Date   

moderated Merge topics within search #suggestion

 

(Copied over from the Canny board)

As a moderator I want to use search to merge topics so I can combine messages that have been posted with a large time difference

Today, the merge feature is only available when you page through topics chronologically. This is time consuming and difficult to find similar messages that have been posted with a large time difference between posts.

One more comment to try to gain some more support for this one. We've recently migrated 1,000s of messages from Yahoo Groups and this process of merging old messages is painful. But the reward is when someone finds a message through search they will see all of the other messages in the thread.


moderated Moderator - Profiles #suggestion

 

(Copied over from the Canny board)

Would it be possible to configure some predefined Moderator roles. I intend to split my moderators into 3 roles. It would be nice to be able to create some predefined moderators, which can then just be allocated to people rather than individually set them.

The 3 roles I have identified would be:

  1. Adding members, sole ability is to add, review or ban members
  2. Content Managers - Manage hashtags management to keep group organised. New tags, modify, update message topics etc
  3. Actual moderators, who access topics/messages, make changes etc

Also, I would like to be able to change the name of the Role Moderator to something else. Maybe can be a name change to "Content Manager" just a label change, not behind the scenes change. Still considered a Moderator, just would be easy for users to identify the differences.


moderated Automated event invites when someone join a group #suggestion

 

(Copied over from the Canny board)

A group setting where when someone joins a group, they receive a set of invites to all current calendar events. And when someone leaves a group, they receive a set of cancel event notices for all current calendar events.


moderated More mod-permission granularity #suggestion

 

(Copied over from the Canny board)

The granularity of mod permissions is currently very crude. Pls add settings for the group owner to control

  1. Whether or not a mod is privy to receiving owner messages. Currently, the mod themselves sets it as an email delivery setting, and it is assumed that all mods are privy to these messages. Instead, access permission would be granted by the owner or not, and only if access permission has been granted would the mod would be able to set their email delivery preference to actually receive or not receive them.

  2. Whether or a not a mod has access to Member "Notes" pages. For some mods, a group owner may want these to be private in the sense of limited to certain mods only. They may, for example, contain personal info about the member that should not be widely distributed if there are several mods. Etc.

  3. In general, review all the possible things moderators currently have access to and permission for by default, and consider making them individual mod settings.


moderated Re: hashtag "done" for suggestions, analogous to "fixed" for bugs #meta #done

 

Haha. :-) Great!


On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:13 AM Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

Done.

Mark


--
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: non-mod usable beta tag set for private replies only #meta

KWKloeber
 

>>>On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 08:21 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
At this point I have no particularly compelling example.<<<
A (non-specific) example could be if there was a way using Private to formulate (read: fine-tune) a soon-to-be-formalized #suggestion and minimize the chaff (my new fav word, the visual fits so well) that leads up to (at least some) finally agreeing on a "way to" - or what "should" - be suggested to be implemented.  I'm envisioning something akin to

"Topic X #suggestion
I'm thinking of suggesting that Mark implement X, in a way to effectuate Y but also allow Z and Q for our group."   
"Anyone have anything to add to that that would make it better?
"

I believe that it would lend itself to more thoughtful replies than the easy-to-instantly-hit "Reply" (in other words, ready-aim-suggest (not fire-ready-aim).+
A drawback is the messaging would all be individual, with no group collaboration as if it were on here or, say, Basecamp or other.
If there's some way to provide that type discussion it might streamline the discussion here, if only because a lot of the misunderstandings/clarifications could be fixed up front.


** Mark, could I also suggest that signatures on Beta (other than a name, etc.) be "discouraged"?  They add nothing to Beta and are better reserved for individual groups and just add to the volume we have to view.  If you don't have one, I don't see a compelling reason why we need them.


moderated Re: New Group Charter #admin

KWKloeber
 

>>>Mark Fletcher wrote:
Please let me know if you have any questions.<<<

Not only a 'charter' question but a suggestion as well.  Will you be publishing guidelines - specifically referring to what is most helpful to you and want to see added (or refrained from) re: discussion of a #suggestion.  Some thoughts if you decide to go that route:

- "I agree" and "me too" be forever banned (unless Beta is intended to be a popularity poll.)  "LIKE" works.

- "No one will use that" -  no one has enough foresight to definitively predict what the average user (or non-average) will or will -

- "That would cause a mess" or "cause more confusion than now" or "can't be implemented"  or ..... similar type replies.  

- For the most part "opinions" have little value and add to unnecessary chaff on Beta.  Everyone has one and every one (just as everyone) is as valid as another.

- "Fact-based" -  discussions/additions/clarifications that are fact-based and add to understanding or clarification (or forbid improvement) of someone else's suggestion, not leading to needing to defend one's opinions (rather than presenting or clarifying facts,) which adds tons of chaff. 

....more..?

Thx


moderated Subgroup staging state and scheduled start date/time #suggestion

Mo
 

I would like to be able to set-up subgroups that are for a specific purpose for instance cooking a Full english breakfast.  Would be good to be able to set at specified date/time to switched to new "permanent" settings as per now. The reason for a specific date/time would be to coincide with a marketing release or start date of something. 

These include :- Eggs, Bacon, sausages, hash browns, toasts, fried slice, black pudding, tomatoes, baked beans, mushrooms etc. Add a vegetarian and vegan spins. Then you need a cooker, gas, electric, wood. Implements like frying and sauce pans to plates, knives and fork. Do you do plastic, wood or whatever materials. 

I want to have it public, but only after its been fully configured with hashtags and messages, databases and polls. I want to flesh out the site before I decide its permenant fate.

Maybe we could have the staging as a Template, can't send emails, but can directly add. Limit to 10 people. The types of emails sending can be tested with temporary subgroups. So not needed here. 

As a research group, could possibly use subgroups for specific subjects, would be good to create template subgroups for this purpose. Master templates, then copies to be used. A copy is not updated if master changes.


moderated Re: hashtag "done" for suggestions, analogous to "fixed" for bugs #meta #done

 

Done.

Mark


moderated hashtag "done" for suggestions, analogous to "fixed" for bugs #meta #done

 

I notice there is a #fixed hashtag for bugs. Maybe there could be an equivalent #done or #implemented (or other status) tag for suggestions. You could argue that it would be redundant because those changes are included in the changelog, but bug fixes are also included there. So having hashtags for both would be more symmetrical.
--
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: non-mod usable beta tag set for private replies only #meta

Samuel Murrayy
 

On 21/01/2020 01:35, Mark Fletcher wrote:

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 04:28 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

...and/or they want to communicate with others offlist about the
subject for some other (non-nefarious) reason, thinking that beta
members may be the best-equipped to discuss it with.
My first inclination is to not do this. I thought there was too much
off-topic stuff on Beta recently, and I'd like to avoid that going forward.
I understand, but you must realise that your changes are going to change
the nature of the "beta community". Although chit-chat has always been
officially discouraged here, chit-chat nevertheless occurred.

So here's a suggestion: create a subgroup for beta'ers who want to talk
in a somewhat less formalised setting, talk@beta.groups.io. It need not
be a free-for-all chat group -- it'll be a place where beta'ers can have
discussions unmoderated that they may personally feel veer just a little
too far away from the main group's neat and tidy setup.

Samuel


moderated Re: make "use by mods only" hashtag restriction viewable by non-mods #suggestion

 

Larry wrote:

I'm not sure what form the implementation would take, but if all are
visible, this would be a perfect place for Tooltips!
I like this idea, and would make the tooltip cover the entire box area, not just the slashed-circle "no" symbol.

Only if J's letter badges idea is adopted would I limit the tool-tip to the area of the associated badge (since there might be more than one).

For a list of tags as short as beta's that's likely sufficient. But I
think the addition of a "Also Show Moderator-Only Hashtags"
checkbox (default off) at the top of the list would likely be very
helpful in groups with a larger collection of hashtags.

Shal


moderated Re: non-mod usable beta tag set for private replies only #meta

 

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 09:37 PM, Bill Burns wrote:
Surely this is why the Group Managers Forum list exists.
Yes but the problem persists here. 
 
--
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: non-mod usable beta tag set for private replies only #meta

Bill Burns
 

On 1/20/2020 8:21 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
The main kinds of off-topic posts I see in beta involve “help” questions. Even with the new hashtag restrictions, topics here frequently start with a valid suggestion but then quickly devolve into long, drawn-out “how to” threads that don’t belong in beta. I think that adding a “private” hashtag even to those kinds of threads, once they take off in that kind of direction, could actually cut down on clutter and messsges that don’t belong in beta.
Surely this is why the Group Managers Forum list exists.

--
Bill


moderated Re: New Group Charter #admin

Judy F.
 

What if one was already submitted to support? 
Judy F.
SW Florida - USA


Since we now have a recognized #bug hashtag, should we begin to submit bug reports here instead of support@groups.io?

Yes please.

Thanks, Mark


moderated Re: non-mod usable beta tag set for private replies only #meta

 

And this topic has now so severely strayed off topic that I expect it to be locked soon...
--
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: non-mod usable beta tag set for private replies only #meta

 

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 07:42 PM, txercoupemuseum.org wrote:
Main@beta seems to be where to submit requests or ideas for consideration.  It’s a “different set eyes, ears, and mindset" from GMF.  Any response from you is, by definition,”official.  Nothing from GMF is "official words”.  That difference is what brings some of us newbies here seeking authoritative words from “on high”.
WRB,

While I completely sympathize and understand your predicament, I think it's important to recognize that virtually nowhere else would you expect the founder, owner, and sole developer of a major software product to make himself available for routine "help" questions about how to use the product. So I think it's unrealistic to come to beta as a newbie because he is here, and because he is the official word, and to expect forebearance for and answers from him for basic questions about how to use the product.

That's why he has designated other groups for that, such as GMF and Group_Help. The people in those groups are more than capable of answering 99.9% of questions from people new to the product. You don't need the "official" word from Mark on how to use hashtags, or how to use advanced subscription preferences, or nearly anything else that already exists as a feature. But, you might say, how do you know if something already exists as a feature or not? Simple. Until you are really familiar with the product, you ask in one of the help forums whether it already exists before making your suggestion on beta.

I hope this makes sense, and I hope I'm not being presumptuous in answering a question that you clearly meant for Mark. Mark is the creator of the whole thing and shouldn't need to answer questions like this. Although he will probably answer anyway. :)
 
--
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: non-mod usable beta tag set for private replies only #meta

txercoupemuseum.org
 

Hi Mark,

For every person confident enough to try to voice request for help there will always be many more “lurkers"who breathe a sigh of relief that someone else was having the same problem.  So, after you have read through this post please share with us what hashtag it should have had and perhaps share a screen shot as to how that would look.

Main@beta seems to be where to submit requests or ideas for consideration.  It’s a “different set eyes, ears, and mindset" from GMF.  Any response from you is, by definition,”official.  Nothing from GMF is "official words”.  That difference is what brings some of us newbies here seeking authoritative words from “on high”.

That need doesn’t make us “draftees” to be put or kept in “our place" by a drill sergeant.  Many of us find Groups.io confusing in many ways because we simply do not have the time (or the will) to educate ourselves to “expert” level here.  These are neither complaint nor public confession, merely simple impersonal facts.

No one can change the fact that half the solution to any problem is someone perceiving said “problem” as such in the first place.  By their very nature, “problems” are often situations concerning that which we “don’t know that we don’t know”.  With my limited IT background, I don’t claim to be able to definitively identify a “Bug” from a “feature” that is less than “intuitive”.

So when, inevitably, a newbie like me makes a suggestion out of inexperience with Groups.io, I find those “...long, drawn-out “how to” threads that don’t belong in beta…” to often be of considerable help; whether in clarification of that which is already here, or in FINDING information I didn’t ’t know enough to successfully search for.  

While individual responses may very well NOT “belong in beta”, I have found some of these most useful on occasion and believe they DO “belong” SOMEWHERE.  I still don’t understand how to use a hashtag as J_Catlady suggests, but I do think there should be a “OT” discussion place, thread, whatever works to which such “follow-up” could transfer without the stigma of having somehow erred from the established path.  

Anything that improves comprehension and understand here serves an important purpose until such time as overall documentation and/or help risers to the level of a Groups.io “manual”.   So inasmuch as such would seem desirable and positive in the overall, I see merit in allowing such PUBLIC conversations on/off Main@beta.  

Groups.io can have “structure” without forcing one and all into conforming to a complex and inflexible series of procedure and “topics”.  

Best!

WRB

— 

On Jan 20, 2020, at 7:21 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Mark,

Thanks for your response. It is very helpful, after making a suggestion, to have an idea of which way you are leaning on it. 

<snip>

The main kinds of off-topic posts I see in beta involve “help” questions. Even with the new hashtag restrictions, topics here frequently start with a valid suggestion but then quickly devolve into long, drawn-out “how to” threads that don’t belong in beta. I think that adding a “private” hashtag even to those kinds of threads, once they take off in that kind of direction, could actually cut down on clutter and messsges that don’t belong in beta.

I think a hashtag like #OT would be used very infrequently by group members themselves, and when used, would result in only a single message onlist. Whereas if the hashtag could be used by you to stop topics from going in the wrong direction.

That’s the only case I can make right now. 


On Jan 20, 2020, at 4:35 PM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 04:28 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

It might be helpful to allow beta members to start topics that they only want private replies to, either because they are somewhat off-topic and they don’t want to clutter up the message list with the replies, and/or they want to communicate with others offlist about the subject for some other (non-nefarious) reason, thinking that beta members may be the best-equipped to discuss it with. To that end, I suggest a beta hashtag set to private replies only and usable by non-mods.

My first inclination is to not do this. I thought there was too much off-topic stuff on Beta recently, and I'd like to avoid that going forward. I'd like it to be more focused than it has been recently. If you have a specific example, I could be open to changing my mind. But I think it'd have to be compelling.

Thanks, Mark


--
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: New Group Charter #admin

 

Mark,

What should be done now, if anything, about suggestions we've already posted on canny? I noticed you implemented the MF group setting option from there. Should I assume that the rest of my suggestions there have already "registered" with you, or should I/we start repeating them here?

Same question with bugs reported to support for which no acknowledgement was received. I have a couple in my sent folder from long ago and could repost them here.

Thanks.
--
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: non-mod usable beta tag set for private replies only #meta

 

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 5:51 PM lloyd lehrer <lloydlehrer@...> wrote:
Is there a mods only messaging tool or a way to create unique email grouping addresses within groups.io?  I use a subgroup to message our mod team but is there another way to keep other eyes off a set of messages with a single address to the team?

This is off-topic to the original post, and is more a question for GMF or List_Help.

Thanks,
Mark