For general Groups.io questions, please see the Group Managers Forum and Group_Help groups. Note: those groups are volunteer-led and are not officially run by Groups.io.
|
moderated
Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply
#suggestion
Thanks so much for the brainstorming Mark. Another, perhaps better or easier/straighforward solution might be to have two buttons to the left, one "Send to Group" and the other "Send to Sender" - and eliminate the private button. "Discard" can stay, perhaps on the right. Consider Better, not Bigger. So many advantages. Just ask. USA adds a Chicago to our overpop each year. "Still more population growth is not our way to a healthy community, a healthy planet, OR enjoyable cycling." ~Mike
On Thursday, October 7, 2021, 04:00:12 PM EDT, Mike Hanauer via groups.io <mghanauer@...> wrote:
Thanks Mark. Now see your point. I think, still, I would retain sender. Me thinks changing terminology is a bigger problem. I don't think "author" is used elsewhere. Consider Better, not Bigger. So many advantages. Just ask. USA adds a Chicago to our overpop each year. "Still more population growth is not our way to a healthy community, a healthy planet, OR enjoyable cycling." ~Mike
On Thursday, October 7, 2021, 03:53:31 PM EDT, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
Yes, I will be fixing the Send to/Reply to inconsistency. I was asking about Send to Sender changed to something else, because yes, that sounds a bit weird. Mark
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply
#suggestion
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 03:53 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Yes, I will be fixing the Send to/Reply to inconsistency. I was asking about Send to Sender changed to something else, because yes, that sounds a bit weird.My understanding: The original complaint was that clicking "Reply to Sender" didn't make it clear that the button actually closed the editor and sent a message. Personally, I was not confused by this, and did not consider it broken...but I guess others disagree. That being the case, "Send to Sender" doesn't sound so bad. At least it tells you what's going to happen. "Send to Author" doesn't work so well if the original post was a quote. "Post to Sender?" "Send to Originator?" They all have their problems, and are no better than "Reply to Sender" was. How about "Close and Send" with the actual destination indicated (and toggled as appropriate) elsewhere? I will find some way to adapt to whatever we end up with. Wondering now if others will be so accommodating. Regards, Bruce
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply
#suggestion
I see what’s going on here, and agree with J’s discussion.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
But I don’t care for “Author”. How about “Member” - that IS where it’s being directed - to that member.
On Oct 7, 2021, at 11:42, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply
#suggestion
Thanks Mark. Now see your point. I think, still, I would retain sender. Me thinks changing terminology is a bigger problem. I don't think "author" is used elsewhere. Consider Better, not Bigger. So many advantages. Just ask. USA adds a Chicago to our overpop each year. "Still more population growth is not our way to a healthy community, a healthy planet, OR enjoyable cycling." ~Mike
On Thursday, October 7, 2021, 03:53:31 PM EDT, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
Yes, I will be fixing the Send to/Reply to inconsistency. I was asking about Send to Sender changed to something else, because yes, that sounds a bit weird. Mark
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply
#suggestion
Yes, I will be fixing the Send to/Reply to inconsistency. I was asking about Send to Sender changed to something else, because yes, that sounds a bit weird. Mark
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply
#suggestion
It IS the sender. It is probably the author. FURTHER, "sender" is what you use in many other contexts -- why introduce another inconsistency. Reply to sender is everywhere. And then "Reply to Sender" BUT "Send to Author". Yuck me thinks. But, the main point is that if "private" is chosen, and even reclicked, "Send" reverts back to "Reply" for both cases. ~Mike
On Thursday, October 7, 2021, 03:37:47 PM EDT, Mike Hanauer <mghanauer@...> wrote:
I think "Sender" is the more recognized. But, the main point is that if "private" is chosen, and even reclicked, "Send" reverts back to "Reply" for both cases. ~Mike
On Thursday, October 7, 2021, 03:32:18 PM EDT, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 12:04 PM Andy Wedge <andy_wedge@...> wrote:
Hmmmm. How about 'Send to Author'? Mark
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply
#suggestion
I like “send to author”.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On Oct 7, 2021, at 12:32 PM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply
#suggestion
I think "Sender" is the more recognized. But, the main point is that if "private" is chosen, and even reclicked, "Send" reverts back to "Reply" for both cases. ~Mike
On Thursday, October 7, 2021, 03:32:18 PM EDT, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 12:04 PM Andy Wedge <andy_wedge@...> wrote:
Hmmmm. How about 'Send to Author'? Mark
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply
#suggestion
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 12:04 PM Andy Wedge <andy_wedge@...> wrote:
Hmmmm. How about 'Send to Author'? Mark
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply
#suggestion
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 06:12 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
I've changed the `Reply` word to `Send`If you start a reply and then hit the Private button twice it changes back to 'Reply to Group'. There's also now an inconsistency in the terminology as we have 'Send to Group' but the private message option says 'Reply to Sender'. If you were just thinking of changing instances of Reply to Send then 'Send to Sender' really doesn't sound good. Andy
|
|
|
|
Mark,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Thanks. All of that makes perfect sense! I suspected something like that, except for the creation timestamp. A couple of suggestions at this point: 1. Figure out whether, and when, Active should be the default. Should it be consistently one way or the other, or should it be the default only if this is the first message of that type being created, etc? In particular, I would not continue to have it be the default in the cases where multiple active noticed are allowed. I think most users will not understand that if they create what (to them) is simply a new, or alternative, welcome notice, for example, it actually gets ADDED to any existing active one(s) and ALL are sent out as welcome messages. (I love the ability to do this. But it came as a shock to me.) Minimum, I would add some explanation to the Active checkbox in those cases. 2. What is the purpose of a name, if it’s not an identifier, something that sets the notice apart from others of its same type? It makes no sense to me to allow multiple notices of the same type with identical names, and I would have the system reject those.
On Oct 7, 2021, at 9:58 AM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
--
J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply
#suggestion
Hi All, After looking at what Gmail does, I've changed the `Reply` word to `Send` for the various reply button combos (ie it's now `Send to Group`). Hope this helps. Mark
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 5:37 AM Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote: On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 07:17 AM, Chris Jones wrote:
|
|
|
|
Hi J, On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 8:55 AM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
What happened is that member notices really shouldn't have an empty name ("name not set"). That bug was fixed last December. When you added the new member notice, we went in and updated the old member notice, giving it a name ("Banned"). That changed the updated date on the notice (which was labeled 'Date' on the Member Notices page, but I've now changed that to 'Updated'). Confused? Make sense? 3. (a) The default, upon creation of the message, was that the Active box was checked. This is different from yesterday, when I reported the bug. At that time, it defaulted to unchecked. I just fixed this bug. Thanks, Mark
|
|
|
|
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 08:38 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
monthly reminders.I think I've been MIA. I never knew we had "monthly reminder" notices! That and multiple active welcome messages is going to make my life much easier. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 08:37 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
I think I have fixed this. Please check it and let me know.Mark, I am very sorry to tell you this, but there are now other weirdnesses! I just tried again to create a new Banned notice in my test group. Here is what happened: 1. (a) There are now TWO Banned notices, listed as at the same time (same timestamp, a couple of minutes ago), one with name "Banned Member" (which was the correct name - the name I left in place as the default) and another with name "Banned." (b) Despite the (alleged) two new notices, there is only log entry for my having created a new notice. 2. My original, pre-test Banned notice, with "name not set," and creation date a long time ago, has disappeared. 3. (a) The default, upon creation of the message, was that the Active box was checked. This is different from yesterday, when I reported the bug. At that time, it defaulted to unchecked. (b) Yet despite the default, both "new" notices were created as not active. The good news is that the navigation is fixed. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 7:17 PM Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:
All member notice types can have only one active, with two exceptions: the welcome message and monthly reminders. Thanks, Mark
|
|
|
|
Hi J, On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 8:09 PM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote: Ok, here is a confirmed, reproducible bug, with all the details: In my test group, I have a current Banned Member notice, with "name not set." I try to add another Banned Member notice with name "Banned Member." The system lets me create the notice (with, by the way, "Active" not checked by default - this is inconsistent with adding Welcome notices, where "Active" is the default) and it lets me click on "Add Notice" at the bottom. The log logs the creation of the notice. But (1) the notice does not actually get added, and (2) after clicking on "Add Notice," I'm taken not back to the list of notices but to my list of groups, complete outside the group in question. I think I have fixed this. Please check it and let me know. Thanks, Mark
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply
#suggestion
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 07:17 AM, Chris Jones wrote:
A single person not understanding what is in front of them does not suggest that non - understanding of these particular functions is widespread.It would also depend on whether an individual had read the section of the Members Manual relating to how to reply. I don't get too excited about suggestions like this when the information is readily available. Little tweaks can be useful, but are often suggested because many don't want to be bothered reading the manuals. Duane
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply
#suggestion
A couple of thoughts, Chris:
AllTheBest. ~Mike
On Thursday, October 7, 2021, 08:28:43 AM EDT, Chris Jones via groups.io <chrisjones12@...> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 01:17 PM, I wrote: A single person not understanding what is in front of them does not suggest that non - understanding of these particular functions is widespread.Further to the above the steps required to reply to a post (either to the group or only to the sender of the message) are clearly set out in Para 7.3.3 of the pdf version of the Members Manual. Chris
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply
#suggestion
Chris Jones
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 01:17 PM, I wrote:
A single person not understanding what is in front of them does not suggest that non - understanding of these particular functions is widespread.Further to the above the steps required to reply to a post (either to the group or only to the sender of the message) are clearly set out in Para 7.3.3 of the pdf version of the Members Manual. Chris
|
|
|