Date   

moderated Re: Notify by email when RSVP status changes #suggestion

Andy Wedge
 

Hi Mark,

following on from above, if someone subsequently changes their mind a second time and changes their RSVP status back to Will Attend, no email notification is sent.  However, if they have changed their mind a second time and change their RSVP status to Will Attend and get placed on a waitlist, no notification email is sent to say they are on the waitlist but a notification is sent if a place becomes available and they are added to the event.

It leaves people a bit confused as to whether they have actually given up their place or if they have a place on an event at times.

Regards
Andy


moderated Re: #bug event times in /feed are all 8 hours out #bug

Malcolm Austen
 

Thanks Mark, I will give it a proper look, with some varying settings of time zones, tomorrow.

On a very quick look, it seems good. I have two comments though ...

1. for 'all day' events, you are showing the time (as 00:00) which wasn't shown before and probably should not be showing now.

2. the new coding still ignores my preference setting for the date display. This is unchanged from before so may be intended? If it is intended, I will submit it as a separate bug :-)

Malcolm.

-- 
Malcolm Austen <malcolm.austen@...>

On 17/02/2021 21:00:15, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

Hello,

I've made some substantial changes in both how our javascript helper files are delivered as well as the code to display the actual event times. Please let me know if that fixes the problem.

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: Invalid All+R combo (due to the new SubScreen changes) left in the user db table #bug

 

On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 12:10 PM Christos G. Psarras <christos@...> wrote:

If you did run a query to update the user table with the new Replies-under-Following enforcement then I have no idea why this happened ...  but if you didn't run such a query then it would explain what I just noticed 


I have not had a chance to go through the database looking for previously allowed but invalid combinations.

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: #bug event times in /feed are all 8 hours out #bug

 

Hello,

I've made some substantial changes in both how our javascript helper files are delivered as well as the code to display the actual event times. Please let me know if that fixes the problem.

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Notify by email when RSVP status changes #suggestion

Andy Wedge
 

Hi Mark,

I have found that if someone RSVPs Will Attend for an event, they receive an email notification confirming they have a place. However, if they subsequently update their RSVP status to say Will Not Attend, no email notification is sent. It would be helpful if responses were consistent and email notifications were sent in both cases.

Thanks
Andy


moderated Re: Mobile/desktop menu flip #bug

Bruce Bowman
 

Mark -- I'm here to ask that you please reconsider the cutoff point between desktop and mobile menus.

Visually impaired people continue to struggle with it (ref: https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum/topic/80693046). It's difficult to explain why their menu items have disappeared when they haven't changed anything. Even those who are not blind may need fairly high zoom to be able to read the content.

This seems like a high price to pay just so users of some tablets don't have to rotate their device by 90 degrees. Thanks for your consideration.

Regards,
Bruce


moderated Invalid All+R combo (due to the new SubScreen changes) left in the user db table #bug

 

Hi Mark,

If you did run a query to update the user table with the new Replies-under-Following enforcement then I have no idea why this happened ...  but if you didn't run such a query then it would explain what I just noticed today in the MyGroups screen with my docs subscription:

That R shouldn't be there by itself, not anymore based on the new rules.

This would also explain my #bug post regarding docs topics appearing in my FollowedTopics list.  I must had set docs to R only (with All) to test something related to following and the user settings screen proposal back in January, but I cannot remember for sure, January was a bit hazy ... but it would explain this, I was fooled:  When I noticed the docs topics being in my FollowedTopics list 3 days ago, and not realizing then I must had done it (because I normally use F+FF+R), I went to check my docs subscription but the new changes "hid" the checked Replies I had set from back then, so it fooled me into believing I was set to Single+All for docs, when in reality I was Single+All+R ... and that fooling prompted me to post the aforementioned bug post.

 


To make sure this is what it was, I set my docs subscription to F+R, saved, and it showed correctly as F+R in MyGroups; then set it to All and F+R went away as expected.

An update query could be run against the user table and update anyone who has All+R to F+R, I'm sure I'm not the only one that may had it set up like that.  This will remove the invalid combo and prevent this condition from happening. 

Or do it as it comes up, adjust the sub settings loading to where, even if the Save button is not clicked, it still does the new R-under-F-only rule check and if found, update the screen and also the data record to change it to F+R.  This method would however still retain the invalid combo in the user table and only change it if the user goes in the sub settings screen.

Or something similar, or even do nothing, this is not a show-stopper, but it could generate unnecessary support emails or GMF/GH tickets due to confusion if not addressed.

Cheers,
Christos


moderated Re: possible bug in confirmation/application flow #bug #misc

 

On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 09:54 AM, Christos G. Psarras wrote:
I have noticed that I seem to have to resend the pending question more often in the past months than I used to
I am talking about a very specific case, where the pending member shows up as "NC" and the email delivery history is showing the last email received is the confirmation email. This makes it very hard to tell whether (since apparently, according to Duane, both the confirmation and pending notices are sent at the same time, which to me means "ordered at the same time but we can't really know which went out first") - makes it very hard to tell whether or not the pending notice actually went out and was received at all. If this is changed so that the pending notice goes out specifically only after the member has confirmed, mods would have much more information about this.
 
--
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: possible bug in confirmation/application flow #bug #misc

 

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 06:46 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
In these cases I always resend the pending message, because it looks to me like they never got it.

Now that you mentioned this, I have noticed that I seem to have to resend the pending question more often in the past months than I used to do when I first started.

Cheers,
Christos


moderated Activity log date filter Today includes details from previous day #bug

Andy Wedge
 

Hi Mark,

I've just removed a list of members from my group and to check I had done the correct number and not missed anyone from my list I viewed the Activity Log for Removed member with date filter of Today.  The search results actually showed an entry from the previous evening when my co-owner removed another member.  So, the Today filter is either not doing what it says or perhaps it should really be labelled Within 24 hours ?

Regards
Andy


moderated Re: possible bug in confirmation/application flow #bug #misc

 

Also I think making this change would create consistency with the email-application flow. I think in that case the member has to confirm (or if you prefer, call it “confirm their interest,” even though the notices are identical) before they are sent the pending notice. Again, please correct me if I am wrong.


On Feb 16, 2021, at 4:44 AM, J_Catlady via groups.io <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Those issues are different. But they admittedly exist. And I think clearing up the system process would help mods understand which it is: is this person unresponsive, or did the system even send the pending message? With the current process it’s impossible to tell. And so we resend the messsge in some cases where it’s totally unnecessary, possibly even at a slight expense of good will (“why are they resending this to me when I got the first one three minutes ago?”) or in the other side (“is this another clueless/impolite/unresponsive member?”). 


On Feb 16, 2021, at 3:55 AM, Chris Jones via groups.io <chrisjones12@...> wrote:

On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 12:59 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
I want to turn this into a suggestion that a group’s  pending message be sent only to confirmed groups.io accounts.
I would support that, although IME it won't completely "debug" the joining process for the simple reason that such bugs as there are are in the hands of the applicants!

I cannot begin to count the number of times we receive applications (with or without "confirmation" where despite sending reminders about returning the Pending Subscription request nothing ever turns up.

We have one pending at the moment; it is his second application (the first was in December) and he has still not responded despite a reminder. Unless he acts promptly this one will fall off the edge of the table as well in a few days time.

It may be that original P/S messages & reminders go into applicants' spam boxes, but there is nothing we can do about that.

Chris.

--
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


--
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: possible bug in confirmation/application flow #bug #misc

 

Those issues are different. But they admittedly exist. And I think clearing up the system process would help mods understand which it is: is this person unresponsive, or did the system even send the pending message? With the current process it’s impossible to tell. And so we resend the messsge in some cases where it’s totally unnecessary, possibly even at a slight expense of good will (“why are they resending this to me when I got the first one three minutes ago?”) or in the other side (“is this another clueless/impolite/unresponsive member?”). 


On Feb 16, 2021, at 3:55 AM, Chris Jones via groups.io <chrisjones12@...> wrote:

On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 12:59 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
I want to turn this into a suggestion that a group’s  pending message be sent only to confirmed groups.io accounts.
I would support that, although IME it won't completely "debug" the joining process for the simple reason that such bugs as there are are in the hands of the applicants!

I cannot begin to count the number of times we receive applications (with or without "confirmation" where despite sending reminders about returning the Pending Subscription request nothing ever turns up.

We have one pending at the moment; it is his second application (the first was in December) and he has still not responded despite a reminder. Unless he acts promptly this one will fall off the edge of the table as well in a few days time.

It may be that original P/S messages & reminders go into applicants' spam boxes, but there is nothing we can do about that.

Chris.

--
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: possible bug in confirmation/application flow #bug #misc

Chris Jones
 

On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 12:59 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
I want to turn this into a suggestion that a group’s  pending message be sent only to confirmed groups.io accounts.
I would support that, although IME it won't completely "debug" the joining process for the simple reason that such bugs as there are are in the hands of the applicants!

I cannot begin to count the number of times we receive applications (with or without "confirmation" where despite sending reminders about returning the Pending Subscription request nothing ever turns up.

We have one pending at the moment; it is his second application (the first was in December) and he has still not responded despite a reminder. Unless he acts promptly this one will fall off the edge of the table as well in a few days time.

It may be that original P/S messages & reminders go into applicants' spam boxes, but there is nothing we can do about that.

Chris.


moderated Re: possible bug in confirmation/application flow #bug #misc

 

Ok, thanks. 

In that case, I want to turn this into a suggestion that a group’s  pending message be sent only to confirmed groups.io accounts. That seems to make the most sense in terms of group privacy, as well as preventing us from having to go through the resend scenarios you mentioned, and which I’ve also been doing in the cases I’m referring to here.


On Feb 15, 2021, at 4:49 PM, Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 05:46 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
And my understanding (if correct?) is that they're not sent a group's pending message (or shouldn't be) until they've confirmed.
No, the confirmation and pending message are sent at the same time.  I see it quite often in my groups where they reply to the pending before they're confirmed.  For those that do confirm, I resend the pending notice, for those that don't, I send both.  (I also see where both are bounced because they entered an incorrect email address, so just remove the member.)

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: possible bug in confirmation/application flow #bug #misc

Duane
 

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 05:46 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
And my understanding (if correct?) is that they're not sent a group's pending message (or shouldn't be) until they've confirmed.
No, the confirmation and pending message are sent at the same time.  I see it quite often in my groups where they reply to the pending before they're confirmed.  For those that do confirm, I resend the pending notice, for those that don't, I send both.  (I also see where both are bounced because they entered an incorrect email address, so just remove the member.)

Duane


moderated possible bug in confirmation/application flow #bug #misc

 

I'm not sure what to call this, or whether it's a bug.

I've noticed that sometimes we get a pending member who is not marked NC (so they have confirmed), and whose last email delivery shows as "Confirmation Message." These are members who applied via the web, which means that the confirmation message was sent because it's the first group they're joining. (Members who already have a groups.io account and who apply to a group via email also receive the equivalent of a confirmation message, although people will say here that it's "not really" a confirmation message. But we're not in that case so the terminology doesn't matter.)

Anyway, the issue is that it seems they never received the pending subscription message. Because if their last email delivery was the confirmation  message, and they're not marked NC, then they must have confirmed. And my understanding (if correct?) is that they're not sent a group's pending message (or shouldn't be) until they've confirmed. So, if correct, the steps are (a) receive confirmation message, (2) confirm, (3) receive the group's pending message. These applicants have been through (1) and (2) (they've confirmed, since they're not NC) but are still not showing that they've received the pending member message, so they're missing (3).

In these cases I always resend the pending message, because it looks to me like they never got it. But I would like to know what's happening, and whether my understanding is correct. If so, this would seem to be a bug.
--
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: Site updates #changelog

 

On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 3:00 AM Andy Wedge <andy_wedge@...> wrote:

On the Default Sub Settings page, the Converse point doesn't work.  When the initial settings are Individual Messages and Following Only, if you change the Email Delivery to Special Notices Only and click the Update Group button a message is displayed at the top of the screen saying Your changes have been saved but the settings remain the same as before.

Also, there are two update styles (my term) when changing these options now.

I've changed all 3 screens (edit subscription, group member, and group default sub settings) so that any incompatible changes are fixed immediately in the page and not when the changes are saved.

Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Re: unify moderation response #suggestion

Duane
 

On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 09:19 PM, Glenn Glazer wrote:
On 02/13/2021 19:17, Duane wrote:
That would be the way you have Thunderbird set up.  For me, the 'sent' message goes in the Sent folder of my Gmail account, not the Inbox.

Duane

Sure, but it's still a duplicate I don't need.
In that case, I would use POP3 for email so there are never duplicates in various email clients.

Duane


moderated Re: unify moderation response #suggestion

Mark Murphy
 

I agree with Glenn's suggestion and his subsequent replies to comments. He is just asking for a third link for this purpose. What exactly is the downside?


moderated Re: #bug event times in /feed are all 8 hours out #bug

Malcolm Austen
 

Mark,

In trying to look at this afresh, as far as I can see we are now being delivered the old copy of this javascript file - without the change you made (see below). I have run closed all browsers and Ccleaner (and rebooted too) and still see the old javascript in two browsers.

Can you check the file that you are serving up please?

Thanks, Malcolm.

-- 
Malcolm Austen <malcolm.austen@...>

On 12/12/2020 04:48:36, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 12:40 PM Malcolm Austen <malcolm.austen@...> wrote:
At risk of making a fool of myself, I think I have spotted it as a bug in https://groups.io/js/displaytime-0.2.6.js

function DisplayEventTime(t, tzstr, dateFormat, timeFormat) {
    if (t == 0) {
        return '';
    }
    if (typeof tzstr === 'undefined' || tzstr == '') {
        tzstr = '';
        momentDay = moment(t);
    } else {
        momentDay = moment(t).tz(tzstr);
<snip>
should, I suspect, have that last line before the snip as                  momentDay = moment.tz(t,tzstr)
- that's what the matching line looks like in the other, similar functions in that file.


You might be right. I've been unable to reproduce the bug, try as I might. I've made the change to this line of code, please let me know if it fixes the problem for you. You may need to do a force reload; hold down the shift key while clicking the browser refresh button.

Thanks,
Mark

1161 - 1180 of 29413