Date   

locked Re: renaming GMF

 

This is not appropriate for beta. Closing.

Mark


moderated Re: Non-permitted groups

Stephen Cowley <stephen.cowley@...>
 

Hi Mark,

Yes, there have to be rules, but these reflect the nature of any real discussion if they are phrased in a way that reflects the views of a reasonable person (legal term). So I suggest that you consider including "the advocacy of violence or illegality by other ideologies" in point 4 as a definition. At present, all your examples are American and some/all probably ephemeral.

All the best
Stephen Cowley


moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

 

I've been around here for a while now; just about two weeks shy of five years if beta's records are correct. I've learned a lot and I occasionally throw a comment into a discussion. Some days it doesn't get thrown back! And yes, I'm one of those people who pay for Premium groups. Right now three of them, but I hope to convert one back to regular in another year or so. I also have a few regular groups that are not real active. I try not to pester support, as they have enough to do already. Beta and GMF have handled 95% of my needs quite simply and effectively.

I haven't looked at Canny. It's just one more thing I haven't had time for. I try to keep up with beta, and generally do well enough, although I often get in at the end of discussions. What's important here for me is that I DO routinely read beta. And I try to browse all the beta posts, because I know that thread drift will often obscure a good idea.

If I find what I think might be a bug, I bring it to GMF first. If I get feedback that there's a reason for something, I like to know first before bothering Mark with it. For me, GMF acts as that filter. And I'd prefer that enhancements be discussed here in beta rather than Canny - because I know I won't make it there.

I don't use hashtags, but could use them here, I guess, if I have to, I suppose, eventually. Having a menu of primary hashtags would help that, or a responder to my few original posts could add a hashtag.

As for GMF, it is what it is. Don't screw around with renaming it and confuse the thousands who come looking for assistance. The worst thing you can do to a successful business is rename it. As for Group Help - sorry, never heard of it before this. And knowing the knowledge base that's on GMF, I'll keep going there - AND coming here.

Dano


moderated Re: @ Susan B/renaming-thread

 

Ronaldo

One can also close the thread, as Mark has done on others.
And PS I’ve been moderating and owning for 27 years.

Susan B

On Dec 29, 2019, at 9:36 AM, ro-esp <ro-esp@dds.nl> wrote:


2b. Re: renaming GMF
From: Susan B <doggiesmail@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2019 22:26:36 CET
Could we stop discussing changing this group’s name and go back to discussions of groups.io issues? I think it is past time for Mark to close this thread!!

Susan, a thread ends when nobody contributes to it anymore. Netiquette says that you don't have a discussion about whether to discuss a topic, and especially not on-list

On groups.io, if you are fed up with a thread, you can simply click "mute this topic", and be done with it

groetjes, Ronaldo



moderated @ Susan B/renaming-thread

ro-esp
 

2b. Re: renaming GMF
From: Susan B <doggiesmail@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2019 22:26:36 CET
Could we stop discussing changing this group’s name and go back to discussions of groups.io issues? I think it is past time for Mark to close this thread!!

Susan, a thread ends when nobody contributes to it anymore. Netiquette says that you don't have a discussion about whether to discuss a topic, and especially not on-list

On groups.io, if you are fed up with a thread, you can simply click "mute this topic", and be done with it

groetjes, Ronaldo


moderated Re: Non-permitted groups

 

On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 01:17 PM, Charles Roberts wrote:

DLTDHYITA.....

I would like to apologize for approving this message. This is not the type of atmosphere I'd like to foster here on beta. Thanks to the people who called me on this. I was wrong.

Mark


moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

 

Mark,
I like your idea.

Susan B

On Dec 28, 2019, at 6:09 PM, Jim Fisher <ejf@jimella.co.uk> wrote:

I just want to register my support for this proposal to use Beta as you
describe and drop Canny. It has the added advantage that anyone on Beta who
happens to spot a problem with a proposal can draw attention to it, whereas on
Canny access is restricted so fewer eyes are looking for possible snags.

Jim Fisher

On 26 Dec 2019 at 9:02, 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)



--
http://jimellame.tumblr.com - My thoughts on freedom (needs updating)
http://jimella.wordpress.com - political snippets, especially economic policy
http://jimella.livejournal.com - misc. snippets, some political, some not
Forget Google! I search with https://duckduckgo.com which doesn't spy on you






moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

 

I just want to register my support for this proposal to use Beta as you
describe and drop Canny. It has the added advantage that anyone on Beta who
happens to spot a problem with a proposal can draw attention to it, whereas on
Canny access is restricted so fewer eyes are looking for possible snags.

Jim Fisher

On 26 Dec 2019 at 9:02, 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)



--
http://jimellame.tumblr.com - My thoughts on freedom (needs updating)
http://jimella.wordpress.com - political snippets, especially economic policy
http://jimella.livejournal.com - misc. snippets, some political, some not
Forget Google! I search with https://duckduckgo.com which doesn't spy on you


locked Re: renaming GMF

Chris Jones
 

On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 09:04 PM, Christos G. Psarras wrote:
I also do think that GMF could be renamed to better reflect its non-ties to GIO
Duane's post should have been quite enough to explain the history behind the name "GMF". That apart, the group's name is under the control of its Owners (& Moderators, I dare say!) not Groups.io. As far as I can see Mark is perfectly content with the way things are, and I strongly suspect that most of the GMF's subscribers are as well. Changing the name is likely to cause more confusion than it could ever resolve.

Chris


moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

 

Gerald, 

I see. But Freeloader is not a humorous term. Maybe you can adopt Catlady’s term  “non-Premium” groups. 

Susan B


On Dec 28, 2019, at 3:18 PM, Gerald Boutin <groupsio@...> wrote:

On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 03:54 PM, Susan B wrote:
“Freeloaders??” Wow. That’s pretty rude!! 

 
Hi, Susan.

I hoped that everyone would realize that I meant this in jest. I assume you probably did as well, at least I hope you did.

By the way, I am definitely a "freeloader" myself and I also like to think that I have a good sense of humor. However, for some reason, a lot of people still seem to miss even my best attempts at humor.

 --
Gerald


locked Re: renaming GMF

 

Could we stop discussing changing this group’s name and go back to discussions of groups.io issues? I think it is past time for Mark to close this thread!!


On Dec 28, 2019, at 4:04 PM, Christos G. Psarras <christos@...> wrote:

I also do think that GMF could be renamed to better reflect its non-ties to GIO, plus more closely align itself with the forgotten group, Group-Help.  Personally, if you are going to have Group_Help, to me Group_Managers_Help seems a logical choice as it "associates" both groups together, one for regular users (primarily), the other for admins.mods (primarily). 

One observation,

>>> Lastly, if the name were changed, there would be nothing to prevent someone else from starting a group with the current name, thus making it even more confusing.<<<


Not quite correct, all one has to do is create a placeholder group with the pertinent info, set it to not visible/closed, etc, and nobody can create the same group, at least with the same address.


Cheers,
Christos


moderated Re: Non-permitted groups

Charles Roberts
 

DLTDHYITA.....

Chuck


On Dec 28, 2019 12:22 PM, "Kinji Kameda via Groups.Io" <hakuchi@...> wrote:

On Sat, 28 Dec 2019, Mark Fletcher wrote:

> If you object, you should take your groups elsewhere.

Nice to notice there is such a good welcome to different opinions and
discussion ... makes it clear that I do not need to continue my study of
this thigie anymore.

I'm not going to support any fascist-site-thingie that is not allowing
free speech and discussion of different opinions and has such intolerant
view of more tolerant views of dicussion.

Nice thing I didn't invest any more into this ... couple days of browsing
is something I can waste for something like this.

Good this unearthed sooner than later.

Keep on rockin' in the ?Free?world!


<EOM>

\\\..
^.. \\

"In a mad world only the mad are sane." - Kyōami

.





moderated Re: Non-permitted groups

 

On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 12:34 PM, D R Stinson wrote:
Trying to define these things is difficult because of what different people define them as
True. And when you think about it logically, using the broad term "conspiracy theory" to rule out groups creates no problem in the way of discouraging groups from applying who might otherwise apply. Nobody who believes in a conspiracy theory thinks it's a conspiracy theory, so group owners reading that conspiracy theory groups are disallowed will just apply anyway. Then Mark can decide whether it's a benign or a non-benign conspiracy theory. No harm done.
 
--
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: renaming GMF

 

I also do think that GMF could be renamed to better reflect its non-ties to GIO, plus more closely align itself with the forgotten group, Group-Help.  Personally, if you are going to have Group_Help, to me Group_Managers_Help seems a logical choice as it "associates" both groups together, one for regular users (primarily), the other for admins.mods (primarily). 

One observation,

>>> Lastly, if the name were changed, there would be nothing to prevent someone else from starting a group with the current name, thus making it even more confusing.<<<


Not quite correct, all one has to do is create a placeholder group with the pertinent info, set it to not visible/closed, etc, and nobody can create the same group, at least with the same address.


Cheers,
Christos


moderated Re: Non-permitted groups

 

The conspiracy theory category seems awfully broad. It could
include topics like Area 51, Planet X, Moon landing, Bigfoot,
dollar bill symbology, Flight 007, HAARP, chem trails, JFK,
Lincoln, Julius & Ethel Rosenberg... Perhaps the intended
"objectionable" conspiracies would be eliminated by the
other restrictions?
And therein lies the problem. Some of the ideas you mention (such as chemtrails) are seen by most as disinformation from the tinfoil hat crowd. Trying to define these things is difficult because of what different people define them as. If this was a group, the moderator would handle such comments on a case-by-case basis, as they see fit. Given that Mark is the owner, I'm satisfied with his good judgement to do the same thing. He must, after all, consider the reputation of groups.io. As has been repeated, there are other places to home such groups.

Dano


moderated Re: Non-permitted groups

Kinji Kameda <hakuchi@...>
 

On Sat, 28 Dec 2019, Mark Fletcher wrote:

If you object, you should take your groups elsewhere.
Nice to notice there is such a good welcome to different opinions and discussion ... makes it clear that I do not need to continue my study of this thigie anymore.

I'm not going to support any fascist-site-thingie that is not allowing free speech and discussion of different opinions and has such intolerant view of more tolerant views of dicussion.

Nice thing I didn't invest any more into this ... couple days of browsing is something I can waste for something like this.

Good this unearthed sooner than later.

Keep on rockin' in the ?Free?world!


<EOM>

\\\..
^.. \\

"In a mad world only the mad are sane." - Kyōami

.


locked Re: renaming GMF

Duane
 

I seriously doubt that this will happen.  From the GMF home page, "This Group Managers Forum (GMF) was founded as a sister to the Group Managers Forum for Yahoo! Groups owners, with the same management but this one is focused on Groups.io instead of Yahoo! Groups."

As far as official or not, on the beta home page it says, "For general Groups.io questions, please see the groups Group Managers Forum and the Group_Help group. Note: those groups are volunteer-led and are not officially run by Groups.io."  The same mention doesn't appear at the top of the site help page in the gray Need Help? area and should probably be added. At the bottom of the page, in the Questions and Bug Reports section, it does say, "Alternatively, if you have a question about something, the best place to start is with the Group Managers Forum, which is a collection of experienced group owners. They're great people and should be able to help."  I think it would be better/fair if Group_Help were also mentioned whenever GMF is though.

Lastly, if the name were changed, there would be nothing to prevent someone else from starting a group with the current name, thus making it even more confusing.

Duane


moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Gerald Boutin <groupsio@...>
 

On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 03:54 PM, Susan B wrote:
“Freeloaders??” Wow. That’s pretty rude!! 

 
Hi, Susan.

I hoped that everyone would realize that I meant this in jest. I assume you probably did as well, at least I hope you did.

By the way, I am definitely a "freeloader" myself and I also like to think that I have a good sense of humor. However, for some reason, a lot of people still seem to miss even my best attempts at humor.

 --
Gerald


locked renaming GMF

ro-esp
 

[starting new thread to unbury the subject]


2b. Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks
From: Patti Woodbury <deserthorses@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2019 15:58:14 CET
It might be clearer that GMF is a peer to peer “not official” group if
it were renamed “Groups Manager Community” or “Groups Community Forum”.
Yes, and a different abbreviation would reduce the chances of confusing it with the GMF on yahoogroups.

groetjes/ĝis, Ronaldo


moderated Re: Non-permitted groups

Glenn Glazer
 

I have found, when moderating groups and other organizations, that when rules that limit intolerance are questioned, that it is helpful to refresh myself on the Paradox of Tolerance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

I hope others also find it useful in supporting why such rules must exist.

Best,

Glenn

6841 - 6860 of 29999