On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 02:07 PM, ro-esp wrote:

"unfollow thread" is the technically correct terminology

It's not here, because a decision was made to use "topic" instead of "thread" everywhere. All instances of "thread" were supposed to be changed to "topic." Every so often a missed one pops up. This is just one of those. Just a global terminology decision and a minor oversight. No big deal.
 
--
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

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 04:28 AM, J_Catlady wrote:

The confirmation page for unfollowing a topic asks "unfollow this thread?" but
should be "topic"

I don't think so. It's perfectly possible that in due time, there's more than one thread about the same topic, or at least with the same subject-line.

"unfollow thread" is the technically correct terminology

groetjes/ĝis, Ronaldo

I don't think that's a bug.  It appears to me that there is no "active" ckeckbox because it is always active.  The control you have here is if you create a direct add notice it's added to the text.  If you delete it or don't have one, the canned notice is sent without the additional text.  I have a test member that I keep on special only just to test with.  I removed it from the group then added it back direct add.  It added the text (which I had never had before).  A direct add notice does not show as active and there is not check box either.  GIO adds the text if it's there and doesn't if one is not but the notice is still sent.

John

--
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

I recall reporting this bug, or something like it (there have been a lot of bugs related to the logging of changing display names), in the past but am not sure. The bug is that if a moderator changes a display name, it is logged in the group activity log as "changed moderator permissions" (even if the member is not a moderator in the first place).
--
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

Someone on GMF reported that they couldn't delete their photo in the profile for a group.  I did some checking this morning and realized that the "Remove file" button doesn't work on the Profile Photo.  For now, the work around is to upload a blank file.

Thanks,
Duane

Take care of you and yours, this can wait!

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 11:54 PM, Jim Avera wrote:

The point is we have an *existing* email address used to "send messages to the list" (in the old system), and I want messages sent there to go out in the new GIO list.  But only if the sender is authorized to post (this screening function used to be performed by a human, and now is supposed to be automatic with GIO).

The existing email is not secret.  So the original sender MUST be validated before posting messages received via that original posting mbox.

Jim -- I guess I don't understand the problem. Clearly, what we're talking about is not a bug...at worst, it's a missing feature.

Please post to GMF and perhaps we can help you there. I have further suggestions but don't want to extend what amounts to an off-topic thread.

Regards,
Bruce 

Praying for your family, Mark.
--
Tom Biggs
GFCA

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 11:03 AM, Duane wrote:
  On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 12:38 PM, Jim Avera wrote:
     But ANY message from any user gets posted.

Another but, only if they have the specific email address assigned to the integration.  Highly unlikely that someone would accidentally create that address.

The point is we have an *existing* email address used to "send messages to the list" (in the old system), and I want messages sent there to go out in the new GIO list.  But only if the sender is authorized to post (this screening function used to be performed by a human, and now is supposed to be automatic with GIO).

The existing email is not secret.  So the original sender MUST be validated before posting messages received via that original posting mbox.

P.S. I don't see any way to "assign to the integration" our existing email address.  The only option I see is to generate a new email address of the form groupname+int+gobbledegook@groups.io and forward our existing mbox to that.  Which defeats all posting security AFAICT.   If I'm missing something here please reply -- I don't understand how the "email integration" can be very useful for announce-only groups.  Thanks.

Take care of yourself and your family, that's a higher priority. This all can wait.

Best,

Glenn

Oh no Mark, y'all stay well out there.

--
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

Our block group is organizing for the pandemic and trying to get the whole block involved. To that end, we are re-inviting many people who did not act on invites a long time ago. To to this, we are using "send again" from the Sent Invite page, but are discovering to our chagrin that the original (and now completely obsolete) custom messages sent to them years ago are going out to these people again. Hopefully I'm missing something, but I can't find a way to change it. I think the custom message should be editable when re-sending an invite.
--
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