Date   

moderated Re: Process to propose new features #meta

ro-esp
 

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 01:11 AM, Simon Hedges wrote:


I'd like to suggest that it's done the other way around, with Beta as the more
open freer group where "proposals" can be discussed. Then if Mark endorses
them he create a post in a subgroup for "suggestions"
I don't have strong feelings as to whether or not we should do it this way, but if we do it this way we need to use terminology that's more clear than "suggestion vs proposal". In my mind those words are pretty much synonymous, but in the practice we envision one could be a "brainfart" while the other one has been discussed and refined...


groetjes, Ronaldo


moderated Re: Upload ICS file into the calendar #suggestion

Charlie Behnken
 

I like the concept, but it does not have to be a .ics file.  Uploading any type of file (.txt, .csv) or even sql would be very useful to me.  

We do a quarterly newsletter of events and entering 65 or more event manually to the calendar does not really work.   Prone to error, and unwanted notifications at times.  The ability to do a simple, no notification bulk upload is what I would like.


moderated Event: Database server crash #outage - Wednesday, 22 January 2020 #outage #cal-invite

main@beta.groups.io Calendar <main@...>
 

Database server crash #outage

When:
Wednesday, 22 January 2020
4:54am to 5:06am
(UTC-08:00) America/Los Angeles

Description:

The main database server froze up for reasons unknown. Rebooting the machine fixed the problem.


moderated Re: New Group Charter #admin

 

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 04:27 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:

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

Yes please.

Can a non-member of beta report bugs to support? If so, what happens to the bug report?
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: Process to propose new features #meta

 

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 08:58 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
I am not being paid to make suggestions
In fact, as an owner of a premium group for many years, *I* and paying *Mark* for the privilege of making suggestions. The last thing I want is to make it like I'm still working for a software company.

I don't want to pay Mark to whitewash his fence. I want beta to be fun and easy. 
 
--
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: Process to propose new features #meta

 

I have no interest in working with members of beta in formulating a "consensus" of any of the suggestions I propose (many of which, I can say, have been implemented by Mark). I am not an employee of groups.io and I am not being paid to make suggestions, let alone to work on "teams" of people formulating a "consensus" of ideas before they are presented to Mark. I don't know how many people here are actually interested in that.

This group started out as a place for simply expressing our ideas for making groups.io better. If it morphs into a "working group" in any way, shape, for form, I will leave.
--
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: Process to propose new features #meta

KWKloeber
 

Simon's idea and others - 

It really doesn't matter whether the discission or let's call it "fine-tuning" is accomplished here (beta) or a subgroup, or a whole different group.  A name is just a name, that's all.  It could be called Initial Suggestion Group and Final Suggestion Group.  Who cares?  My original point was, Mark doesn't need to see the harangue of comments that leads up to some formulation of a (near final?) version of a #suggestion.  

Let me be clear that in no way did I suggest that those discussing the #suggestion would usurp and of Mark's control.. but relieving him of needing to necessarily monitor all the discussion (and there can be MANY as we know that lead nowhere, and many that lead to consensus -- or at least partial.)

Perhaps when a topic is first #suggested on that group (or sub) it might also be moderated initially.  If it's a duplicate, (or in Mark's mind is defo a "don't bother" non-starter)  we could be told before heading off into the discussion sunset?


On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 07:11 PM, Simon Hedges wrote:

I'd like to suggest that it's done the other way around, with Beta as the more open freer group where "proposals" can be discussed. Then if Mark endorses them he create a post in a subgroup for "suggestions" (though maybe "candidates" might be an alternative), where people can look if they want to see what's potentially going to be adopted. That's like to result (in the "suggestions" group) a better formed, appropriately tagged and managed, list of potential changes.

Simon

-----Original Message-----
From: main@beta.groups.io <main@beta.groups.io> On Behalf Of JohnF via Groups.Io
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 11:43 PM
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Process to propose new features #meta

The proposal process seems too complicated to me. If I want to make a simple suggestion like, "I think the background color should change to orange on Halloween," I don't want to have to go through a proposal phase for it.


moderated Re: Process to propose new features #meta

 

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 04:50 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
this idea.
Referring to Simon's idea.
 
--
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: Process to propose new features #meta

 

I love this idea.
--
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: Process to propose new features #meta

Simon Hedges
 

I'd like to suggest that it's done the other way around, with Beta as the more open freer group where "proposals" can be discussed. Then if Mark endorses them he create a post in a subgroup for "suggestions" (though maybe "candidates" might be an alternative), where people can look if they want to see what's potentially going to be adopted. That's like to result (in the "suggestions" group) a better formed, appropriately tagged and managed, list of potential changes.

Simon

-----Original Message-----
From: main@beta.groups.io <main@beta.groups.io> On Behalf Of JohnF via Groups.Io
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 11:43 PM
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Process to propose new features #meta

The proposal process seems too complicated to me. If I want to make a simple suggestion like, "I think the background color should change to orange on Halloween," I don't want to have to go through a proposal phase for it.


moderated Re: Coordinate banning w removal #suggestion

 

In addition, sometimes a banned member is described as "banned" in the Past Members list but does not even appear in the Banned list. And on top of that, the date field in the Banned list now shows some date that seems to have no connection with anything that I can see. It is certainly not the banned date. (Mark, if you start on this at some point in the future, let me know and I can send you some details offlist, if they're still findable by then.) By far the worst right now is that the Notes page is always now blank in the Banned list and has to be copied over from the same member from the Past Members list. 
--
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: Process to propose new features #meta

 

The proposal process seems too complicated to me. If I want to make a simple suggestion like, "I think the background color should change to orange on Halloween," I don't want to have to go through a proposal phase for it.

Mo's suggestion is good. If you say something like, "I'd like to improve the database feature. Here are some outstanding suggestions that are already on the list of things to do. Which of these are most important, and can you think of any others that would be especially helpful?" that might improve the suggestion quality for that area for a little while.

If you really want to organize things, a form with dropdown fields for the individual features combined with an automatic search for similar issues as part of a suggestion process would be helpful, but that would be work to implement in itself.

JohnF


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

ro-esp
 

"something like "this group will start functioning februari 30th, 18.45 UTC"

Nice idea, but why limit it to SUBgroups?

groetjes, Ronaldo


moderated Re: Italian reply to message by email uses preface RES, not "Re," creating new topic #bug

 

Oops, looks like it's Portuguese, not Italian. 
--
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 Italian reply to message by email uses preface RES, not "Re," creating new topic #bug

 

I'm not sure what kind of bug this is, but it seems that at least in the one case attached here, a reply via email by someone in Italy attached the preface "RES", instead of "Re:," which caused lack of threading and creation of a new topic. 
https://groups.io/g/FeralCats/topic/res_feralcats_goat_s/69964908?p=,,,100,0,0,0::recentpostdate%2Fsticky,,,100,2,0,69964908

--
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: Online reply remembers original, not adjusted subject text if a hashtag was removed #bug

 

Yes and there's some similar funkiness with merging and splitting. The titles are not kept in synch. Noticed this a long time ago, but since I no longer merge or split, including rarely changing a topic title, it has not bothered me for awhile.
--
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

Christos G. Psarras
 

Hi Mark,

I just went through Canny and posted a bunch of #suggestions to beta (I temporarily turned the #suggestion hashtag to No Email when I did so to avoid spamming the list).

I noticed that two of the new topics (69961750, 69961762) you copy-created over from Canny have duplicate threads already existing in beta.  (I know because I'm the perpetrator of both the original beta threads and Canny requests for the two topics)

Since there is some more info in those original threads (at least on one of them), should I go and add a message reply with a reference link to the original thread for those two dupes?  Or at least for the one with additional detail info?

Cheers,
Christos


moderated Re: Process to propose new features #meta

 

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 11:10 AM, Mo wrote:
Maybe instead of a free for all we concentrate on one area of the system at a time.
It's not a terrible idea, but I don't think Mark would necessarily get the best product from that. The features he's thinking about at any given time are unlikely the ones where people have a great idea that just happens to pop into their head. And people (we) are unlikely to save up feature ideas for the time when Mark happens to be asking about that area of the product.

I think thinks were going along just fine with the new hashtags, as long as someone (i.e., Mark or a designee) is keeping track of the suggestions. I think ultimately that's the problem and what's causing the chaotic free-for-all. Nobody was keeping track. I was thinking along the lines of refining the situation, possibly with further hashtags to let members keep track of what's *not* done or fixed, but keeping the same structure. 

I assume that bugs are tracked somewhere officially in groups.io, for example. Is there not, or could there not be, a method for tracking feature suggestions as well? Of course it would require human input. It can't just chug along by itself.
 
--
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: Process to propose new features #meta

Bill Hazel
 

Mo,
I think this is a good suggestion.
Perhaps one way to solicit suggestions for a specific features would be for Mark to create a message asking for input on that subject, example:
"Looking for suggestions for wikipage editing #suggestion" 

Then he could make it "sticky" so it would be at the top of the message list.
He could add as many as he wanted, 2 or 3 maybe, adding one per week and leave it there for 3 weeks so they would cycle.

There could also be a wikipage created, and maybe made sticky, that would record all the #suggestion messages by subject.
That way the first thing a visitor sees are the suggestions made and those requested.

Mark, or another Moderator could manage the page, merging posts as required.

How could Mark decide which topics to post?
A poll maybe? He and the other Moderators could get together and come up with a list of 20 possible subjects,
The purpose and "Rules" specified in the Question portion could explain the process so the poll respondents would understand what the goal is.
As the top answer gets moved to a sticky post, the Poll could be updated to include new choices, perhaps based on the spurious requests that come in.

Perhaps one of the choices would be to either explain how to restore a wikipage revision or add a "Restore the version" button 


moderated Online reply remembers original, not adjusted subject text if a hashtag was removed #bug

Christos G. Psarras
 

Greetings,

Short version:

Here's a glitch, in short, at least in beta, when one replies through the online interface to an existing message which had its original subject altered by removing a #hashtag, the online Reply function will remember the original subject and include the deleted hashtag.

 

Long version:

This happened on beta today when I wanted to add my latest update to this thread, originally posted before you did your hashtag reorg:

https://beta.groups.io/g/main/topic/69924762

The original subject was "Re: Following a new topic sends out catch-up emails with missing group [Subject Tag] #bug #SubjectTag", and you removed the #SubjectTag hashtag from the original subject.


When I tried to reply to either one of those two existing posts, clicking reply brought up the original subject with the #SubjectTag in it.  Tested a bit more, both from my normal account and a different test account, and it will only do it on either of those original posts, NOT (of course) on my latest update message in that thread, as I manually made sure to remove that hashtag so it matches your change (and topic displayed).

 

Cheers,

Christos