Date   

Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 05:09 PM, Jim Higgins wrote:
why not simply tell that member that the specific hashtag must be applied
If the required hashtag is known ... Some of them would be known at joining. Some would not be known. Some members would comply. Some would not. Etc. etc. etc. 
 
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

Jim Higgins
 

Received from J_Catlady at 9/3/2018 06:35 PM UTC:

The idea is that either the member or the mod applies the hashtag at some point, thus *eliminating* the need to moderate on a per-message basis and/or add it later. In our group, we deal with one main disease that has subdiagnoses. We know a priori when a member joins which their cat has (or the cat may be diagnosed with it later). We would apply the hashtag to the member immediately upon joining, or when their cat's diagnosis becomes known.

If the required hashtag is known when the member joins the group, why not simply tell that member that the specific hashtag must be applied to every new thread that member starts?

Jim H


moderated Re: Button to temporarily swap Owner/Mod view to Subscriber view (for testing purposes)

Jim Higgins
 

Received from Alan N at 9/3/2018 06:47 PM UTC:

Not sure if this has previously been requested. I'm a new Group Owner, and finding it cumbersome to "see" what how the website appears to regular (non Owner or Moderator) Subscribers. I only have ONE personal email address, and would rather not have to create another one to subscribe (as a "testing profile") for my group. It would be a lot easier to have the option (under Owner or Moderator Settings) to easily swap back and forth.

I've pretty much given up walking subscribers who won't look at the HELP files for themselves thru how to do things, but if this will really help those who still have the patience then it would be a VERY GOOD THING.

Jim H


moderated Re: Poll option allowing subscribers to include additional answers/choices to an existing poll #suggestion

Drew
 

I forgot to include... "Poll has been updated" notices should be suppressed when subscribers add their own answers to an existing poll.

Actually, the option to suppress such notices might be desirable regardless of who edits or alters an existing poll. We don't need such notices to be sent out, for example, when a minor spelling error, etc is corrected.

Drew

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 07:44 PM, Drew wrote:


Feature request: Option to allow subscribers to add additional answers/choices
to an existing poll. This option should be poll-specific, set at the time the
poll is created; not a group setting.

This would allow additional input/interaction by subscribers in polls for
which all the answers are not known by the poll creator or which are not well
defined-- basically, a survey where respondents will have the choice of voting
for existing answers or supplying one of their own.

Drew


moderated Poll option allowing subscribers to include additional answers/choices to an existing poll #suggestion

Drew
 

Feature request: Option to allow subscribers to add additional answers/choices to an existing poll. This option should be poll-specific, set at the time the poll is created; not a group setting.

This would allow additional input/interaction by subscribers in polls for which all the answers are not known by the poll creator or which are not well defined-- basically, a survey where respondents will have the choice of voting for existing answers or supplying one of their own.

Drew


moderated Re: Members list without members' email addresses #suggestion

Don McKee
 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 03:47 PM, Gerald Boutin wrote:
If you didn't mind a bit of effort and you are handy around a computer, you can already export the groups's member list.
Yes, but only if one has permission to look at the "Members" list in the first place.

Actually, the "Members" page lets you download a CSV (the JSON export is under "Settings"). I guess that for the option I'm asking for, the download button would need to be disabled except for Owners and appropriately authorized moderators.

-Don


moderated Re: Whacky wiki ToC

 

Ken,

The issues applying a ToC to each wiki page (that warrants one is well documented.  

What's wrong with them?

For example:
image.png
(one of several examples I've created in GMF's wiki)

Shal


moderated Re: Members list without members' email addresses #suggestion

kr402
 

For those that get messages via email, 
they see the persons complete email 
addie. As eg I saw yours, because I 
received  your message in my email. 

On Sep 4, 2018, at 3:16 PM, Don McKee <Don.McKee@...> wrote:

I can see an advantage to providing that option, but I think it should be sure to clarify that the email addresses of any members who post cannot be hidden from group members who are subscribed via email.

I'm not sure what you mean. I'm looking for an option that lists the "Display Name", but  hides
a usable email address.


moderated Re: Members list without members' email addresses #suggestion

Gerald Boutin <groupsio@...>
 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 05:14 PM, Don McKee wrote:

I would like the ability to display the "Members" list (not the "Directory") to all subscribers, but omit or obscure the email addresses to those who wouldn't otherwise be able to see them. This would be helpful when I want everyone in a group to be able to see who is (or maybe more importantly, who isn't) subscribed, but still want to maintain some level of privacy.



 Don,

If you didn't mind a bit of effort and you are handy around a computer, you can already export the groups's member list. It comes as a .json format file. However, that is just a text file and with a little bit of editing and formatting, you could generate a file with whatever info you wanted and include that in a post or upload as a file.

--
Gerald


moderated Whacky wiki ToC

KWKloeber
 

The issues applying a ToC to each wiki page (that warrants one is well documented.  
Whats the probability of those issues getting “fixed”?  Or should we just move on to another wiki platform?

Page ToCs **should** look respectable as they do with the mediawiki platform, like in this example:
http://c34.org/wiki/index.php?title=Diesel_Engine

Is that outside the rehlm of the possible? (I.e., ain’t gonna happen”?)

 Ken


moderated Re: Members list without members' email addresses #suggestion

Don McKee
 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 01:28 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
I can see an advantage to providing that option, but I think it should be sure to clarify that the email addresses of any members who post cannot be hidden from group members who are subscribed via email.
I'm not sure what you mean. I'm looking for an option that lists the "Display Name", but  hides a usable email address.

 
Also, the display in the list of members without a display name seems problematic. Would you just leave them out?
If users haven't set their display name, then just leave them blank or maybe replaced with "<Not Provided>" (I'm fine with the former). In those cases, all you've got to go on is the part of the email address that's displayed (e.g. "don.mckee@..." in my case). If the email address is omitted completely, then this option may not provide much value for those groups whose members don't set their display name.

It's also a little unclear what's meant by "those without the correct permissions." I would leave that out entirely and have it say "Subscribers, but mask email addresses." Otherwise, you're basically implying that some subscribers could see more than some moderators, and that sounds like a mistake.
What you suggested is what I originally had. I changed it to imply that owners (and moderators with appropriate permissions) would still see the entire email address.

-Don


moderated Re: Members list without members' email addresses #suggestion

 

"the display in the list of members without a display name"

should read

"the list's display of members without a display name"



On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 1:28 PM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
I can see an advantage to providing that option, but I think it should be sure to clarify that the email addresses of any members who post cannot be hidden from group members who are subscribed via email. 

Also, the display in the list of members without a display name seems problematic. Would you just leave them out?

It's also a little unclear what's meant by "those without the correct permissions." I would leave that out entirely and have it say "Subscribers, but mask email addresses." Otherwise, you're basically implying that some subscribers could see more than some moderators, and that sounds like a mistake.

--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: Members list without members' email addresses #suggestion

 

I can see an advantage to providing that option, but I think it should be sure to clarify that the email addresses of any members who post cannot be hidden from group members who are subscribed via email. 

Also, the display in the list of members without a display name seems problematic. Would you just leave them out?

It's also a little unclear what's meant by "those without the correct permissions." I would leave that out entirely and have it say "Subscribers, but mask email addresses." Otherwise, you're basically implying that some subscribers could see more than some moderators, and that sounds like a mistake.

--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Members list without members' email addresses #suggestion

Don McKee
 

[A locked post by the same title, although slightly different request, can be found here.]

I would like the ability to display the "Members" list (not the "Directory") to all subscribers, but omit or obscure the email addresses to those who wouldn't otherwise be able to see them. This would be helpful when I want everyone in a group to be able to see who is (or maybe more importantly, who isn't) subscribed, but still want to maintain some level of privacy.

From a UI perspective, this might be implemented by adding an option to the "Members Visible" setting:
  • Subscribers, but mask email addresses for those without the correct permissions
  • Subscribers
  • All owners, and moderators with the correct permissions
  • Owners Only
Thanks for your consideration!

-Don


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Tony Moody wrote:
What about some sort of filter?  ; like a whitelist /blacklist and/or a trainable baysian filter.
What about just considering my original feature request. :) Why are people suggesting things as far afield as AI and Bayesian filters? This has gone really far afield. ;p
 
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

Tony Moody
 

Peace.

What about some sort of filter?  ; like a whitelist /blacklist and/or a trainable baysian filter.
Not sure how to handle the results but maybe the filter could add appropriate hashtags or push the post to moderation if in doubt. 

Each group could have their own filter to play with and that could be a handy feature.

OK,
Tony



On 4 Sep 2018 at 10:03, J_Catlady wrote about :
Subject : Re: [beta] setting to moderate ever

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 09:57 AM, Dave Wade wrote:

I see examples of this type of behaviour in groups most every day.

Of course. But that's not a reason to throw in the towel. You may as well recommend doing away with moderated threads completely because people will always find a way around them. Is that what you are advocating? Because that's the logical conclusion to your objection.

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu

  


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 10:29 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
I am not sure it has general and wide spread utility…
I have no idea how many groups veer one way or the other in terms of individuals vs. topics needing moderation. But moderating a topic is ALREADY a feature i in groups.io. By saying that "in most its usually people who need moderating, not topics" you are again essentially arguing that the feature is useless. And it is not.

The only question is whether moderating threads by certain individuals would have value. My group is in existence proof that it would. It can't be known a prior how many other groups would take advantage of or benefit from it, but these arguments against it are really perplexing. It would be a minute change to the UI and trivial to implement, and nobody would have to use it who didn't want to. 
 
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

Dave Wade
 

 

As others have said, in most its usually people who need moderating, not topics. In most groups there are one or two vocal individuals who need careful management.

They divert threads off-topic and hijack sensible discussion. Even then they are, if membership is not moderated, prone to opening new accounts….

.. so what I am saying is that whilst I can see some benefit in it, I am not sure it has general and wide spread utility…

 

Dave

 

From: main@beta.groups.io <main@beta.groups.io> On Behalf Of J_Catlady
Sent: 04 September 2018 18:04
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] setting to moderate every thread a member starts

 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 09:57 AM, Dave Wade wrote:

I see examples of this type of behaviour in groups most every day.

Of course. But that's not a reason to throw in the towel. You may as well recommend doing away with moderated threads completely because people will always find a way around them. Is that what you are advocating? Because that's the logical conclusion to your objection.
 
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 09:57 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
I see examples of this type of behaviour in groups most every day.
Of course. But that's not a reason to throw in the towel. You may as well recommend doing away with moderated threads completely because people will always find a way around them. Is that what you are advocating? Because that's the logical conclusion to your objection.
 
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

Dave Wade
 

J,

 

It might work for JUST your group, but I see examples of this type of behaviour in groups most every day. Saw one at the weekend in a Ham Radio group where some ones post was blocked, and in a Vintage Computer group just today where a reply was removed..

 

Dave

 

 

From: main@beta.groups.io <main@beta.groups.io> On Behalf Of J_Catlady
Sent: 04 September 2018 17:48
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] setting to moderate every thread a member starts

 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 09:41 AM, Dave Wade wrote:

When folks figure out their replies are moderated they will simply create new threads or change the subject in a different thread to get their urgent replies through.

I disagree. That will not happen in our group. How do I know this? Because I ALREADY moderate such threads and it doesn't happen. The only difference is that I now have to do it by hand.

The "having worked in IT for years" argument also holds no sway with me - although, as I posted before re the Freakonomics Radio story, human nature does make people find a way around rules. This is not about IT. 
 
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu

12641 - 12660 of 30674