1. main@beta.groups.io
  2. Messages
   Date   
moderated Re: Testing new feature request/tracking system

Patti Woodbury
 

I liked the Trello board. Simple, clear, room for comments. Just archive the out of date stuff.
Maybe it's too simple and not high tech enough?

Patti
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

txercoupemuseum.org
 

I’’ve looked at Canny here…didn’t get much from that visit.

As to hashtags…those may be fine for those who understand them and working with them.  Not so much for those of us older folks (who tend to start/own forums) who want  solutions that “just work”.  If my people want to use hashtags, fine; they're available.  But like AppleScript, hashtags are not a function I wish to learn.

I apologize if what follows is considered “off topic”.  If this isn’t the “right” place to bring these concerns, I will gladly “repackage” them if given clear instructions.    

I’ve followed the many posts on this list since late November (yeah, I’m a newbie here) to try to better understand the culture” here at Groups.io.  While I think Mark has walked on water through this period, I see nothing documented that would identify precisely WHAT suggestions/improvements are “on the list” and, of these, which he is seriously considering for implementation whether soon or at some future point in time.   

Most group owners have their hands full just riding herd on their own group(s).  They want a simple series of interfaces that “just work”.  There seems to be a presumption that the alphabet soup of forums here is clear.  Not to me.  I ASSUME “GMF” is a group moderator’s forum.  Haven’t joined.  Should I?   WHY?  What are the appropriate steps to join?   Is there a “GOF” (group owner’s forum”)?

I would describe a “bug” as behavior that is either unplanned or unpredictable…coders or administrators might know this but few users could.  Is not a “feature” just an existing function?  I see MANY of these no one seems to have explained (and posted) in reasonable detail.  

When signed in as “owner”, the “Subscription” tab is pretty clear as is.  “Admin”, not at all.  By playing around with “Members” I have found that the “default sort” is by the date “joined”, but one can sort by any of the headings just by clicking it.  Why isn’t that stated anywhere?  

Our group doesn’t use “invites” or “Direct Add”s.  Reading about “Integrations” makes me suspect this is something best turned off because members might inadvertently violate copyright laws. 

At present the most important concern within my group is fuzzy photos. It appears we are not alone.  Without more information from Groups.io on how all this works “under the hood” and why, I can’t explain why posted pictures are unacceptably fuzzy or if/when the issue will be addressed.  It would seem this issue affects any and all groups that allow photo attachments.  

How do we make the most of the tools at our disposal?  In “Settings” there is NO explanation as to advantages/disadvantages of “Database” “Max Image Size” options (or examples).  Same for “Max size” in Photos, Email and Wiki.  In “Files” why is there no “Max Image Size” option (or examples)?  

How does one correlate the “resolution” choices offered with standard graphic terms such as dots per inch (dpi) or image or document “{data size" in kB?  What is the scan/storage method that gives the best image with minimum storage overhead, etc?

It’s not a “solution” to post 1MB photos as files that then eat up a group’s storage at an unacceptable rate, yet I don’t see an ongoing discussion anywhereIt would be of considerable benefit to owners new here if there were a “go to” sheet for each subject that explains how the present system works and how to get the most out of it as it presently exists.  

Supposedly simple black and white text documents should be clear at "minimal data” size.  How do we do that?.  Similar “issue” for B&W photos and then for color photos.  

Can I, as Owner, pull a photo or file, manually resize it, and replace it.  Can I manually assign numbers to these (or photos) for ease of reference?
  
A MAJOR constraint for groups that are (or wish to be) “free” is the 1GB limit on storage.  If one has a subgroup, that becomes 1/2 GB.  That’s not practical in the long term even with occasional document or photo posts. 

Don’t use Aliases, Domains or Promote.  Would like to see message numbers shown in “activity” appended to posts in “Messages” for easy cross reference of specific replies within threads.  In “donations” there is no information as to how to withdraw funds donated. 

There’s a nice breakdown of current group storage utilization in the “Billing Overview”, but that’s a subject  typically checked once a year.  In my humble opinion this information is something to constantly monitor to assure the group’s activity storage usage is consistent with our data limit(s) in the long term.  

I Have yet to see any discussion as to whether next year at renewal time my existing “Premium” subgroup can EASILY become a separate “free group” with it’s own 1 GB storage entitlement.  Anyone else wonder about that?

Best!

William Bayne

— 

On Dec 27, 2019, at 12:23 AM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

All,

Please, let's limit this thread to only discussing the possibility of switching off Canny and using hashtags instead, and if we do, how that would look/work.

Mark
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Susan B
 

What is “Canny”?


On Dec 27, 2019, at 1:23 AM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

All,

Please, let's limit this thread to only discussing the possibility of switching off Canny and using hashtags instead, and if we do, how that would look/work.

Mark
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Shal Farley
 

Mark,

I thought of another way we could address this, using just the beta
group and hashtags.

What do you think?
This sounds very familiar:
https://beta.groups.io/g/main/topic/24224958

We could use a designated hashtag for feature requests ...
I thought that was the only sort of topic that should be in beta. And if all messages have it it isn't really useful.

(and maybe another for bugs)
I thought those were to be sent to support.

Or we could switch to something like my proposal.
I'm in favor of dogfooding it here in beta. That will likely encourage the development of some supporting features which will have utility in other groups.

Shal
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Mark Fletcher
 

All,

Please, let's limit this thread to only discussing the possibility of switching off Canny and using hashtags instead, and if we do, how that would look/work.

Mark
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Michael Pavan
 

On Dec 26, 2019, at 6:34 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@gmail.com> wrote:

I simply think that I and some others are able to make substantial contributions towards helping others asking for information
Agreed, that is the concept of a peer to peer group

(I’ve peeked into GMF recently and several instances of wrong info posted, or info lacking - I’ve seen sent one or two of these to Shal offlist),
and would sincerely like to do so, but are put off by the moderation.
Your correction of misinformation should be sent to the list so that it could be helpful to the misinformed and the misinformer(s).

Sending a complaint to Shal offlist is merely criticizing him for allowing what you perceive as misinformation to not have been Moderated to your satisfaction.

Try giving him (and the other Moderators) the chance to allow your 'correct information' to be helpful.
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Duane
 

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 06:37 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
No one has yet actually argued why total moderation on GMF is so crucial, in response to a number of us (three, so far) who have dared express our opinion that it change from moderated to NuM.
No one has said it's crucial.  It's my understanding that GMF, here and Yahoo, has been fully moderated for about 20 years.  I think that if it's worked this long, it can't be broken too bad.  There are now 5 moderators, so delays on approvals are usually minimal.  The things that take the longest are removing the ads, excessive quotes, and other extraneous things in the incoming messages.

Duane
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Christos Psarras
 

>>>
Yet opinions are getting shut down just on the basis that they are opinions and we shouldn't be expressing them. To paraphrase the politicians, that's a process argument, not a factual one. No one has yet actually argued why total moderation on GMF is so crucial, in response to a number of us (three, so far) who have dared express our opinion that it change from moderated to NuM.
<<<

My sentiments exactly; I've been watching this thread with interest, and nobody has yet to actually provide any real substance as to the why; the only replies seem to be douchy insults and the typical childish take-it-or-leave-it attitude BS, and unsurprisingly-enough, those gems of answers are no less provided by the supposedly "real-experts" to the supposedly "pseudo-experts" because they (gasp!) dared express a different opinion ... I mean, really??  Are you guys incapable of participating in a civilized debate, offer a well-structured point/reply as to why some idea is not preferable, and instead devolve into 5th grade schoolyard postering??

Cheers,
Christos
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

KWKloeber
 

Opinion vs dialog

There a broad gray line, not a thin one ...  opinions aren’t worth the bandwidth they’re printed on. Everyone has one and no one’s is more valid than another. Green or blue? Cats or dogs? Sweet potato fries or loaded curly fries?

opinions lead to (I’ve said many times) the more vocal piling into the less vocal.  Mee two, mee three, and mee as well.  The number of ayes are irrelevant. As I’ve said, if what one wants is validation, start a frickin survey. It will have as much usefulness as simply opinions expressed herein. 

 

hint/test - when one feels the need to defend oneself rather than explain or clarify a post (‘er message that is) one has crossed that broad gray line. 


i don’t use that function because....  or.. if gio had it I would because...  or... if that operated differently it would have this benefit...   is meaningful and helpful to mark.  


I don’t give a bull crap what one’s opinion is. Give me factual info to evaluate beta topics, suggestions, requests, etc. 

ps, recall that Mark has shut down topics when they become no more than opinion wars. Buyer beware. 
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Charles Roberts
 

I promise not to take "future silence as agreement", but I certainly will take it with appreciation.
Thanks,
Chuck
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Janet_Catlady
 

Just one more thing! (Kidding 😊)
--
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
Note on an occupational hazard: I comment frequently in beta based on my desire for the betterment of groups.io as a product. Only a fraction of the time are my comments and suggestions specifically a matter of self-interest. Don't assume the latter when the former may be the case.
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Simon Hedges
 

Hi,

 

I think that tagging would be good to distinguish between bugs, new features, and other types of email.  But less good, I think at enabling progress on reporting on specific bugs and new features.

 

For example how are features to be accurately identified for progress tracking (e.g. when we have dozens of emails with titles like “improve reporting” or “adding users” or “poll improvements” or “better colours”, some of which are about precisely the same thing, and some of which are not, and each potentially with several replies?  And probably some of those emails will have several suggestions in, some of which may get picked up for improvements, and some not. 

 

How will it be possible to search for a list of the currently requested features, any response to them, and a likely priority order?

 

I run a software development team, and the thought of enabling my users to track progress on the changes they request without a structured bug/feature list, gives me the heebie jeebies.  We use Jira, which is fine, but very expensive for any significant number of users (i.e. more than 10), so I’m absolutely not suggesting that.  But maybe the groups.io database function could be used to work in conjunction with the emails – whereby emails are used to submit requests for new features, but a database entry is used (maintained by the change manager) as the master status for that feature.

 

Just a suggestion.  I do like a list.

 

Simon

 

From: main@beta.groups.io <main@beta.groups.io> On Behalf Of RCardona
Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2019 6:54 PM
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

 

I concur, consolidating all functions to the beta group and "canning" Canny makes the most sense.

RC

On 12/26/19 12:02 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:

Hi All,

 

So, it seems that some people are using Canny to submit feature requests and that it can be a useful tool for doing so. I do see a few drawbacks:

 

- There are still a bunch of posts to beta that would be more appropriate instead as Canny feature requests.

- There is no notification of new posts to Canny on beta. So it can be difficult to know when new things are posted to Canny.

- People who don't run premium groups cannot post to Canny.

 

I can address the second issue with a custom email summary sent to beta on a regular basis, but that will require some development effort on my part. My main problem with Canny is with the first issue; people will still post feature requests on beta, and the discussion about those feature requests will still happen on beta.

 

I thought of another way we could address this, using just the beta group and hashtags. We could use a designated hashtag for feature requests (and maybe another for bugs). That would make it easy to address the first issue above; if someone posts a feature request without the correct hashtag, I can just add it. To view all feature requests, just filter on the hashtag. The one main thing that doesn't provide is the ability to sort by popularity (ie likes). However, I could add something like that to the search results page (he says without thinking it through completely).

 

(Also, I would add 'status' hashtags, like #closed, #planned, etc)

 

What do you think? I'm willing to continue using Canny if you all think it's a good solution. Or we could switch to something like my proposal. Or something else if someone has a better idea.

 

Thanks,

Mark (still on vacation)

 
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Janet_Catlady
 

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 04:28 PM, Ken Kloeber wrote:
mark has basically reinforced that being an opinion-oriented battle group isn’t the purpose
If you read back, you will see that what Mark actually said was not to dispute someone's feature idea and to let him do that. In this thread he has specifically asked for opinions. Yet opinions are getting shut down just on the basis that they are opinions and we shouldn't be expressing them. To paraphrase the politicians, that's a process argument, not a factual one. No one has yet actually argued why total moderation on GMF is so crucial, in response to a number of us (three, so far) who have dared express our opinion that it change from moderated to NuM. 

I'm done here. Don't take future silence for agreement.
 
--
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
Note on an occupational hazard: I comment frequently in beta based on my desire for the betterment of groups.io as a product. Only a fraction of the time are my comments and suggestions specifically a matter of self-interest. Don't assume the latter when the former may be the case.
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

KWKloeber
 

>>> that's not what I thought this group was for.<<<


you are correct, and if you read back mark has basically reinforced that being an opinion-oriented battle group isn’t the purpose nor is it helpful to the masses.  It’s humorous  how members will opt out, until/unless it’s time to defend the same opinion (again).  And some are gio developer wannabees who have the ‘best’ opinion as what’s the best for gio.  I’m not talking pluses and minuses of genuine improvements (in the eye of the beholder.)  I’m talking pseudo experts who ought to just start their own group or their own forum application/platforms and they can dictate what’s best for their own members. 
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Janet_Catlady
 

Duane,

Please don’t characterize the expressing of opinion and of a desire for change as “complaining”, and tell people, me or anyone, that we “shouldn’t complain.” If that were true, if nobody should express a desire for change, as for example if there’s a feature of groups.io they don’t like  they should be quiet and not complain because after all, they “have lots of choices,” then beta would not exist.


On Dec 26, 2019, at 4:03 PM, Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 12:24 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
Group Help doesn't really have critical mass.
Have you used it?  If not, then the "critical mass" will never be reached.  That group was actually here before GMF and I try to mention both when someone asks for help.  Folks already have a choice of how much moderation they're willing to accept.  Whether you choose not to use the Group_Help group or not, you shouldn't complain about GMF when there are other options available.  With something over 4 million users now, the site should be able to support several assistance groups.

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
Note on an occupational hazard: I comment frequently in beta based on my desire for the betterment of groups.io as a product. Only a fraction of the time are my comments and suggestions specifically a matter of self-interest. Don't assume the latter when the former may be the case.
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Duane
 

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 12:24 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
Group Help doesn't really have critical mass.
Have you used it?  If not, then the "critical mass" will never be reached.  That group was actually here before GMF and I try to mention both when someone asks for help.  Folks already have a choice of how much moderation they're willing to accept.  Whether you choose not to use the Group_Help group or not, you shouldn't complain about GMF when there are other options available.  With something over 4 million users now, the site should be able to support several assistance groups.

Duane
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Janet_Catlady
 

In the matter of expressing opinions, Mark has asked for our thoughts on how to allocate messages between the groups. You are free to express yours as well, including your opinion that the rest of us should express ours.
Have a good day.


On Dec 26, 2019, at 3:26 PM, Charles Roberts <croberts@...> wrote:


YES.........what he said!
 
I'm getting real tired of some people rehashing their personal opinions about how they think things should be run.....that's not what I thought this group was for.
 
My two-cents
Chuck
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Duane
Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2019 6:20 PM
Subject: Re: [beta] Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 03:03 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
I believe that GMF is actually shooting itself in the foot by insisting on moderation of every message, even by long-term, highly knowledgeable group members.
It sounds to me like you (or anyone that disagrees with the GMF policies) should start a help group that you can run the way you want.  Once you do, you can notify Mark and he can decide if he should add it to the recommendations on the home page of this group.

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
Note on an occupational hazard: I comment frequently in beta based on my desire for the betterment of groups.io as a product. Only a fraction of the time are my comments and suggestions specifically a matter of self-interest. Don't assume the latter when the former may be the case.
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Janet_Catlady
 

Duane,

I think you know that’s unrealistic. GMF is already doing the job, minus the one detriment (IMO). There’s neither a need, nor even enough space, to drive a second group like Group_Help, let alone a third one.

 I simply think that I and some others are able to make substantial contributions towards helping others asking for information (I’ve peeked into GMF recently and several instances of wrong info posted, or info lacking - I’ve seen sent one or two of these to Shal offlist), and would sincerely like to do so, but are put off by the moderation.

 I don’t understand why you are so wedded to it. I’ve discussed this with Shal many times in the past, and IIRC he was strongly considering it at a couple of points (but I’ll let him speak for himself), and in the end would not let go of moderation. 



On Dec 26, 2019, at 3:20 PM, Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 03:03 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
I believe that GMF is actually shooting itself in the foot by insisting on moderation of every message, even by long-term, highly knowledgeable group members.
It sounds to me like you (or anyone that disagrees with the GMF policies) should start a help group that you can run the way you want.  Once you do, you can notify Mark and he can decide if he should add it to the recommendations on the home page of this group.

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
Note on an occupational hazard: I comment frequently in beta based on my desire for the betterment of groups.io as a product. Only a fraction of the time are my comments and suggestions specifically a matter of self-interest. Don't assume the latter when the former may be the case.
moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Charles Roberts
 


YES.........what he said!
 
I'm getting real tired of some people rehashing their personal opinions about how they think things should be run.....that's not what I thought this group was for.
 
My two-cents
Chuck
 

----- Original Message -----
From: Duane
Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2019 6:20 PM
Subject: Re: [beta] Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 03:03 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
I believe that GMF is actually shooting itself in the foot by insisting on moderation of every message, even by long-term, highly knowledgeable group members.
It sounds to me like you (or anyone that disagrees with the GMF policies) should start a help group that you can run the way you want.  Once you do, you can notify Mark and he can decide if he should add it to the recommendations on the home page of this group.

Duane

moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Duane
 

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 03:03 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
I believe that GMF is actually shooting itself in the foot by insisting on moderation of every message, even by long-term, highly knowledgeable group members.
It sounds to me like you (or anyone that disagrees with the GMF policies) should start a help group that you can run the way you want.  Once you do, you can notify Mark and he can decide if he should add it to the recommendations on the home page of this group.

Duane
8841 - 8860 of 31945