Additional PMs not notified of merge proposals (?)

Question

I was a bit surprised to see some merges take place on profiles I manage without having received any prior notifications.  They were proposed by an additional PM on the profiles.  No more than three or four days ago these merges weren't in my 'Pending Merges Initiated by Me' or 'Pending Merges Waiting for Action by Me', presumably because neither statement was literally true.  The problem is that I had also never received any notification when the merge proposals were made.

So, why are additional PMs not notified when there are multiple PMs and one of them makes a merge proposal?  I don't have any problem with these particular merges, but I would think that most active PMs want to be notified.  Has this been discussed in G2G before?  I would like to see Wikitree make a change to address it.

Comments

Kerry, please double check your email inbox -- including your spam filter and trash  -- for May 5.  That's when you and all other PMs should have received a notification of the merge proposal.

---

Jillaine, I did search around quite a bit and didn't find a message.  I don't see that much merge activity, so I usually remember.  If you're saying that the system does notify other PMs, I'll take your word for it and assume this was a one-off or I just missed/misplaced the email.  Thanks for your help.

---

It should work this way, but if it's not working, we should figure it out. Maybe we should do a test.... I'm on the road at the moment and about to walk into a business meeting, so perhaps someone else could do a test with you-- propose a merge of two profiles where you're PM of one of them.

---

Jillaine, I know it's challenging when you're using a phone, so I want to alert you to look at my answer, which is a theory as to why it didn't work right in this case.

Answer 1

Kerry, I agree that this is wrong and all PMs should have opportunity to weigh in about proposed merges.

It sounds to me like there is a logical (programming-wise, that is) reason for other PMs not to receive notification when a PM of the profile proposes the merge, though.  The way the logic works, when a PM of one profiles proposes a merge of it with another profile then that is interpreted (by the software) as approval of the merge for that profile and it only needs approval from a PM of the other profile to complete.  Thus, the proposed merge is automatically approved for the profile you manage, since it was proposed by another manager of the same profile.  Now that it has been approved for that profile, there is no need to notify other PM's that their approval is needed, so you don't get email about the merge.

Disclaimer - I have no actual knowledge about this but am only speculating, based on my general knowledge of software logic.

Comments

That's one hypothesis. We need tech to weigh in on this.

---

Agreed!

---

yes, I think you have hit the nail on the head Gaile, it also can apply when the merge is completed, sometimes I get notification of a merge proposal and when I go to do it, get the notice that it is already completed.

Mind you, I don't particularly want more notifications in my e-mail, have loads as is.

---

Gaile, can you retag this with tech and bugs? Unless it is a bug that is fixed, but I think we are still having problems with merges.

---

Edie, sorry but I don't have tagging powers.  Jillaine commented, so she'll see my response and I think she has superpowers to do it.  Actually, it should be in tech category with bug and/or sysops as tag(s).

---

Done.  Bug tag.  Tech tag no longer accepted.  

BUT I'm not sure it's a bug.

If indeed a profile manager proposed the merge, only the PMs of the *other* profile would be notified.  That could be intentional design even if we don't like it.  I'd still like to know, though, if Gaile's hypothesis is accurate.

---

THANX, Jillaine.  I agree that I'm not sure it's a bug, but only wanted to honor Edie's request.  I knew that tech is no longer a valid tag - that's because it's a category that could have been selected for the question, instead of the tree house … and THANX, also, for underscoring that my explanation is only an off-the-top-of-my-head guess.

EDITED: Putting the bugs tag on it won't hurt, even though it's probably not a bug - it will get Jamie's attention and she's who we REALLY need to hear from on this.

---

Thank you, Gaile and Jillaine. I think it's an important issue.  I think as PMs we expect to be notified any time a merge is proposed.  Sometimes we have numerous PMs and merges get out of hand and end up changing who the original profile was supposed to represent.

Answer 2

As Gaile says, messages go to the other end.  There's no message to send to other people at the same end.  What would it say?

But it's part of a bigger issue.  As a PM, you think you have 30 days to see a proposed merge and think about it and block it.  But that's only true if you have the TL to yourself.  If you don't, the merge can be completed before you get out of bed.

Likewise LNABs.  If somebody sends a request to two TL members, either can do it before the other one can say hmm.

The only function of a PM is to be an obstacle.  You can't do anything that can't be done without you.  But you can block things.  But if you share your TL, you can't even do that.  You now need everybody at your end to sit on their hands collectively.

Comments

RJ, what the message would say when going to other managers of the same profile is simple - it could say the same thing that it would if someone other than another manager of that profile proposed the merge.

I shudder to suggest it, but maybe what's needed is a mandatory minimum time after a merge is proposed before it can be approved by anyone, just as we have the 30 day period before default approval kicks in.

---

Normally the merge message invites you to approve or complete the merge.  But if another TL member at your end proposed the merge, you can't.

Approval combined with co-management and "default approval" is quite paradoxical.  If you want to allow the merge, just do nothing.  Your permission isn't required.

If you approve, all you're doing is cutting short other people's chance to have a say.  You're just railroading the job past other people, especially the other people at your end.

A TL basically says "any one of us here speaks for all".  It's a check book where anybody can sign, not where all have to sign.  If your partner dumps you, don't bother checking the joint account, it's empty.

Approval is a permission system.  Default-approval is a veto system.  Combining both is a veto system where people take away each other's veto.

It's like a UN Security Council where 5 delegates each have a red "Veto" button and a green "Do it" button and the debate ends as soon as anybody presses either button.

Co-management of a profile doesn't give more people management rights, it just takes away the power of a sole manager.