Profile Management Issue

I am concerned about the way management of profiles is currently being handled. Specifically, any notifications for management functions (such as requests for management, or invitations to join Projects, or Discussion tagging) are going to a black hole if the primary manager has abandoned his tree.

If the profile only has one manager, it can be reported as abandoned - but all of the requests and correspondence already sent to the first manager just continue to sit out there in deep space somewhere. The first manager is not around to act on them, the new manager doesn't know they exist. Once reported and a new manager is assigned, the new manager sits in a subsidiary position and STILL does not receive management notifications. What, then is the point of reporting the original manager and assigning a new one?

If the profile has multiple managers the option to report does not appear, so other users may not be aware that there actually is no one actively managing the profile. Again, management notifications go to limbo.

If I check the primary manager of a profile with multiple managers - which is in itself an unwieldy process - and report the primary as abandoned, later management notifications continue to go to that primary - and cannot then be resolved.

This problem defeats the whole purpose of profile management and needs to be addressed.

You are partly wrong: Don't look at the profiles, only the profiles of the managers. If the manager has not logged in for over 9 months you will get an Abandoned Account option in the Actions menu, which will add the closest active family group member as a manager you can invite to collaborate to get full access. However: On single manager profiles you will get the same option, but it goes on the status of the manager, not the profile itself (if it does matter).

I understand what you're saying, Bjorn, but I don't understand how that addresses the issue of management notifications being sent to inactive accounts and not re-routed when a new manager comes on board.

Again, although what you're proposing (requesting collaboration with the new manager) is a viable workaround, it's unwieldy and s-l-o-w. It creates an undue burden on those of us trying to get work done. My workflow is scattered enough without having to endure a weeks- or months-long multiple-step process just to try to add a profile to a project, or edit relationships.

To put it simple: inactive accounts are flagged as that by having the abandoned account menu entry. If you don't see it they are not inactive.

Being inactive is however a countdown since the last login. As a regular user you cannot see the last login and the only activity you can see in the activity tab is activity on public profiles.

There is however a big but: If already reported as inactive there is some time before that option becomes available again, but if a replace manager was found you would see it already on the public profiles.

Thank you. I understand. None of that addresses my concern, though - Geni no longer *replaces* inactive managers; new ones are added. They are generally added in a subsidiary position to the original, inactive manager, which means that the new managers do NOT get management notifications. I've watched very carefully when I've sent every kind of notification there is, and for almost all of them the notification goes to the Original Inactive manager, who will not receive it. This is true whether the profile has been reported or not, and whether a new manager has been added or not.

Again: You cannot see if a user is inactive, so your base for your conclusions is probably wrong.

When Abandoned Account is executed the requirement for finding a new manager is that it IS an _active_ manager in the family group. If not found you get an error message or you get a link to the new manager.

But again: Not logged in the last 9 months is the criteria for being flagged as inactive, but it could however be anything between one day until 9 months, so just be patient, - if almost flagged as inactive you will get a new option later on.

If not patient enough you can ask a curator as me to make a check. We can see the last login and the most experienced curators can also give you a hint about another family member you can contact to get your problems solved.

BTW: IF a replacement manager is added that manager become the _primary_ manager, - which get all notifications. You might however have to send the new manager a message about taking a look in the requ

I'm so sorry to be so dense, Bjorn, but I'm really struggling to try to understand what you're saying. I go to a profile. I check the options. If 'Report As Abandoned' comes up, I report it. How is that an incorrect basis for my conclusions? Again, I apologize, I really am trying to understand, not to be difficult!

Check the results of the 'Report As Abandoned' action. If successfully you will get the name and a link to the new manager. I can guarantee that it is an active manger (the 9 months rule), but what I cannot guarantee is that this new manager will be collaborative, but that is not a fault of the system.

It could however be a user that needs some guidance from you, so I suggest sending a message as well offering your help.

Okay - but after getting a new manager, I've gone into my Requests folder and deleted the old request to the original, inactive manager, and then generated a new request - and it defaults to the original inactive member, and there's no way to change it. THAT'S what I'm concerned about.

Most users ignore their merge center, a personal message is the only thing that works.

Bjørn's right, I completely ignore my merge center.

I thought that where there are multiple managers notifications were supposed to go to all managers?

Whether or not notifications are supposed to go to all managers, they don't.

Regardless of whether or not anyone in the galaxy pays attention to the merge center, we have it, and so it should work properly. The fact that it does not work properly is not excused by saying that no one pays attention to it. That would be like saying that everyone ignores a stop light so there's no point in fixing it if it becomes stuck. Either you have the thing and you ensure that it works, or you don't have the thing.

And some people do pay attention to it - I do. I know that others do. Perhaps more people would, if it worked properly.

I think I sound obdurate - I can feel my jaw jutting out! I'm sorry for that, as no offense is intended.

Private User - If you go to the Profile, and click "Contact Profile Manager" - that creates a Message to ALL the Profile Managers (if less than 20 managers), not just the Primary Manager -- that change I know for a fact was made!!

I believe when more than 20 managers, may only go to "top 20" - no idea how that is decided. Bjorn - is that part correct? And if so, do you know what determines which managers get the message?

Actually - I also know at least some notifications are going to more than just the Primary Manager - because both my cousin and I have gotten the same notifications for some of the Profiles we both manage.

Lois thank you for bringing up the "send manager" option, i meant to earlier.

If there are more than 20 managers, the message goes to "the most recently active" plus curator if any for the profile.

Lois,

I'd say "Top 20" = 20 most recently active users, the system knows exactly who is doing what even if, as Bjorn points out, us users often cannot see anything happening.

Jennifer,

I agree with you completely about if the site has a feature it should work properly. Currently in my notifications menu i have 444 "Matches" in my merge centre. I did once upon a time trawl thru every single menu in my centre and check every single issue.
Forgeting Smart Matches for a second the vast majority will be requested merges which are stalled due to inactive managers in my extended family.
So the two biggest categories are Smart Matches, which rarely tell me anything useful this side of the paywall, and stalled merges, which i can do nothing about. I'd guess that most people, especially with a lot of Collaborators, are in the same position, hence why so many just ignore it.
Not a good excuse just explaining my point of view.

Yeah, I get what you're saying, Alex. Only that's not germane to my complaint. I'm not sure how we ended up talking about the merge center, since the merge center has nothing to do with what I have been describing in this discussion.

I am talking about management notifications such as "Send a message to manager"; "Invite to Project"; "Request profile management", etc.

Yes, if I click on Send A Message To Manager, all/many/most managers show up in the automatically-generated address field of the message. That is the ONLY feature that works that way.

Oh, I see. Bjorn said most people ignore their merge center, Alex agreed, and I replied that most people ignoring a feature doesn't mean that the feature shouldn't work correctly. I used the phrase "merge center" in my reply, sorry.

I'm not complaining about the merge center. The merge center can go jump in a lake as far as I'm concerned! /lol

Jennifer

I'll cut to the chase & tell you what I find most effective way to get what I want done. In Geni there are usually several ways to reach same goal.

So - what did you want to do?

When management of a profile is transferred to a new manager due to the old manager having abandoned Geni there is no feature (allegedly) to forward all the "old mail" from this profile to the new manager.

I think the distraction of multiple managers is where the waters got muddy (pun intended, water, lake...).

Alex, ROFL!

You guys are all so kind, trying to help me figure this out. I really appreciate it.

Erica, the bottom line for me is that I want to be able to detail a profile without a hassle. 'Hassle', for me, is defined as having to jump through too many hoops having to do with permissions and requests and invitations and reporting and checking back to see if there's a new manager so that I can re-send the request and... well, you get the idea. It seems as though the genealogy gets lost in the process, sometimes.

I think what I've learned in this Discussion is that although there may be lots of ways to get specific tasks done, I'm just not going to get a streamlined easy process. If I want to be happy, I need to give up that idea because it's just creating frustration for me. So although this discussion didn't work exactly the way I'd hoped, I did learn how to deal with my issue!

Slightly off-topic - but - for anyone else who has no idea - I googled "ROFL" and found - "ROFL is an internet accronmym for Rolling On Floor Laughing".

I've requested to be added as a manager to a few public profiles this morning (too lazy to just create a dupe and merge).

It seems that the management request function only sends the request to the primary manager, at least the only screen statement certainly implies that the request is only sent to one person.

Can easily imagine that for a non-MP profile created in 2007 of the 30 odd managers the "primary" manager, aka the "original" manager, would be the most likely to be inactive.

Thank you, Alex. That is certainly one of the situations I was describing!

Yeah, I don't bother to request management unless i "see" the primary manager on line; too impatient. But - PROs only need to co manage for fields that are not under reversion control. For most of what's need to build out the tree & detail profiles you have the rights already & without needing the additional burden of profile mgmt.

Can't change relationships on many profiles unless you're a manager - so if you need to move someone on a tree, or get rid of an extraneous wife or child, you must be a manager...

Not sure (entirely) but I think that collaborating with a manager who collaborates (etcetera) let's you do many of the relationship repair functions. But - you collab with many.

Anyway; there is an enhancement request entered exactly for what you mention - that requests to "add as manager" route to all managers plus curator (if any).

Oh, that's awesome, thank you!

This is a first, I found a profile today that was not added by anyone.

Iorwerth ab Owain Wan, prince in Wales, lord of Caerleon