Date   

moderated Re: Guidelines tab

Jeremy H
 

Mark

Thanks.

My preference would still be for a second wiki (set of pages) for this sort of purpose, but yes, having a designated one is a good approach (but will there be the possibility of multiple pages?).

Does your checkbox idea for emailing page out only apply to the guidelines page? How much flexibility over when it gets sent?
My preference would be the flexibility of being able to e-mail a page (potentially any page) out as required (including as special message) - manually (to individuals or group), or automatically, based on event (however this might be triggered: possibly adding this as a future phase) or regularly, based a calendar entry (where all the routines for sorting out when are; perhaps with a new entry category 'action'?) or otherwise. Ideally the message should be able to have fixed text, with ability to include system/group/user variables, as well as wiki page (or pages).
While what you're proposing will satisfy some, others will be frustrated that it doesn't do what they want (now or in the future).

While adding additional visibility options per page, I would like to see the flexibility of the various options suggested by Shal in message   (mods-only, members-only, members and parent-group members only, public) - perhaps adding 'owners only'.

To some extent a case of should you go for the quick and dirty solution, or something cleaner, with more functionality and flexibility?

Jeremy


moderated Re: Guidelines tab

 

I'm thinking in spurts. Another checkbox could be "send to direct-add members", per Shal's request that only a separate, direct-add message (entered through the member notices page) be sent to those people when they join. 

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:19 PM, J_Olivia Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
It could be entered in the Settings page, with yes/no checkbox options ("send to all new members", "include in tab", "include as member notice") but there would be only one place to enter and maintain it. There could possibly be other checkbox options for it added later if people think of them. Like the one someone suggested with the "+guidelines" email. 

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:14 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
p.s. Yes, it's not just a wiki page. It's a separate kind of beast. It doesn't walk like a wiki page. ;)

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:06 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
Mark,

Posts just crossed. The whole POINT (or one of them) is to get the guidelines OUT of the welcome message so they don't have to be maintained both there and in a separate place (or places). So I don't care where the guidelines are stored physically  - wiki page, member notice, or other, but I would like that to be one place only and everything else uses pointers to it (or physically duplicates it if that's easier, but I suspect it's not).

No, I think there should be only one "guidelines" page (or object) per group and you use that for all the places where you want it to go: wiki page (if selected and if that's used for the tab), tab (if wiki page not used for this), autosend on joining group (if option is checked), and member notice (if selected) (with member notice making it easy to send on a one-shot basis to people who need or ask for a reminder).

I hope this  makes sense. I'm just waking up from a nap. Need caffeine. ;)
--
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




--
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

 

It could be entered in the Settings page, with yes/no checkbox options ("send to all new members", "include in tab", "include as member notice") but there would be only one place to enter and maintain it. There could possibly be other checkbox options for it added later if people think of them. Like the one someone suggested with the "+guidelines" email. 

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:14 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
p.s. Yes, it's not just a wiki page. It's a separate kind of beast. It doesn't walk like a wiki page. ;)

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:06 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
Mark,

Posts just crossed. The whole POINT (or one of them) is to get the guidelines OUT of the welcome message so they don't have to be maintained both there and in a separate place (or places). So I don't care where the guidelines are stored physically  - wiki page, member notice, or other, but I would like that to be one place only and everything else uses pointers to it (or physically duplicates it if that's easier, but I suspect it's not).

No, I think there should be only one "guidelines" page (or object) per group and you use that for all the places where you want it to go: wiki page (if selected and if that's used for the tab), tab (if wiki page not used for this), autosend on joining group (if option is checked), and member notice (if selected) (with member notice making it easy to send on a one-shot basis to people who need or ask for a reminder).

I hope this  makes sense. I'm just waking up from a nap. Need caffeine. ;)
--
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



--
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. Yes, it's not just a wiki page. It's a separate kind of beast. It doesn't walk like a wiki page. ;)

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:06 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
Mark,

Posts just crossed. The whole POINT (or one of them) is to get the guidelines OUT of the welcome message so they don't have to be maintained both there and in a separate place (or places). So I don't care where the guidelines are stored physically  - wiki page, member notice, or other, but I would like that to be one place only and everything else uses pointers to it (or physically duplicates it if that's easier, but I suspect it's not).

No, I think there should be only one "guidelines" page (or object) per group and you use that for all the places where you want it to go: wiki page (if selected and if that's used for the tab), tab (if wiki page not used for this), autosend on joining group (if option is checked), and member notice (if selected) (with member notice making it easy to send on a one-shot basis to people who need or ask for a reminder).

I hope this  makes sense. I'm just waking up from a nap. Need caffeine. ;)
--
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

 

Mark,

Posts just crossed. The whole POINT (or one of them) is to get the guidelines OUT of the welcome message so they don't have to be maintained both there and in a separate place (or places). So I don't care where the guidelines are stored physically  - wiki page, member notice, or other, but I would like that to be one place only and everything else uses pointers to it (or physically duplicates it if that's easier, but I suspect it's not).

No, I think there should be only one "guidelines" page (or object) per group and you use that for all the places where you want it to go: wiki page (if selected and if that's used for the tab), tab (if wiki page not used for this), autosend on joining group (if option is checked), and member notice (if selected) (with member notice making it easy to send on a one-shot basis to people who need or ask for a reminder).

I hope this  makes sense. I'm just waking up from a nap. Need caffeine. ;)
--
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

 

Autosend to the new members (or the option for that ) is really critical to avoiding duplicate upkeep in the welcome message. Sending on demand  would be just a welcome bell/whistle.

J

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 30, 2017, at 3:49 PM, Sarah k Alawami <marrie12@...> wrote:

Agreed. I never use the website to read anything such as a notice or list rules and guidelines, I'd much rather have it in the body of a message. That's just me though.
On Aug 30, 2017, at 3:46 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Mark,

Yes, great. But although we can then send a link to the wiki page to (a) new members and (b) people who need a reminder, sending the link is unhelpful to people who only use email and never log in. If at least new members could also be emailed the text automatically (in addition to sending automatically to everyone once a month), that would be a great boon. So would adding the ability to send it individually on demand.

Also, I would like the auto-email to go out as a special notice,

Thanks!

J

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 30, 2017, at 3:04 PM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

Hi All,

Thanks for the feedback. Shal, I understand your proposal, but it definitely implies a level of complexity, both in terms of UI and implementation. I do like the flexibility of utilizing the calendar for sending out notices, but a lot of the feedback I've received over the years is that it's not intuitive.

It seems like if there's an option to send out the guidelines page once a month automatically, that maybe that takes care of the majority of what people want in terms of an automatic notice system?

So, modified proposal:

- Designate a wiki page as a guidelines page
- There'd also be a checkbox to indicate that this page should be emailed out once a month to everyone except people on No Mail.
- I'd also add additional visibility/permissions options for every wiki page, so that moderators could hide pages from subscribers.

Make sense?

Thanks,
Mark

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 7:09 PM, Shal Farley <shals2nd@...> wrote:
Jeremy,

> Over all groups, I suspect there are some using the wiki for their
> own, 'random', purposes, within which group guidelines (and such)
> would not fit.

True.

Such a group can create its own "home" page for the wiki, to replace the automatic index page that is there by default. That's what I've done in mine. The group's wiki home page only links to the pages that are appropriate to the group's use of the wiki;  the guidelines (and sticky) pages don't show up except in the full list of pages (which I don't expect most members to ever peruse).

> ... but separate control setting, perhaps with more restrictions on
> visibility and editability, ...

That's on my wish list for the wiki generally. There is already a per-page "mods-only may edit" control, but I'd also like to be able to control visibility on a per-page basis (mods-only, members-only, members and parent-group members only, public).

Shal

--
https://groups.io/g/Group_Help
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum





--
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

 

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 3:46 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Yes, great. But although we can then send a link to the wiki page to (a) new members and (b) people who need a reminder, sending the link is unhelpful to people who only use email and never log in. If at least new members could also be emailed the text automatically (in addition to sending automatically to everyone once a month), that would be a great boon. So would adding the ability to send it individually on demand.


So you'd like the option for it to go out like the welcome message goes out? I'm a little concerned about whether this makes things more complicated and if there's overlap conceptually between the welcome message and the guidelines message. With the member notices, we have them all in one place. Here's this new thing, the guidelines message, that's completely separate, yet kind of functions similarly. I'm concerned about things getting confusing. Instead of a wiki page, do I just create a new member notice, called Guidelines, that has extra options to send out monthly/special? But then, could you create multiple Guidelines pages? And then do we end up with a situation where every month I get 10 guidelines emails from every group?

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: Integration of Sub-Groups #suggestion

Duane
 

While I'm on a few forum type sites that are completely interactive between sub-forums, I don't feel they should be compared to groups and subgroups. On a forum site, it's quite normal for everyone to have access to all parts of the site, including sub-forums. On this group site, only the folks that we want to allow as part of a subgroup may use it. Anything that pertains to the entire group will be in the main group. Subgroups are for specialized discussions not intended for the membership as a whole. In most cases, not even intended for sharing between subgroups.

After I left Yahoo groups and before coming to this site, I was on a site where I had to use subgroups. It was an extreme disappointment because of the complexity. Folks were constantly posting and uploading files/photos to the wrong group/subgroup. Because of that, I decided to have totally separate main groups here. No confusion at all.

When signed in, the overview page (https://groups.io/), topics page (https://groups.io/topics), and Calendar (https://groups.io/calendar) give a nice summary of my membership, including all groups and subgroups. From there, it's a simple matter to click to the exact point that I want to be.

Duane


moderated Re: Guidelines tab

Sarah k Alawami
 

Agreed. I never use the website to read anything such as a notice or list rules and guidelines, I'd much rather have it in the body of a message. That's just me though.

On Aug 30, 2017, at 3:46 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Mark,

Yes, great. But although we can then send a link to the wiki page to (a) new members and (b) people who need a reminder, sending the link is unhelpful to people who only use email and never log in. If at least new members could also be emailed the text automatically (in addition to sending automatically to everyone once a month), that would be a great boon. So would adding the ability to send it individually on demand.

Also, I would like the auto-email to go out as a special notice,

Thanks!

J

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 30, 2017, at 3:04 PM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

Hi All,

Thanks for the feedback. Shal, I understand your proposal, but it definitely implies a level of complexity, both in terms of UI and implementation. I do like the flexibility of utilizing the calendar for sending out notices, but a lot of the feedback I've received over the years is that it's not intuitive.

It seems like if there's an option to send out the guidelines page once a month automatically, that maybe that takes care of the majority of what people want in terms of an automatic notice system?

So, modified proposal:

- Designate a wiki page as a guidelines page
- There'd also be a checkbox to indicate that this page should be emailed out once a month to everyone except people on No Mail.
- I'd also add additional visibility/permissions options for every wiki page, so that moderators could hide pages from subscribers.

Make sense?

Thanks,
Mark

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 7:09 PM, Shal Farley <shals2nd@...> wrote:
Jeremy,

> Over all groups, I suspect there are some using the wiki for their
> own, 'random', purposes, within which group guidelines (and such)
> would not fit.

True.

Such a group can create its own "home" page for the wiki, to replace the automatic index page that is there by default. That's what I've done in mine. The group's wiki home page only links to the pages that are appropriate to the group's use of the wiki;  the guidelines (and sticky) pages don't show up except in the full list of pages (which I don't expect most members to ever peruse).

> ... but separate control setting, perhaps with more restrictions on
> visibility and editability, ...

That's on my wish list for the wiki generally. There is already a per-page "mods-only may edit" control, but I'd also like to be able to control visibility on a per-page basis (mods-only, members-only, members and parent-group members only, public).

Shal

--
https://groups.io/g/Group_Help
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum





--
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,

Yes, great. But although we can then send a link to the wiki page to (a) new members and (b) people who need a reminder, sending the link is unhelpful to people who only use email and never log in. If at least new members could also be emailed the text automatically (in addition to sending automatically to everyone once a month), that would be a great boon. So would adding the ability to send it individually on demand.

Also, I would like the auto-email to go out as a special notice,

Thanks!

J

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 30, 2017, at 3:04 PM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

Hi All,

Thanks for the feedback. Shal, I understand your proposal, but it definitely implies a level of complexity, both in terms of UI and implementation. I do like the flexibility of utilizing the calendar for sending out notices, but a lot of the feedback I've received over the years is that it's not intuitive.

It seems like if there's an option to send out the guidelines page once a month automatically, that maybe that takes care of the majority of what people want in terms of an automatic notice system?

So, modified proposal:

- Designate a wiki page as a guidelines page
- There'd also be a checkbox to indicate that this page should be emailed out once a month to everyone except people on No Mail.
- I'd also add additional visibility/permissions options for every wiki page, so that moderators could hide pages from subscribers.

Make sense?

Thanks,
Mark

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 7:09 PM, Shal Farley <shals2nd@...> wrote:
Jeremy,

> Over all groups, I suspect there are some using the wiki for their
> own, 'random', purposes, within which group guidelines (and such)
> would not fit.

True.

Such a group can create its own "home" page for the wiki, to replace the automatic index page that is there by default. That's what I've done in mine. The group's wiki home page only links to the pages that are appropriate to the group's use of the wiki;  the guidelines (and sticky) pages don't show up except in the full list of pages (which I don't expect most members to ever peruse).

> ... but separate control setting, perhaps with more restrictions on
> visibility and editability, ...

That's on my wish list for the wiki generally. There is already a per-page "mods-only may edit" control, but I'd also like to be able to control visibility on a per-page basis (mods-only, members-only, members and parent-group members only, public).

Shal

--
https://groups.io/g/Group_Help
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum





--
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: Integration of Sub-Groups #suggestion

 

Hi Brian,

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 8:35 PM, Brian Vogel <britechguy@...> wrote:

          Amen!   I have been saying that subgroups as implemented and presented by groups.io are dead zones for a long while now.  They are used on other forums and are presented such that members of the main group are aware that the subgroups exist.  And even subgroups can have subgroups, but at all levels the subgroups are visible at the level of the group that serves as the parent group.  That way you know they're there and, by their names, what their purpose is.


Are you asking for something other than the 'combined' view that Jeremy is asking for? IIRC, you previously asked for subgroup names to be displayed at the top of the page? I'm not sure how that would work for groups with lots of subgroups (some have 10-50).

Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Re: Integration of Sub-Groups #suggestion

 

Hi Jeremy,

Thanks for the feedback. I definitely appreciate it. I'm always looking for ways of improving the service. Comments inline.


On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Jeremy Harrison via Groups.Io <jeremygharrison@...> wrote:

The starting point is perhaps one of conception: that sub-groups are essentially normal, stand alone, groups except for their designation as sub-groups, and having membership restricted to that of the main group, functioning as a separate group just for that sub set; with the main group being where most things happen. A better conception might be that the main group is just a base or shell, for a number of sub-groups, with no more than an owner, the master member list, some settings and a home page: all the activity and resources happening within the sub-groups; with perhaps one being a regarded as the primary sub-group (first among equals), sharing the master member list, but quite possibly with little or no activity.

I don't understand the purpose of forcing the parent group to be a shell, with no activity. What advantage does that provide? One thing to keep in mind with any proposal is the lifecycle of groups. Generally they start as a stand-alone group, and then they decide they want subgroups. The stand-alone group becomes the parent group. How would your proposal affect that?

Members of the main group, apart from being part of the primary sub-group, should then be able to join other sub-groups, as now, with moderatorship being set separately for each sub-group. Whether ownership, or any moderating privilege, should cascade down to sub-groups, and how this might work is something for debate: there is certainly a case that each sub-group should have its own owners and moderators, with those of the main group not necessarily being even members. Different groups will have different wants and priorities in this area, with many issues of balancing power and responsibility to be faced and resolved. I can certainly foresee a need for sub-groups management (creation and deletion) privilege to be subject to approval (‘You can set up, and become owner of a sub-group, subject to my approval of each sub-group – and it’s then all down to you’).

Subgroups already have complete moderator/owner controls. How would this be different?

 

Then there should be – essentially – a three layer perspective over membership, as far as each sub-group is concerned: someone can be a member of that sub-group; a member of the main group (but not that sub group); or a total-non-member (even of the main group, with only public rights). All ‘who can do (or see) what’ settings should then be based on this, with extension as now to cover moderators, etc. So something (whatever: messages, posting, files, etc.) should be available to public, main group members, sub-group members or (sub group) moderators.

If I understand this correctly, that's already how things work.
 

Within the web interface, then I think there need essentially to be two views – at ‘main group’ and sub-group level; with the ‘main-group’ view showing a composite of all subscribed sub-group bits (messages, files, calendar entries, etc.). I’m not sure quite how this should work – whether there should be a separate ‘main group’ view set of pages, in addition to sub-group ones, or whether should be some sort of switch to change from main to sub group view. Perhaps a drop down menu at the top of all pages, to select the main, overall, view, or any subscribed sub-group view. On the home page (or pages), perhaps group descriptions for both main and (current) sub-group; with a list of all subscribed sub-groups, and all those available to join (as made visible), with a note of those requiring authorisation. But anyhow, it should be as easy to move from the same page for different sub-groups, as for different pages for the same sub-group.

What you're asking for is a new view, or new set of views, that aggregate all subgroups that you're subscribed to? So, the Messages tab would show all messages from all subgroups that you're a member of, for example? If you just go to https://groups.io and click the Messages or Calendar tabs, right now you get that for all the groups you're a member of. These new views would be like that, but only for the subgroups you're a member of?

 

One further aspect of integration that I feel desirable is to be able to set ‘to (specified) other sub-group’ as a default, or selectable, option – on its own or in conjunction with other options (group, sender, moderators).

Not sure I understand this part. Can you explain further? 

Thanks!
Mark


moderated Re: Guidelines tab

 

Hi All,

Thanks for the feedback. Shal, I understand your proposal, but it definitely implies a level of complexity, both in terms of UI and implementation. I do like the flexibility of utilizing the calendar for sending out notices, but a lot of the feedback I've received over the years is that it's not intuitive.

It seems like if there's an option to send out the guidelines page once a month automatically, that maybe that takes care of the majority of what people want in terms of an automatic notice system?

So, modified proposal:

- Designate a wiki page as a guidelines page
- There'd also be a checkbox to indicate that this page should be emailed out once a month to everyone except people on No Mail.
- I'd also add additional visibility/permissions options for every wiki page, so that moderators could hide pages from subscribers.

Make sense?

Thanks,
Mark

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 7:09 PM, Shal Farley <shals2nd@...> wrote:
Jeremy,

> Over all groups, I suspect there are some using the wiki for their
> own, 'random', purposes, within which group guidelines (and such)
> would not fit.

True.

Such a group can create its own "home" page for the wiki, to replace the automatic index page that is there by default. That's what I've done in mine. The group's wiki home page only links to the pages that are appropriate to the group's use of the wiki;  the guidelines (and sticky) pages don't show up except in the full list of pages (which I don't expect most members to ever peruse).

> ... but separate control setting, perhaps with more restrictions on
> visibility and editability, ...

That's on my wish list for the wiki generally. There is already a per-page "mods-only may edit" control, but I'd also like to be able to control visibility on a per-page basis (mods-only, members-only, members and parent-group members only, public).

Shal

--
https://groups.io/g/Group_Help
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum





moderated Rearrange photos in an album / nested albums #suggestion

Sara <gigideeagostina@...>
 

In the photos section, I would like to be able to:

1. Rearrange photos in a photo album. 
2. Mass edit photo names
3. Define which photo is the album thumbnail
4. See the entire photo in thumbnail, or get to pick what the thumbnails show (as it is always something awkward, like their elbow or their face cut off)
5. Created nested/sub album folders


Thank you!

Sara


moderated Re: notification re cancelled invite if recipient attempts to respond #suggestion

Sarah k Alawami
 

I agree there. I thought logically there would have ben, but can this be looked into?

Rank: high
Priority: high

On Aug 29, 2017, at 9:41 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

I was testing cancelling an invitation. It turns out that if someone responds by email to an invitation (i.e., attempts to accept the invitation) but the invitation has been cancelled, they receive no notice of this, not even a bounced email. I think there should be something to communicate to them that the invitation has "expired" or whatever.
--
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 notification re cancelled invite if recipient attempts to respond #suggestion

 

I was testing cancelling an invitation. It turns out that if someone responds by email to an invitation (i.e., attempts to accept the invitation) but the invitation has been cancelled, they receive no notice of this, not even a bounced email. I think there should be something to communicate to them that the invitation has "expired" or whatever.
--
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: Integration of Sub-Groups #suggestion

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

Jeremy,

          Amen!   I have been saying that subgroups as implemented and presented by groups.io are dead zones for a long while now.  They are used on other forums and are presented such that members of the main group are aware that the subgroups exist.  And even subgroups can have subgroups, but at all levels the subgroups are visible at the level of the group that serves as the parent group.  That way you know they're there and, by their names, what their purpose is.

--
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: Guidelines tab

 

Jeremy,

Over all groups, I suspect there are some using the wiki for their
own, 'random', purposes, within which group guidelines (and such)
would not fit.
True.

Such a group can create its own "home" page for the wiki, to replace the automatic index page that is there by default. That's what I've done in mine. The group's wiki home page only links to the pages that are appropriate to the group's use of the wiki; the guidelines (and sticky) pages don't show up except in the full list of pages (which I don't expect most members to ever peruse).

... but separate control setting, perhaps with more restrictions on
visibility and editability, ...
That's on my wish list for the wiki generally. There is already a per-page "mods-only may edit" control, but I'd also like to be able to control visibility on a per-page basis (mods-only, members-only, members and parent-group members only, public).

Shal

--
https://groups.io/g/Group_Help
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum


moderated Re: Integration of Sub-Groups #suggestion

 

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 06:19 pm, Jeremy Harrison wrote:
In looking into sub-groups, as a newcomer to Groups.io, a major issue that strikes me about them is that they are very poorly integrated with their main group
That problem struck me early on - or at least, the ways in which they *are* integrated seem random or undocumented, and so their behavior seems unpredictable. Unlike you, though, instead of taking the time to think about and analyze the situation, I've just stayed away from using subgroups. Hopefully your message will help speed up getting them better designed, and then, maybe, at some distant day in the future, I will start using them.:)
 
--
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 Integration of Sub-Groups #suggestion

Jeremy H
 

In looking into sub-groups, as a newcomer to Groups.io, a major issue that strikes me about them is that they are very poorly integrated with their main group, and each other, and that many of the issues that have been raised in other threads are a result, or a reflection, of this. My apologies if this post is felt to be rather long, or cover old ground, but it is an attempt to indicate all the areas where I consider integration needs to be improved, to enable them to be tackled together, or as part of an overall plan, rather than raising and resolving half issues as they arise.

The starting point is perhaps one of conception: that sub-groups are essentially normal, stand alone, groups except for their designation as sub-groups, and having membership restricted to that of the main group, functioning as a separate group just for that sub set; with the main group being where most things happen. A better conception might be that the main group is just a base or shell, for a number of sub-groups, with no more than an owner, the master member list, some settings and a home page: all the activity and resources happening within the sub-groups; with perhaps one being a regarded as the primary sub-group (first among equals), sharing the master member list, but quite possibly with little or no activity.

Members of the main group, apart from being part of the primary sub-group, should then be able to join other sub-groups, as now, with moderatorship being set separately for each sub-group. Whether ownership, or any moderating privilege, should cascade down to sub-groups, and how this might work is something for debate: there is certainly a case that each sub-group should have its own owners and moderators, with those of the main group not necessarily being even members. Different groups will have different wants and priorities in this area, with many issues of balancing power and responsibility to be faced and resolved. I can certainly foresee a need for sub-groups management (creation and deletion) privilege to be subject to approval (‘You can set up, and become owner of a sub-group, subject to my approval of each sub-group – and it’s then all down to you’).

Then there should be – essentially – a three layer perspective over membership, as far as each sub-group is concerned: someone can be a member of that sub-group; a member of the main group (but not that sub group); or a total-non-member (even of the main group, with only public rights). All ‘who can do (or see) what’ settings should then be based on this, with extension as now to cover moderators, etc. So something (whatever: messages, posting, files, etc.) should be available to public, main group members, sub-group members or (sub group) moderators.

Within the web interface, then I think there need essentially to be two views – at ‘main group’ and sub-group level; with the ‘main-group’ view showing a composite of all subscribed sub-group bits (messages, files, calendar entries, etc.). I’m not sure quite how this should work – whether there should be a separate ‘main group’ view set of pages, in addition to sub-group ones, or whether should be some sort of switch to change from main to sub group view. Perhaps a drop down menu at the top of all pages, to select the main, overall, view, or any subscribed sub-group view. On the home page (or pages), perhaps group descriptions for both main and (current) sub-group; with a list of all subscribed sub-groups, and all those available to join (as made visible), with a note of those requiring authorisation. But anyhow, it should be as easy to move from the same page for different sub-groups, as for different pages for the same sub-group.

Something that is probably desirable, but hard, if not impossible, to achieve, is the ability to share some entities (such as files or photos) between specified (but not all) sub-groups, either as a whole, or at folder/album level.

One further aspect of integration that I feel desirable is to be able to set ‘to (specified) other sub-group’ as a default, or selectable, option – on its own or in conjunction with other options (group, sender, moderators).

And then perhaps issues over group management, of less importance: the ability to copy settings from one sub-group to another, make all members of one sub-group members of another, or perhaps change primary sub-group.

Quite how things might work or be set up in practice will be down to technical considerations, and the way each group chooses to function.

Jeremy

16221 - 16240 of 30697