Date   

locked Re: Allow mods with appropriate privileges to edit messages in a locked topic #suggestion

 

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 07:38 AM, Brian Vogel wrote:
Since it is the group owner or a moderator who determines whether something gets locked or not, it makes little sense to restrict their range of options once a topic is locked.
Exactly!
 
--
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


locked Re: Allow mods with appropriate privileges to edit messages in a locked topic #suggestion

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

I'll say it again, and have said it before when this has come up, elsewhere this privilege is standard operating procedure, and should be so for Groups.io.

Since it is the group owner or a moderator who determines whether something gets locked or not, it makes little sense to restrict their range of options once a topic is locked.

I can both edit and post to topics that have been locked on another site where I am a moderator right now, and that's also been the case on several others.

I'll also edit certain posts when "the keyword" or "the key phrase" has a significant typo in it that would make the topic unlikely to be found by future searchers.  This doesn't happen all that often, but it does happen.
--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763 

     I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other half.

           ~ Jay Gould, U.S. financier & railroad robber baron (1836 - 1892)


locked Re: Allow mods with appropriate privileges to edit messages in a locked topic #suggestion

 

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 05:01 AM, Chris Jones wrote:
the capability of locking a message (and thus the topic) at the time of its origination. Send Locked comes to mind...
This already exists if you're starting a new thread, by using a hashtag set to Locked. But of course, you can't do it in an existing thread. So I agree that it would be handy.
 
--
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


locked Re: Allow mods with appropriate privileges to edit messages in a locked topic #suggestion

Chris Jones
 

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 09:55 AM, Marina wrote:
I wish to add that owners and moderators (with appropriate privileges) should be able to bypass all limitations,
Now that I can support, although I don't think I would wish to edit an existing message for a number of reasons.

My own particular example would be to add to a locked (and perhaps "sticky") Group Management thread; at the moment this requires the thread to be unlocked, a new message sent, and then promptly locked again; all well and good but as sent the accompanying email will enable members to attempt to reply. A simple "lock override" capability would be excellent, as would the capability of locking a message (and thus the topic) at the time of its origination. Send Locked comes to mind...

I can see risks in being able to send attachments when members cannot; even though we make no secret of the fact that for various reasons we do not allow them we still get people trying; if I or other Moderators sent out attachments on a Group I moderate then I suspect that we would get even more members trying it and wondering why their attachments weren't appearing, with all the attendant "clearing up" afterwards to be handled.

Chris


locked Re: Allow mods with appropriate privileges to edit messages in a locked topic #suggestion

Marina
 

I am all in favour of Catlady's suggestion and I wish to add that owners and moderators (with appropriate privileges) should be able to bypass all limitations, including sending attachments in groups where attachments are not permitted.
Sometimes I find it difficult to moderate my group because I am subject to the same restrictions which apply to members.

Thank you.
Marina


locked Allow mods with appropriate privileges to edit messages in a locked topic #suggestion

 

Very often, I have to edit a message right after locking the topic. Yet you can't do that: locked a topic makes all messages in it uneditable. I think moderators (with the appropriate privileges) should bypass that limitation. Currently, I have to unlock the topic to edit any message in it, and then go back and lock it again.
--
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: Yahoo group transfers

 

Yay, the lifeboats are afloat again! 
--
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 Yahoo group transfers

 

Hi All,

I think I've got Yahoo group transfers working again. No guarantees how long it will last.

Thanks,
Mark


moderated RSVP and Waitlist #suggestion

Andy Wedge
 

Hi Mark,

I responded 'Yes' to an RSVP and was added to a waitlist but did not receive an email to confirm that.

Only when another member dropped out and I was added to the event did I receive the RSVP Yes confirmation and Good News! emails.

It would be helpful if users received an email saying they were on a waitlist (including the position in the waitlist).

Thanks,
Andy


moderated Re: "modified file" should now say "updated file"

 

On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 12:55 PM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
In keeping with the change of language ("update file" instead of "edit file"), the log entry should probably also be changed. It currently reads "xyz modified file."

Done.

Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Re: Change "New Topic" to "New Message", or (preferably) revert this change.

 

Shal,

On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 12:26 AM Shal Farley <shals2nd@...> wrote:

 >   * CHANGE: Previously we would treat web posts as new topics,
 >     regardless of whether they had the same subject as a previous
 >     topic. This was different from how we treat email messages, where
 >     we combine new messages into existing topics when we can. Now we
 >     do the same for web posts.

If "New Topic" no longer means /new topic/ it ought not say that.

I actually prefer the old behavior but if that is thought to be somehow
too confusing then at least make the button say what it does.


I've reverted the change.

Thanks,
Mark
 


moderated Re: Subscription Approval Needed notices sent prematurely

Jim Higgins
 

Received from Michael Pavan at 1/8/2019 07:15 AM UTC:

It is better to improve Groups.io by having more flexibility for more groups to function as desired, than to get stuck fighting over names.

Amen on the fighting over names. As to desired functionality, there does come a point where how I'd like it or how it was somewhere else should take a back seat to what's really working just fine as is. Flexibility in the form of options that can be ignored if we want to is - to me - something quite different from a change to a process that will affect all of us.

I want to keep seeing a prompt "Approval Needed" notice so that if the "Pending" notice sent to the subscriber is lost in his spam/junk folder (or no response is received for whatever reason) I know to follow up with a personal email. Holding the "Approval Needed" notice until the actions requested in the "Pending" notice have been taken by the applicant "breaks" this useful aspect of the current process. And no one needs 14 days to perform required "Pending" actions or to approve a subscription. I don't care if the current 14 days is extended as far as infinity, but changing the timing of the "Approval Needed" and "Pending" notices breaks functionality for Owners/Moderators who actually manage their group subscription process.

Jim H


moderated Re: Subscription Approval Needed notices sent prematurely

Michael Pavan
 

On Jan 8, 2019, at 1:06 AM, Shal Farley <shals2nd@gmail.com> wrote:

Michael,

... but I (and many others) believe we would be well served by simply
having the "Pending Subscription" Member Notice ask questions and a
response received, prior to the Subscription Approval Needed notice
being sent to moderators.
To be clear, I have no problem with implementing that functionality. My complaint is with taking the established name "Pending Subscription" for the new function.*
Of course implementing the functionally is definitely more important.

In #19486 and #19493 you seem to accept the idea of putting the new function on a new Member Notice type, "Application Information Required”. If that's still on the table then I think we have little or no conflict.
Absolutely.

Shal
* Yes, I understand your belief that "Pending" should have meant something different all along, and that you've wanted it for a long time. But I've been /using/ it the way it is for years here, and over a decade at Yahoo Groups. So my semantic expectations are at least as strongly founded as yours.
OK

It is better to improve Groups.io by having more flexibility for more groups to function as desired, than to get stuck fighting over names.


moderated Re: Subscription Approval Needed notices sent prematurely

 

Michael,

... but I (and many others) believe we would be well served by simply
having the "Pending Subscription" Member Notice ask questions and a
response received, prior to the Subscription Approval Needed notice
being sent to moderators.
To be clear, I have no problem with implementing that functionality. My complaint is with taking the established name "Pending Subscription" for the new function.*

In #19486 and #19493 you seem to accept the idea of putting the new function on a new Member Notice type, "Application Information Required”. If that's still on the table then I think we have little or no conflict.

Shal
* Yes, I understand your belief that "Pending" should have meant something different all along, and that you've wanted it for a long time. But I've been /using/ it the way it is for years here, and over a decade at Yahoo Groups. So my semantic expectations are at least as strongly founded as yours.


moderated Re: Subscription Approval Needed notices sent prematurely

Jim Higgins
 

Received from J_Catlady at 1/7/2019 08:18 PM UTC:

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 11:45 AM, Michael Pavan wrote:
The "Subscription Approval Needed" is not accurate for Restricted Groups with a "Pending Subscription" Member Notice requesting additional information, because until/unless it is provided, no approval is needed.
What if we change it to "Subscription Approval Needed - BUT NOT YET!" ;p

Better, but that still risks leaving a rare few Moderators wailing and wringing their hands because it doesn't tell them EXACTLY WHEN to approve. ;-)

What if we just say "If it ain't really broke, don't fix it."

Jim H


moderated Re: Subscription Approval Needed notices sent prematurely

Jim Higgins
 

Received from J_Catlady at 1/7/2019 07:29 PM UTC:
 
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 11:21 AM, Jim Higgins wrote:
what's the big problem with the Owner/Moderator simply taking the "Approval Needed" notice as simply a notice that someone applied for membership and then waiting for any response

I personally don't see any problem with this (i.e., the way things are). I can also see why Michael made his suggestion to change things. The problem seems to be that his mods sometimes don't wait for the response. It's not a problem in my particular group because the mods understand they have to wait for the response.


Yep, a bit of education can go a long way. And if that were to fial I'd turn off the problem Moderators' ability to approve subscriptions before I'd ask for a change to the Groups.io subscription process. Too many years in Engineering and Quality Management tells me to fix the root cause.

Jim H


moderated Re: Subscription Approval Needed notices sent prematurely

 

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 11:45 AM, Michael Pavan wrote:
The "Subscription Approval Needed" is not accurate for Restricted Groups with a "Pending Subscription" Member Notice requesting additional information, because until/unless it is provided, no approval is needed.
What if we change it to "Subscription Approval Needed - BUT NOT YET!" ;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


moderated Re: Subscription Approval Needed notices sent prematurely

Michael Pavan
 

On Jan 7, 2019, at 2:22 PM, Jim Higgins <HigginsJ@sc.rr.com> wrote:
OK... but back to the original suggestion... what's the big problem with the Owner/Moderator simply taking the "Approval Needed" notice as simply a notice that someone applied for membership and then waiting for any response to a "Pending Member" notice before actually approving?
1) The "Subscription Approval Needed" is not accurate for Restricted Groups with a "Pending Subscription" Member Notice requesting additional information, because until/unless it is provided, no approval is needed.

2) The "Subscription Approval Needed" and "Pending Subscription" Member Notice requesting additional information are currently sent at the same time, which reduces a moderator’s time to act by the wait for a reply from the applicant.

That "Approval Needed" notice" is nice to have in the case where notices to pending applicants go into their junk folders and the applicants subsequently inquire whether their application was received.
A "Subscription Approval Needed” does start the 14 day clock to approve or not,
BUT
an "Application Received" notice sent to moderators would not, only the "Pending Subscription" Member Notice reply (if received within 14 days) would start the ‘Approval Clock’.


As I wrote:
After an applicant'e email address has been confirmed they should be sent an "Application Received" notice saying it will expire in 14 days
OR
a "Pending Subscription" (or "Additional Information Required") Member Notice which says what is required within 14 days before a Moderator would have 14 days to act.
Yes, this would extend the life of an application by giving both the applicant and moderator 14 days - currently the moderator’s time is reduced by the wait for a reply.


moderated Re: Subscription Approval Needed notices sent prematurely

 

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 11:21 AM, Jim Higgins wrote:
what's the big problem with the Owner/Moderator simply taking the "Approval Needed" notice as simply a notice that someone applied for membership and then waiting for any response
I personally don't see any problem with this (i.e., the way things are). I can also see why Michael made his suggestion to change things. The problem seems to be that his mods sometimes don't wait for the response. It's not a problem in my particular group because the mods understand they have to wait for the response. 
 
--
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: Subscription Approval Needed notices sent prematurely

Jim Higgins
 

Received from J_Catlady at 1/7/2019 07:06 PM UTC:

Are we now mixing up the member's pending subscription notice with the mod's "subscription needs approval" message? All restricted groups have the the latter, automatically, and it doesn't have any relationship to the member's pending notice per se. Not all groups even have a member pending notice. The Subscription Needs Approval notice, which is the title/subject of your thread, is unrelated to the Pending Membef Notice. You could create a relationship by making the former contingent on the latter, for the convenience reason you cite. But there is nothing incorrect about the current terminology.

OK... but back to the original suggestion... what's the big problem with the Owner/Moderator simply taking the "Approval Needed" notice as simply a notice that someone applied for membership and then waiting for any response to a "Pending Member" notice before actually approving?

That "Approval Needed" notice" is nice to have in the case where notices to pending applicants go into their junk folders and the applicants subsequently inquire whether their application was received.

Jim H

9541 - 9560 of 28876