Date   

moderated Re: Welcome message delivered to NC members #bug

 

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 05:46 AM, Duane wrote:
After confirming your email address this way, you do still need to verify that you want to join a group if you apply via email, but the pending/accepted member will not be NC.
Nevertheless, if this is the first group someone is joining, and that group happens to be a premium restricted group, the group can confirm the member (INCLUDING removing the NC) by approving their membership. I have been arguing for some time that this should be true also for non-premium groups, because - as Shal implicitly argues in this thread - once a group approves someone's membership, that should also confirm them.

The fact that NC stands for "not confirmed," yet does not display even when a member HAS confirmed their interest in a second group, makes the situation even worse. 's the language that's the problem in this detail. It may even have been leading to a situation reported here as a bug recently (I think by you?) where the NC has not been appearing even though the member has not confirmed.

The entire NC display and confirmation process, including the language, is in need of a major overhaul IMO.
 
--
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: Welcome message delivered to NC members #bug

Duane
 

On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 09:51 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
Confirmation is not strictly a function of the account if the member applies to a group via email. They still have to confirm in that case, even if they already have an account.
NC is strictly a function of the account.  It's only needed once per account, regardless of the number of groups joined.  After confirming your email address this way, you do still need to verify that you want to join a group if you apply via email, but the pending/accepted member will not be NC.

Duane


moderated Re: Welcome message delivered to NC members #bug

Chris Jones
 

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 03:43 AM, Duane wrote:
I do see where it makes no sense to send it (on either type of group) if they haven't confirmed their email address though.
IMHO there is another anomalous factor in play. The group I co - own has on occasions admitted members who have not responded to the Confirmation Message, but who have responded to the Pending Membership message. In sending that response they have confirmed their email address and the reason for joining, so the NC flag serves no useful ongoing purpose. I usually prompt them to positively respond to the Confirmation Email by firstly sending them a specific email about the point and then sending another Confirmation Email. At least I think I do; let me explain further. In the example cited above the email I send shows up (a) in the Activity Log (even if its content is not recorded) and (b) in the individual's Email Delivery History. The subsequent resending of the Confirmation Email shows up in the Activity Log but not in the Email Delivery History. I have just sent another Confirmation Email to such a member without a prior warning email; again it shows up in the Activity Log but not the Email Delivery History. 

It leaves me wondering whether these Confirmation Emails actually get sent. If the members responded to them I would know, but they don't; is the lack of response because (a) they cannot be bothered, or (b) because they didn't actually receive anything to respond to?

Chris


moderated Re: Site updates #changelog

Andy Wedge
 

On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 04:25 PM, Thomas Gruber wrote:
See entry from 4/30/20
Yes, I'm aware of that. I wanted to make sure that the situation hadn't changed again since then.

Andy


moderated Re: Welcome message delivered to NC members #bug

 

I agree with Duane. My point was that in essence, Shal is arguing that restricted groups should be allowed to confirm their members upon approval, but without removing the N.C. That’s like trying to have it both ways. Either let non-premium restricted groups confirm their own members upon approval, as premium groups do, including removing the N.C., or treat unconfirmed members in every way as if they’re not yet in the group, which is the whole idea behind confirmation (I.e., don’t make them privy to member information until they’re confirned(.

Confirmation is not strictly a function of the account if the member applies to a group via email. They still have to confirm in that case, even if they already have an account.


On May 3, 2020, at 7:44 PM, Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:

On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 08:28 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
There exist restricted groups with no real restrictions - that is, the group is technically restricted and needs to approve memberships, but actually accepts any email address that applies. In those cases the welcome message should not go to out to NC members. And of course it should not go out to NC members in non-restricted groups, either.
I don't see that it makes any difference.  The NC is related to their account, not their membership.  If they become a member, automatically (unrestricted) or approved (restricted), it should be sent to them.  I do see where it makes no sense to send it (on either type of group) if they haven't confirmed their email address though.

Duane

--
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: Welcome message delivered to NC members #bug

Duane
 

On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 08:28 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
There exist restricted groups with no real restrictions - that is, the group is technically restricted and needs to approve memberships, but actually accepts any email address that applies. In those cases the welcome message should not go to out to NC members. And of course it should not go out to NC members in non-restricted groups, either.
I don't see that it makes any difference.  The NC is related to their account, not their membership.  If they become a member, automatically (unrestricted) or approved (restricted), it should be sent to them.  I do see where it makes no sense to send it (on either type of group) if they haven't confirmed their email address though.

Duane


moderated Re: Welcome message delivered to NC members #bug

 

On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 06:08 PM, Shal Farley wrote:
If the group is restricted and you've approved the membership request (or if the group is unrestricted) then I think the question of whether they should be privy to the group's messages, including its welcome message, has already been answered in the affirmative by your approval of their membership request.
And by the way, this  ^^^ just bolsters my previous argument that restricted groups should automatically confirm members when they approve them, rather than having it be a premium feature:
https://beta.groups.io/g/main/topic/72079353

Either restricted groups should automatically confirm members upon their approval, OR, if not, the NC members should not receive the welcome message or anything else that bona fide, confirmed members are privy to.
--
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: Welcome message delivered to NC members #bug

 

There exist restricted groups with no real restrictions - that is, the group is technically restricted and needs to approve memberships, but actually accepts any email address that applies. In those cases the welcome message should not go to out to NC members. And of course it should not go out to NC members in non-restricted groups, either.
--
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: Welcome message delivered to NC members #bug

 

J,

I don't remember whether I've already reported this as a bug, but the
welcome message is going out to NC members, which should not happen.
Can you clarify a point for me, are these members or pending members?

That is, if you have a restricted group and you haven't approved their membership yet then I agree, NC status should not cause the Welcome to go out before approval.

If the group is restricted and you've approved the membership request (or if the group is unrestricted) then I think the question of whether they should be privy to the group's messages, including its welcome message, has already been answered in the affirmative by your approval of their membership request.

Shal


moderated Re: Copy and Paste for Tool Bar #suggestion

Jim Jackson <jwjackson43@...>
 

I am aware of "shortcuts" and use them constantly. 

 

From: main@beta.groups.io [mailto:main@beta.groups.io] On Behalf Of outlawmws via groups.io
Sent: Sunday, May 3, 2020 12:26 PM
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Copy and Paste for Tool Bar #Suggestion

 

Command keys -
[ctrl] c (Copy) and [ctrl] v (Paste) should always work?


moderated Re: Copy and Paste for Tool Bar #suggestion

Bob Bellizzi
 

Except on a smartphone
--

Bob Bellizzi


moderated Re: Copy and Paste for Tool Bar #suggestion

outlawmws
 

Command keys -
[ctrl] c (Copy) and [ctrl] v (Paste) should always work?


moderated Welcome message delivered to NC members #bug

 

I don't remember whether I've already reported this as a bug, but the welcome message is going out to NC members, which should not happen. Only actual group members should be privy to a group's welcome message, which may contain information that's not for the public.
--
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 Copy and Paste for Tool Bar #suggestion

Jim Jackson <jwjackson43@...>
 

A member of one of my  groups has asked about the possibility of adding "Copy" and "Paste" icons to the message tool bar.  He typed out his text in Word and copied it into the message box.  I promised to pass his query on to those who can answer the question.

Thanks,

Jim "Pops" Jackson


moderated Re: Wiki link color is hard to see - usability #bug

Duane
 

On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 11:19 AM, Jason Diceman wrote:
It's just a matter that text links should always be obvious
According to my testing on the WCAG site, the black (333) text on white background has a contrast of 12.63:1 and the unvisited link (337ab7) has a contrast of 4.55:1, both above the minimum of 4.5:1 recommended.  The visited gray/grey (787878) is just below minimum at 4.41:1.  I'm not sure how much of this is from the site and how much is from my browser.

Duane
PS  Using the Always setting in FF is much more visible, but seems a bit 'harsh' when viewed for any length of time.  Probably why the default colors are used.


moderated Re: Wiki link color is hard to see - usability #bug

Chris Jones
 

On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 07:20 PM, I wrote:
I think I like that,

On second thoughts.. uh - oh.

That changes too much. It completely changes the appearance of (say) the NMM flag in the members list. With a "normal" setting the flag is white letters on a blue background; with "Always" set it appears as a blue letter on white. So if I was to describe something to look for based on the "normal" setting to someone with the "Always" setting they will not see what I describe. Another example is something like a screenshot based on a normal setting; it will appear normal irrespective of the viewer's browser setting, but what they will see if they go to the subject of the screenshot will be different if they have Always set in their own browser..

Confusion all round...

Chris


moderated Re: Wiki link color is hard to see - usability #bug

Chris Jones
 

On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 06:23 PM, Duane wrote:
By choosing "Always", I see the second (Contrast).
Now that really does make a difference!

In several places... inc. the composition box!

I think I like that, and I don't have a visual impairment.

Chris


moderated Re: Wiki link color is hard to see - usability #bug

Duane
 

On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 10:56 AM, Chris Jones wrote:
I  changed the Visited / Unvisited colours in my browser (FF) and as far as I could see it made no difference whatsoever to the appearance of links within Groups.io.
Just below the color settings is an option box in FF.  By default, it selects "Only with High Contrast themes.", so I see the first attachment (Normal).  By choosing "Always", I see the second (Contrast).

Duane


moderated Re: Wiki link color is hard to see - usability #bug

 

It's almost as if accessible design can help everybody, even sighted folk. 🤔. It utterly baffles me how non disabled developers haven't grasped this yet. Mark actually cares, but he's one of the few that do.

Sure, some small navigational things can be done to make navigating threads easier for us screen reader peeps, but this contrast bug should be fixed across the whole website, not just the mentioned page. It should be a priority, and a bug, not a feature request.

Mark has done a great job wit accessible design so far.

Imagine you're using the app, for example, the upcoming app, and the son is in your eyes or something. Temporary blindness is a thing.

By the way, the upcoming app should be accessible too, contrast wise.


moderated Re: Wiki link color is hard to see - usability #bug

Chris Jones
 

On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 05:19 PM, Jason Diceman wrote:
It's just a matter that text links should always be obvious and easy to visually scan for
A valid point given the patently obvious existence of links in emails.

Chris

6041 - 6060 of 30663