On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 06:11 PM, Chris Jones wrote:

Once a "troublesome member" realised that they could start a topic unmoderated, but that replies were held for moderation, they might start posting replies with a slightly amended subject line in an attempt to circumvent the moderation delay.

That same argument was put forward -- in reverse -- for the topic origination overrides...didn't stop it from being implemented.

Bruce

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 11:02 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

And if so, what would be the real downside in simply putting them on moderation?

From my own viewpoint that would be the easier option.

Once a "troublesome member" realised that they could start a topic unmoderated, but that replies were held for moderation, they might start posting replies with a slightly amended subject line in an attempt to circumvent the moderation delay.

The benefit of just moderating the individual(s) concerned is that it is totally unambiguous in its scope. Then they set up another membership in an attempt to frustrate the process... :(

Chris

Technotronic,

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 02:59 PM, Duane wrote:

Exactly.  If they start a new topic, everything is fine.  It's when they use reply for a post totally unrelated to the topic they've replied to (hijacking the thread) that a problem occurs. 

Oh, I see. But how often do they start topics as opposed to replying to other topics? Presumably an order of magnitude less? And if so, what would be the real downside in simply putting them on moderation?
 
--
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

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 04:46 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

equivalent to putting them on moderation only for replies, not for first messages of any new topics they start

Exactly.  If they start a new topic, everything is fine.  It's when they use reply for a post totally unrelated to the topic they've replied to (hijacking the thread) that a problem occurs.  I've got folks that do it regularly as well.  My first thought when I read Bruce's post was to moderate them constantly.  Then realized that it's only their erroneous replies that cause a problem, not new topics.

Duane

Noticed a while back that after I tagged a post with a subject with no hashtag, with one that is
related, any of the following subject replies didnt tie in to the 1st subject , even with the initial post
with same subject tagged.

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 02:32 PM, Ken Schweizer wrote:

we could add an infinite number of new moderation types

I think the recent new types (moderating all topics a person starts and moderating the first message of all topics a person starts) make sense and are useful. I don't see the usefulness of the request here, which is equivalent to putting them on moderation only for replies, not for first messages of any new topics they start.  
 
--
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

Could I ask, is there any reason not to just put such members on moderation?

--
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

Some time ago (Ref: https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/18455), new moderation settings were established for topics that a "problem subscriber" initiates, to wit:


I'd really like to be able to set a moderation override for topics that a subscriber replies to. Such a setting would allow me to head off a pernicious problem with subscribers who hijack existing topics when they should be starting a new one.

Thanks for your consideration,
Bruce

On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 07:25 AM, Shal Farley wrote:

If you are a mod or owner the From address is a drop-list: select the group's +owner address.

This may not provide the required functionality; see my #16576 of April 2018. If the requirement is for any given message (or reply for that matter) to be unambiguously from a Group Owner or Moderator then using the existing drop down is not wholly effective; the message still has the originator's personal Display Name included. I just wish my original request had achieved greater traction.

Chris

Glenn,

Need a way to send the group announcements from the owner, moderator
of a group.

Click New Topic. If you are a mod or owner the From address is a drop-list: select the group's +owner address.

Shal
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum

I agree. I've hacked this by creating an account called [MyGroupName]Moderators and making it an owner. But it's a PITA.
--
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

Need a way to send the group announcements from the owner, moderator of a group.

 Even with the first group event we held, we experienced people who cancelled literally in the 11th hour, a couple of whom strongly requested a change of time and venue to accommodate them. I want these people waitlisted the next time they RSVP as coming to an event, and would really like to be able to do that. Without it, we're stuck letting them hold places in the next events (which are limited to small numbers of attendees) while they make up their minds.

We have similar problems, we have people either cancel at the last minute or just not even show up. We need to be able to waitlist or remove repeat offenders as many of our events our limited by the venue we are visiting. It also makes our group look bad when only half the people show up. This could be resolved if I could have moved people off the waitlist who were waiting for someone to cancel, but never do. It's very frustrating!

On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 08:58 PM, Nancy Funk wrote:

What isn't available yet is the ability for the organizer to take people off the list manually.

Does the word "yet" mean this might be coming down the pike? That would be awesome if it is! :)

I agree that this would be a very useful and important addition. Even with the first group event we held, we experienced people who cancelled literally in the 11th hour, a couple of whom strongly requested a change of time and venue to accommodate them. I want these people waitlisted the next time they RSVP as coming to an event, and would really like to be able to do that. Without it, we're stuck letting them hold places in the next events (which are limited to small numbers of attendees) while they make up their minds.
 
--
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

What isn't available yet is the ability for the organizer to take people off the list manually.

On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 03:57 PM, Glenn Hobbs, Catnap, 3400 PCI00395L393 wrote:

Ability to search files.  Awesome if included filename and content.

That's already available on the Files page.  I know it includes content in PDF files, but not sure about others.

Duane

Ability to search files.  Awesome if included filename and content.