I can't believe this is still a problem (well, I can...). Being able to use C-F-A IDs for our work is vital rather than the description. Historically we have had our IDs and descriptions identical, but once we stop using OLX, we have to make our descriptions donor-friendly, i.e. LONG because we can no longer give a custom label to our default fund in forms.

Working in Finance, I find ids more useful than just descriptions.

I entered a batch in grid view yesterday, and it was so frustrating working with full descriptions for the campaign, fund, appeal, and package. While I appreciate that I can enter "00100" as an entry point, when the corresponding "really long fund name" description appears, it stretches out the batch. Webview batches are already very large with lots of white space and impossible to view gifts in the same way DB view is- this makes it even more difficult, slowing things down. It also requires ME to toggle my thinking from "description" to "ID", as I'm entering/reviewing compounding the issue.

Yes we need to see BOTH IDs and Descriptions!

I'd' like to see BOTH ID and Description in output. Why is it either/or?

As a database admin on a finance team, I still cannot believe the option to change preference between ID or Description for Campaign/Appeal/Fund/Package is not available yet. Although the descriptions are great for fundraisers, for finance teams it is very inconvenient to look at a constituent record to see which appeals the donor has been sent and to only see the long descriptions, or to look at their gifts and only see the Fund and Appeal descriptions. Please change this to a personal preference setting like in database view, or at the very least allow us the ability to toggle between the two on the separate sections for assigned appeals, gifts, opportunities etc.

I need to be able to have the Campaign, Fund, Appeal, & Package ID print on the validation report instead of the Description. We have many long fund names and the IDs are short and what our internal team uses to refer to these funds. Donors and execs do not see these reports, so the IDs should take priority, or at least have the option to choose Description or ID.

We use appeal, fund, and package IDs MUCH more heavily than we ever would description. Recently, I ran into a gift query where I had queried on the package ID in the package list, and was obtaining no results in webview. This should NOT be the case- I should be able to query in DB view and obtain the same results that I would in webview, otherwise things will inevitably get missed. This has been requested since 2017, with hundreds of votes- it is very clear people want and need this!

Please add the ability to choose to see the Fund, Appeal and Package IDs within the giving history instead of the descriptions. The descriptions are lengthy and difficult to quickly use. Staff rely and know the IDs.

Our team uses fund ID heavily. I would love to see the Fund ID in brackets next to the Fund name on a gift record and the option to include it in the view or not, depending on user/role, area of the platform.

Within the Giving History section on a constituent record, please add the option to view Appeal ID and Fund ID. Our gift processing team needs these for every gift entered.

Please add the option to see the Appeal ID. My team uses these, which are far easier to remember than the long-winded descriptions that go with them.

The ability to not use ID versus Description will be a slight migration blocker for us. We have somewhat larger appeal and fund descriptions, and with the oversized text in Web View, including the new Grid Batch View, we have to scroll scroll scroll to see the entire grid. Partly, there is TOO MUCH whitespace, but the font is larger as well. And, the other thing is that since it only displays the Description, with no ability to change to see just the ID, it exacerbates the scrolling issue. PLEASE allow us to toggle to see only the ID, not description, and make it smaller with less whitespace!

As an administrator and not a fundraiser, this is very much needed. The description does nothing for me . . . we are driven by the ID for Appeals . . .

Seeing ID over description is completely necessary. My donation processing team only uses the IDs, not the descriptions. Not being able to see the ID or search by it is very annoying and makes things near impossible.

This is so necessary. Many users are trained to use IDs because it makes the process simpler, and often times we have records with similar descriptions. Using IDs allows users to go directly to the record they are looking for.

Need to be able to work with ID's. Especially with large displays in web view, descriptions are too lengthy in many cases.

This idea was posted A LONG TIME AGO Blackbaud! For many users, this prevents them from being able to easily adopt webview, because naming conventions for IDs and Descriptions are usually established carefully and cannot be easily changed. This needs to be part of webview and prioritized OVER new bells and whistles.

!OVERSIZED WEB VIEW INTERFACE! | SIZE DOWN

What do you all think about the oversized web view interface? As a database manager, I find it hard to catch the finer details when everything is zoomed in and spaced out. For data work, we need a more compact view to scan things line by line.

Blackbaud can you add a toggle or display setting to adjust the interface size for better visibility and detail? VOTE, Vote, vote!

Our gift processing team knows the appeal ID and can quickly code gifts this way. Seeing only the appeal description is much more cumbersome for us and slows down our gift processing. Please consider allowing us to use the APPEAL ID.