We need more specific subgroups for Youth and Leaders.
Youth need subgroups by patrol AND by position (who is coming to PLC).
Leaders need subgroups by position (committee member versus scoutmaster/assistance scoutmasters) for easier communication and calendaring.
If not subgroups, then display patrol AND position with name and allow for the search to see it to filter down to those results when adding attendees to events.
Is this with regard to the calendar? Or messaging?
Anywhere it can be used to create more targeted communications when necessary. All Youth and All Leaders is too general. Especially when associated to more than one unit.
This is in the backlog but we do not know if or when it might be scheduled for development.
The Feature Assistant for Chrome and Firefox adds support for groups for email messages.
Some of those are part of the normal Scoutbook calendar default selections, no?
all leaders (committee meeting selected)
Everyone (pack meetings)
All youth and leaders (for campouts for example)
Then 3 big selections - add all youth, parents, and leaders and ability to unselect as a group.
I would even go for a meeting type for those who dont like meeting
I believe Scoutbook simply defaults to those that were invited on the previous event type as a default. As soon as the PLC changes for the unit you have to go back and clean everything up.
Plus when we get new scouts we have to go back into every event and add then to the invite list.
Ideally we would have the option to select a “type” of attendee and the system would stay current in who it includes in the invite into the future. Should would save us a lot of maintenance!
To some extent, though, that depends on standardizing the invitee list by “type”, which is sort of the underlying issue now. The “standard” list that was implemented in the Scoutbook calendar doesn’t necessarily capture everyone who would be invited to a given event “type” for every unit.
Consider something as straightforward as a PLC meeting. Some units only invite the SPL, ASPL(s), and PLs to a PLC (plus two adults, one of whom is typically the SM). Which adults get the auto invite in such a case, SM plus all ASMs? Some units include all youth POR (plus the SM and maybe even adult advisers for each of the youth POR roles). Since there isn’t a functional role of “instructor adviser” in the system, how would it know to invite that person?
I agree that there is value to simplifying tasks. I suspect that no matter which way the developers go, aside from allowing units to define custom invitee lists that can be “stored” for reuse, units will likely find that any system-selected list of invitees will require editing to one degree or another. That was one reason that I recommended using the Feature Assistant Extension (or native to IA) Copy/Duplicate Event feature in another thread. Customize the event once a term and duplicate it for the rest of that POR term. :^)
I thought it went based on position based on previous discussions (1-2 years back in these forums) about defaulting to add QM for PLCs.
I know for sure committee meetings invite the committee.
Campouts invite the scouts and leaders.
Pack meetings leaders, cubs, and parents.
I think these are default actions and not based on past choices.