFS came when Pres. Hinckley heard about all the duplications from his HP Group Leader and went to the office and said "Fix it?" To imply that every program and solution should be accepted as straight from the prophet is a stretch. The NFS programmers and workers do their best, but should also be sensitive to the real concerns from the users....and I think they generally try to do that. But this time limit one seems to be generally overlooked. I still don't think it's wrong to suggest that there should be a time limit. Heck, some of my names were baptized in 1996 and are still sitting. I'm sure the name slips are long lost. There really should be a method for the computer in the sky to find names that have been sitting 5-10 years and move them to "ready" in NFS. Michele In a message dated 4/13/2009 7:29:30 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jncrandell@broadweave.net writes: Michele wrote: I do think there should be a time limit on these names.....I have quite a few in my own families and I'm not unhappy someone else has submitted them, but I think it's unfair to submit names and let them sit, half completed for years. Not fair to the deceased!! I agree with your feelings, and yet if this were a crucial problem, I believe the Brethren would set a limit to deal with it. Evidently, it hasn't risen to that level to require a time limit, so the guidelines just recommend an approximate submission size. There are times when larger submissions are appropriate. In my case, I had saved some of the names I had researched because we had a very small window of opportunity to have a cousin baptism session between the time my son was endowed and the day he checked in to the MTC. All of the grandchildren of my parents were together in the temple, with my son baptizing them. It was a wonderful experience for these cousins to share together. Part of my work is also to teach my children and help them understand what this is all about. This was a sacred teaching moment for us. After the baptism session, we didn't have nearly as many endowed members of the family to help with the initiatories and endowments. We began working and totally enjoyed the family time shared with our ancestors. We were looking forward to the sealing session together as well. As it turned out, someone else decided time was up, based on their personal time schedule, and we were not able to finish what we considered the crowning blessing to our efforts. That's ok, we moved on. However, I do think it's important for us to follow the guidelines of the Brethren. When they say there is no limit, it is not up to us to randomly decide what WE think the time limit ought to be. We don't know or understand what is happening on the other end. If/when this becomes a serious issue, I'm sure the inspiration of the Lord will cause a time limit to be put in place. Until then, I still say that we should be obedient to the guidelines and considerate of those who actually created the submission. I don't believe that my ancestors were judging us for the time it took to complete the work. I believe they knew what we were doing and that they were enjoying the temple moments with us. Just my opinion. As for duplicates in NFS, yes, that is the only way to find the work that we had done with this submission. My family began the work, but we deleted the last of the ordinances on that submission because someone else had already completed them. The only way to show that all the work is done is to merge my submission with the other submission. Jill Crandell Please send the one word message SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-L-REQUEST@ROOTSWEB.COM ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LDS-WARD-CONSULTANT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message **************Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the web. Get the Radio Toolbar! (http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000002)