<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Poll: Fusion SSO Fitness Eligbility vs IM Eligbility]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Hi all,</p>
<p dir="auto">Our current integration with Fusion only allows one general eligibility field to be passed, but we've had a number of schools request the ability for Fusion to send separate eligibility for Fitness, Intramural, and  Club offerings. We'd like to determine how popular this feature would be so if any interested schools could please respond letting us know that would be much appreciated!</p>
]]></description><link>http://iml.nodebb.com/topic/31/poll-fusion-sso-fitness-eligbility-vs-im-eligbility</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 May 2026 03:38:46 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="http://iml.nodebb.com/topic/31.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2015 15:04:52 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Poll: Fusion SSO Fitness Eligbility vs IM Eligbility on Fri, 26 Jun 2015 18:15:19 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">We currently don't do SSO, but we are facing a similar issue. Having Alumni and Associate (spouse) memberships that are not eligible for intramurals being eligible for fitness would be great for many schools and perhaps the tipping point for us to get our IT on board with SSO and take a look at Fusion.</p>
]]></description><link>http://iml.nodebb.com/post/100</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://iml.nodebb.com/post/100</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Incorvati]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2015 18:15:19 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>