Uploading Photos of Other Members - BAD IDEA

[jdlessley]

These adults that need help then can ask for it.

How does that solve not being able or not being capable? There are several situations that come to mind that would require an administrator to upload the photo. Without administrators having the rights to upload photos for others there is a group of people who would never be able to have a photo in the directory.

[aebrown]

Unfortunately the issue in this thread is the zeal of those with administrator rights who are not following guidance.

Which happens when leaders make it the responsibility of someone other than the individual to get photos loaded up for the whole ward.

Although that could happen in some cases, by no means is that a necessary conclusion. In my stake, wards that have assigned a specific person to help ward members upload photos have had a better experience for everyone involved. That person knows the privacy guidelines and follows them. When members upload photos by themselves, they often face technical challenges and get frustrated. They also frequently don't understand the optimal procedure for sizing and cropping photos.

So I see no reason to dismiss this very helpful option out of hand by making an assumption that is in my experience entirely incorrect.

[Gary_Miller]

How does that solve not being able or not being capable?

When they ask for help the due to not being able or not being capable. Then and only then do you help them, this could be done through their own lds.org login.

There are several situations that come to mind that would require an administrator to upload the photo.

Name five reasons that would require a photo to be uploaded without using the members log in.

Without administrators having the rights to upload photos for others there is a group of people who would never be able to have a photo in the directory.

What group would that be?

[Gary_Miller]

In my stake, wards that have assigned a specific person to help ward members upload photos have had a better experience for everyone involved. That person knows the privacy guidelines and follows them.

Taking a picture and uploading the photo is not helping its doing. It also give the appearance that it has to be done. Unless you are having the person sign a document that its OK to post their photo the person may not even know they have a choice.

So I see no reason to dismiss this very helpful option out of hand by making an assumption that is in my experience entirely incorrect.

Apparently it is or there would not be complaints about it happening.

[aebrown]

Taking a picture and uploading the photo is not helping its doing. It also give the appearance that it has to be done. Unless you are having the person sign a document that its OK to post their photo the person may not even know they have a choice.

That may be your opinion. But if someone lacks the technical expertise to upload a photo, but would like it to be uploaded, I think it's quite clear that they would consider it to be helping. And one form of that helping that sometimes happens is where the helper sits down with the member to lead them by the hand through the process.

If the Church felt that a signed document were necessary, they would have made that a requirement. I certainly agree that it is important for those who may be assigned to help with photos to make it very clear what the policy is and get consent before helping in any way with the upload process. The guidelines I linked to say that consent must be "their informed, voluntary consent to add their photos to the directory." Amen to that! But according to the guidelines we have been given, verbal consent is sufficient.

Apparently it is or there would not be complaints about it happening.

Um, no, I was speaking of "my experience" which you clearly know nothing about.

[jdlessley]

Name five reasons that would require a photo to be uploaded without using the members Sign in.

Are you saying that other members should ask for and expect to be given another member's account credentials just to upload a photo? (asked with a tone of incredulity) A member's LDS Account credentials are private. No one should ask for another member's LDS Account. Nor should they expect to receive it if they ask for it. What are you going to do when you ask for the credentials and you are denied?

What is the importance of having five reasons to upload a photo without using a member's credentials if only one is needed? But just to humor you, here are just a few. The member does not have an LDS Account, does not want one, will not get one, and wants their photo in the directory. The member has an LDS account but does not feel competent to upload a photo and wants an administrator to do so, and of course they are not willing to disclose their account credentials. The member has an account but does not see any reason why they should be required to upload their photo when an administrator can do it for them. Oh yes, and they are not willing to disclose their credentials. The member does not have a photo they would like published but would like someone else to take a current photo and then publish it for them. And yes, they are not willing to disclose their credentials.

What group would that be?

Those in the first reason I gave above. Then there are those who do not have a computer, smart phone, or mobile device and want nothing to do with them but want their photo in the directory. There is also the aged and the infirm who physically cannot upload a photo but want their photo in the directory. Most likely some, or most, of these people may not have an LDS Account. Even if they did they are not required to disclose their credentials just to have a photo in the directory. If I thought long enough I could come up with more. But that isn't necessary. I think I have made my point.

[russellhltn]

In my opinion its best to just let individuals up load their own photos.

When possible, yes. But the fact is that the church has deliberately allowed selected individuals, based on their calling, to be able to do it. That's not the kind of thing that the developers dream up, but something that has been reviewed and approved.