Date   

moderated Re: improve/fix logging, etc., of "set display name via email" action #suggestion

 

On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 07:40 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
why is it being allowed to be "changed via email" at all if it already has a value?
I forgot to mention that our group immediately sets each member's display name, upon approval, to their first name plus their cat's name. So it is obvious when it has been changed to, e.g., their first and last name and no cat's name. 
 
--
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 improve/fix logging, etc., of "set display name via email" action #suggestion

 

Mark,

There's a log entry "set display name via email." When it appears, especially in the case of a generally inactive member, I usually look into the member's activity log to see if there's a similar entry there (there never is); I check the member's page to see if I notice anything different about their display name (there usually is, although there has been no other activity logged for the member, often within months); I check my inbox to see if there's any email from the member, to either the owner or group address (there never is); and I endeavor to do a search for this action by other members by using the dropdown in the group's Member Activity log (which fails because there is no such search criterion in the dropdown).

So here are some questions and suggestions: Suggestions:
- If this action is logged in the group's Message Activity log, also log it in the member's Activity Log.
- Add both "set display name via email" and "set display name via web" to the group's Message Activity search dropdown

Questions:
- What triggers this log entry other than an email from the member - how can it be logged if there was no email? Is it triggered by anything else?
- The former policy, as implemented by request in this group (possibly by me?), was not to change the display name via email unless there has been no display name previously set. So why is it being allowed to be "changed via email" at all if it already has a value?

I have thought for some time that there are some odd things going on with the "set display name" log entries. Hopefully these specific questions and suggestions will be a prod to clear things up a bit! 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


Re: Strip Out Embedded images #suggestion

YT9TP - Pedja
 

I've never seen a message so large as to be objectionable unless it was a reply to a digest with the whole digest quoted.
Well then you deal with highly educated users :)

I guess for average internet user it is normal to drag and drop full resolution photo from his camera or mobile phone and attach it. Not jut singe image, whole folder. :(

In "Settings," under "Message Formatting" you can "Strip Attachments."
That is not an option as there is reasonable need to send some attachments within email, like documents.or illustrations.

As I suggested, the simplest solution would be to set message size limit and if message is larget it should be simply rejected.SEnder then can try to reduce size or attach content to some file sharing service and share link within email (which is, anyways, basic part of Netiquette)


Re: Strip Out Embedded images #suggestion

Bruce Bowman
 

On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 03:16 PM, Jim Higgins wrote:
In "Settings," under "Message Formatting" you can "Strip Attachments." You might also want to look at Plain Text vs HTML for email. There's no explicit setting for stripping embedded images, but I'm guessing that's either part of stripping attachments or part of messages in Plain Text. I'm guessing that because I've never seen an embedded image in my groups and I know some subscribers have tried to send them. Maybe someone else knows the details on this.
I have tested this, and found that if your group is set to Plain Text, you won't be able to embed an image using the online message editor, because the html toolbar is disabled. However, you can still send one to the group via email...upon receipt, it will be converted to an attachment, routed to everybody, and appear in the Emailed Photos folder.

This includes those nice little sig-line images that we all know and love, the 150-byte W10 Mail PNG reply separator, etc. The only way I've found to disable them is to change the group Attachments setting to Bounce or Strip.

Our group does a minimal amount of file sharing via attachments, so this is not an option for us. In Pedja's situation such a setting might not be objectionable.

Regards,
Bruce


moderated Re: suspend/reinstate user rather than ban/unban/resubscribe

 

Jim, Oh, I misread that and thought you were self-referential by doing a ground-hog day thing too. 😜

On Mar 14, 2019, at 12:57 PM, Jim Higgins <HigginsJ@sc.rr.com> wrote:


My point is that "Seems like groundhog day" sounds (at least to me) nothing like, "People might want to have a look to see what's been said about this before."

Jim H



Received from J_Catlady at 3/14/2019 07:49 PM UTC:

My point is that people might want to have a look to see what's been said about this before. What is YOUR point?


On Mar 14, 2019, at 12:45 PM, Jim Higgins <HigginsJ@sc.rr.com> wrote:

Received from J_Catlady at 3/14/2019 07:15 PM UTC:

This conversation is paralleling the conversation I just posted a link to a couple of messages back, including the discussion of automatic vs manual reinstatement, etc.

That conversation was 5 messages back in August 2018. Today is March 14, 2019.

So your point is...?

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: suspend/reinstate user rather than ban/unban/resubscribe

 

Yes, Andy, that was the point!


On Mar 14, 2019, at 1:03 PM, Andy W <andy_wedge@...> wrote:

On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 07:56 PM, Jim Higgins wrote:
My point is that "Seems like groundhog day"
That comment also had a link to a previous discussion which was the point of making it I guess.

Andy

--
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: suspend/reinstate user rather than ban/unban/resubscribe

 

Hahahahaha! 🤪

On Mar 14, 2019, at 12:57 PM, Jim Higgins <HigginsJ@sc.rr.com> wrote:


My point is that "Seems like groundhog day" sounds (at least to me) nothing like, "People might want to have a look to see what's been said about this before."

Jim H



Received from J_Catlady at 3/14/2019 07:49 PM UTC:

My point is that people might want to have a look to see what's been said about this before. What is YOUR point?


On Mar 14, 2019, at 12:45 PM, Jim Higgins <HigginsJ@sc.rr.com> wrote:

Received from J_Catlady at 3/14/2019 07:15 PM UTC:

This conversation is paralleling the conversation I just posted a link to a couple of messages back, including the discussion of automatic vs manual reinstatement, etc.

That conversation was 5 messages back in August 2018. Today is March 14, 2019.

So your point is...?

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: suspend/reinstate user rather than ban/unban/resubscribe

Andy Wedge
 

On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 07:56 PM, Jim Higgins wrote:
My point is that "Seems like groundhog day"
That comment also had a link to a previous discussion which was the point of making it I guess.

Andy


moderated Re: suspend/reinstate user rather than ban/unban/resubscribe

Jim Higgins
 

My point is that "Seems like groundhog day" sounds (at least to me) nothing like, "People might want to have a look to see what's been said about this before."

Jim H



Received from J_Catlady at 3/14/2019 07:49 PM UTC:

My point is that people might want to have a look to see what's been said about this before. What is YOUR point?


On Mar 14, 2019, at 12:45 PM, Jim Higgins <HigginsJ@sc.rr.com> wrote:

Received from J_Catlady at 3/14/2019 07:15 PM UTC:

This conversation is paralleling the conversation I just posted a link
to a couple of messages back, including the discussion of automatic vs manual reinstatement, etc.


That conversation was 5 messages back in August 2018. Today is March 14,
2019.

So your point is...?

Jim H


moderated Re: suspend/reinstate user rather than ban/unban/resubscribe

 

My point is that people might want to have a look to see what’s been said about this before. What is YOUR point? 🙁

On Mar 14, 2019, at 12:45 PM, Jim Higgins <HigginsJ@sc.rr.com> wrote:

Received from J_Catlady at 3/14/2019 07:15 PM UTC:

This conversation is paralleling the conversation I just posted a link to a couple of messages back, including the discussion of automatic vs manual reinstatement, etc.

That conversation was 5 messages back in August 2018. Today is March 14, 2019.

So your point is...?

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: suspend/reinstate user rather than ban/unban/resubscribe

Jim Higgins
 

Received from J_Catlady at 3/14/2019 07:15 PM UTC:

This conversation is paralleling the conversation I just posted a link to a couple of messages back, including the discussion of automatic vs manual reinstatement, etc.

That conversation was 5 messages back in August 2018. Today is March 14, 2019.

So your point is...?

Jim H


Re: Strip Out Embedded images #suggestion

Jim Higgins
 

Received from YT9TP - Pedja via Groups.Io at 3/14/2019 09:38 AM UTC:

I would be satisfied with simple message length limitation. If message is longer it is rejected.

And I would not bother if it contains large image embedded or attachment or whatever. On groups I admin, large emails are not welcome. We use email for communication not for file sharing. So far there is no option to set such limitation.

I've never seen a message so large as to be objectionable unless it was a reply to a digest with the whole digest quoted. That said, a size limit on body text would probably be useful in some groups.

In "Settings," under "Message Formatting" you can "Strip Attachments." You might also want to look at Plain Text vs HTML for email.

There's no explicit setting for stripping embedded images, but I'm guessing that's either part of stripping attachments or part of messages in Plain Text. I'm guessing that because I've never seen an embedded image in my groups and I know some subscribers have tried to send them. Maybe someone else knows the details on this.

Jim H


moderated Re: suspend/reinstate user rather than ban/unban/resubscribe

 

This conversation is paralleling the conversation I just posted a link to a couple of messages back, including the discussion of automatic vs manual reinstatement, 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: suspend/reinstate user rather than ban/unban/resubscribe

Jim Higgins
 

Received from JohnF via Groups.Io at 3/14/2019 12:30 AM UTC:

If a temporary ban/suspension feature is added, I would also like to suggest a way to temporarily suspend a member for a defined period of time, after which the suspension will automatically be lifted.

Yes! "Suspend Member" with an option for an automatic unsuspension could be a really useful feature.

Jim H


moderated Re: On the /topics page, change the browser tab to "Topics"

 

On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 7:18 PM Shal Farley <shals2nd@...> wrote:

While reviewing the new /feed page I noticed it put "Feed" in my browser
tab. I like that. The Help page does too.

I think the Topics page should also. Right now it says "Welcome to
Groups.io".

Fixed.

Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Re: make rejected-subscription notice semi-manual instead of automatic

 

On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 04:07 AM, Marina wrote:
I am not particularly keen on having several Members' Notices (though I can understand that in some groups these may help), a simple dialog box would do in our case.
Implementing my suggestion would in no way require you to have many, or even a single, canned notice. Just as with rejected messages, the composition box would offer a dropdown of any existing canned notices of type "rejected subscription" only if you've created any. Whether or not you haven't created any, you still just type in your 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


moderated Re: make rejected-subscription notice semi-manual instead of automatic

 

I'm thinking in spurts again: Although it's true that rejected messages require a notification. "deleted" pending messages don't. A pending message can be rejected with no notification to the user by using "Delete" instead of "Reject." So you could do the same thing with pending subscriptions: add a "Delete" button, which just removes the pending subscription with no notice. That would do away with having to require another "yes-no" confirmation. The processing would be (nearly) completely parallel to pending messages.


On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 6:57 AM J_Catlady via Groups.Io <j.olivia.catlady=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:
There will have to be a couple of differences between the way rejected subscriptions and rejected messages are handled, one of them somewhat major, one of them minor.

The big one (which hit me in the middle of the night) is that if you implement my suggestion to add a composition box for the (always optional) message for a rejected subscription a la rejected message, you would need to explicitly add a "yes" or "no" (at some point in the process - not sure where the best place would be for this) to "Send a rejection message?" That's because rejecting a message *requires* a notice to the member, even if it's just "Your message was not approved" (with no message added for the reason); whereas with a rejected subscription, groups currently have the option to send no notice at all. Currently, the options are to (a) send the "active" notice every time or (b) send no notice at all. You would need to retain (b). So the code would not be completely parallel to rejected messages, because another yes-no would need to be added. But still not a big deal. Just not sure where the question should go. (And, of course, you could have a "your subscription was not approved" notice go out with no added message, simply by not filling in the message box.)

The minor differences may involve logging, since the rejected pending member is not a member of the group. I'm not sure how this is handled, since I've actually seen an original rejection logged under an email address after the email address is later approved. So my guess is that if the email address has a confirmed account at the time they're rejected, the action still gets logged under their email address somehow. Of course, the rejection action would still be logged under the group and moderator activity, with the text of the notification message included in the log, as with rejected messages.

--
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: Limit for number of invites that can be sent out without approval, enhacement request

 

On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 02:24 AM, YT9TP - Pedja wrote:
If you send out 100 invitation requests, then even if the feature enhancement you want is implemented (and it may already be there,
from your comment above), if more than 20 of them are not members, you still run into the same constraint. I don't know if groups.io can help you with this.
That would not be the problem as that would be significantly smaller number of emails and I could handle them manually,
Maybe, but what I was trying to point out was that your underlying problem is that of not *knowing* who's a member and who's not. That's what you yourself stated. So how would you *know*, in the above example, that it would be a "significantly smaller number of emails", whether the number is 100 or 1,000? Call is "x." No matter what the number, the problem is the same. You have no idea how many within that quantity are already members. 
 
--
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: make rejected-subscription notice semi-manual instead of automatic

 

There will have to be a couple of differences between the way rejected subscriptions and rejected messages are handled, one of them somewhat major, one of them minor.

The big one (which hit me in the middle of the night) is that if you implement my suggestion to add a composition box for the (always optional) message for a rejected subscription a la rejected message, you would need to explicitly add a "yes" or "no" (at some point in the process - not sure where the best place would be for this) to "Send a rejection message?" That's because rejecting a message *requires* a notice to the member, even if it's just "Your message was not approved" (with no message added for the reason); whereas with a rejected subscription, groups currently have the option to send no notice at all. Currently, the options are to (a) send the "active" notice every time or (b) send no notice at all. You would need to retain (b). So the code would not be completely parallel to rejected messages, because another yes-no would need to be added. But still not a big deal. Just not sure where the question should go. (And, of course, you could have a "your subscription was not approved" notice go out with no added message, simply by not filling in the message box.)

The minor differences may involve logging, since the rejected pending member is not a member of the group. I'm not sure how this is handled, since I've actually seen an original rejection logged under an email address after the email address is later approved. So my guess is that if the email address has a confirmed account at the time they're rejected, the action still gets logged under their email address somehow. Of course, the rejection action would still be logged under the group and moderator activity, with the text of the notification message included in the log, as with rejected messages.

--
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: New feed page

Andy Wedge
 

Hi Maria,
If you go to your settings page in your group and select a cover photo and a group icon photo, you can customize those and it will apply to both desktop and mobile.
It just means you haven't yet added a group icon.
Yes, I know I can set the icon.  My point is that I have chosen not to set one up for some groups just yet but an icon is shown for those groups on the feed page;  On the mobile site for one of my subgroups I see this:



Yet on the feed page, it shows this:




I think the icons shown should be the same on the mobile site and feed page.  Personally, I'd prefer standard blue icons I mentioned in my previous post.  I don't want random pictures chosen by someone else.

Regards,
Andy

9061 - 9080 of 29177