Date   

locked Re: Seeding groups

Cherrill <cdjamieson@...>
 

I am just trying to say that if someone is wanting to join a specific type of group, ie friends, pets, technical, whatever; they may not want to scroll through that many pages to find whether there is the type of group they want or not.  
Our little group will remain small because that is the way we want it; and it doesn't matter if it is featured or not; but if it ends up on page 99 or something, a person looking for our type of group will never find it.
However, the 'powers that be' will make the decision on how to categorize groups.

Cherrill



On Oct 30, 2014, at 9:02 AM, walkraft@... wrote:

coffeechocolatechitchat would probably deserve to be featured under my suggestion since it appears to be the most (only) active organic group, apart from those with automated posts. The only reason why I didn't mention it was because your archive is non-public, so I can't personally vouch for the content.



locked Re: Seeding groups

 

coffeechocolatechitchat would probably deserve to be featured under my suggestion since it appears to be the most (only) active organic group, apart from those with automated posts. The only reason why I didn't mention it was because your archive is non-public, so I can't personally vouch for the content.


locked Re: Seeding groups

Cherrill <cdjamieson@...>
 

In reply to this, my group doesn't have many members (5 at the moment), but we have a lot of topics and really a lot of emails.  Yet, we are still rated lower than groups who have more members, but no or only one topic and no or very few emails.

I think groups are better being grouped in categories as to what type of group a person is interested in joining.

I am hoping that this beta groups is not just for technical topics.

Cherrill
think purple and smile!


On Oct 30, 2014, at 8:13 AM, walkraft@... wrote:

Currently, updates and beta are the only public groups of any note. Since I would like to see this platform take off, I would like to make a suggestion about how this could occur.

Instead of the default tab of groups being "Most popular", I would suggest temporarily making the default a new "Featured" tab instead. Featured would include the updates and beta groups, but also some generic groups that you create yourself, such as "Linux", "Apple", "Startups", "Programming", or "Web Development". By making these the most prominent displayed groups, people would be more likely to join them. The groups should be chosen to be the groups that members are most likely to join. If any public groups start to succeed organically, then they could be added to featured as well. Regardless, having the fourth group in the list being "Poop" isn't a good look. I would also suggest promoting this set of initial seed groups via your mailing list.

At the start, you should be able to handle moderation of these groups yourself, but once they take off you should be able to pass moderation onto the community members. Hopefully this would be enough to get the Groups.io community started.

I would be willing to join these groups and make a few posts so that they at least have some content.

Potential issues

1. Mightn't this make the site unwelcoming to those who aren't programmers?

I imagine there would other topics for which you could create default groups, but I could only think of programming one's off the top of my head. Also, the nice aspect of the featured tab is that it enables you to promote groups in order to expand the audience of the site to different kinds of people.

2. Wouldn't it be better for groups to form organically?

As soon as some groups do form organically, then they could be moved on top of the featured tab or the featured tab could be removed. Furthermore, the ability to create sub-communities mitigates many of the issues. If a "Programming" community is too broad, then they can change their focus to general programming questions and shift questions on specific languages to sub-communities such as Java, C++ or PHP.

-------------------------

Anyway, I just thought I'd throw this suggestion out there because I'd love to see this product gain more traction.



locked Seeding groups

 

Currently, updates and beta are the only public groups of any note. Since I would like to see this platform take off, I would like to make a suggestion about how this could occur.

Instead of the default tab of groups being "Most popular", I would suggest temporarily making the default a new "Featured" tab instead. Featured would include the updates and beta groups, but also some generic groups that you create yourself, such as "Linux", "Apple", "Startups", "Programming", or "Web Development". By making these the most prominent displayed groups, people would be more likely to join them. The groups should be chosen to be the groups that members are most likely to join. If any public groups start to succeed organically, then they could be added to featured as well. Regardless, having the fourth group in the list being "Poop" isn't a good look. I would also suggest promoting this set of initial seed groups via your mailing list.

At the start, you should be able to handle moderation of these groups yourself, but once they take off you should be able to pass moderation onto the community members. Hopefully this would be enough to get the Groups.io community started.

I would be willing to join these groups and make a few posts so that they at least have some content.

Potential issues

1. Mightn't this make the site unwelcoming to those who aren't programmers?

I imagine there would other topics for which you could create default groups, but I could only think of programming one's off the top of my head. Also, the nice aspect of the featured tab is that it enables you to promote groups in order to expand the audience of the site to different kinds of people.

2. Wouldn't it be better for groups to form organically?

As soon as some groups do form organically, then they could be moved on top of the featured tab or the featured tab could be removed. Furthermore, the ability to create sub-communities mitigates many of the issues. If a "Programming" community is too broad, then they can change their focus to general programming questions and shift questions on specific languages to sub-communities such as Java, C++ or PHP.

-------------------------

Anyway, I just thought I'd throw this suggestion out there because I'd love to see this product gain more traction.


locked Re: What Does Five Integrations Mean?

 

Each instance of an integration is counted, so option 1 in your email.

The five includes any integrations used in the group as well as any integrations used by any of its subgroups.

Mark

On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:49 PM, <whofanvidme@...> wrote:

When you say that a Basic group can have up to five integrations does it
mean:

1) I can have a total of five integrations: one instagram feed, two
facebook status updates, and two RSS feeds, for example?

2) I can pick and choose as many integrations as I like, but am limited to
five of each type (five RSS feeds, five instagram feeds, etc.)?

3) I can pick and choose up to five different types of integrations (RSS
feeds, instagram, facebook updates, etc.), but can add as many of that type
(twenty RSS feeds, for example) as I want within those five?

Also, does that five count against a group and all of its sub-groups or
does each sub-group get its own five?

Thanks.



locked Wednesday site #changelog

 

Changes pushed to the site today:

- Sub group direct add email notifications now include a link to the group along with the group description.
- Miscellaneous backend changes for better logging. (not visible to users)


Mark


locked What Does Five Integrations Mean?

 

When you say that a Basic group can have up to five integrations does it
mean:

1) I can have a total of five integrations: one instagram feed, two
facebook status updates, and two RSS feeds, for example?

2) I can pick and choose as many integrations as I like, but am limited to
five of each type (five RSS feeds, five instagram feeds, etc.)?

3) I can pick and choose up to five different types of integrations (RSS
feeds, instagram, facebook updates, etc.), but can add as many of that type
(twenty RSS feeds, for example) as I want within those five?

Also, does that five count against a group and all of its sub-groups or
does each sub-group get its own five?

Thanks.


locked Re: Moderation For Integrations?

 

I think you're right, adding a moderation checkbox is the easiest and most straightforward way to achieve what you want. I'll put it on the list.

Worst nightmare? No way. Ask away!

Mark

On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 7:53 AM, <whofanvidme@...> wrote:

> What happens when someone replies to one of these moderated integration
> messages? Should that message be moderated as well?

I don't see why replies would need to be moderated.

I was really just thinking that there are a lot of external feeds, updates,
and photos which, while they may periodically contain a posting that's
relevant to a group's topic, could also include daily postings of the
owner's lunch as well. And that, to avoid a lot of confusion and hunger, it
might be best to be able to filter these out before they managed to reach
the list. Ideally, you would have the option to simply tick a MODERATE THIS
FEED box as you add each one, with an option to edit the setting later.

One thing I did consider post-post was the idea of creating a sub-group
specifically for feeds. But I'll admit I'm discussing all of this in the
dark. I haven't created any sub-groups yet and haven't added any
integrations either. It's just that, if a service offers a feature, I like
to find a way to make use of it. I hate that so many of the Yahoo! Groups I
belong to are seen by their owners as little more than a mailing list when
they can be so much more. I should just pull the trigger and play around
with my options.

I'm afraid I'll soon become your worst nightmare, Mark. In answering this
post, I've just thought of three more related questions to ask.

Hail Hydra! B)



locked Re: How would groups.io deal with abuse?

 

Hi Ronaldo,

Groups.io has the usual assortment of abuse email addresses (postmaster@ and support@ being the two main ones). We have triggers on the direct add function which when tripped, cause the adds to be queued for us to moderate. Between that and the fact that direct add is only available for paid groups, hopefully we won't have an issue with abuse.

(Note that subgroups have the direct add function, but only for people who are already subscribed to the parent group. I don't believe that the possibility of abuse is the same in that scenario.)

Thanks,
Mark


On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 7:08 PM, ro-esp <ro-esp@...> wrote:
Yahoogroups removed the add-feature because too many mods abused it. I understand groups.io does/will have it.

Will there be a complaint-adress? Will abuse mods get their status revoked or something?

I also thing yahoogroups has a webpage where people can "opt-out" of all invitations, but I don't think that's a good idea - because it would be too restrictive for bonafide groups


              groetjes, Ronaldo
--
http://www.esperanto..net  http://www.moneyasdebt.net



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

Mute This Thread: https://groups.io/mt/5896?uid=3
Change Your Subscription: https://groups.io/org/groupsio/beta/editsub?uid=3
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/org/groupsio/beta/leave
Group Home: https://groups.io/org/groupsio/beta
Contact Group Owner: beta+owner@groups.io
Terms of Service: https://groups.io/static/tos
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-



locked Re: Moderation For Integrations?

 

> What happens when someone replies to one of these moderated integration
> messages? Should that message be moderated as well?

I don't see why replies would need to be moderated.

I was really just thinking that there are a lot of external feeds, updates,
and photos which, while they may periodically contain a posting that's
relevant to a group's topic, could also include daily postings of the
owner's lunch as well. And that, to avoid a lot of confusion and hunger, it
might be best to be able to filter these out before they managed to reach
the list. Ideally, you would have the option to simply tick a MODERATE THIS
FEED box as you add each one, with an option to edit the setting later.

One thing I did consider post-post was the idea of creating a sub-group
specifically for feeds. But I'll admit I'm discussing all of this in the
dark. I haven't created any sub-groups yet and haven't added any
integrations either. It's just that, if a service offers a feature, I like
to find a way to make use of it. I hate that so many of the Yahoo! Groups I
belong to are seen by their owners as little more than a mailing list when
they can be so much more. I should just pull the trigger and play around
with my options.

I'm afraid I'll soon become your worst nightmare, Mark. In answering this
post, I've just thought of three more related questions to ask.

Hail Hydra! B)


locked How would groups.io deal with abuse?

ro-esp
 

Yahoogroups removed the add-feature because too many mods abused it. I understand groups.io does/will have it.

Will there be a complaint-adress? Will abuse mods get their status revoked or something?

I also thing yahoogroups has a webpage where people can "opt-out" of all invitations, but I don't think that's a good idea - because it would be too restrictive for bonafide groups


groetjes, Ronaldo
--
http://www.esperanto.net http://www.moneyasdebt.net


locked Re: Display featured groups in the home page

 

Good suggestion. I've moved the Find/Create group link to the top of the nav bar. If you have ideas for other places the create group link should go, please let me know.

Thanks,
Mark

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 8:00 PM, <walkraft@...> wrote:

Currently, there aren't many people who are joining groups. I would suggest that this is likely because the join groups feature is rather hidden. You have to click on "Your Groups", then "Find or Create a group". There are a few possibilities that may lead to more groups being created. One would be to add "Find or create a group" directly to the top bar. Another option would be to display featured groups on the homepage.



locked Display featured groups in the home page

 

Currently, there aren't many people who are joining groups. I would suggest that this is likely because the join groups feature is rather hidden. You have to click on "Your Groups", then "Find or Create a group". There are a few possibilities that may lead to more groups being created. One would be to add "Find or create a group" directly to the top bar. Another option would be to display featured groups on the homepage.


locked Re: Moderation For Integrations?

 

Hmm, I had never thought of that before. Certainly it's doable. I can think of at least two ways to do it:

1) When you set up the integration, specify that those messages should be moderated
2) Adding an option to hashtags so that you can specify that emails with a given hashtag should be moderated

At first thought, I'm leaning towards #2, because that opens up other possibilities with moderation. Thoughts?

What happens when someone replies to one of these moderated integration messages? Should that message be moderated as well?

Thanks,
Mark



On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 10:17 AM, <whofanvidme@...> wrote:

Integrating RSS feeds would be a handy feature for my group, but only if I could pick and choose which posts actually made it onto the list. Would moderation for them (and other integrations) be possible?



locked Moderation For Integrations?

 

Integrating RSS feeds would be a handy feature for my group, but only if I could pick and choose which posts actually made it onto the list. Would moderation for them (and other integrations) be possible?


locked Subgroups live #changelog

 

All,

I've pushed subgroups to the live site. To create a subgroup, click on the '+ Subgroup' tab when viewing your group. Here's the text I've written up for the help center:

----
Groups.io supports subgroups. A subgroup is a group within another group. When viewing your group on the website, you can create a subgroup by clicking the 'Subgroup' tab on the left side. The email address of a subgroup is of the form parentgroup+subgroup@groups.io.

Subgroups have all the functionality of normal groups, with the exceptions that to be a member of a subgroup, you must be a member of the parent group, and you cannot invite people to join subgroups.

Once a person is a member of the parent group, they can subscribe directly to the subgroup if it's permitted, they can be added directly to the subgroup, or they can ask to join the subgroup if it is restricted.
----

Please let me know if you see any problems or have any suggestions for improvements. I'll probably announce this on updates@groups.io Monday or Tuesday.

Thanks!
Mark


locked Re: Welcome to beta

Cacky B
 

I'm on verizon.net, and have had a large number of group messages put into the spam folder by verizon.  I have carefully checked it every day, marked them as "Not Spam", and also listed the domain as as safe in my own account settings.  Yesterday, when I tried to respond to a message for the first time, verizon refused to send it, marking it as spam.  I followed their instructions for that occurrence, sent the message to "spamdetector.update@...", explaining what the domain represented and the purpose of the beta group.  Within about 40 minutes I was able to send the message without a problem.

Hopefully, verizon has white listed the domain.

Cacky

On 10/22/2014 5:54 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:05 PM, CGrlgsby via GROUPS.IO <user+250@groups.io> wrote:
Greetings,
I am not sure if this has been addressed here but as a new subscriber the welcome message copied below which I received from groups.io was sent directly to my AOL webmail spam folder. I do not have any special filters setup on my end so perhaps AOL considered it spam due to the message containing many URL's ? Stranger things have happened, yeah I know it's AOL but their email has always worked predictably more often than not since the early 90s which is more than I can say for Yahoo's products.

Hmm. I haven't heard of any other reports. We're set up to receive notification if anyone with an aol.com email address marks one of our emails as spam, and we haven't received any of those notifications. Perhaps it's an issue with us sending the email as text/html but it not containing any HTML. I'll look into it.

 
I hope the groups.io effort succeeds, I have managed groups on Y! since the OneList/eGroups days of the late 90s and am very unhappy with the 'new and improved' Y! groups and Y!mail. Your way of public beta testing is the way Y! should have handled their sweeping changes, not having thrust them upon unsuspecting group 'owners' and their members.

Thanks!

Mark 




This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.



locked Re: re Welcome

CGrlgsby <cgrlgsby@...>
 

There was a period of time a year or two ago where the .io domains were looked upon with extra scrutiny because they were new and not many people were familiar with them. Since then I believe Google has given them top level domain status placing them on equal footing along with .com .net etc and they are passing more filter gauntlets without issues. Check your favorite search engine for '.io domain issues' or something along those lines for additional background on the .io domain.

Interestingly at least two of the messages Cacky B. sent to this group today were marked as spam by AOL and directed to my spam folder. I do not recall which ones so I cannot check the headers for a possible reason. I will pay closer attention to others and look them over, the answer might be explained in the headers.
CG


-----Original Message-----
From: Cacky B <cackyb@...>
To: beta <beta@groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Oct 23, 2014 9:42 pm
Subject: Re: [beta] Reply to CGrigsby re Welcome

I will try to send the original message again and see what happens.  I'm wondering if the trigger is the number of links at the bottom of the message that are added to any group message that is sent.  If I get the message when I try to send this, I'll copy and send it along.

Cacky

On 10/23/2014 4:31 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Hmm, that's very strange. When you say that Verizon refuses to send it, do they give you an error message?

I have specifically whitelisted the servers we use to send email with Verizon, and got an acknowledgement email from them 10 days ago saying that we should be whitelisted. But that generally only applies to email that we send to Verizon, not the other way around. 

Please let me know if you find out any additional information.

Thanks,
Mark


On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Cacky B <cackyb@...> wrote:
I have been trying to send the message below for two days. Verizon continues to refuse it.  I have cleared the message to which it was a reply (the one sent by the AOL user) in the hope that reducing the number of links in the message will prevent it from being pegged as spam by verizon.  If this goes through, then that tells me it's not the group domain or address, but the links contained within the message that trigger the refusal to send.  If that's the case, then even replies that are sent will need to clear most of the message to which they are replying.

I'm on verizon.net, and have had a large number of group messages put into the spam folder by verizon.  I have carefully checked it every day, marked them as "Not Spam", and also listed the domain as as safe in my own account settings.  Yesterday, when I tried to respond to a message for the first time, verizon refused to send it, marking it as spam.  I followed their instructions for that occurrence, sent the message to "spamdetector.update@...", explaining what the domain represented and the purpose of the beta group.  Within about 40 minutes I was able to send the message without a problem.

Hopefully, verizon has white listed the domain.

Since writing the above, I have tried to send the message, had it refused, submitted it to the spam detector address for verizon, tried sending again the next morning, had it refused, submitted it again, tried sending again, had it refused again.  Will keep trying, as I hope to get this white listed with verizon, rather than having to go through this hassle.  Obviously this will create a problem for anyone owning a list on the site also..

Cacky

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups..io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

Mute This Thread: https://groups.io/mt/4936?uid=3
Change Your Subscription: https://groups.io/org/groupsio/beta/editsub?uid=3
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/org/groupsio/beta/leave
Group Home: https://groups.io/org/groupsio/beta
Contact Group Owner: beta+owner@groups.io
Terms of Service: https://groups.io/static/tos
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-






This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.


locked Re: Error Message

 

Cacky,

Can you try to send that message to mark@corp.groups.io? I don't think it'll work, but it's worth a try.

Another thing is that you can try sending the message after you strip out all parts of the message you were replying to.

Thanks,
Mark

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Cacky B <cackyb@verizon..net> wrote:
I tried again to send the original message.  Here is the error message:  "An error occurred while sending mail. The mail server responded:  5.7.1 The message you attempted to send was determined to be spam. Please visit http://www.verizon.net/spamfaq for more information.. Please check the message and try again."

Of course I went to the spamfaq page that they direct me to in the error message.  That was where I got the instructions to submit the message to spamdetector.update@....

I had no trouble sending the reply message I sent a few minutes ago.  It had all the links on the bottom, so I really don't know what is causing the refusal.

Cacky



This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.




locked Error Message

Cacky B
 

I tried again to send the original message.  Here is the error message:  "An error occurred while sending mail. The mail server responded:  5.7.1 The message you attempted to send was determined to be spam. Please visit http://www.verizon.net/spamfaq for more information.. Please check the message and try again."

Of course I went to the spamfaq page that they direct me to in the error message.  That was where I got the instructions to submit the message to spamdetector.update@....

I had no trouble sending the reply message I sent a few minutes ago.  It had all the links on the bottom, so I really don't know what is causing the refusal.

Cacky



This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.