Multiple active welcome messages are allowed
|
Per Mark in beta just now:
"You can have multiple active welcome messages. " This was something completely unknown to me, and in fact, the documentation currently states there can be only one active notice of any type at a given time. I'm querying Mark as to whether you can have multiple actives for other notice types as well, or just for the welcome. It was sure news to me. J
|
|
|
|
I updated the Owners Manual to mention that the Welcome notice type (and Monthly Reminder notice type, as Mark confirmed in beta) can have multiple active messages. For the record, that was news to me, too. :-) Thanks, Nina
On Wed, Oct 6, 2021, 7:51 PM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote: Per Mark in beta just now:
|
|
|
|
I think it was news to everyone.
|
|
|
|
Nina,
I don't know if Mark wants to include this in there as a note, but for those who have or want to use multiple welcome notices and want to control the order those are emailed out they can do so by selectively updating/saving those notices, as they are emailed oldest to newest, or same order shown onscreen if you sort on Updated ascending. Cheers, Christos
|
|
|
|
Thanks, Christos. I asked Mark about the order in which multiple Welcome (or Monthly Reminder) notices are sent, and whether it’s possible to control it, and he told me what I put in the Welcome notice topic and the Monthly Reminder topic, namely, “…the system sends them all at the same time (within the same second or two). Due to the vagaries of email delivery, there is no way to guarantee the order in which multiple notices are delivered.” So I’m hesitant to include the tip you suggest because it might not happen in every case.
- Nina
From: docs@beta.groups.io <docs@beta.groups.io> On Behalf Of Christos Psarras
Sent: Saturday, October 9, 2021 1:11 PM To: docs@beta.groups.io Subject: Re: [docs] Multiple active welcome messages are allowed
Nina,
|
|
|
|
Hi Nina, Sure, I understand, no problem whatsoever. Cheers,
On 2021-10-10 10:34, Nina E via
groups.io wrote:
|
|
|
|
I actually think it would be good to add the info about the random order, so that no one else is tempted to come to this erroneous conclusion or even wonder about the order.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On Oct 10, 2021, at 8:31 AM, Christos Psarras <christos@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
>>> I actually think it would be
good to add the info about the random order, so that no one else
is tempted to come to this erroneous conclusion or even wonder
about the order.
The statement Nina posted in her reply was already there, I just didn't check-out that section before posting my suggestion, otherwise I wouldn't have bothered. I did plenty of testing with a couple of different accounts and ISPs and my results point to my assertion so I wouldn't call it erroneous. Over-confident or consistently-lucky, sure, but I get it, the mailing process happens very fast and there are plenty of middle points in between to guarantee the order. Cheers, Christos
|
|
|
|
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 11:36 AM, Christos Psarras wrote:
my results point to my assertionYet your assertion is false. Erroneous, "over-confident," "not guaranteed to happen," whatever you want to call it. It's false.
|
|
|
|
I still disagree, but whatever. Cheers, >>> On 2021-10-10 15:44,
J_Catlady via groups.io wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 11:36 AM, Christos Psarras wrote:
|
|
|
|
Ok. Agree to disagree. :-)
|
|
|