Date   

moderated Re: Don't allow members to delete whole topics @strongsuggestion

 

Mark, 

I dunno. Maybe not a bad idea. I’ll think about the possible ramifications as I sit in the dentist’s chair during the next hour and a half. Take my mind off things. :-)


On Dec 18, 2018, at 9:29 AM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

J,

What if, instead of completely nuking the message when someone deletes it, I replace it with something that just says 'This message has been deleted'?

Thanks,
Mark

--
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: Hashtags

Jim Higgins
 

Received from Dave Sergeant at 12/18/2018 05:03 PM UTC:

For those of us who receive email versions of posts and who use email clients that thread by the subject line the threading breaks since only a limited number of characters are used for the threading (at least in my email reader).

Same for most of them.


Personally I can see little point in more than one hashtag in a post.

If used solely for SEARCH purposes and not for the actions that certain classes of #hashtags can trigger... the result the recipe group wants can be had by putting "tags" in the first line (or anywhere) in the message. Just put some character that isn't "#" in front of each "tag" so just plain words won't be confused with tags when searching.

Jim H


moderated Re: Don't allow members to delete whole topics @strongsuggestion

 

J,

What if, instead of completely nuking the message when someone deletes it, I replace it with something that just says 'This message has been deleted'?

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: Identically named topics

 

Mark, I also tested it via email with the same result. Will retest.


On Dec 18, 2018, at 9:23 AM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 1:51 AM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
Currently, members can start an infinite number of topics with the same name. Should this be allowed, or should messages bearing the same name as an already existing topic be threaded into that topic?

If you're referring to messages posted via the website, then this was by design. The thought process being that someone using the 'New Topic' post feature definitely wanted a new topic. This was different than messages received via email, where we did try to merge them into existing topics.

I've changed it so that if someone posts a new topic via the web, it's treated the same as if we had received an email, and should be combined to an existing, recent topic of the same name.

Thanks,
Mark 

--
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: Hashtags

Jim Higgins
 

Received from J_Catlady at 12/18/2018 04:18 PM UTC:

I think there's some difficult technical issue Mark alluded to awhile back with increasing the max.

Possibly (read that as "semi-informed guess") the same reason it would be a problem for some mail reading programs... field size for the subject in the message database may be too short to hold more than X number of bytes... with 68 - 72 bytes or so being a number carried forward from the old days when terminals were teletype machines. Ten hashtags jammed into that space would make for some really short tags... esp after considering that the bytes in "Subject: Re [GROUPNAME] " count toward any possible limit on bytes.

Jim H


moderated Re: Hashtags

 

I almost never use less than two. I’m ok with five as the limit but can see legitimate uses for more, depending on the group.

On Dec 18, 2018, at 9:03 AM, Dave Sergeant <dave@davesergeant.com> wrote:

We don't use hashtags in our groups anyway. But there is a very strong
reason for limiting the number of hashtags. They make subject lines
very long. For those of us who receive email versions of posts and who
use email clients that thread by the subject line the threading breaks
since only a limited number of characters are used for the threading
(at least in my email reader).

Personally I can see little point in more than one hashtag in a post.

Dave

On 18 Dec 2018 at 8:17, Marv Waschke wrote:

Is there a reason for limiting the number of hash tags? Hashtags are
different from searching the message text because the user intentionally
classifies the message with a tag but a search infers the classification
from the contents. Similar, but not always the same. The recipe example
shows that a single post can be in a large number of orthogonal
categories. Other subject matter could have more.

http://davesergeant.com



--
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: Identically named topics

 

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 1:51 AM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
Currently, members can start an infinite number of topics with the same name. Should this be allowed, or should messages bearing the same name as an already existing topic be threaded into that topic?

If you're referring to messages posted via the website, then this was by design. The thought process being that someone using the 'New Topic' post feature definitely wanted a new topic. This was different than messages received via email, where we did try to merge them into existing topics.

I've changed it so that if someone posts a new topic via the web, it's treated the same as if we had received an email, and should be combined to an existing, recent topic of the same name.

Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Re: Hashtags

Dave Sergeant
 

We don't use hashtags in our groups anyway. But there is a very strong
reason for limiting the number of hashtags. They make subject lines
very long. For those of us who receive email versions of posts and who
use email clients that thread by the subject line the threading breaks
since only a limited number of characters are used for the threading
(at least in my email reader).

Personally I can see little point in more than one hashtag in a post.

Dave

On 18 Dec 2018 at 8:17, Marv Waschke wrote:

Is there a reason for limiting the number of hash tags? Hashtags are
different from searching the message text because the user intentionally
classifies the message with a tag but a search infers the classification
from the contents. Similar, but not always the same. The recipe example
shows that a single post can be in a large number of orthogonal
categories. Other subject matter could have more.

http://davesergeant.com


moderated Re: Hashtags

 

I think there’s some difficult technical issue Mark alluded to awhile back with increasing the max.


On Dec 18, 2018, at 8:17 AM, Marv Waschke <marv@...> wrote:

Is there a reason for limiting the number of hash tags? Hashtags are different from searching the message text because the user intentionally classifies the message with a tag but a search infers the classification from the contents. Similar, but not always the same. The recipe example shows that a single post can be in a large number of orthogonal categories. Other subject matter could have more.

Limiting the number of tags seems unnecessarily arbitrary if there is no performance or underlying structural reason for limiting them.  If the only reason for limiting hashtags is that someone might unwisely use too many, wouldn't that be better dealt with by moderating and education rather than limiting the system?
Best, Marv

--
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: Hashtags

Marv Waschke
 

Is there a reason for limiting the number of hash tags? Hashtags are different from searching the message text because the user intentionally classifies the message with a tag but a search infers the classification from the contents. Similar, but not always the same. The recipe example shows that a single post can be in a large number of orthogonal categories. Other subject matter could have more.

Limiting the number of tags seems unnecessarily arbitrary if there is no performance or underlying structural reason for limiting them.  If the only reason for limiting hashtags is that someone might unwisely use too many, wouldn't that be better dealt with by moderating and education rather than limiting the system?
Best, Marv


moderated Re: Don't allow members to delete whole topics @strongsuggestion

 

Deletion has also created confusing situations in the archive, wherein the top post of the thread is gone but the responses are there and are meaningless. E.g., top post is gone and the thread consists of a bunch of posts to the effect of "I agree" or "I disagree." Agree or disagree with WHAT? 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


moderated Re: Don't allow members to delete whole topics @strongsuggestion

Jim Higgins
 

Received from Chris Jones via Groups.Io at 12/18/2018 10:15 AM UTC:

I would support message deletion being available to owners/moderators only, albeit settable at a group level.

+1

Jim H


moderated Re: Don't allow members to delete whole topics @strongsuggestion

Chris Jones
 

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Ro wrote:
If a person wants a delete for personal reasons, nothing wrong with them asking the owner/moderator to delete it.
I agree entirely. I am somewhat puzzled by the facilty whereby members can delete posts; given that once a message is posted it is emailed immediately to those who read their traffic that way, and while the post can be deleted from the archive it cannot be deleted from everyone's Inboxes.

I would support message deletion being available to owners/moderators only, albeit settable at a group level.

Chris


moderated Identically named topics

 

Currently, members can start an infinite number of topics with the same name. Should this be allowed, or should messages bearing the same name as an already existing topic be threaded into that topic?


--
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: Don't allow members to delete whole topics @strongsuggestion

 

Ken and Gerald, I will start a separate thread about your issue. I’d rather keep this one on topic of allowing disabling of deletion.


On Dec 17, 2018, at 11:08 PM, Gerald Boutin <groupsio@...> wrote:

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 01:27 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 07:18 PM, Ken Kloeber wrote:
Can a member post a "new" topic that is identical to another topic? 
Actually, I just tested this and it turns out they can. I would have thought groups.io would have threaded them together, but it doesn't. I'm not sure what the goal would be and don't quite understand your message, but yes, they can do that, it turns out. It seems to be a separate issue, but I wonder whether this is the behavior we want/
 
--
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, I have to agree with you.

I understood from a comment Mark posted recently that they would have been "threaded" together as long as the topic name had been active "recently". That is, after some period of time it is allowed to make a new topic with the same topic label.

I also tested and confirmed that I can make two new topics with the same name. I guess I either that functionality was changed or it is broken or I misunderstood some part of the explanation.

--
Gerald

--
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: Don't allow members to delete whole topics @strongsuggestion

Gerald Boutin <groupsio@...>
 

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 01:27 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 07:18 PM, Ken Kloeber wrote:
Can a member post a "new" topic that is identical to another topic? 
Actually, I just tested this and it turns out they can. I would have thought groups.io would have threaded them together, but it doesn't. I'm not sure what the goal would be and don't quite understand your message, but yes, they can do that, it turns out. It seems to be a separate issue, but I wonder whether this is the behavior we want/
 
--
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, I have to agree with you.

I understood from a comment Mark posted recently that they would have been "threaded" together as long as the topic name had been active "recently". That is, after some period of time it is allowed to make a new topic with the same topic label.

I also tested and confirmed that I can make two new topics with the same name. I guess I either that functionality was changed or it is broken or I misunderstood some part of the explanation.

--
Gerald


moderated Re: Don't allow members to delete whole topics @strongsuggestion

 

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 07:18 PM, Ken Kloeber wrote:
Can a member post a "new" topic that is identical to another topic? 
Actually, I just tested this and it turns out they can. I would have thought groups.io would have threaded them together, but it doesn't. I'm not sure what the goal would be and don't quite understand your message, but yes, they can do that, it turns out. It seems to be a separate issue, but I wonder whether this is the behavior we want/
 
--
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: Print option for Databases?

Pamela Tatt
 

Thanks Shal,

I have both Excel and LibreOffice.  I will play around with them, see which one is easiest for me to use and take it from there.

Thanks everyone for your most helpful advice.

I love Groups.io 

Pamela


moderated Re: Don't allow members to delete whole topics @strongsuggestion

KWKloeber
 

Can a member post a "new" topic that is identical to another topic? 
Or they could just insignificantly change it to "edit" and resend the original message.

-ken


moderated Re: Hashtags

Jim Higgins
 

Received from Bruce Bowman at 12/17/2018 10:44 PM UTC:

This strikes me as a peculiar application of hashtags.

The online search engine searches the message body in addition to the subject line...and with that understanding, I don't see how duplicating one into the other is going to enhance search capabilities.

I agree. But no objection to the proposal provided the implementation of it lets the group owner select the max number of hashtags... from zero to 10 (or whatever).

Jim H

8861 - 8880 of 27948