Andrew Steele
My feedback
92 results found
-
25 votesAndrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
12 votesAndrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
24 votesAndrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
10 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Andrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
51 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Andrew Steele
commented
I'm setting up an event and am very frustrated by the limitations of the "guest" feature. For this event, members attend for free, and non-members AND guests of members are $5. Many of our members are couples and are accustomed to registering together, i.e. one person registers both members plus a few non-member guests. Because the "guest" price can only be set to one price, it’s impossible for two members to register on the same order and both attend for free.
Does anyone have a good workaround for this? Requiring both members register separately will confuse our members and throw off our registration packets. We are considering not using Wild Apricot at all for this event because it's too confusing for members. This is very unfortunate, because one of the main reasons we switched to WA was so that we could do event registrations online!
Andrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
8 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Andrew Steele
commented
I agree that the linked registration needs improvements so that the list of attendees can be sorted alphabetically by the host's last name, while keeping the host's guests grouped with the host. This is how we like to organize our Will Call List, check-in packets, name tags, etc. It's currently very tedious work in Excel to put it in the correct order. Even when the registration is for a single person, WA should still put their name in the linked registration field so that the whole list can be sorted alphabetically by host's last name.
Andrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
58 votesAndrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
2 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Andrew Steele
commented
I think what Stuart is referring to is being able to include a specific call-to-action "register" button or link for a specific event. For example, when writing a blog post about the event, the direct link to register could be included. Or when putting a blurb on the website home page, a direct link to "Register Today!" or similar could be included. This link would go directly to registering, rather than to the event page. It would be similar to the email macro {Registration_buttons} but wouldn't automatically log the person in.
Andrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
32 votesAndrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
33 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Andrew Steele
commented
I completely agree. Eblasts get reviewed by multiple people. It's a pain to send the email to a select few as a test, and then duplicate it in order to send the final version. Either that or I have to send it to myself as a test, and then forward it on to the others, but this sometimes messes with the formatting.
Andrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
180 votes
Evgeny Zaritovskiy
responded
Merged together several closely related by meaning ideas – so we can properly resolve them all together, in different live scenarios
An error occurred while saving the comment Andrew Steele
commented
The reply-to field of an eblast currently defaults to the administrator who is creating the email. This means I have to change it every single time I create an eblast, so that it's the main organization's email instead of my personal one. The reply-to field should be associated with the eblast template, so that it customized for different types of mailings.
Likewise, the reply-to field should be customizable for each system email, so that replies to membership emails can go to one staff member while replies to event notices can go to another person, donations replies to yet another, etc.
Andrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
59 votesAndrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
29 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Andrew Steele
commented
This is very important to our organization. We are fairly lenient with our annual members paying late, but don't want them to get free months as a result.
We also prefer all annual members be due on the first of the month after their join date. Setting their renewal to the date they paid throws this off. We can't just use the "specific date" feature, because they get a year's membership starting on the first of the month after they join. We don't want to deal with prorating.
Andrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
21 votesAndrew Steele
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Andrew Steele
commented
This would be useful in other situations too, such as only listing guests for an event registration if there are in fact registered guests. Otherwise it looks like something is missing when the confirmation email contains "Guests:" with a blank afterward. We also have added a middle initial field, which we need to include on some materials, but leaves an awkward double-space for those who don't have this information.
-
13 votesAndrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
13 votesEvgeny Zaritovskiy
responded
This is a known limitation of Wild Apricot. See printing instructions – https://help.wildapricot.com/display/DOC/Printing+in+Wild+Apricot
An error occurred while saving the comment Andrew Steele
commented
I'd like members to be able to print their own invoice so they can mail it in with a check. They may also wish to print a page from the member directory or the details for an event (e.g. driving and parking instructions). Using the browser's print function yields poor results on all these pages, at least in the Whiteboard theme. The text continues off the right side of the page and is cut off in portrait mode. The header takes up a large chunk of the first page. There should also be the option to add a "Print" button to pages. Please revisit the CSS print stylesheets within the themes to ensure they are functioning well.
Andrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
12 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Andrew Steele
commented
This is another one of those things that I expected to be default behavior. We have many couples that are both members. It's disappointing that if they register themselves, we won't have an accurate record of member attendance because one will be recorded as a guest.
Andrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
84 votesAndrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
48 votesAndrew Steele
supported this idea
·
-
22 votesAndrew Steele
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Andrew Steele
commented
This is similar to this Wishlist item: Add Boolean logic to Advanced Search. We are also advocating that Advanced Search allow radio button field searches to have multiple selected. It sound like you want the same thing for dropdowns, which makes a lot of sense. https://forums.wildapricot.com/forums/308932-wishlist/suggestions/8825653-add-boolean-logic-to-advanced-search?tracking_code=d9b4a0c59c20d6678d6e539deb74dfc5
I agree that guests of a main registrant should have all the original ticket options that the main registrant does. Or preferably, admins should be able to choose which ticket types are available to guests of the main registrant type.
Case A: Senior/Child/Military/etc. pricing, such that each guest might have a different price.
Case B: Member vs Non-Member Price - such that multiple members and non-members can register on the same order and each be priced appropriately. Currently, members have to register completely separately if the guest price is different than the member price (i.e. a member cannot be registered by another member if the guest price is different than the member price; it will charge the 2nd member the guest price).
Case C: Add branching logic - e.g. the main registrant is Exhibitor, and that opens up "guest" ticket types of Professional Saturday Badge, Professional Sunday Badge, etc. at different prices and quantity limitations.
The word "guest" needs to be modifiable too. In some cases, "register additional attendees" or other language may be more appropriate. "Guests" tends to be associated with "non-member," which isn't always accurate for "guest registrations" by the main registrant.