I need to give our Treasurer access to the financial functions (invoices, Quickbooks export, etc.).
Currently the only way to do that is to make him a full Admin. That is no way to run an organization or a website.
What's really needed is the ability to create custom admin roles. There are so many different admin privileges that a limited set of roles will never suit the needs of so many different organizations.
Lacking that, WA will continue to need to create different roles like this one.
Seems to me I submitted something similar a few years back.
While clicking and waiting and clicking and waiting to go to October, seemed to me I should try to bump this.
How about some respect for our and our members' time?
Can you provide a custom URL that will always start us admins in Public view, even if we were previously logged in in Admin view?
Usually when I go to our website, I want to start in Public view. But if my last visit ended in Admin view, I get to watch the spinning wheel for 20 seconds or so before it lets me do anything.
Why make your admins start off frustrated?
This was available prior to Release 6.1, which broke it. Please put it back.
We continue working on Android version of member app. There is still long way to go, but we are ready to share with you a beta version of Android app. Currently it has only a part of iOS version functionality:
- Personal profile & member card
- Member Directory & Member Details
Since this is a beta version, we distribute it not through Google play, but directly as a link to file. Here is a download page: https://rink.hockeyapp.net/apps/fafdfad013004fce842711145d80d65b/
We will continue sharing beta versions of the app here. You are free to use it or with your members, but don’t forget this is beta version.
Larry, Team Mobile was talking only about Mary's request for a map gadget.
As for the entire Android app, they responded to our comments, moved it up in priority and are working hard on it. It is a major project and I can only imagine what it took to move it to the top of the list.
Michael, apparently it is on hold awaiting acceptance of the iOS app. See comment "Android app is something we will definitely build if we see good stats on current app." in this thread: https://forums.wildapricot.com/forums/308932-wishlist/suggestions/8826631
So admins are waiting to roll out the app until Android is developed, which won't happen unless the app is rolled out and used.
Can you do this at least for Wild Apricot Payments? This would be a major incentive for lots of us to switch to your system (which I assume you make some money from).
+1. It's important to make member transactions as smooth as possible.
[quote user="epgremill3"]We'd even be happy to name our address fields something standardized (e.g. same as Wild Apricot payment page) to get this to work.
Seems like this is a simple solution to avoid another form.
You could have and state clear rules. For example, the first field that contains "zip" would be the zip code. The first member field that contains "address" but not "email" or "e-mail" would be the street address. This would accommodate many - not all - choices of field names. If our field names didn't work with your rules we'd have the choice of changing them or not enabling the feature.
Then give members a checkbox "Use member's mailing address" on the credit card form. Give admins the ability to enable/disable this.
We have redesigned email settings and extended subscription options for event announcements and email blasts as well. See details in presentation: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1bj4iE_bnw_mhLM2u5KMoH6WTCh4n0oPZkDXdB2folt4/pub?start=false&loop=false&delayms=3000
There used to be a roadmap that was updated periodically. Could that be revived?
And then anything not on the roadmap would be "This is not in our plans right now."
It would need to be understood that a roadmap is a snapshot, not a promise, and things may move down as well as up.
There are a lot of good ideas out there, and they can't do everything.
I count 13 Wishlist items with more votes than this one. And there are some with fewer votes that probably have more impact.
It's frustrating when we want to run our organization better but need a new feature to do that. All I can say is that our club looks better and runs smoother with less work since we got on Wild Apricot. I'm not happy waiting for new features but it's part of the package.
We now have another need for this feature.
Up until now, our administrative group could communicate with our club just by sending an email to our (non-WA) mailing list. But that is becoming unusable due to more stringent email validation practices.
Trying to get them to use the WA email system will be difficult. It is a multi-step process. The UI, particularly the text editing, is quirky. They don't need all the formatting - they just want to send an email.
If we could subscribe all our members to a forum, we could give our administrative group access to the forum page. This would give them a much simpler UI for just sending out a message.
No one will actually read this forum - it will just be a vehicle for sending emails to our club.
I think you're looking for "Managing email subscriptions to forum updates" - https://forums.wildapricot.com/forums/308932-wishlist/suggestions/8826331-managing-email-subscriptions-to-forum-updates , with the addition of linking a group to a forum.
In addition to default subscriptions, the admin should also be able to specify default notification frequency. As is, everything defaults to daily which is not always the best choice.
The Forum gadget should have settings for the default notification frequency (immediate, daily, weekly) for subscriptions to (a) the forum and (b) individual posts.
The Member profile will need four : immediate, daily, weekly and default. It would initially always be "default", so that changing the forum default would change any subscribed member unless they had selected something else.
I mentioned this in the Wishlist thread https://forums.wildapricot.com/forums/308932-wishlist/suggestions/8825587-listserv-i-e-ability-to-submit-forum-posts-by-ema . But these two are related and the design for one should accommodate the other.
Since this feature is going to be part of the implementation of listserv functionality,* the admin should be able to set protection for subscription to a particular forum the same as for common contact fields: admin access only vs. contact can change.
In other words, the admin should be able to set whether the user can subscribe or unsubscribe to the forum.
As we discussed in this thread, forums could be used to provide most of the functionality of a listserv : http://forums.wildapricot.com/forums/308932-wishlist/suggestions/8825587-ability-to-submit-forum-posts-by-email-to-use-fo .
But that will require this feature to have the full benefit; otherwise the lists will only be opt-in which is ineffective for most situations.
We have finished design and want to share progress with you. We have redesigned email settings and extended subscription options for event announcements and email blasts as well. See details in presentation below.
The slideshow is a private Google doc. Please make public.
We are planning to
* - Add new Email Settings page, which will allow administrators to:
* Setup default forum subscriptions for new contacts
* Bulk subscribe existing contacts to forums
* - Extend Email settings page in Contact details to allow subscribing to forum topics
* - (most likely) Add similar subscription settings for subscription sources
This will be helpful.
Yes, Katya, but if they drop out of the payment workflow they are still registered, with an outstanding invoice.
Merged together several closely related by meaning ideas – so we can properly resolve them all together, in different live scenarios
This has just become urgent for our club. Aol.com has set their DMARC policy to p=reject. That means we can no longer use our traditional email list server - we are now stuck with WA.
PLEASE, PLEASE make this simple change, which I recommended some time back:
1: If the Reply-to address (the actual sender) is from our WA-hosted domain, then it matches the SPF record. So in this case, you can use it as the "From."
2: If not, keep the Organization contact as the From, but put the actual sender in the name of the From, like this:
Then the From can be the hosted domain but it will be clear to the recipient that it is really from Jane Doe.
And they won't be surprised when they reply and it goes directly to
""Jane Doe <firstname.lastname@example.org>."
I am the organization contact so am wasting a bunch of my time handling and forwarding a slew of member replies that ought to automatically go to our membership chair.
We only have 150 members. I can only imagine what a pain in the neck this must be for really large organizations.
And this feature should really be part of this wishlist item: https://forums.wildapricot.com/forums/308932-wishlist/suggestions/8936389-allow-admin-to-define-multiple-sender-emails-and-u
If I'm understanding this correctly, the Routing of system emails setting sends copies of outgoing system emails to the selected recipients.
But the request is to be able to set the reply-to address on membership emails so that member replies go to this membership admin email address.
Please reopen this - or better yet, add it to this thread: https://forums.wildapricot.com/forums/308932-wishlist/suggestions/8936389-allow-admin-to-define-multiple-sender-emails-and-u .
May I suggest that this feature request be expanded to include customizing the reply-to address in each email context?
A number of us have brought this up in this discussion. And it's all about the same thing - letting us identify the person in club management that the member is communicating with.
There are several reply-to requests on the wishlist. They all ought to be part of this one.
Apologies for chiming in again, but it's been over a year since I last piped up on this.
Not having this feature degrades the way our club presents itself to our members. Always using the organization contact takes communications that could look personal - i.e., from an individual - and makes them impersonal.
This seems like a very simple fix (see my suggestion below). No database change, no UI change, just change how the From field reads based on the Reply-to field.
WA spends a lot of effort on improving our email communication with members through workflow and templates. This could give us a significant improvement with not much effort.
Apologies for this redundant post. It was submitted via Feedback, which I was told would go directly to the development group, but that wasn't the case.
I posted this in the thread https://forums.wildapricot.com/forums/308932-wishlist/suggestions/8936389-allow-admin-to-define-multiple-sender-emails-and-u but am
Savvy Apricot suggested that I also submit it here through Feedback.
What people are asking is for the From address on emails to be the actual sender (e-blast sender, event organizer, etc.) rather than always the Organization contact. This is really important for several reasons I won't repeat here, but read the thread.
You already have the actual sender as the Reply-to in most cases. It should be the From as well. This is what people expect when receiving an email.
Dmitriy said that the Reply-to can't be used as the From because the From has to match the SPF record.
Here's my simple two-part solution.
First part: If the Reply-to address (the actual sender) is from our WA-hosted domain, then it matches the SPF record. So in this case, also use it as the "From."
Second part: If not, keep the Organization contact as the From, but put the actual sender in the name of the From, like this:
Then the From can be the hosted domain but it will be pretty clear to the recipient that it is really from Jane Doe.
And they won't be surprised when they reply and it goes directly to
""Jane Doe <email@example.com>."
This should be really easy to implement.
What do you think?
Here's a two-part solution for this problem with very little implementation effort.
An Apricot explained to me that the From field of the email can't be the Reply-To because From needs to be from our domain in order to pass spam checks. If "From" is a gmail.com address but sent by our website, it will look like spam.
But it would be legal for WA to use the Reply-to as the From in the cases where the email address is from our own domain hosted at WA. For example, we have a contact login "firstname.lastname@example.org" that is used to send our weekly e-blast. tyc.org is our domain, so it could be used as the actual "From" address.
In cases where the Reply-To is not from our domain, include the Reply-To address in the name of the "From" email address.
For example: Instead of
From: My Organization Name <email@example.com>
It will be pretty clear to the recipient that it is really from Jane Doe.
And they won't be surprised when they replay and it goes directly to "Jane Doe <firstname.lastname@example.org>."
My apologies for another comment on this, and for the critical tone. But as I use WA and stumble over ways it presents our club poorly, I feel the need to reemphasize the need for a quick, simple partial fix on this issue.
We are already allowed to specify a Reply-to contact for many if not most emails. Why not just use that for "From" as well?
It is just plain wrong for WA to send event emails and e-blasts "From" the organization-wide From email address when the "Reply-to" is the event organizer or blast sender. These fields should be the same, as they are on almost every email on the Internet except those sent under WA.
How big a fix would this be? Isn't this something that can be slipped into the next release without waiting for larger email solutions?
If you don't want to change overall behavior, then give us a checkbox in Dashboard / Organization to opt for this.
We are about to do our first dues renewal under WA and I am so not looking forward to having to forward each individual reply to the membership committee.
Even in cases where another email is allowed (e-blasts, event email), it's always the reply-to email (if I understand correctly). This is lame.
The way an organization presents itself to members is very important. By limiting our choice of from and reply-to addresses, WA is not letting us fulfill that function adequately.
From Email and Contact Email fields should be specifiable for every WA-generated type of email, including membership notifications.
The email recipient should feel they are getting the email from a role-specific person. It's hard to get people to open emails. Every bit of personalization helps.
The webmaster should not be loaded down with the job of handling and routing all replies.
Showing members the current tally is a great way to get them to participate and to engage them in the questions being asked.
I was all excited about publishing a poll to get discussion started on choices for club activities, but without this feature it is so much less useful.
We dealt with this by using a dummy email address for the other members. For example, if email@example.com is the primary, then his email-less wife Jane could be firstname.lastname@example.org, and similarly for the kids. WA accepts this address.
Jane can log in, and can register for events, but of course can't get email.
I don't know if this would work, but possibly Jane and the kids could all have their secondary email address set to the family address. Their registration emails would bounce from the dummy address but go through to the family address.
Does this help?
For repeated (multi-session) events, WA allows sending event reminder emails either before the first session or before every session.
This option should be offered for event announcement emails as well.
There can be events with multiple sessions where people could attend any of them, not necessarily all or none, and announcements should be available for each session.
Until repeated events are implemented, multi-session events are the only way to schedule weekly or monthly repeated events, short of typing each of them individually. This shortcoming of WA should not prevent announcements for this type of event.
This feature would also be useful for scheduling repeated emails not linked to an event, by creating a dummy admin-only event.
There is a membership field type Multiple Choice with Extra Charge. If it accepted negative dollar amounts, it could be used for this.
More generally, I suggest all extra charge fields, including event registration forms, allow negative dollar amounts so that discounts can be specified.
Could this please be merged with "Allow 0 and Negative Price in Extra Cost Items" - https://forums.wildapricot.com/forums/308932-wishlist/suggestions/19709806-allow-0-and-negative-price-in-extra-cost-items?tracking_code=4a14a2a09553145b4a4e8606caf1f75a
And please consider the relatively modest resources needed to implement this, compared to higher priority requests for massive changes or new features.
This easy* change could solve a number of problems, especially if the price calculation were not shown for zero cost.
1) It would allow discounts - e.g., Number of attendees x cost, and then Number of members included in that x discount.
2) After a deadline, I want to switch from a prepay online price to a higher pay at the door price, but not generate an invoice. Setting the cost to 0 would do that, but the system won't let me.
* - (I know, Evgeny - nothing is easy. But this is easier than most requests.)
And if the cost amount could be zero, we could use this for the numeric-only field we need but don't have.