Tom Berry
My feedback
14 results found
-
1 voteTom Berry
shared this idea
·
-
1 voteTom Berry
shared this idea
·
-
3 votesTom Berry
shared this idea
·
-
2 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Tom Berry
shared this idea
·
-
1 voteTom Berry
shared this idea
·
-
1 voteTom Berry
shared this idea
·
-
10 votesTom Berry
shared this idea
·
-
143 votes
We have started analysis for this issue, and it seems that key problem is how Wild Apricot handles level changes close to renewal date. The system is currently designed to collect the full new level amount and set renewal date according to new level renewal policy. All prepaid amounts for old levels are disposed. Moreover, since no prorating occurs, the new level might be effective only for a few days.
As a first step, we suggest to redesign how level change is working and add prorating there:
- Level would be changed immediately, as now - Remaining portion of old membership level payment will be applied to new level - For new levels with specific renewal date (e.g. annual levels with renewals Jan 1st) apply the pro-rating settings for new applications: - Allow member to pay only a pro-rated amount of the new level fee (e.g. six months before renewal…Tom Berry
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Tom Berry
commented
We have a bunch of different membership levels, and we occasionally have people changing from one to another. Why on earth would someone in WA design think it was a good idea to automatically change the renewal due date if this happens?
I'm flattered to think the designers believed us users are so perfect that we could never enter the wrong level by mistake and then have to change it after the fact, but that happens.
We also have members who were in bundles until the administrator decides to have them removed; if we want to keep in touch with these people, we have to change their membership level to individual, and hey presto, they are automatically extended for a year from current date even though they aren't renewing.
Fix this, please!
-
2 votesTom Berry
shared this idea
·
-
21 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Tom Berry
commented
The renewal system needs to be rethought.
We operate on a quarterly cycle, with about a quarter of our members coming due for renewal each quarter. Within each quarter, we send out a renewal notice and a final notice. We are trying to generate accurate statistics for the number of renewals paid between the renewal notice and the final notice, and between the final notice and the next quarter’s renewal notice. But the only means of doing this, the [Renewal Date Last Changed] function, reports ALL changes to renewal dates; along with renewals, it reports every manual adjustment, including error corrections, upgrades to life memberships and even deaths.
Why not set up the renewal function to work like the donations function, where each one is tabulated individually in such a way that they can be reviewed at a later date by date? That would give us the information we need for renewals paid by date range.
If this is unacceptable, then at the very least change the Renewal Date Last Changed function so that it can filter out manual edits and adjustments.Tom Berry
supported this idea
·
-
66 votesTom Berry
supported this idea
·
-
7 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Tom Berry
commented
We now offer discounted two- and three-year renewals. WA currently presents a renewal button with the date one year from the member's current expiration date. We need buttons with the two- and three-year dates as well. it makes absolutely no sense to me why WA would consider these to be different levels of membership; with four levels of membership to which the discounts apply, we would have to have a dozen levels to account for the second and third years. It would be a lot simpler to just treat them for what they are - renewals for two or three years instead of one.
Tom Berry
supported this idea
·
-
255 votesTom Berry
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Tom Berry
commented
The logic of how WA saves e-mail templates escapes me. I end up with copies of copies of templates by following the normal logic of [save] and [save as] that applies anywhere else.
-
22 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Tom Berry
commented
This has been a big problem. Record so far is the same member having four different accounts - what was originally exported from QuickBooks, two accounts from different renewals, and registered forum user.
Tom Berry
supported this idea
·
To clarify - please release a daily summary of Wishlist postings by e-mail so users can see what has been suggested.