Date   

moderated Re: Web-only group #suggestion

 

It’s unclear whom you’re quoting. I am strongly in favor of the anonymous group concept, however it’s implemented.

On Sep 30, 2018, at 3:34 PM, Jim Higgins <HigginsJ@sc.rr.com> wrote:

Received from ro-esp at 9/28/2018 08:36 PM UTC:

On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 05:25 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

The advantage is as I stated at the beginning: the ability to create an "anonymous group," where members are not privy to the other members' email addresses.
Depending on the type of group, it could be a serious disadvantage that people cannot contact eachother "offlist", as in: lots of chitchat on-list that other people don't find interesting. Like on youtube

That may very well come to be but it's not a good reason to reject the notion of an anonymous group to those who want one. Group Owners would need to deal with too much chitchat however they choose to, and those who don't like the result would be free to unsubscribe. To each his own, with those not liking it being the ones who need to change... or leave.

Jim H



--
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: Web-only group #suggestion

Jim Higgins
 

Received from J_Catlady at 9/28/2018 08:48 PM UTC:

On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 01:36 PM, ro-esp wrote:
it could be a serious disadvantage

Disabling the emails - essentially making everyone "special notice only" or "no email" - is the next step up.

Only if "the next step up" is to deny membership via email, thus disenfranchising a lot of otherwise worthwhile members. There's a better solution.

Jim H


moderated Re: Web-only group #suggestion

Jim Higgins
 

Received from ro-esp at 9/28/2018 08:36 PM UTC:

On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 05:25 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

The advantage is as I stated at the beginning: the ability to create an "anonymous group," where members are not privy to the other members' email addresses.
Depending on the type of group, it could be a serious disadvantage that people cannot contact eachother "offlist", as in: lots of chitchat on-list that other people don't find interesting. Like on youtube

That may very well come to be but it's not a good reason to reject the notion of an anonymous group to those who want one. Group Owners would need to deal with too much chitchat however they choose to, and those who don't like the result would be free to unsubscribe. To each his own, with those not liking it being the ones who need to change... or leave.

Jim H


moderated Re: Direct Add in a Subgroup

 

Mark,

I wrote:
2) A bulk Direct-Add ability. Rather than checking hundreds of boxes
(and double-checking that I got just the right ones) it would be
easier for me to copy a column of email addresses from excel to
identify the members who signed up for the additional activity
represented by the subgroup.
Never mind.

It turns out I can do this with Direct Add on the primary group. I get an error for each member who's already in the primary group, but they do get added to the subgroup checkmarked on the Direct Add page.

And as a bonus, from my point of view, they don't get the "You've been added", presumably because of the error on the primary group add.

But I as moderator still get the notification:
"New Subscriber To subgroup@example.groups.io"

Perfect!

Shal


moderated Easier way to delete photos #suggestion

 

Following on the comments in the other photo thread, about deleting photos one by one: I embarked on a cleanup project for my group's emailed photos and have quickly become bogged down in an exponential process, namely: I can only click on and delete one photo at a time, and after refreshing the page (which is the only way to click on and delete the next photo), I end up back at the top of the page and am faced with traversing the list again down to where I was. With hundreds of photos, this is becoming sisyphean.

Could there be a "delete" checkbox below each thumbnail, so that you can check a bunch of them at a time and delete them in one fell swoop? 
--
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: Removed for Spam suggestion #suggestion

 

Mark,

I wrote:
The problem is that the receiving service will look at who delivered
the message (Groups.io) and who is named in the From (somemod @
example.com) and treat the message as having been "spoofed". This will
probably make the message more likely to be delivered to the spam
folder, ...
It occurs to me that this also applies to normal group postings coming from services that do not require the DMARC mung of their From address.

So maybe that workaround on the outbound would help. That is, for every /receiving/ service that has a high rate of unsubscribes, mung all From addresses sent to that service.

I noticed that it was generally the same services that publish DMARC p=reject that show up as those operating FBLs with the highest perceived rates of member unsubscriptions. Maybe that's not a coincidence, maybe those services are also particularly sensitive to inbound spoofs, even when the sending service does not publish a sequester policy, or has no policy at all.

Maybe.

Shal


moderated Re: Removed for Spam suggestion #suggestion

 

Toby,

3. the From: address is the owner/mod, not the group address
I think this is a bad idea (unless you mean the group's +owner address).

The problem is that the receiving service will look at who delivered the message (Groups.io) and who is named in the From (somemod @ example.com) and treat the message as having been "spoofed". This will probably make the message more likely to be delivered to the spam folder, the opposite of your intent.

A message that is honestly from Groups.io, or better still a message direct from the mod/owner's email service, are almost always more likely to be delivered to a person's Inbox than a spoofed message.

Suggestion 2 does not require the member to go to any web page, they
stay in their email. They only need to click Reply and Send.
I like this idea. Along with your later suggestion that 1 & 2 could be combined: a single message that lets the (former) member choose whether to reply by email or click the link.

I would suggest that the resubscribe command email does not generate
the welcome message or an email containing a link to confirm - if the
sender was previously subscribed to the group.
This is already true of the notice containing the resume link. So that should be easy.

This would require groups.io to retain knowledge that the member was
unsubscribed from the group,
This also must already be true for the resume link to work.

Shal


moderated Re: Removed for Spam suggestion #suggestion

Toby Kraft
 

The verbiage would be different and, in the member's mind, they may not even know they got unsubscribed so would confuse them to get an invite to a group they are already in. 
Also, no subsequent welcome message.
But could coalesce both suggestions into single email - either link or reply would resubscribe.
Was thinking that having From: be the owner/mod sender would avoid message going into spam folder.
Another thought - email containing many links is sometimes considered "spammy" so email with no links might be better.
Toby


moderated Re: Removed for Spam suggestion #suggestion

 

How is this functionally different from an invitation to the group?
--
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 Removed for Spam suggestion #suggestion

Toby Kraft
 

There has been much discussion which I won't repeat.  Many commented that, for certain users, getting them to click a link in an email is a challenge (and I understand that).
I have 2 suggestions:
  1. Provide a means for owner/mods to resend the "re-subscribe" email with the link:
    1. with updated easier to understand language and terminology
    2. allow a customizable section for a personalized message
    3. the From: address is the owner/mod, not the group address
  2. Provide a means to send a "re-subscribe" email - but this email does not contain a link:
    1. allow a customizable section for a personalized message
    2. the From: address is the owner/mod, not the group address
    3. the Reply-to: address is set to a special address which will resubscribe the member without further ado (perhaps GROUPNAME+resubscribe@groups.io).
Suggestion 1 has been mentioned elsewhere along with extending the time period for the Re-sub link.
Suggestion 2 does not require the member to go to any web page, they stay in their email.  They only need to click Reply and Send.  I would suggest that the resubscribe command email does not generate the welcome message or an email containing a link to confirm - if the sender was previously subscribed to the group.  This would require groups.io to retain knowledge that the member was unsubscribed from the group, essentially in suspended state as has also been suggested.

Thanks
Toby



moderated Re: Extend "Unsubscribed for spam" link expiration

Bob Bellizzi
 

I've noticed that the 3 day limit really has some stretch in it.
One of my members went almost 4 full days and successfully rejoined using the link
--

Bob Bellizzi

Founder, Fuchs Friends ®
Founder & Executive Director, The Corneal Dystrophy Foundation


moderated Re: Photo search and clean up of the photos pages

Toby Kraft
 

I'd like to point out that the partial word matching only works on "words" separated by spaces or non-alpha characters in the file name.  It does not do a search for a string of characters anywhere in the filename.  To me, this is less than ideal.  Say you have photos named "ThisPartyxxx", "ThatPartyxxx", "OtherPartyxxx".  A search for "Party" will not find anything.

Thanks

Toby


moderated Extend "Unsubscribed for spam" link expiration

Duane
 

It has been suggested that the 3 day expiration of the resubscribe link be extended to 7 or 10 days.  Some folks don't check email daily, so may not see or find the notice for awhile and it could have expired.  Hopefully this would be a minor/easy change, but may reduce complaints for some users.

Thanks,
Duane


moderated Re: Photo search and clean up of the photos pages

Duane
 

On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 10:14 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
You can conveniently delete only one photo at a time...
Yeah, I've had to work with that several times.  It looks like it's because the photos in the album get renumbered when one is deleted, so the identifier is incorrect.  Not a problem if deleting in different albums.

Duane


moderated Re: Photo search and clean up of the photos pages

 

It is, however, a slight PITA if you're on a mission to clean up the photos pages. You can conveniently delete only one photo at a time...


On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 8:12 AM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 07:41 AM, Drew wrote:
You need to refresh the page after each delete.
That's what I was thinking. I guess this is considered ok and I won't send Mark the example since it's reproducible. Thanks.
 
--
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: Photo search and clean up of the photos pages

 

On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 07:41 AM, Drew wrote:
You need to refresh the page after each delete.
That's what I was thinking. I guess this is considered ok and I won't send Mark the example since it's reproducible. Thanks.
 
--
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: Photo search and clean up of the photos pages

Drew
 

It has been that way for awhile. You need to refresh the page after each delete. Then when you click on an image it will show the correct one.

Drew

On 09/29/18 00:04, J_Catlady wrote:
Something is off. After deleting a photo, the thumbnails (I guess you could call them that) don't seem to adjust. You click on an image and it produces a completely different photo from the thumbnail image.
--
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: Photo search and clean up of the photos pages

 

Mark,
I was thinking that it was probably an existing bug. I'll have to figure out the best way to send you an example and will do that soon. Thanks.
--
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 Site updates #changelog

 

Changes to the site this week:

  • NEW: Photo search.
  • CHANGE: Cleaned up and modernized all the photos pages.
  • CHANGE: Ignore any autoreply headers if the message is to an email integration (normally we would drop those messages).
  • BUGFIX: Fixed the email address and URL in the bounce message for messages sent to enterprise groups where you are not subscribed.
  • NEW/TESTING: You can define a Display Template to specify how database tables are displayed. This is in limited testing for the moment.
  • NEW: New database column type 'HTML Paragraph'.
  • SYSADMIN: Replaced a badly behaving webserver.
  • SYSADMIN: Updated nsqd on all machines.
  • INTERNAL: More infrastructure work to make it easier to bring up new machine instances.
  • CHANGE: Cap images at a max of 10k per side, regardless of group setting.

Have a good weekend everyone.

Mark


moderated Re: Photo search and clean up of the photos pages

 

Hi J,

On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:04 PM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
Something is off. After deleting a photo, the thumbnails (I guess you could call them that) don't seem to adjust. You click on an image and it produces a completely different photo from the thumbnail image.

Hmm, nothing I did should have changed that. Can you email support with the group name, the album name and the photo to click on to demonstrate the bug? Perhaps it's a bug that predates the changes.

Thanks,
Mark 

11721 - 11740 of 30101