Hello!
I think I know the answer to this, but will a digital performances only show up on a patron's account in TNEW if they purchased the performance (ie: the order is on their constituent account)? I suspect this is the case, but I was hoping that recipient on a SLI could also drive the access. I am trying to come up with ways to manage access for sponsors and their comps (or patrons who want to gift digital content access to another patron).
Thanks!Kristine
In the Webinar Q&A they said owner and initiator would have access, but not recipient.
I am actually in the middle of a meeting going over options for purchasing access for others. One of our two guiding principles (well, my guiding principles) is, start with "No", and then where you cannot evaluate the precise audience and how that might guide your solution.
Three ideas (we may use any or all):
Owner makes obvious sense, but I am not sure I understand initiator and not recipient. I mean, the way we have used recipient for normal orders is as the one who receives the tickets. I am not sure what the thinking is for digital content to NOT be able to go to the recipient unless it was just technically difficult to code given the underlying table structure. Then again, I have also been irritated that you cannot assign mailing addresses in orders for the recipient. I guess, for me, if we take a theoretical order, Patron A initiates the order, but for reasons it should live on Patron B's account (owner), but Patron C is the one who will be receiving the tickets, in that circumstance, I would want to be able to mail those tickets to Patron C. With logical extension then, I would also want Patron C to be able to log into their account and view the digital content, if that was what was in the order. Sure, the importance of signifying Patron C as recipient is also important for ticket history purposes, but I think it makes sense here, too.
Long story short, I guess this is me saying I would love it if recipient got access to more from the order level. Maybe this is just my own thing, though.
Definitely agree, John! Recipients would definitely alleviate some headaches over here!
Initiator is often used to flag which member on a household is associated with the order, while the owner is usually pegged as the household itself.
The issue here is that they have tied the interface (probably for more than one reason, but the basic structure of TNEW, logins and orders would be a primary reason) to the order, and the order is linked to owner and initiator, while recipient is tied to specific sub line items.
That said, in future iterations I'll certainly be voting to change to displaying events instead of orders, as that is more natural (and will allow more natural searching and sorting) and for allowing access for recipients.
I suppose I could have phrased my thing about initiator better. I get why initiator would be included. But if you are going to include initiator, it seems like it makes just as much sense to also include recipient. If you are just looking at the desire of any given organization to want to give access to more than just the owner, the desire to give to the recipient is likely just as strong as the desire to give to the initiator.
But, from a coding standpoint, given that the initiator is order level and the recipient is not, I get it. But that does not mean that I do not WANT it.