Date   

moderated Re: Testing Notifications; Fault or Feature? #bug

 

Chris,

... Integration sent message "File Notifications #file-notice"
requiring approval because it's a moderated integration message via
email.
I believe the word Integration there is a misnomer, relating to the Admin | Integrations feature. Not to be confused with the combiner.

I haven't fully tested everything yet but the implication is that a
"single upload notification" would pass through without moderation
being required.
I believe the inference is incorrect, caused by the terminology error in the Activity log entry.

I was unable to replicate what I had observed earlier. In all cases
the member notification went through without the need for moderation.
If the notifications were "To:" your personal address then they were Moderator Notices (my terminology), and moderation is not required.

If they were "To:" the group posting address the they were Group Notices (again my terminology) and should obey both the group's Moderation setting and the Moderated checkbox in the hashtag for that notice.

IMO the incorporation of the File Name into a single notification is
wrong; ...
Why? I think it is better to provide the additional information in the subject, when appropriate.

Another source of puzzlement was as follows: the "Uploaded By" column
in Files had my /member/ Display Name shown (expected). However, the
Notifications showed the uploads as having been carried out by my
moderator Display Name (NOT expected).
Oh, that is weird. Looking at the upload of 1:08pm today (PDT)...

I see the same discrepancy between the Files list and both the Moderator Notices and Group Notices I received for those files you uploaded. I think the combiner somehow combined more than it should have, attributing all the individual actions to one (the first?) actor.

Shal


moderated Re: Testing Notifications; Fault or Feature? #bug

Chris Jones
 

On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 05:09 PM, I wrote:
I was unable to replicate what I had observed earlier. In all cases the member notification went through without the need for moderation. 

Some clarification about the "protocol" would be greatly appreciated.
It suddenly occurred to me that the moderation requirement seen this morning could be a function of the moderation status of the "uploader", based on remembering that this morning's upload was by a moderated member while some photos uploaded by an unmoderated member 12 days ago resulted in a notification that did not require moderation.

Again I was unable to replicate this possibility on a test group by making my second membership "moderated". The notification happened without moderation, but again seemed to use the wrong Display Name in the notification.

I am more bewlidered than ever.

As to Andy W's Having it checked by default again would just cause more complaints about unwanted emails as most people would not consider (or just forget) to uncheck it...

I do understand your point but my perspective is that of being heartily fed up with members who upload "stuff"  without bothering to announce the fact. The upshot is that the wider membership has no idea that it's been uploaded, presumably with the intention of their reading / seeing it, and that I and the other moderators have to trawl through the Activity Log to find out what odd corner things have been put in.

A push notification is too transient to be of any help here.

Chris


moderated Re: Testing Notifications; Fault or Feature? #bug

Andy Wedge
 

On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 05:09 PM, Chris Jones wrote:
As an aside, having found (the hard way) that it is very easy to forget to tick a "notify" checkbox when doing multiple uploads, my current view is that the File & Photo checkboxes should be checked by default. Better still (to satisfy both schools of thought) the default state should be moderator settable in Settings.
If the default option of checked/unchecked is settable my a Moderator I could live with that as I would have it unchecked. Having it checked by default again would just cause more complaints about unwanted emails as most people would not consider (or just forget) to uncheck it. If it went back to checked by default I'd be left with moderating the hashtag and trying to decide whether the message was really intended by the uploader or not, which would be a PITA when I could spend my time doing other things.

Andy


moderated Re: Database column headers obscuring description text #bug #fixed

Bob Bellizzi
 

Peter,
One thing we have in common is Mark Fletcher who gives us unbelievable support.
That's a "luxury" that was nonexistent on Yahoo.
Please note  that our group is a patient advocacy outreach of a nonprofit and we are accountable for every penny that we utilize because it all originates with the generosity of caring donors.
We forgo luxuries and cconcentrate on what's necessary to provide information and support to the many people with a rare vision disease.

In case you haven't noticed, the basic Database has the ability  to present location/direction Google maps via a provided link on each address.

--

Bob Bellizzi


moderated Re: Moderator notifications enabled for all #update

 

Thanks a lot, Mark!

I´ve been waiting for this and I am glad it´s enabled.

Cheers and have a good vacation time!

Victoria


moderated Testing Notifications; Fault or Feature? #bug

Chris Jones
 

Mark; I know you are on leave at the moment but I hope you will spot this and answer it on your return.

When I switched on this morning there was a (File upload) Notification awaiting moderation, which I found slightly surprising. The member had uploaded 3 files within the "window" so the single Notification contained the 3 separate files.  A visit to the group's Activity log provided the following: Integration sent message "File Notifications #file-notice" requiring approval because it's a moderated integration message via email. I haven't fully tested everything yet but the implication is that a "single upload notification" would pass through without moderation being required. The actual uploads took place in real time without moderation. (Expected!)

I carried out some tests using a test group to which I have access but I finished up more confused than when I started. For the avoidance of doubt I have 2 memberships of that test group (i.e. I have two Groups.io Accounts); one as a moderator and the second set to "member" for these tests, and I was careful to ensure that I was only logged in to one or other account at a time; never both together. Uploads were only done using the "member" account

I was unable to replicate what I had observed earlier. In all cases the member notification went through without the need for moderation. 

Some clarification about the "protocol" would be greatly appreciated.

There were additional anomalies...

Individual File Notifications were titled: File /<file name>.docx uploaded. (Plus Hashtag) A collective notification was titled File Notification. (Plus Hashtag). IMO the incorporation of the File Name into a single notification is wrong; all (file) notifications should be titled File Notification (Plus Hashtag)

Another source of puzzlement was as follows: the "Uploaded By" column in Files had  my member Display Name shown (expected). However, the Notifications showed the uploads as having been carried out by my moderator Display Name (NOT expected). (Notifications here means both the emailed and web UI versions) As stated above at the time I carried out the uploads I was only logged in with my "member" account. FWIW I have seen that behaviour on a previous occasion but didn't think to worry about it. 

Something is telling me that this last oddity may well be involved with the first one above, but some clarification would again be greatly welcome.

As an aside, having found (the hard way) that it is very easy to forget to tick a "notify" checkbox when doing multiple uploads, my current view is that the File & Photo checkboxes should be checked by default. Better still (to satisfy both schools of thought) the default state should be moderator settable in Settings.

Chris


moderated Moderator notifications enabled for all #update

 

Hi All,

The new moderator notifications, for chat, photos, files, database, and wiki activity, have been enabled for all moderators. This also includes new settings in the Moderator Notifications panel in the Subscription and group member pages.

Cheers, Mark


moderated Re: Notify Members checkboxes #update

 

Chris,


I only found out about this uploading because I was looking in the Activity Log for something else entirely.

This problem is addressed by the additional Moderator Notices currently under test. I thought they were due to go live to all moderators yesterday, but I'm not sure if that happened.


While I can understand the point about members being informed about edits, relocations and so on ...

Ok, good.

I cannot see any reason why I should have to "defend" myself for wanting to maintain some sense of order in our Photos section or anywhere else,

I don't think you should either, in the sense that I don't think a reasonable member would challenge you on it (unless you did something unreasonable). But I also am not comfortable with a moderator's desire to be able to change member's content under cover of darkness.

I am still firmly of the view that moderators not only have the right but a duty to try to maintain order in a group's limited storage without having to explain their actions in detail on each and every occasion.
 
I don't disagree with any of that, and I don't think knowing that the particular member involved will be informed of your efforts should in any way deter you. It certainly does not deter me on those occasions where I find that a member's message that has already been posted needs to be redacted or otherwise modified.

Shal


moderated Re: Notify Members checkboxes #update

 

On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 04:22 AM, Chris Jones wrote:
am still firmly of the view that moderators not only have the right but a duty to try to maintain order in a group's limited storage without having to explain their actions in detail on each and every occasion.
Agree 100%.
 
--
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: Notify Members checkboxes #update

Chris Jones
 

On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 03:03 AM, Shal Farley wrote:
For edit I'd say the member deserves to know (and you likely deserve to fend off such questions). Maybe move too (if not notified the member might look and not find his/her content, and believe that it was deleted). I'm more willing to concede on delete: as J points out that's already a fact with messages.
I know that quite a lot of water has flowed under the bridge in the 7 days since the above was written, but...

This morning a member of the group I moderate uploaded some photos into an album he had created especially for the purpose.

He did not look to see if there was already a suitably titled album into which he could upload more photos.
He did not compose an album title that properly reflected the contents other than in a sense that was so broad as to be meaningless. .
He did not choose to notify the membership of anything, either by using the checkbox or by posting a separate message about his uploads.

He is not unique in taking a rather haphazard approach to making sure that uploads "make sense". I only found out about this uploading because I was looking in the Activity Log for something else entirely.

While I can understand the point about members being informed about edits, relocations and so on I cannot see any reason why I should have to "defend" myself for wanting to maintain some sense of order in our Photos section or anywhere else, especially when we have had a group wiki page about this sort of random uploading in existence for months.

I am still firmly of the view that moderators not only have the right but a duty to try to maintain order in a group's limited storage without having to explain their actions in detail on each and every occasion. It's also the sort of problem where the longer it's left the harder it is to do.

Chris


moderated Re: Database column headers obscuring description text #bug #fixed

Peter Rawbone
 

Hello Bob et al,

We’re a basic group and obviously don’t have the luxury a the map element (we would love it, incidentally!) and I understand your concern.

However, I’m sure that Mark with all his expertise will be able to resolve the issue mKing us all happy bunnies.

Stay safe
--
Peter


moderated Re: Photo search and clean up of the photos pages

 

[Mod note: Added #suggestion hashtag]
If you did, it's not showing up on the web site. #bug

JohnF


moderated Feature survey #tosender

 

Hi All,

I'm on vacation this week, but I had a question for you that will help set me priorities for the rest of the year. Here it is:

What's the most important feature that you need for your group that we don't currently have?

No guarantees about whether I'll be able to address it, and I'll be prioritizing features that would most appropriately belong in the paid plans.

Replies to this message are set to go only to me.

Thanks, Mark


moderated Re: Database column headers obscuring description text #bug #fixed

Bob Bellizzi
 

Peter, et al,
The List view of the database works fin on lap tops, etc BUT, for paid groups, the Map view does not work correctly;
it scrolls the map and titles completely off the screen

--

Bob Bellizzi


moderated Re: Photo search and clean up of the photos pages

Terry Slattery
 

This is an old thread, but is on-topic for my query...

I just tried searching Photos and Messages for posts by an individual using their Member name. The name is not one of the fields that is used for the search. Searching Messages has a Tools button that includes "Exclude Signatures", which is not checked.

Is it reasonable to ask for a Tools item to include the poster's name in the search fields?

[Mod note: Added #suggestion hashtag]


moderated Re: Testing notifications #misc

Andy Wedge
 

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 06:02 AM, Lena wrote:
From what I can see, the subject tag was always sent on email notifications so
that hasn't changed.
Email notifications of pending messages and members hadn't subject tag but had group name in From. Now group name is in both From and Subject. I ask to remove subject tag in email notifications of pending messages and members.
OK - I see which ones you're referring to now. I thought you were talking about the new notifications for database and wiki changes etc.

I think having the tag in the email subject is good and with that, we don't really need the email address of the group at the end of the subject as that is normally in the From field.

I have an email rule in Outlook that looks for the string "groups.io Notification" in the message headers and that seems to work OK in allowing me to divert these types of message from any group to another folder.

Regards,
Andy


moderated Re: Database column headers obscuring description text #bug #fixed

Peter Rawbone
 

Mark & Andy,

Andy's problem doesn't occur in a database (>200 entries) in either my Safari or Firefox devices as shown below:-



--
Peter


moderated Re: Testing notifications #misc

 

On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 04:00 PM, Andy Wedge wrote:

From what I can see, the subject tag was always sent on email notifications so
that hasn't changed.
Email notifications of pending messages and members hadn't subject tag but had group name in From. Now group name is in both From and Subject. I ask to remove subject tag in email notifications of pending messages and members.


moderated Re: Testing notifications #misc

 

Mark,

All notification titles now are prefixed by the group's subject tag.
...
Now they look so much more like ordinary group messages.
And this has broken at least one moderator's email filters, sending actionable mod notifications off into the "later" folder with group messages:
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum/message/32492

Shal


moderated Re: Create +mute, +follow, and +unfollow group addresses, use in message footers. #suggestion

 

J,

Would that run a ... risk that people who get hold of an email ... but
are [not] the actual original recipient ... could act on that
recipient's account?
No.

To do anything of the sort they'd have to forge the original recipient's From address. If they can do that then they can use any of the email addresses, including +unsubscribe. This vulnerability is closed off by the fact that all such "email commands" (I call them) send a confirmation request with reply required.

Shal