Received from J_Catlady at 9/7/2018 08:04 PM UTC:

I would change them all of these entires to start with "Message rejected," making the word "rejected" unambiguously an adjective rather than an action.

In the original "Rejected message" the word "rejected" could be an adjective or a verb, but in the proposed "Message rejected" it's a verb (past tense). English language syntax doesn't place adjectives AFTER the noun they modify or describe. The proposed change only adds confusion.

Perhaps "System rejected message..."

Jim H

I think (but am not sure) that this is a recent change:  

The search terms for rejected messages all now read
"Rejected message because of [xyz]"
e.g., "Rejected message because of attachments," "Rejected message from member who can't post," etc.

These are entires in the Message Activity log, and the word "Rejected" is meant to read as an adjective. Yet they actually read as an action by a person, as if a moderator rejected the message, and that's not the case. All the rejections in these entries were automatic by the system. The only active "rejection" available in the Moderator Activity log is "Rejected pending message."

So I think the language is unclear, and I would change them all of these entires to start with "Message rejected," making the word "rejected" unambiguously an adjective rather than an action. This change would also make them consistent with the other entries in the search terms, like "Moderated message' and "Non-member message."

--
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

I just received a private message which obviously came from some groups.io group, but I have no idea which one (I'm a member of several). The message title is pretty generic and the group name or tag is not included. Could that be added?
--
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

If a topic is marked with a hashtag, and you later (after the message has posted) set the hashtag to set to (for example) "reply to sender" (in a group set to "reply to group"), the topic is then correctly set to "reply to sender." Similarly with the reverse: if a topic has a hashtag set to "reply to sender," and you later remove "reply to sender" from the hashtag, the topic also loses the "reply to sender" attribute.

The same behavior holds for "moderated": if a topic is already marked with some hashtag, and you later set the tag to "moderated," the topic becomes moderated; and the reverse (remove "moderated" from the tag and the topic goes back to unmoderated). 

However, the "locked" hashtag attribute behaves differently. If you mark a topic with a tag and later set the tag to "locked," the topic does not become locked; and similarly for the reverse (if you mark a topic with a tag that is set to "locked" and you later remove the lock attribute, the topic does not unlock).

In looking at the descriptions of the hashtag attributes, there is a slight discrepancy between the "locked" and "moderated" attributes. "Moderated" is described as "messages with this hashtag will be moderated," whereas "Locked" is described as "topics with this tag will be locked immediately." And so I wonder whether this discrepancy in the language - locked "immediately" vs. no such adverb for "moderated" or for "reply to sender" (et al) - is an intentional reflection of intentionally disparate behavior: namely, you can use a hashtag to lock a topic only "immediately" (but not later), in contrast to the other attributes, where the topic marches in lock step with later changes in the hashtag.

So my questions are, is this disparity (in both the language and the behavior) of the "locked" attribute on a hashtag intentional, and if so, why? Couldn't "Locked" be something which, like the other attributes, could be applied later to the topic if and when the hashtag changes?

(A minor matter: in testing these, I noticed that a topic locked via hashtag displays the locked icon, but a topic moderated via hashtag does not display the moderated icon.)
--
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

On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 04:08 AM, Bruce Bowman wrote:

One cannot assume that attachments *are* images.

True, but it would still be nice to have the carousel feature for attachments, no matter what they are. We have members posting lab reports, sometimes large numbers of them in a single post, and you continually have to go back and forth and see them all.
 
--
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

On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 01:09 AM, Shal Farley wrote:

Handling the attachments to a given message as a mini-album is a reasonable suggestion. It would be equivalent to what Yahoo Groups referred to as a "Photomatic" album.

One cannot assume that attachments *are* images. And doesn't the Photomatic functionality already exist in the Emailed Photos folder?

Bruce

Colin,

I'm not seeing this at all. When I see a post with image attachments,
it has a bunch of small images underneath.

Bruce was referring to images in an album in the Photos section.

Handling the attachments to a given message as a mini-album is a reasonable suggestion. It would be equivalent to what Yahoo Groups referred to as a "Photomatic" album.

Shal

I thought I'd seen something about this before, so I did a search and found the request below, which seems related to my request to curtail the length of the signature in general, and also to this thread:

https://beta.groups.io/g/main/topic/9499672

--
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

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 09:08 PM, Shal Farley wrote:

(Though saying that ensures that someone will think of one.)

Of course they will. I'm counting down. ;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

J,

This could be done with sub-option under "Normalize HTML emails" that
says "Include auto-signatures."

Even simpler, I wouldn't bother with the sub-option. I can't imagine a use case for not also normalizing the signature.

(Though saying that ensures that someone will think of one.)

Shal

Thank you Dave for the explanation.  I created an email alias, and will use that to test the Subscriber view.

OP-
Good document control practise is that you do not have a constantly named file unless it's iteration is also described.
People will inevitable download these things and then not know what version it is they have. (Ever been accused of misleading ppl only to find they have a 3 year old file they use for reference)?
Relying on a 'change date' field is a poor second best 'control'.

Not criticising Marks bug fix or reasons for change ;-)
regards
davew

This is somewhat related to a previous request I made for an option to limit the number of characters in the sig:
https://beta.groups.io/g/main/topic/23851783

--
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

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Jim Higgins wrote:

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

I've no idea how that particular comment helps in any way the request made.

FWIW Alan, using another profile for 'Admin-Test' purposes has been the way on 'systems' for years AND is more robust.
It is cleaner, personal (to you) and certainly involves a lot less tricky programming than I expect Mark would ever want to do even if he has the time and wherewithall to do so.
Mail.com allows accounts and up to 10 alias', so while it's a chore for you, you are talking about ensuring your clients well being and usefulness of the group.
Regards, davew

This ^,
and strip the d** annoying html advertising sigs from other sites period; as well as graphic based sigs.
Both are using space and extend (as stated above) into abuse of screen space.
Yes, some of us do continue to use 8 year old laptops- no, we don't all have unlimited wealth and 24"+ screen real estate to fawn over.
Cheers dave

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 02:21 PM, ro-esp wrote:

and whether that value outweighs the amount of programming

It would be easy to implement. It's not quite so clear how to make the setting interact with Helen's suggestion about just moderating the first message in threads started by the member. I think the two could be nested options, with moderate whole thread beneath moderate first message.

that's what often happens when an idea is "outside the box"...

I don't see it as that far out of the box. But yeah. ;)
 
--
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

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 07:35 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

The only question is whether moderating threads by certain individuals would
have value.

Moderating threads *started by* certain individuals, right?
Something like "override. threads started by this member are moderated"

and whether that value outweighs the amount of programming

these arguments against it are really perplexing.

that's what often happens when an idea is "outside the box"...

groetjes, Ronaldo

I'm not seeing this at all. When I see a post with image attachments, it has a bunch of small images underneath. When I click one, it goes to an image URL and displays the image (no HTML). I need to click "back" to go back to the messages, find the next image (remember where I was) and click on the next one.

/Colin

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 08:32 AM, Colin 't Hart wrote:

May I suggest that images be displayed in a "carousel" -- with next and previous buttons? Right now images open in a new page, requiring Back and the clicking on the next one (if you remember where you were up to).

There already are next and previous buttons. Click anywhere in the grey areas that flank the image. It does take awhile to load and render the next image, though.

Bruce

I have a new group member whose signature comes out double-spaced, which ends up using about a half page of real estate at the bottom of each of his posts - the posts themselves are often quite short. I went into his member page to fix this, but the signature in his member page appears to be single-spaced. So this seems to be something he copied and pasted from somewhere (possibly a word doc) with formatting not visible.

This may have come up before here (if so, I couldn't find the thread(, but I would like to be able to remove formatting from signatures, just as our group removes formatting from posts. This could be done with sub-option under "Normalize HTML emails" that says "Include auto-signatures." (Since with signatures the problem is not really emails, perhaps the wording could be changed to "Normalize HTML messages," with the sub-option "Include signatures" - or something like that.)
--
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