Date   

moderated Re: #suggestion Need to permit different email addresses for group joining #suggestion

Andy Wedge
 

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:04 PM, judy Warden wrote:
Consequently, I already have two accounts so tried to set up a third but seems it didn't let me. Got around this by opening with a new browser. 
You don't actually state what error message, if any, you see when you say 'it didn't let me'.  Groups.io uses a cookie to keep track of whether someone is logged in or not so if you resolved your issue by using a different browser it suggests you may not have logged out from one account before trying to access another in the same browser session. Many Owners and Mods have multiple accounts and some manage this by using different browsers. Personally, I use Firefox with the Multi-account Containers add-on which isolates cookies between different browser tabs.  That way I can have multiple accounts logged into Groups.io at one time and just switch browser tabs to access them.

One of the main reasons that Owners and Mods have multiple accounts is so that they can view their groups from different perspectives. The options available to your group members will most likely be different to what a group owner sees and it's helpful to have a member's view especially when group settings are being changed.  This may not have been your initial reason for asking but something to consider anyway.

Regards
Andy


moderated Re: Poll participation by non-account holders #suggestion

Bruce Bowman
 

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 02:34 PM, Duane wrote:
That could create a secondary complication though where someone decides to change their vote.  Maybe in that case they'd need to contact the owner/mod and request a new 'vote link' (a one-shot sent by the owner/mod)? 
What I was visualizing is that the separate links for each response would continue to be valid after voting. If someone wanted to change his vote, he need only click on a different link, and the new vote would supersede the old one.

Some variety of this could also function as a way to allow folks to vote for more than one option in a poll that has the "allow multiple choices" flag set.

Regards,
Bruce


moderated Re: #suggestion Need to permit different email addresses for group joining #suggestion

judy Warden <myizrblu@...>
 

That is what I  am already doing and it seems like a waste of time and space to have different .io accts for different groups.  Would it be much more simple to have 0ne .io account with the option in subsciptions to changed that group to a preferred address rather than many .io accounts.   Consequently, I already have two accounts so tried to set up a third but seems it didn't let me. Got around this by opening with a new browser. 
Have a great day,
AZJudy


On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 8:30 AM Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 09:14 AM, judy Warden wrote:
We could join a group and then state the address we preferred to use for that specific group.
You can already do that, you just need a different account using the other email address(es) when joining a group.  The only difference is that you're responsible for keeping things separate instead of the site.  I use several emails/accounts on GIO, so it's easy to keep them separate (and keep me less confused.)  BTW, this has been discussed before and doesn't seem to be a pressing concern.

Duane


--
Thanks,
 Judy


moderated Re: #suggestion Need to permit different email addresses for group joining #suggestion

 

Judy,

Depending on what you want to achieve by having different email addresses for each group, we may can offer a way of doing it; for example, if what you like by this scheme is that you have "clean"/separate inboxes, you can achieve this by adding all the accounts you want to use to your main GIO account as aliases, and creating Forward-then-Delete rules/filters on that main account's inbox to route the messages to the respective inboxes by using the [group_tag] value in the subject line as the "router".  So by spending a few minutes, you can do this and the end result will be the same more-or-less as it was on yahoo, inbound group emails still go to the separate inboxes as before; the only difference is that if you reply to one of those routed messages from the aliased inbox, your reply will not show as coming from that account but from the main one.

If you're not familiar with account aliases, read here:
https://groups.io/helpcenter/membersmanual/1/understanding-groups-io-accounts/setting-account-preferences-and-viewing-account-information
It allows you to send messages to your group from a different email address than your main one.  By augmenting that with the inbox filter/rule routing you now get back the ability to also receive group messages to physically-different inboxes, same behavior as was on yahoo.

If this is not the reason for wanting this, let us know.

Cheers,
Christos


moderated Re: Can you clarify the long-term status of "legacy" groups? #suggestion

Duane
 

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 02:24 PM, David Kirkby wrote:
What can we expect to pay ( approximately) in 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025?
I don't work for GIO (and don't have a crystal ball ;>), but I'd expect your costs to remain the same as they are now for those years.  So far, Mark has been very kind in allowing existing groups to remain on their current plan, Basic or Premium.  The message you referenced, https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/27191, does say that it's for groups created (or upgraded) after the implementation.  As long as you don't drop back to Basic and upgrade again, nothing should change for you.

As I understand things, even with 4708 members, you could use a Premium group, but it would cost ~$2600/yr if it were an upgrade.

Duane


moderated Generic link type #suggestion

Gilbert Coville
 

Last summer Mark added links in the files sections, with type of Google Drive/Docs, Dropbox, Box, or Microsoft Onedrive. Each link type has a nice icon to go with it representive of the service.

One group I’m in is doing quite a bit of file hosting on a different platform: archive.org.

Instead of attempting to add a link type for every service out there, it would be nice to have a generic link type that uses a more generic icon. A search for “external link Icon” brings up some familiar ones with a little square with an arrow pointing out of it. Or you use the chain-link icon used in the groups.io message composer.

Gilbert


moderated Re: Poll participation by non-account holders #suggestion

 

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:45 AM David Grimm <engrdave325@...> wrote:

So perhaps Groups.io isn't for you or your group. It was explained to you why the feature you requested doesn't exist the way you envision it, and maybe it was a little blunt, but so is asking for a change to the system to conform to what YOU think it ought to be. 


As has been pointed out, beta is where one does ask for the system to be changed. 

I am confused as to why the OP's request has generated such heat. It was a completely reasonable request! I want the Groups.io service, and by proxy the beta group, to be welcoming to people of all skill/knowledge levels. Please remember that. Some of the responses here do not live up to that. Tom, on behalf of the group, I want to apologize for that.

I am moderating this topic and will only approve helpful posts.

Mark


moderated Re: Poll participation by non-account holders #suggestion

Glenn Glazer
 

On 01/18/2021 11:03, Peter Cook wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 01:45 PM, David Grimm wrote:
asking for a change to the system to conform to what YOU think it ought to be
That's part of the purpose of beta. 

Exactly. That comment bothered me and you put words to my unease.

Best,

Glenn

--
PG&E Delenda Est


moderated Can you clarify the long-term status of "legacy" groups? #suggestion

David Kirkby
 

I'm one of the owners of this group


we have 4,708 members, and since we are using more than 1 GB of disk space, we are paying  for the "Premium" package. Our membership is not due for renewal until 30th August this year. What can we expect to pay ( approximately) in 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025?

This post


Are we going to be looking at a cost of a couple of hundreds dollars/year, or thousands of dollars per year?

4708 members appear to be in the "Enterprise" membership region, which runs into the thousands of dollars/year, not hundreds, so would be a significant expense.

Perhaps you could clarify more about the legacy groups. If the pricing of our group is going to go anywhere near the thousands of dollars per year, then we will probably look to set up phpBB on a virtual private server and/or use a mailing list. Groups.io suits us well, but I would like to suggest you make it more clear what the plans are for current premium gropus.

Dr David Kirkby Ph.D C.Eng MIET
Email: drkirkby@... Web: https://www.kirkbymicrowave.co.uk/
Kirkby Microwave Ltd (Tel 01621-680100 / +44 1621-680100)
Stokes Hall Lodge, Burnham Rd, Chelmsford, Essex, CM3 6DT.




moderated Re: Poll participation by non-account holders #suggestion

Peter Cook
 

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 01:45 PM, David Grimm wrote:
asking for a change to the system to conform to what YOU think it ought to be
That's part of the purpose of beta. 


moderated Re: Poll participation by non-account holders #suggestion

Duane
 

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 12:15 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
At first blush, Bruce's proposal makes sense to me, although I'd just add one change: just make the Vote Now link work the same way as an 'email me a login link' works now. It would automatically log you in if you weren't already logged in.
A couple of situations I can see offhand.  One is the forwarding that's already been mentioned.  To minimize that problem, the 'login' could be a one-shot with no cookie set, but could still be misused at times.  That could create a secondary complication though where someone decides to change their vote.  Maybe in that case they'd need to contact the owner/mod and request a new 'vote link' (a one-shot sent by the owner/mod)?  This situation is related to the suggestion at https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum/message/29461, though there was never any discussion on it so I don't think it was presented on beta.

Duane


moderated Re: Poll participation by non-account holders #suggestion

Glenn Glazer
 

On 01/18/2021 11:21, Bruce Bowman wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 01:59 PM, Glenn Glazer wrote:
Help me out here, because I'm not sure how your recommendation solves the problem you state. Let's say there are separate links in the email as you recommend. Let us then say I forward my email to Joe. Joe clicks the link and votes without logging in. That's the same result as in Mark's recommendation.
Yes, this person clicking on a vote in a forwarded message has cast a proxy vote in your name, which is bad (and which I already mentioned here).

But it's not nearly as bad as having him remain logged in, so that he could subsequently change your subscription options, unsubscribe you from groups, post spam, or any other number of nasty things -- with your name attached to it.

Regards,
Bruce

Aha, gotcha. Yes, continued impersonation of the authorization would be bad.

Best,

Glenn

--
PG&E Delenda Est


moderated Re: Poll participation by non-account holders #suggestion

Bruce Bowman
 

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 01:59 PM, Glenn Glazer wrote:
Help me out here, because I'm not sure how your recommendation solves the problem you state. Let's say there are separate links in the email as you recommend. Let us then say I forward my email to Joe. Joe clicks the link and votes without logging in. That's the same result as in Mark's recommendation.
Yes, this person clicking on a vote in a forwarded message has cast a proxy vote in your name, which is bad (and which I already mentioned here).

But it's not nearly as bad as having him remain logged in, so that he could subsequently change your subscription options, unsubscribe you from groups, post spam, or any other number of nasty things -- with your name attached to it.

Regards,
Bruce


moderated Re: Poll participation by non-account holders #suggestion

Glenn Glazer
 

On 01/18/2021 10:45, Bruce Bowman wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 01:15 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
At first blush, Bruce's proposal makes sense to me, although I'd just add one change: just make the Vote Now link work the same way as an 'email me a login link' works now. It would automatically log you in if you weren't already logged in.
Mark -- On first sight, I kinda like this, except for the potential for forwarding, and accidentally granting someone else access to your account. Having specifically requested a link to log in, folks are unlikely to forward that email...this is not necessarily true with an ordinary group email, especially if the poll is mixed up with other messages in a digest.

With these things considered I'd still prefer that we provide separate links for each poll response and record the vote that arrives via clicking each link without logging anyone in.

Regards,
Bruce

Bruce,

Help me out here, because I'm not sure how your recommendation solves the problem you state. Let's say there are separate links in the email as you recommend. Let us then say I forward my email to Joe. Joe clicks the link and votes without logging in. That's the same result as in Mark's recommendation.

All that said, as yet another owner of 99% email groups, I strongly approve of this proposal, however it eventually takes shape.

Best,

Glenn

--
PG&E Delenda Est


moderated Re: Poll participation by non-account holders #suggestion

Bruce Bowman
 

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 01:15 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
At first blush, Bruce's proposal makes sense to me, although I'd just add one change: just make the Vote Now link work the same way as an 'email me a login link' works now. It would automatically log you in if you weren't already logged in.
Mark -- On first sight, I kinda like this, except for the potential for forwarding, and accidentally granting someone else access to your account. Having specifically requested a link to log in, folks are unlikely to forward that email...this is not necessarily true with an ordinary group email, especially if the poll is mixed up with other messages in a digest.

With these things considered I'd still prefer that we provide separate links for each poll response and record the vote that arrives via clicking each link without logging anyone in.

Regards,
Bruce


moderated Re: Poll participation by non-account holders #suggestion

David Grimm
 

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 12:19 PM, Tom U wrote:
That's exactly what I do want to do.  At least for the majority of members.   I hope that the additional pro services would be of benefit to the managers but if the only way to make use of them is to get 100 kayakers to learn about groups.io features, well, not going to work for this group.

OK, I'm a little testy about being told how I should be using the service.  There is a way that I want to use the service.  I hope that I have explained my reasons for my use case.  
So perhaps Groups.io isn't for you or your group. It was explained to you why the feature you requested doesn't exist the way you envision it, and maybe it was a little blunt, but so is asking for a change to the system to conform to what YOU think it ought to be. 

Dave


moderated Re: Poll participation by non-account holders #suggestion

Starchild <sfdreamer@...>
 


Tom,

From this user's perspective, what you wrote is spot-on, and pretty well describes where the groups I manage stand as well. The attractiveness of Groups.io for a lot of people is that it offers email lists that you can use without having to deal with a whole new interface like Slack or something. 

While bells and whistles can be nice in some cases, email is reliable, inclusive, and user-empowering, because almost everyone has an email address and knows how to use it and you are less reliant on any one company (lots of options to obtain free or paid email addresses, archive messages on your own device without going through a particular platform). 

Our members generally don't seem to want yet more accounts, or care enough about special features to deal with the learning curves, and I am wary of fancier platforms when they could be suddenly pulled out from under us, as the recent wave of censorship by big tech companies illustrates (whether or not you agree with their actions at this particular political moment).

Love & Liberty,

((( starchild )))
 


On Jan 18, 2021, at 7:53 AM, Tom U wrote:
Sorry, but you are way off beam here. Every member of a group (hosted by Groups.io, that is!) has an Account, even if they don't realise it.
No I'm not.  I may have not read the user manual (thanks for the link) and may not understand the subtlies of how groups.io tracks users, but I do have a valid point about our user's experience.  Calling me "way off beam" is discouraging of my future engagement.

I'm using groups.io to facilitate communication in a community of kayakers in a local outdoor club.  I considered options such as slack and basecamp but most of our members are resistant to adopting new technology.  Also, communication is infrequent enough that they won't come to some web site and check for it.  Communication must come to them.  I choose an e-mail list because everyone uses e-mail, they can control how they receive communication, and they don't need to "create an account"

For the purpose of this post, "create an account" is used to mean the common understanding:  Submit a user name and password which I then use to access the services.  I wanted to not require everyone to create an account on yet another service.

So far, so good.  I over 100 people have joined our mailing list.  The free version did most of what we wanted but I argued that we should pay for service and that would make the manager's life easy.  A few people have created accounts and are figuring out what paid serves gets us.  However most of our members are just on a mailing list.

I'm not convinced that the paid service is providing much value for us.  I sugged that we try using some of the features, such as pools.  

 * We created a poll
 * I noticed I had to log in
 * I asked others if they didn't participate in the poll because they didn't have an account
 * many said that was their experience.
 * I conclude that polls, as implemented, are not useful to us.

> At the risk of repeating myself, ALL your members already have accounts; all they need to do is complete the process of setting them up to enable web access. 

Perhaps, technically, but they don't know that, they have not set a password, they don't want yet-another-account, and I'm not going to tell them to, besides, most would not bother.

Having non - account holders to vote means risking non - members voting, and that would be a HUGE mistake.

That's what I want, I'm willing to take that risk.  Calling this a HUGE mistake is a HUGE misunderstanding of my needs and risk assessment.

> IMHO treating Groups.io purely as a mailing list is also a mistake, but that's another story...

That's exactly what I do want to do.  At least for the majority of members.   I hope that the additional pro services would be of benefit to the managers but if the only way to make use of them is to get 100 kayakers to learn about groups.io features, well, not going to work for this group.

OK, I'm a little testy about being told how I should be using the service.  There is a way that I want to use the service.  I hope that I have explained my reasons for my use case.  

Tom


moderated Re: Poll participation by non-account holders #suggestion

Peter Cook
 

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 12:51 PM, Chris Jones wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 05:19 PM, Tom U wrote:
Calling me "way off beam" is discouraging of my future engagement.
I said that because of your assertion that your members did not have accounts when in fact they do. 
The same value to the group, minus the negativity, could have been delivered with "That's not correct, Tom. Every member of a group (hosted by Groups.io, that is!) has an Account, even if they don't realise it." 

Honestly, I cringe when I see this kind of language. It's completely unnecessary.

Pete


moderated Re: Poll participation by non-account holders #suggestion

 

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 9:51 AM Chris Jones via groups.io <chrisjones12=btinternet.com@groups.io> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 05:19 PM, Tom U wrote:
Calling me "way off beam" is discouraging of my future engagement.
I said that because of your assertion that your members did not have accounts when in fact they do. 


Tom's users don't think they have Groups.io accounts. Whether they technically do or not is not their problem nor concern. They want to participate in a poll, and are having trouble doing so. That's the problem. How best to help them should be the focus.

At first blush, Bruce's proposal makes sense to me, although I'd just add one change: just make the Vote Now link work the same way as an 'email me a login link' works now. It would automatically log you in if you weren't already logged in.


Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: Poll participation by non-account holders #suggestion

Chris Jones
 

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 05:19 PM, Tom U wrote:
Calling me "way off beam" is discouraging of my future engagement.
I said that because of your assertion that your members did not have accounts when in fact they do. 

Further on you wrote: Perhaps, technically, but they don't know that, they have not set a password, they don't want yet-another-account, and I'm not going to tell them to, besides, most would not bother.

Perhaps I am getting old and tetchy but I now have to ask if your members have also avoided setting up accounts with Amazon, ebay, and so on. I find myself rather saddened that people should see setting up an Account with Groups.io as in some way too much trouble. Are they not prepared to put in a little effort so that they can get the best out of Groups.io?

"Saddened" might be better replaced with a slightly stronger feeling but I'll leave it as it is.

Chris

2641 - 2660 of 30420