Date   

moderated A 554 Bounce code not recognized as bouncing on first occurrence #bug #fixed

John Pearce
 

I had read about how groups.io processes bouncing in the wiki and I had also asked about this on the GMF forum.  What I found is that a 554.30 mail box disabled is not seen as a hard bounce and will not trigger groups.io to process the member as bouncing.  My problem is, members who are on special notices only in our group only get one email per month.  It bounces but it isn't enough to trigger the bounce status in the member list as it does not satisfy the 4 continuous days (or bounces) of bouncing.  So these types will build up in the list forever.  Apparently if a account is closed that would trigger bouncing after the first "hard" bounce.  But if an account is disabled it's not for 4 days or bounces.  See cut and paste from a guy who just came on bounce status today.  This guy did take 5 occurrences to show up and was placed on bounce status.  However had he been on special notice it would never happen.  We moved over to groups.io with the automated method you provide in Oct/Nov.  We had 1500 members in Yahoo on nomail, most had been members a decade or more.  I knew many were no longer valid and before the move I disallowed nomail so all those people were put on special so that they would show up as bouncing and I could eliminate them.  Many bounced as accounts do not exist and I removed them but many I saw looking at samples of the email delivery history had disabled boxes and were not put in bounce status.  So I went through all 1500 one at a time and when I found the 554.30 I removed the member.  It's now down to 900 members on special only and all are with yahoo email addresses.  I'm told on GMF that a 500 level error should trigger after one bounce.  So I opened this issues with a bug hashtag.  I do realize there could be reasons why this is not a bug but the specter of having to periodically go through that many members once a year or so to clean things up compelled me to open this and hope for the best.  Thank You

John P

Message
Digest #48
Delivered
Jan 17
Response
ok dirdel
Most Recent Unsuccessful Attempt
No email deliveries
Recent Bounces
When Message Reason
2:59am Digest #53 mta7.am0.yahoodns.net: 554 delivery error: dd Sorry, your message to bautista_2010@... cannot be delivered. This mailbox is disabled (554.30). - mta4266.mail.bf1.yahoo.com
Jan 21 Bounce probe mta6.am0.yahoodns.net: 554 delivery error: dd Sorry, your message to bautista_2010@... cannot be delivered. This mailbox is disabled (554.30). - mta4018.mail.gq1.yahoo.com
Jan 20 Digest #52 mta7.am0.yahoodns.net: 554 delivery error: dd Sorry, your message to bautista_2010@... cannot be delivered. This mailbox is disabled (554.30). - mta4362.mail.bf1.yahoo.com
Jan 20 Digest #51 mta7.am0.yahoodns.net: 554 delivery error: dd Sorry, your message to bautista_2010@... cannot be delivered. This mailbox is disabled (554.30). - mta4080.mail.bf1.yahoo.com
Jan 19 Digest #50 mta7.am0.yahoodns.net: 554 delivery error: dd Sorry, your message to bautista_2010@... cannot be delivered. This mailbox is disabled (554.30). - mta4312.mail.gq1.yahoo.com
Jan 18 Digest #49 mta6.am0.yahoodns.net: 554 delivery error: dd Sorry, your message to bautista_2010@... cannot be delivered. This mailbox is disabled (554.30). - mta4463.mail.bf1.yahoo.com


moderated Re: Enlarge the vertical size of the "Your Groups" pull-down menu #suggestion

dave w
 

hi
Last modified a year ago?
At that time it was a variable width (and when an idiot creates a group name 30 words long, so was the window... ;/ ) while the vertical height drop down dropped below the window pane entirely... which Mark changed to the current condition.
So using a laptop for two decades I'm restricted in height (as will be many others) - therefore any further change needs to be dynamic scrolling, not back to the click on first then hand/ arrow scroll all the way to bottom of groups. Otherwise, go... cheers
dave
PS -The like isnt mine!


moderated Re: Process to propose new features #meta

Duane
 

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 04:08 PM, Jim Fisher wrote:
Doesn't GMF already deal with discussion of proposals, including, but not
confined to, proposals for facilities that already exist?
Yes, we do.  While the stated intent of the group is to improve the management of groups, we often kick things around to get a more solid idea of what is really wanted as a site tool.  Some folks ask about bugs they've found, only to find out that it's a misunderstanding on their part.  Other times it's about not understanding how to do the same thing here that was done on another site.  I believe that several of the recent suggestions made here and on Canny were more complete from having discussed them.

While there aren't as many members (yet?), the Group_Help group also tries to assist with these things.  I'm a member of both and do what I can to help.

Duane


moderated Re: Process to propose new features #meta

 

Doesn't GMF already deal with discussion of proposals, including, but not
confined to, proposals for facilities that already exist? I've certainly used
it in that way at least once, and I know others have also.

Jim Fisher

On 21 Jan 2020 at 10:27, Mark Fletcher wrote:

Hi All,

Ken in https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/23853 mentioned something I've been
thinking about. Right now, proposing a #suggestion is a free-for-all. Duplicate
suggestions appear often. Previously discarded suggestions come back up, etc
etc. It would help me if we could establish some kind of process around it, a
way to help people vet their ideas before they are officially proposed. It would
not be my goal to put up roadblocks or otherwise intimidate newbies from sharing
their ideas; the opposite actually. I want to increase the quality of
suggestions.

It seems it would be good for there to be a way to 'discuss' a proposed
suggestion before it actually becomes a suggestion. Which means that the
suggestion process involves two steps, the #proposal and the #suggestion. I can
see two ways of doing the #proposal:

- Create a new, unmoderated subgroup to discuss proposals.
- Add a new feature to hashtags that would work as follows:
- The topic is set so that no one follows it.
- Replying to the message automatically sets you to follow the topic.
- You would be able to manually follow the topic as well if you wish.

In either case, once a consensus is reached (and only then), submit a
#suggestion, referencing the proposal topic. If there's no interest in the
#proposal, it doesn't become a #suggestion.

Ideally, I would not have to moderate (or spend much time involved with) the
#proposal process. I think we all want me focused on actually getting stuff
implemented. :-)

Thoughts?

Thanks,
Mark
--
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: Coordinate banning w removal #suggestion

 

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 10:59 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
The results are inconsistent with the intended functionality,
You could call it a bug, but it's in that zombie zone between feature and bug, since this has been an ongoing evolution (e.g., banning did not used to remove the member, now it does; display has been changing; banned record used to include history and past record not; now past record contains notes and banned does not; etc). It's more an issue of making the records match in the ways that matter (i.e., what's displayed), what date to display in the banned members page, etc.
 
--
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 Enabled/disabled button status inconsistency bug at the Drafts management screen #bug

Christos G. Psarras
 

Contrary to how buttons work in other similar list management areas, when one is at the Drafts management screen, the "Delete" button is always enabled, even if no draft on the list is checked, resulting in a rather nonsensical message.

Cheers,
Christos


moderated Re: Coordinate banning w removal #suggestion

 

It removes the member if they are currently a member, it removes the account’s click button to apply to or join the group via the web, and it results in only a log entry (“banned member attempted to join the group”) rather than a pending member notification if attempting to subscribe via email. Banning can be undone by “unbanning” the email address. None of this functionality is in dispute. But the results are inconsistent with the intended functionality, mostly due to implementation issues involving the fact that a separate member record us created for a banned address. 


On Jan 22, 2020, at 9:47 AM, Jeremy H via Groups.Io <jeremygharrison@...> wrote:

Looking at the GIO help, and GMF wiki, did not provide me with an explanation of what ban/ning/ned means: and I think that a decision on what it does - logically - is the first step.

There seem to me to be two options - is it:
  1. A prohibition on a member from participating in the group, temporarily or permanently, with them - some time later - being either unbanned or removed from the group: i.e. they remain a member of the group, but with 'banned' status (so they can't do anything)
  2. A 'removal with attitude': i.e. they are deleted from the group, with a 'banned = prevent from rejoining' flag set in their 'past member' record. (Should there be any other difference between a 'banned' and a 'removed' member?)
(The 'banned = prevent from rejoining' flag should also be set/carried into their 'past member' record in (1) if they are subsequently removed).

Jeremy

--
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: Coordinate banning w removal #suggestion

Jeremy H
 

Looking at the GIO help, and GMF wiki, did not provide me with an explanation of what ban/ning/ned means: and I think that a decision on what it does - logically - is the first step.

There seem to me to be two options - is it:
  1. A prohibition on a member from participating in the group, temporarily or permanently, with them - some time later - being either unbanned or removed from the group: i.e. they remain a member of the group, but with 'banned' status (so they can't do anything)
  2. A 'removal with attitude': i.e. they are deleted from the group, with a 'banned = prevent from rejoining' flag set in their 'past member' record. (Should there be any other difference between a 'banned' and a 'removed' member?)
(The 'banned = prevent from rejoining' flag should also be set/carried into their 'past member' record in (1) if they are subsequently removed).

Jeremy


moderated Re: Process to propose new features #meta

 

Haha. That term is possible option.

On Jan 22, 2020, at 9:15 AM, ro-esp <ro-esp@...> wrote:

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


--
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

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