jethro-pmm
jethro-pmm copied to clipboard
tbar0970
Private or restricted fields
Some people don't want certain of their details shared but the church still needs such details.
I propose that some fields have a restricted access flag - phone numbers, email address and address.
As with notes, some people would have access to this information and others wouldn't. We create a run-time flag for this. For those who don't have permission it is set to no-access. For those who do have access they would have the option to suppress their privilege in some cases such as reports and contact-list. In fact it would default to do not show (similar to how archive flag works).
It should be possible to make the change such that any code that 'forgets' to set the permission gets a result with 'private' data set to blank.
This idea makes sense, but is one of those areas where it's a bit debatable whether the extra complexity is worth it.
The workaround in the meantime is to put "unlisted" contact details in the "contact remarks" field, which isn't shown in the members area. Admittedly, contact details stored there will be omitted from bulk email and bulk sms broadcasts. But they are visible to control-centre users for indiviidual use.
Question: In your context, how many people do you have that this is relevant to? (Ie people who want to be included in a church directory, but who have certain contact details they don't want shared)?
I recently replicated our church directory in Jethro and found at least 10 people where this was relevant. I'm thinking this may only be relevant for things like church directories. An alternate way of flagging this could be to add people to groups which the contact list process could refer to (optionally). So groups for mobile, email, home phone and address (maybe address and suburb separate). Groups are only for people so if anyone in the family is in the directory it applies (or should it apply regardless of if they are in the directory? Maybe that could flags on the family record?)