Date   

moderated Re: maintain Word formatting when copy-pasting documents into messages

Gerald Boutin <groupsio@...>
 

On Sun, Sep 1, 2019 at 05:06 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
i make this request not only because of my ill-fated limerick this morning, which I copy/pasted from a Word doc, and which appeared here with extra line spaces, but because the problem occurs frequently in my group as well: when someone copy/pastes a Word doc into a message, the formatting is often all screwed up, including, but not necessarily limited to, the addition of extra line (or paragraph) breaks. I don't know if anything can be done about this, but will remain hopeful.
--
I would like to offer this as an add-on for pasting improvements needed. Please allow pasting an image into a "post" online.
 
--
Gerald


moderated maintain Word formatting when copy-pasting documents into messages

 

i make this request not only because of my ill-fated limerick this morning, which I copy/pasted from a Word doc, and which appeared here with extra line spaces, but because the problem occurs frequently in my group as well: when someone copy/pastes a Word doc into a message, the formatting is often all screwed up, including, but not necessarily limited to, the addition of extra line (or paragraph) breaks. I don't know if anything can be done about this, but will remain hopeful.
--
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: "Emailed Files" folder

 

Bruce,

As for whether this should actually replace the functionality
currently found at https://groups.io/g/GROUPNAME/attachments, I
haven't decided on that yet.
I would say "yes", with the possibility of leaving the link behind on the Upgrade/Billing page, updated to point to this new folder.

Shal


locked Re: suggestion - Consistency (ies)

 

darn formatting came out all wrong! :-(

--
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: suggestion - Consistency (ies)

 

According to Marv, let’s use “post”

And make the word “message” a ghost.
When shooting the breeze,

Don’t “message me” please

Or screen real estate will be toast.


--
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: suggestion - Consistency (ies)

Marv Waschke
 

Memory, storage, processor cycles, and bandwidth are all cheaper than dirt compared to the last century. But screen real estate in these days of pocket computers, is still precious. "Post" is shorter than "Message". Also "post" is conventionally acceptable as verb, but some fastidious people object to "message" as a verb. For these reasons, I would scrub "message" and consistently replace it with "post." On the other hand, if I were managing groups.io development, I probably tell the team to work on more important things, like the app, where screen real estate is critical.
Best, Marv


moderated "Emailed Files" folder

Bruce Bowman
 

It would be handy to have a system-created "Emailed Files" folder from which non-image message attachments can be more readily examined.

I envision the controls to be similar to what's available in the existing "Emailed Photos" folder. As with "Emailed Photos," file attachments could be deleted from this folder without generating a notification. 

This has been discussed tangentially before, but as best I can tell never presented as a proposal. As for whether this should actually replace the functionality currently found at https://groups.io/g/GROUPNAME/attachments, I haven't decided on that yet.

Thanks,
Bruce


moderated Re: #hashtags

 

Technotronic Dimensions,

As for the date being a factor in weather a topic is "stale" or not, I
as a group owner dont believe its relevent,
Recall that this test is only applied to messages posted by email that lack the customary "In-Reply-To:" or "References:" header field. That should be a minority case in replies posted by email as most email user interfaces will include one or the other if the person uses the Reply function.

Lacking those fields is an indicator that the person likely composed the email as a new message, not a reply. So the time limits are intended to prevent the accidental inclusion of a new message with common Subject text into a on old Topic. For example, a new member might post a message with a non-specific Subject like "Hello". It would make no sense to link that new message to a similar incident years ago.

Shal


moderated Re: #hashtags

Technotronic Dimensions
 

Thanks for your hard work Chris in your evaluation and testing, I dont see anything being left out and you built on my original
findings quite more than my efforts, which was my intent that someone would.

Perhaps offering options on how hashtags behave and let the group owners set them is the best way to go. Default would be how they are now,
and other options that coule be checkboxes maybe:

[ ] Attempt to apply hashtags to all postings by searching archives for closest matches in subject.
[ ] Same as above, but search message body as well.

As for the date being a factor in weather a topic is "stale" or not , I as a group owner dont believe its relevent,
so my group would not need to bother, but for those who do, I suppose a drop down list with anything from "never"
to x days, weeks , months etc could be a feature.

As for a typo in the event someone has a brainstorm and rather retype the subject by memory, or has lost the archives,
or cant access the UI, it would be up to the group owner and their mods to catch the typo, and let them correct the subject.


Now to a genuine oddity. A topic is started without a hashtag, and for some strange reason a subscriber (who may in fact be an owner or moderator) >>replies to it by email adding a hashtag to the subject line. (Don’t ask why they might do that!) That hashtag will not turn up against the topic in the web >>UI, but it will be included in distributed emails and will continue to propagate along the thread if anyone replies to a distributed email with the hashtag in >>the subject line.
My head hurts…
Chris
Hope I allieved some of the pain. Keep up the good work.


moderated Re: #hashtags

 

Chris,

My head hurts…
Two principles of operation might help.

1) Replies don't edit the topic's Subject in the web UI. Only the Edit Topic function does that.

2) When Groups.io processes a message posted by email I don't think it does any modification to the subject line as emailed out to members other than to ensure that it includes the group's Subject tag. In particular it doesn't re-write the message Subject to match the Subject of the topic (if any) to which that reply is attached in the web UI.

Shal


moderated Re: #hashtags

Chris Jones
 

On Sat, Aug 31, 2019 at 06:56 PM, I wrote:
I am now writing the report; it should be finished later today / this evening UK time.

 

The original query (which I have to say I did not find entirely clear in its description of the problem) appears to have conflated two completely separate “phenomena” in the way Groups.io behaves. I would delete the word “anomalies” in my earlier post and replace it with phenomena for the simple reason that I don’t think either of the two can be described as faults, but may not qualify as full features either, although one of them comes rather close.

 

In all fairness the fact that two entirely separate factors are in play did not become really clear until I started investigating, and as far as I have been able to determine there is no interaction between them; neither modifies the action of the other, although on occasions it may seem that they do.

 

As might be realised from the original post the phenomena are exhibited by the behaviour of Hashtags in “unusual” circumstances (i.e. retrospectively applied) and the behaviour of Threading.

 

It is easier to consider threading first. A topic may be started from either the web UI or by email, and replies to that topic can be also sent either way. If the replies are sent via the web UI then by definition the messages will thread correctly, and this will still work  after a long period of topic dormancy. (> 30 days) If the replies are sent by email then they will thread correctly, but at the time of writing it has not been possible to test if there is a “30 day rule” applicable to them for the simple reason that my usual modus operandum is by web  so I have no “old” emailed posts to which I can reply. (I hope to check this in 31 days from now.)

 

There is, however, a second way of replying by email, and that is by composing a “new” email and typing Re: + subject in the subject line. This will thread correctly with the original topic provided that it has not been dormant for > 30 days; if the inactivity on that topic is longer than that then the “Re:” will be stripped off by Groups.io and the subject will appear as a new topic.

 

It must be noted that this method will fail if there is a typing error in the subject so that there is no match between an original subject and the reply in question, resulting in a new topic with a typing error starting; the Re: will be stripped off automatically.  (As an aside the system seems tolerant of 2 spaces rather than one after Re: but the full extent of this tolerance has not been tested.)

 

Now… hashtags. Consider first a topic started with a hashtag applied; it matters not whether the topic was started by web UI or by email. The email sent to subscribers by Groups.io will have the hashtag in its subject line, and that hashtag will be perpetuated by the replies to the original message irrespective of whether those replies are by email or web UI unless for some reason a subscriber sends an email with a typed subject line that does not include the relevant hashtag. In this case the post will appear as normal as part of the topic but the emails sent out by Groups.io will not have the hashtag in the subject line either. All replies generated via the web UI will have the hashtag added.

 

If the hashtag is added retrospectively then the possibilities for confusion become greater. By way of example let us assume that a topic is started with no hashtags and that there are then 4 replies to it (5 posts in total). At that point a moderator edits the subject line and adds a hashtag. Following that, 5 subscribers post replies using the web UI, followed by another 5 who post via email.

 

Now the 5 posts done via the web will result in emails that have the hashtag in the subject line; the next 5 might be more complicated; if their (emailed) replies were replies to one of the initial 5 posts (prior to the addition of the hashtag) then their emails will not have the hashtag in the subject line and neither will the resultant distributed emails; if, however, any of them were replies to one of the messages sent from the web UI then they will have the hashtag in the subject line, and so will the resulting distributed emails. Over time – depending on how many posts the complete thread accumulates – some of the emails distributed to members will have hashtags in the subject line while others will not.

 

Now add the effects of threading and retrospectively – added hashtags together…

 

Looking back to the original query there are bits of evidence missing, e.g. the existence or otherwise of non – hashtagged threads that may have been split by virtue of the way various posts were generated; I think some more detailed investigation by the OP would be in order in the hope of getting a more comprehensive picture of what is happening on his group.

 

Now to a genuine oddity. A topic is started without a hashtag, and for some strange reason a subscriber (who may in fact be an owner or moderator) replies to it by email adding a hashtag to the subject line. (Don’t ask why they might do that!) That hashtag will not turn up against the topic in the web UI, but it will be included in distributed emails and will continue to propagate along the thread if anyone replies to a distributed email with the hashtag in the subject line.

 

My head hurts…

 

Chris

 

 

 

 

 


locked Re: suggestion - Consistency (ies)

 

Ken,

It's a matter of "direction." ... The screen talking back - they
are "your"s -- you own them, you set them - but I abide by them.
This is the context I think applies - the user is a visitor at a web site. What appears on the page is the site talking back to you.

Note that the confusion complaints aren't by seasoned users ...
-- It's those who are afraid that clicking something they aren't
supposed to might blow up the world, or at least their laptop.
I fully agree with this point of view, please don't take my disagreement with any of the specific examples as a dismissal of your overall goal.

Settings can occur in different areas.
Indeed they can. And that leads to my primary objection for using that word as the link here. The context of the column of links on the left is "pages of this group". So absent the possessive pronoun I'm concerned that the timid user may be afraid of finding group settings there, and perhaps "blowing up" the group.

My thought was that /Subscription/ better implies a personal connection to the user - in the context of a group it could only refer to one's personal subscription to that group.

At least "Preferences" (display, communication, etc) would be
recognizable.
That's not bad. It may be better.

I think it has a much more personal connotation than /Settings/, and a more "friendly" one. Something offered as your preference doesn't seem as risky as (read with a booming ominous voice in your head) A SETTING.

It would also be consistent usage with the Preferences page in your Account.

But regardless, consistency is the key - when one goes from one screen
to another or to a help page, there are different terms for the same
items that a novice has to stop and wonder, ...
Perhaps the tech writer will take on the challenge of spotting those cases for correction.
https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/20986

Meanwhile, I imagine Mark would welcome having them pointed out here.

Shal


moderated Re: #hashtags

Chris Jones
 

On Sat, Aug 31, 2019 at 06:32 PM, Shal Farley wrote:
Hopefully Chris' investigation will ultimately lead to better clarity.
The investigations have been done (all bar one which will have to wait for >30 days) and I am now writing the report; it should be finished later today / this evening UK time.

Whether it provides further clarity may be for others to judge...

Chris


moderated Re: #hashtags

 

Ken,

The question pertains to the topic here - revising subject lines and
how the result ends up getting threaded. That said I’m happy to cross
post on gmf but I would have nothing of substance to add at this
point.
I suggested the change in venue to stay in keeping with this group's mission, n.b. the beta group's home page description. Once the facts of "what is" are established it would make sense to return here with suggested changes, if any.

I haven’t a clue about updating the page, or it’s incorrect at all.
Whether the page is factually correct or not, I've inferred from your question that at the least it lacks sufficient clarity. Otherwise you should be able determine whether your example fits the description or not.

Hopefully Chris' investigation will ultimately lead to better clarity.

Shal


moderated Re: Meta Suggestion: preferences

Bob Bellizzi
 

Ken,
You perceived rightly, thank you.
While groups.io seems simple when you are conditioning a group to your needs, it is actually extremely complex.
And more often than not, what I want to do can be accomplished without change in the system by using alternative methods.
--

Bob Bellizzi


moderated Re: Site updates #changelog

Glenn Glazer
 

On 8/30/2019 21:13, Mark Fletcher wrote:

Changes to the site this week:

  • CHANGE: The email bounce returned when sending a message to a group you're not subscribed to had a link to the /join page, which if you are logged in, would bounce you to another page. Removed the /join part of the URL.
  • INTERNAL: Updated Facebook API integration to use their latest version.
  • API: Added googleloginstart and googleloginfinal endpoints.
  • API: Added facebookloginstart and facebookloginfinal endpoints.
  • NEW: Enterprise groups now support single sign-on (currently only by Auth0, others by request).
  • API: New logout endpoint.
  • API BREAKING CHANGE: All POST endpoints now require a csrf field. The new csrf_token in the login object should be used for this.
  • API BREAKING CHANGE: API endpoints have been moved to https://groups.io/api/v1. The old endpoints will remain up for a month.
  • API BREAKING CHANGE: The API is moving from Basic Authentication to a cookie based authentication. The existing Basic Auth tokens will continue to work until they expire.

Have a good weekend everyone.

Mark


I'm curious, Mark. Does the API have many programmatic clients outside of the groups.io infrastructure itself?

Best,

Glenn

--
We must work to make the Democratic Party the Marketplace of Ideas not the Marketplace of Favors.

Virus-free. www.avast.com


moderated Re: #hashtags

Chris Jones
 

On Sat, Aug 31, 2019 at 07:56 AM, Ken Kloeber wrote:
The question pertains to the topic here - revising subject lines  and how the result ends up getting threaded. That said I’m happy to cross post on gmf but I would have nothing of substance to add at this point. 
From my point of view this thread has generated more heat than light.

I have started a series of tests on Shal's test group and have found one "anomaly" (the quotation marks are important here) but until more has been done I will not report any detail back.

I reserve the right to report on GMF rather than here because I suspect that is the better place for it. I'll think a bit more about that...

Chris


locked Re: suggestion - Consistency (ies)

 

Ken,

"Messages", but "Posts by members"
What I've seen in Groups.io (I mean the interface, not user content) is that /message/ is the noun, and /post/ is the action.

"New Topic" and "Edit Topic", but we add a new (and edit an old)
"Subject"
A message has four key components: To, From, Subject, and body. In this context To is always the posting address of he group, and From is the email address of the person posting the message (possibly DMARC munged). When posting via the web UI the To and From are supplied implicitly, as is the Subject when using Reply rather than New Topic.

A /topic/ is a list of one or more messages where all but the first are replies to a message in that same topic, and all share the same Subject text.

... (typically better known as a "thread")
Whether to call them /topics/ or /threads/ was discussed long ago, with /topic/ winning out. Hopefully the UI and Help are consistent about that. I don't know if /threading/ (as in "the threading algorithm") is used anywhere in the UI or Help, but I would be ok with that as otherwise you need a circumlocution to avoid an abomination like "topicizing".

J wrote:
As in "all posts by this member". Good catch, I agree.
I agree, that nominialized use of /post/ is an example inconsistency in the UI. It could be rewritten as "All Messages By This Member".

If anyone spots other specific example inconsistencies posting them here may be a good way to get them corrected.

Shal


moderated Re: #hashtags

KWKloeber
 

On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 04:59 PM, Shal Farley wrote:
Ken,
 
Shal Farley wrote:
Ken,
Ok, but that doesn't explain why ...
 
If that page needs correction or improvement please do so (that's what wikis are for). Or let's discuss it in GMF.
 
Shal
******
shal I haven’t a clue about updating the page, or it’s incorrect at all. 
You referred me to that page in reply to my question why two subject lines, identical, would end up in different threads. 
Mid you know why I’m all ears. If you don’t i surely don’t either so can’t revise the wiki page. 

The question pertains to the topic here - revising subject lines  and how the result ends up getting threaded. That said I’m happy to cross post on gmf but I would have nothing of substance to add at this point. 
 


moderated Site updates #changelog

 

Changes to the site this week:

  • CHANGE: The email bounce returned when sending a message to a group you're not subscribed to had a link to the /join page, which if you are logged in, would bounce you to another page. Removed the /join part of the URL.
  • INTERNAL: Updated Facebook API integration to use their latest version.
  • API: Added googleloginstart and googleloginfinal endpoints.
  • API: Added facebookloginstart and facebookloginfinal endpoints.
  • NEW: Enterprise groups now support single sign-on (currently only by Auth0, others by request).
  • API: New logout endpoint.
  • API BREAKING CHANGE: All POST endpoints now require a csrf field. The new csrf_token in the login object should be used for this.
  • API BREAKING CHANGE: API endpoints have been moved to https://groups.io/api/v1. The old endpoints will remain up for a month.
  • API BREAKING CHANGE: The API is moving from Basic Authentication to a cookie based authentication. The existing Basic Auth tokens will continue to work until they expire.

Have a good weekend everyone.

Mark

8501 - 8520 of 30420