Date   

moderated Re: Guidelines tab

Sarah k Alawami
 

I agree. I never look at any websites when joining lists, so this would be helpful for those of us who don't want to, or cannot look at websites for such things.

Take care

On Aug 29, 2017, at 9:45 AM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Mark,

I think that would be great! 

What would also be helpful would be an option to automatically send out the text of the Guidelines as a separate email (i.e., separate from the Welcome message) when a new member joins. That way, the text would not have to be included (and changes doubly maintained) in the Welcome message.

J

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
Hi All,

For the new Guidelines tab, here is my simple proposal:

It behaves similarly to the Sticky Wiki page setting. In the group settings page, you can select a wiki page to act as the Guidelines page. If one is selected, a Guidelines tab will appear in the group's sidebar, directly under the Home tab. Clicking the tab will display the associated wiki page. If no wiki page is selected, the Guidelines tab does not appear in the sidebar.

Thoughts?

Thanks,
Mark





-- 
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. Especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu



moderated Re: Guidelines tab

 

What do you mean by "a new email address"? I'm thinking of an "action" from the member page to "resend group guidelines"

J

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Joseph Lee <joseph.lee22590@...> wrote:

Hi,

I second the below suggestion, possibly with a new email address that sends a copy of the guidelines page to members.

Cheers,

Joseph

 

From: main@beta.groups.io [mailto:main@beta.groups.io] On Behalf Of J_Catlady
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 9:53 AM
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Guidelines tab

 

p.s. Another helpful thing would be the ability to easily resend the the guidelines message to any member at any time - they might request them, they might need a reminder, etc. This would be for members who don't access the group via the web.
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. Especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu



--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. Especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: Guidelines tab

 

Hi,

I second the below suggestion, possibly with a new email address that sends a copy of the guidelines page to members.

Cheers,

Joseph

 

From: main@beta.groups.io [mailto:main@beta.groups.io] On Behalf Of J_Catlady
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 9:53 AM
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Guidelines tab

 

p.s. Another helpful thing would be the ability to easily resend the the guidelines message to any member at any time - they might request them, they might need a reminder, etc. This would be for members who don't access the group via the web.
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. Especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: Guidelines tab

 

p.s. Another helpful thing would be the ability to easily resend the the guidelines message to any member at any time - they might request them, they might need a reminder, etc. This would be for members who don't access the group via the web.
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. Especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: Guidelines tab

 

Mark,

I think that would be great! 

What would also be helpful would be an option to automatically send out the text of the Guidelines as a separate email (i.e., separate from the Welcome message) when a new member joins. That way, the text would not have to be included (and changes doubly maintained) in the Welcome message.

J

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
Hi All,

For the new Guidelines tab, here is my simple proposal:

It behaves similarly to the Sticky Wiki page setting. In the group settings page, you can select a wiki page to act as the Guidelines page. If one is selected, a Guidelines tab will appear in the group's sidebar, directly under the Home tab. Clicking the tab will display the associated wiki page. If no wiki page is selected, the Guidelines tab does not appear in the sidebar.

Thoughts?

Thanks,
Mark



--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. Especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: Special notices #suggestion

 

Hi Frances,

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Frances <travel@...> wrote:
As an owner of a group, I selected Special Notices for one posting on the web interface. It was correctly sent as a special notice according to  Activity. But I wasn't sure that this was happening when I was moderating my message. It would be nice if it showed that during moderation.


Done.

Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Guidelines tab

 

Hi All,

For the new Guidelines tab, here is my simple proposal:

It behaves similarly to the Sticky Wiki page setting. In the group settings page, you can select a wiki page to act as the Guidelines page. If one is selected, a Guidelines tab will appear in the group's sidebar, directly under the Home tab. Clicking the tab will display the associated wiki page. If no wiki page is selected, the Guidelines tab does not appear in the sidebar.

Thoughts?

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Special notices #suggestion

Frances
 

As an owner of a group, I selected Special Notices for one posting on the web interface. It was correctly sent as a special notice according to  Activity. But I wasn't sure that this was happening when I was moderating my message. It would be nice if it showed that during moderation.

Not a biggie but nice!

Frances


moderated Re: Dealing with Terms of Service violations/other complaints

 

All,

I have still not gone through every message in this thread, but I am calling an end to the discussion over owners and whether they should be able to shut down their own groups. It's not directly on topic and I think all the arguments have been made. Any more messages on that topic will not be approved.

I do not anticipate making any changes to Groups.io in regards to whether owners can delete their groups.

Mark


moderated Re: Dealing with Terms of Service violations/other complaints

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

J,

          I am not angry, but I am disturbed that what I have said, as this whole thing has unfolded, could possibly be characterized as you have with, "The thought that once having started a group I would not be free to stop it without permission, or that I would be forced to give the whole thing away to anyone who happens to volunteer, is - well, I'm out of adjectives,"  leaves me without adjectives with the exception of inaccurate.

          Also, and I say this to you as you keep trying to say to me, the group that you have is not characteristic of the vast majority of online groups I've had contact with since the late 1980s onward.   Your topic is intensely focused, your degree of control is vastly tighter, your personal contribution of material much higher  - it just isn't characteristic of the majority of online groups.  It is not difficult for you to find this out for yourself.  I am not saying your group is not what you say it is, nor that it does not need to be what it is, but it is idiosyncratic.

           I still think it would be a terrible shame if a group such as yours could be removed, in its entirety, after being online and used as a resource by many simply because you (and in this case it would be you, personally) wish to do so.  What it amounts to is the cyber equivalent of book burning (and, before you ask, yes, I'm serious).  You have the right to lock it down and walk away, with no one being able to do anything but consult what you've created that is not something that you've written as "freestanding" material copyrighted in its own right that you may have chosen to put up as part of a wiki or library.  When you post, and I do mean post only, to an online group it should be expected that this becomes a part of the historical record, not unlike published newspapers, broadcasts, etc.

           Your accomplishments are an outlier on the bell curve, and that's not an insult.  But you need to understand that and to realize that what you're demanding applies to almost no groups but those like yours rather than the majority.  One can formulate policy that covers both circumstances, and one should.  But what you propose is wrong, pure and simple, for the online groups where I've spent most of my adult life.  I just wish you could or would acknowledge that your model is very much a niche, and that really seems to be something you are resisting with every fiber of your being, and that's even if you have and maintain every bit of the control you seek.  Your model is not typical.

--
Brian  - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1703, Build 15063  (dot level on request - it changes too often to keep in signature)
I worry a lot. . . I worry that no matter how cynical you become it's never enough to keep up.
    ~ Trudy, in Jane Wagner's 
            Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe


moderated Re: Dealing with Terms of Service violations/other complaints

 

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 05:47 pm, Brian Vogel wrote:
That requires, of course, that you consider an online forum or e-mailing list a community, and I do.
I consider it more of a business whose customers happen to form a community. The founder of the business still owns the entity (group or business, the name doesn't matter) that overlies the community unless they (voluntarily) sell it. The copyright issue is only one aspect. The value doesn't just lie in tangible assets (e.g., posts and files). It's in reputation, connections, customers (members), what you call "collective knowledge" (which in some cases is actually specialized knowledge belonging to the group owner and key members, and which is given by them to group members who need or ask for it), etc.. In good online communities, these are meticulously built and cultivated by the group owner(s).

It's easy to say everyone contributes equally and everyone "owns" the group, but that's just not true in general. Just as in a business, the owner is doing all, or most of, the work and the customers (members) are free to partake in the resulting party or community - just as we are doing here. I would even argue that in groups where members contribute the most, the owners are probably doing even more work behind the scenes to keep things humming.

I don't know, Brian, whether you've actually ever owned a group. I understand you've moderated one or two. Building and cultivating a group from scratch, developing its membership, building its library of content offerings, tending to the membership and the interactions, maintaining order, etc., is a whole different ballgame. I would give my group away only to the most carefully picked and qualified person. The thought that once having started a group I would not be free to stop it without permission, or that I would be forced to give the whole thing away to anyone who happens to volunteer, is - well, I'm out of adjectives.
 
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. Especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: Dealing with Terms of Service violations/other complaints

 

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 04:14 pm, toki wrote:
Does a third party have the right to override the explicit wishes of the
individual who founded the list?
I am seriously becoming worried that the scenario where a group is forced to stay open despite the founder's clear wishes is something that Mark is actually considering. All of my other posts have assumed that such a policy is so obviously ludicrous that it would not even be considered. But at this point I have one more comment and a question. The question first: if such a policy actually goes into effect, how would you deal with premium or enterprise groups in which the owner was paying the fee? The comment: if such a policy does go into effect, I think that legally it would be inapplicable to all groups that came into effect before the policy.  I don't think you can force a new policy of "once you unilaterally create your group, you can't unilaterally delete it" (without permission, or you have to let someone else run it, or whatever) on people who formed their groups with the clear expectation that they could delete the at any time.
 
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. Especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: Dealing with Terms of Service violations/other complaints

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

Jonathon,

             I already covered this by saying that I was not referring to commercially produced material.  There is no question as to who owns the copyright to a commercial film, published book (or full article), journal article, and the list goes on.   These are, of course, far more promptly taken down because no one can argue about who owns the copyright.

             I am referring to material, such as my words here, that are composed as part of the back and forth of interaction in an online forum.   I cannot imagine a court in the world finding for me were I to try to get a formal take-down order for this, even if there were absolutely no Terms of Service for the venue where posted.

Toki,

           Also covered earlier in the thread.  I absolutely believe that, for a public or wide-subscription online forum, where the bulk of the content is not the result of the originating founder or some private entity, that it is not that founder or founding entity that owns that content.   I would argue that, under the ToS here, it can legitimately be argued that it is the property of Groups.io.  Even if they were not in existence, my words on a public or wide-subscription forum, are not your property even if you have legal right to distribute them.

           We are in a new world where a lot of the issues we're discussing could not even have been possible as recently as 20 years ago.  I do not believe that the founder of a list has the right to do anything beyond locking it down if they wish to terminate its ongoing existence.  What has accrued as community knowledge through the normal back and forth that occurs in a forum or mailing list, cannot reasonably be construed as "belonging" to any one member of that community.  That requires, of course, that you consider an online forum or e-mailing list a community, and I do.

           Regardless of who started them, the content of them, if it's been public, is something that anyone I know expects to be able to find either directly at that site that hosts it so long as that service provider exists or via the internet archive if they go defunct.  I thought I covered this about as thoroughly as I possibly could in:  https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/14566

At this point I'm out because I feel like I'm flogging a dead horse and also think that my prior posts have covered the eventualities that are being brought up as "what if's" quite thoroughly.
--
Brian  - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1703, Build 15063  (dot level on request - it changes too often to keep in signature)
I worry a lot. . . I worry that no matter how cynical you become it's never enough to keep up.
    ~ Trudy, in Jane Wagner's 
            Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe


moderated Re: Hide "Sent from my "

 

Have done that too and then you find out there was a motivation for the autocorrect feature. 😜

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 25, 2017, at 5:15 PM, Duane <txpigeon@gmail.com> wrote:

I think the simplest solution would be to turn off autocorrect. Then any mistakes made will be your own.

BTW, my award for the worst auto-sig goes to "Sent on the Verizon 4G LTE network using Zmail on my Galaxy 23". (I don't remember the email client or device, but it really was that long.)

Duane


--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. Especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: Hide "Sent from my "

Duane
 

I think the simplest solution would be to turn off autocorrect. Then any mistakes made will be your own.

BTW, my award for the worst auto-sig goes to "Sent on the Verizon 4G LTE network using Zmail on my Galaxy 23". (I don't remember the email client or device, but it really was that long.)

Duane


moderated Re: Hide "Sent from my "

 

Absolutely correct. (Not autocorrect. ;) It's ridiculous to blame typos and spelling errors on anyone using a (so-called) smart phone, and then to accuse them of being lazy! LOL!

This is why seeing the iPhone (or other phone) attribution can be helpful.
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. Especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: Hide "Sent from my "

toki
 

On 08/24/2017 09:27 PM, Mark via Groups.Io wrote:
Blaming it on autocorrect just means that the sender is too busy (lazy) to be bothered with proof-reading before hitting send.
a) I am pretty much at the point of not using my phone for text
messages, email, or anything along those lines, because autocorrect
insists on changing my correction, until after the fourth or fifth time
I've corrected it. And if I use the identical word in the next
sentence, I have to rewrite it four or five times, for autocorrect to
understand that I really want to use the word it thinks is wrong;

b) For those who use a11y tools, spelling errors are par for the course.
It doesn't matter if they are using a mobile device, or a computer.
Unless a third party is reading their text, proof reading is not
possible. If you have an iPhone, activate Siri,then tell it to proofread
your outgoing email. I don't know what the similar function for Android
devices does. If you use Windows on the desktop, install Dragon
Naturally Speaking and JAWS, and use those two tools to write,
proof-read, and send your email.

jonathon


moderated Re: Hide "Sent from my "

Benoît Dumeaux
 

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 01:41 pm, Mark wrote:
I think it used to matter, when messages sent from a phone were composed on a tiny screen with poor resolution. It was a way of saying, "Excuse my mistakes, this is a quick reply on an ill-suited device." With the size and quality of the phone screens these days, I find it simply to be the person saying, "I am too lazy to take the time to compose a proper message so I am just going to blame it on my phone."

Completely agree 👍


moderated Re: Dealing with Terms of Service violations/other complaints

toki
 

On 08/25/2017 08:38 PM, Brian Vogel wrote:
If that group is public it becomes de facto if not de jure public domain.
I'm not a lawyer, but I doubt that Hollywood would spend upwards of five
million dollars a month on firms to file DMCA take down notices, filing
court cases that are de facto fishing expeditions, and then sending
alleged defendents John Doe letters offering amnsety, if content that
was publicly available was either de juro or de facto public domain.

More pointedly, _The Pirate Bay_ has lost its hosting on several
occasions, had its hardware seized by law enforcement on at least two,
and maybe three different occasions, and even seen its owners and
operators sued, on the grounds that the content it distributes is
emphatically under copyright.

I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.

jonathon


moderated Re: Dealing with Terms of Service violations/other complaints

toki
 

On 08/25/2017 02:58 AM, Brian Vogel wrote:

consider what you're saying ethically suspect because we do not believe a group founder is the actual "owner" of a group in any meaningful sense of the word "owner."
This gets into why the group was created, and what the primary function
of the group is.

To take an example:

* List-B was created by an interested individual, as a marketing
vehicle. As far as revenue generation for their business goes, it was an
absolute disaster. As an open space for discussing the issues within the
field, it was a success. As time passed, the list owner died, and,
their will stated that the lists were to be deleted. Due to the terms
and conditions of the company where the list was hosted, the list could
be neither deleted, nor transferred to another party, nor function
without the list-owner. The list-community wanted the list to remain
open and functioning. At least two organisations within the field wanted
the list to remain open and functional.

Does a third party have the right to override the explicit wishes of the
individual who founded the list?

I far prefer the term "group administrator" be used because it carries the clear implication that a group is not owned by any one person, but it certainly may be administered by one.
Change the owner in the above example, from an individual, to a
corporation. The corporation is dissolved. Do the lists remain open?

jonathon

16241 - 16260 of 30686