Date   

moderated Re: Suggested Feature - Provide email "call" for a message by specifying the message number

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 01:37 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
Because we have no stake in it. We have no "standing." Existence or nonexistence of features like these doesn't affect us one way or the other.
I disagree, but I'm also done.   Anyone using a system as it exists has standing when changes are being discussed, whether or not said changes are something they, personally, would use or not.

I don't see feature requests as something that cannot be questioned/challenged, and for reasons both practical and philosophical, on principle.  On more than one occasion when, "But you can already do this . . .{insert way here}," has been brought up the reply has been, "Oh, I didn't know that."  That's why these sorts of discussions have value, at least to me.
--

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)


moderated Re: search suggestion - first posts of all new topics

 

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:48 AM, Chris Jones wrote:
Unless I have grossly misunderstood what is being requested
Yep, grossly misunderstood. :) This has nothing to do with wanting to see topics that are new *to me*. Perhaps my thread is mistitled. It probably should say "first posts of all topics."
 
--
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 Feature bloat and what should and should not be added

 

Hi All,

NOTE: The following IS NOT directed at any one person or set of people and is something I've been thinking about for awhile.

I don't think a discussion on whether a proposed feature would be bloat/useful or not is terribly productive and I would appreciate it if those were not to happen. I think it can also be intimidating for some people who would like to propose/discuss new features when they see other people being told that their proposed features are bloat or otherwise not appropriate. Like Groups.io itself, I want beta@ to be welcoming for people of all experience levels. 

I appreciate all feature proposals, even if I can't get to 99.9% of them. :-)


Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: search suggestion - first posts of all new topics

Chris Jones
 

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 05:08 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
The requested feature is the ability to produce a list of all first messages of all topics, in chrono order.
Unless I have grossly misunderstood what is being requested, the capability exists now, almost hidden in plain sight.

If I go to a Group (web UI) on which there have been numerous posts since I last visited those Topics that I have not read at all, i,e, the new ones will show the Topic Title in a pale blue colour. If I "expand" that Topic to read through it then when I return to Topics view then the Topic Title will have changed to a pale grey.

However, if a Topic that I have already looked at receives a new post, the "grey" does not revert to "blue", so even if the additions to an existing Topic are more recent than the start of a new Topic and thus appear "above it" in Topics view I can see more or less at a glance those Topics that are "new" because the Titles are "blue" and those that are "old" (and have been read) but have been added to because the Titles are in "grey".

So - on the face of it - what you want is there now. All it needs is a visual sort.

And just in case anyone was wondering I'm using Firefox...

Chris


moderated Re: Suggested Feature - Provide email "call" for a message by specifying the message number

 

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:37 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
Existence or nonexistence of features like these doesn't affect us one way or the other.
(continuation)...doesn't affect us in terms of implementation and maintenance and work for Mark. Of course the people who actively want the feature have a stake in the debate. But people who don't want it have no reason to object since it doesn't affect them.
 
--
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: Suggested Feature - Provide email "call" for a message by specifying the message number

 

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:25 AM, Brian Vogel wrote:
For myself, being "a contrarian" is a role I don't mind taking.
Gosh, I had no idea! ;)

You are absolutely correct that, in the end, it is up to one person only:  Mark.
It's always up to Mark. But with these kinds of features, I would argue that we are wasting his time by even debating the matter here. Because we have no stake in it. We have no "standing." Existence or nonexistence of features like these doesn't affect us one way or the other.

I don't mind being a contrarian either. :)
 
--
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 Recent bounces list

Marv Waschke
 

Like a lot of moderators, I've been looking at the "Recent Bounces" list frequently lately. I'd appreciate a timestamp rather than a naked date on the list.
Best, Marv


moderated Re: Suggested Feature - Provide email "call" for a message by specifying the message number

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 01:14 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
It does not make sense IMHO for people in beta to fight tooth and nail against a feature that neither they nor their group members never even have to be consciously aware of.
Nor I, and we've had this discussion.

For myself, being "a contrarian" is a role I don't mind taking.  Providing counterpoint isn't, in my opinion, arguing "tooth and nail" against anything.  Nor is repeating that educating one's own users about the mechanisms already available, sometimes not only on Groups.io but elsewhere as well, should be the first order of business rather than requesting "the next feature," that simply does the same thing in another way.

You are absolutely correct that, in the end, it is up to one person only:  Mark.
 
--

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)


moderated Re: Suggested Feature - Provide email "call" for a message by specifying the message number

 

Typo, should read implementation and maintenance 


On Mar 25, 2019, at 10:14 AM, J_Catlady via Groups.Io <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Discretion is always required and  I am as familiar (if not more) with feature bloat as anyone here. But unless any given feature seriously detracts from general user experience (and I’ll grant that a few non-optional features that have been requested here in the past fall into that category), then what constitutes feature bloat in terms of implementation maintenance is entirely up to Mark to determine. It does not make sense IMHO for people in beta to fight tooth and nail against a feature that neither they nor their group members never even have to be consciously aware of.


On Mar 25, 2019, at 9:46 AM, Brian Vogel <britechguy@...> wrote:

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:21 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
One more comment on the notion that's frequently propagated here to the effect that "there's already a way to do this, we don't need another one." I think if you call the alternate way a "short cut," in general it might get more respect.
Honestly, and I'm not arguing with regard to this request, but in general - this is often what becomes "feature bloat."   There are minuses, sometimes severe, to having to maintain N ways of doing things when, say, 2 are routinely used by the majority of users.  The possibility of the introduction of bugs, possible points of failure really shouldn't be ignored.

If an existing way is very easy, there's even less need for another one.

I'm not saying that any and every feature request be denied, either.  But given the water that's passed under the beta bridge, there have been plenty that deserve to have floated downstream without ever having been plucked out.  Discretion is required, particularly with regard to what falls more into the "need" rather than "want" categories.
 
--

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)


--
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: Suggested Feature - Provide email "call" for a message by specifying the message number

 

Discretion is always required and  I am as familiar (if not more) with feature bloat as anyone here. But unless any given feature seriously detracts from general user experience (and I’ll grant that a few non-optional features that have been requested here in the past fall into that category), then what constitutes feature bloat in terms of implementation maintenance is entirely up to Mark to determine. It does not make sense IMHO for people in beta to fight tooth and nail against a feature that neither they nor their group members never even have to be consciously aware of.


On Mar 25, 2019, at 9:46 AM, Brian Vogel <britechguy@...> wrote:

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:21 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
One more comment on the notion that's frequently propagated here to the effect that "there's already a way to do this, we don't need another one." I think if you call the alternate way a "short cut," in general it might get more respect.
Honestly, and I'm not arguing with regard to this request, but in general - this is often what becomes "feature bloat."   There are minuses, sometimes severe, to having to maintain N ways of doing things when, say, 2 are routinely used by the majority of users.  The possibility of the introduction of bugs, possible points of failure really shouldn't be ignored.

If an existing way is very easy, there's even less need for another one.

I'm not saying that any and every feature request be denied, either.  But given the water that's passed under the beta bridge, there have been plenty that deserve to have floated downstream without ever having been plucked out.  Discretion is required, particularly with regard to what falls more into the "need" rather than "want" categories.
 
--

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)


--
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: search suggestion - first posts of all new topics

 

Thanks for that explanation of what a computer can and can’t do. The term ‘recently’ refers to my subjective desire to assess what’s been happening in my group recently, as a rationale for the requested feature. It does not refer to the requested feature itself. The requested feature is the ability to produce a list of all first messages of all topics, in chrono order.

On Mar 25, 2019, at 9:40 AM, ro-esp <ro-esp@dds.nl> wrote:

A computer can't handle the notion " recently" , but having an option to see all messages or just the starts of threads *after a specified date* seems very practical to me - like when you've been away on vacation or something.

groetjes, Ronaldo


--
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: Suggested Feature - Provide email "call" for a message by specifying the message number

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:21 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
One more comment on the notion that's frequently propagated here to the effect that "there's already a way to do this, we don't need another one." I think if you call the alternate way a "short cut," in general it might get more respect.
Honestly, and I'm not arguing with regard to this request, but in general - this is often what becomes "feature bloat."   There are minuses, sometimes severe, to having to maintain N ways of doing things when, say, 2 are routinely used by the majority of users.  The possibility of the introduction of bugs, possible points of failure really shouldn't be ignored.

If an existing way is very easy, there's even less need for another one.

I'm not saying that any and every feature request be denied, either.  But given the water that's passed under the beta bridge, there have been plenty that deserve to have floated downstream without ever having been plucked out.  Discretion is required, particularly with regard to what falls more into the "need" rather than "want" categories.
 
--

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)


moderated Re: search suggestion - first posts of all new topics

ro-esp
 

A computer can't handle the notion " recently" , but having an option to see all messages or just the starts of threads *after a specified date* seems very practical to me - like when you've been away on vacation or something.

groetjes, Ronaldo


moderated Re: search suggestion - first posts of all new topics

 

Duane, I think we've been through this, and everybody always advises me to make my browser remember it, bla bla. In this case, I seem to be one of those naive users. Groups.io seems to remember in some of my groups but not others, seemingly randomly, and I've just gotten used to it. I will gladly report this as a bug if someone can assure me that it is actually one and not a missing feature. Thanks.


On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 8:57 AM Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 09:30 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
groups.io pushes it on me by refusing to remember my last view.
If that's the case, you should report the bug to support.  I have no trouble with it remember which view I last used.

Duane


--
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: Reply to Sender

Dave Sergeant
 

On 25 Mar 2019 at 14:43, Noel Leaver via Groups.Io wrote:

The email interface is fine, as it has a 'Reply to Sender' link as well
as a 'Reply to Group' link.
Only on the HTML part of email messages, those who opt for (or who post
in) plain text are missing that.

I agree with your comment, I am also often asked the same question or
'please tell me your email address'. which is always visible in the
'from' line of emails, though may be munged, but the 'from' on the web
version is shortened for security reasons.

Dave

http://davesergeant.com


moderated Re: search suggestion - first posts of all new topics

Duane
 

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 09:30 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
groups.io pushes it on me by refusing to remember my last view.
If that's the case, you should report the bug to support.  I have no trouble with it remember which view I last used.

Duane


moderated Reply to Sender

Noel Leaver
 

I've twice had users of the web interface complaining that there is no way to 'Reply to Sender'. I have to explain that it is there, but you need first to reply (which is not obvious, as it feels like reply to group) and then notice the greyed out button on the right  "Private" and realise this is the same as reply to sender, and that it is not greyed out because not available but because the option is not selected.

 

It seems sufficiently obscure that people can't find it even when looking for it.

 

The email interface is fine, as it has a 'Reply to Sender' link as well as a 'Reply to Group' link.

 

I would prefer to have a button labelled "Reply to Sender" alongside "Reply to Group" and get rid of the Private button. I realise this gives something of an issue with the BCC me option - how valuable is this? could it be shown anyway and ignored for Reply to Group.

 

Or to have both Reply to Group and Reply to Sender options under the message display a level up.

 

Another option, less of a change, would be to alter the Private button to be a check box above the Reply to Group button, that way it would be more noticeable and more clearly associated with the Reply button.

 

Noel


moderated Re: search suggestion - first posts of all new topics

 

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 07:10 AM, Gerald Boutin wrote:
As you can probably tell, I hardly ever venture into Topics view.
I would never venture into it either, except that groups.io pushes it on me by refusing to remember my last view. :)
 
--
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: Suggested Feature - Provide email "call" for a message by specifying the message number

 

One more comment on the notion that's frequently propagated here to the effect that "there's already a way to do this, we don't need another one." I think if you call the alternate way a "short cut," in general it might get more respect. Nobody has anything against shortcuts to be used under certain situations and conditions where there's something simple and immediate the user wants. So why on earth not provide the shortcut if it's simple? Nobody has to use it or even be aware of it if they don't want to. There are tons of shortcuts available in all the software I use and I'm generally oblivious to them. But why should I fight against them?

That's besides the fact that there's at least one other use-case I mentioned for this feature, besides the one for which it was originally suggested, where someone may simply want a hard copy of a particular message in their inbox (for other reasons besides not being able or wanting to log on). They may want to forward it or whatever. And there may others.

--
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: search suggestion - first posts of all new topics

Gerald Boutin <groupsio@...>
 

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:07 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 06:04 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
Not topics that were recently created.
EDIT: It does not show only topics that were recently created, which is what I'm requesting. Topics view or collapse topics may show 20 or 100 topics with recent activity above one or two new ones, if the activity on those 20 or 100 occurred after creation of the two new ones.
 
We crossed posts here as I had a couple of short internet outages. Now that you've explained it, I do see that behavior. As you can probably tell, I hardly ever venture into Topics view.

--
Gerald

8761 - 8780 of 29103