THANX for the clarification and correction, Cindy. I apparently misused inductive reasoning to jump from the new requirement of unlisted privacy for all non-member living profiles to theorize that new members, who are not yet full-fledged members when they join, are assigned a default of unlisted privacy. I further judged that, if this were the case, it would be adding another layer of complexity to their initial learning curve for them to have to immediately make a change to their privacy level when they are confirmed as full members.
As penance, I just took a closer look at privacy levels and options and found the following examples (extrapolating from cases in my close family members):
- A member's own profile does not have a privacy option of Unlisted, Public, or Open, which matches my understanding of how it is supposed to be.
- The profile of a different (full, not family) member (for whom I am a co-manager) does not have a privacy option of Public or Open, but does have an option of Unlisted. There is something wrong here - I should not be able to make a member's profile Unlisted, especially when that member couldn't do it for him/her self!
- The profile of a living non-member that I manage has privacy options of Unlisted and all four Private levels. I thought it's now required that these profiles all be Unlisted.
- The profile of a deceased non-member that I manage does not have Unlisted as an option, which matches my understanding of how it is supposed to be.
This does lead to a question of why a guest member is able to make his/her profile Unlisted, when that option is disabled for full members. If it is the intent to permit guest members to be Unlisted then it would probably be a good idea to change that to red Private automatically when a new member has volunteered, signed the honor code, and is confirmed as a full member, since Unlisted is not an option for full members.
Oops, I made another mistake. The example profile I used for a member that I co-manage is not a full member (as I stated) - it is a family member, so I suppose it's OK for that to have the option of Unlisted. I don't have an example of a full member whose profile I co-manage, so someone else needs to look at that case.