Date   

moderated one page to see all pending messages #suggestion

Ry Jones
 

Hi,
I would like one page to visit where I can see all pending messages for all of my mailing lists. Right now, I can see that I have a dozen or so pending messages (mostly spam) across all of my lists, but then I have to go click several times to delete them all, or to approve the rare message I should approve.

I would like an easier way to do this.
Ry
--
Ry Jones
Community Architect, Hyperledger


moderated Re: Subgroup Category setting changes do not stick #bug

Ry Jones
 

Thank you!


On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 5:21 AM Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 1:06 PM Ry Jones <rjones@...> wrote:

When setting group categories in the admin interface, the UI reports success, but the value is not updated.

This should be fixed now.

Thanks,
Mark 



--
Ry Jones
Community Architect, Hyperledger


moderated Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply #suggestion

Chris Jones
 

On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 09:06 AM, Andy Wedge wrote:
So, instead of having just the options Reply, Like and More under a message, why not have  'Reply to Group', 'Reply to Sender', Like and More.  The little arrow symbol next to the word Reply could be duplicated for ' Reply to Group' and left as a single arrow for ' Reply to Sender'. Alternatively, the single arrow could be supplemented with a group head & shoulders icon for ' Reply to Group' or a single person head & shoulders icon  for 'Reply to Sender'.

This would a) make the approach of starting a reply more consistent with email clients b) remove the need for the Private button and c) enable a single 'Send' button to used below the message composition window (more consistency with email clients).
It would also (d) remove the set Default Reply Option that Owners currently have as pointed out in my #30478, and I think that would be a mistake.

I will readily agree that it would look very neat, but as I also said earlier A change of button or tab wording is one thing; a change in available functions is another matter entirely. If there is a genuine difficulty with the existing wording then IMHO resolving that by tinkering with the availability of a function is the wrong solution.

Chris


moderated Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply #suggestion

 

On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 01:06 AM, Andy Wedge wrote:
On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 08:14 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
I also think Send to Member works great with Send to Group in the other case.
As I've said, I was quite happy with how it was.
That's not how it was.
 
--
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: Button Label Clarification for web site reply #suggestion

Andy Wedge
 

On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 08:14 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
I also think Send to Member works great with Send to Group in the other case.
As I've said, I was quite happy with how it was. I never found it confusing and I've not had any comments from any of my members about that either.

I think the root cause of this issue is that the initial reply option makes no distinction, like in many email clients, between 'Reply' and 'Reply All', It's only after the initial 'Reply' has been selected that we then get to the point of deciding how many people we are replying to.

So, instead of having just the options Reply, Like and More under a message, why not have  'Reply to Group', 'Reply to Sender', Like and More.  The little arrow symbol next to the word Reply could be duplicated for ' Reply to Group' and left as a single arrow for ' Reply to Sender'. Alternatively, the single arrow could be supplemented with a group head & shoulders icon for ' Reply to Group' or a single person head & shoulders icon  for 'Reply to Sender'.

This would a) make the approach of starting a reply more consistent with email clients b) remove the need for the Private button and c) enable a single 'Send' button to used below the message composition window (more consistency with email clients).  The 'BCC Me' check box option should still only be displayed for 'Reply to Sender' responses.

Regards
Andy


moderated Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply #suggestion

 

Shal,

You were very clear. I feel like either one is too wordy.

I also think Send to Member works great with Send to Group in the other case.

On Oct 8, 2021, at 12:10 AM, Shal Farley <shals2nd@gmail.com> wrote:

I wrote:

How about just "Send", with a fuller explanation in text below the
button:
"Send your reply to the group" (button background is green).
"Send your reply only to the individual" (button background is blue).
I may not have been clear, but my intent was that only one of those two phrases appear, the one matching the color of the button.

J wrote:

But I think Shal's idea goes too far in the direction of wordiness.
You probably understood my intent, but seeing your comment I decided to respond anyway in case others hadn't.

K wrote:

...

Dang, there ought to have been a "K" in this topic.

Shal




--
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: Button Label Clarification for web site reply #suggestion

 

I wrote:

How about just "Send", with a fuller explanation in text below the
button:
"Send your reply to the group" (button background is green).
"Send your reply only to the individual" (button background is blue).
I may not have been clear, but my intent was that only one of those two phrases appear, the one matching the color of the button.

J wrote:

But I think Shal's idea goes too far in the direction of wordiness.
You probably understood my intent, but seeing your comment I decided to respond anyway in case others hadn't.

K wrote:

...

Dang, there ought to have been a "K" in this topic.

Shal


moderated Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply #suggestion

 

"Send to Sender" reminds me of this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouroboros
^^^snake eating its own tail

But I think Shal's idea goes too far in the direction of wordiness. I would just go back to "Send to Member."
--
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: Button Label Clarification for web site reply #suggestion

 

J wrote:

I think “Send to Sender” sounds weird for a specific reason, which is
that it creates a chronological conundrum, ... Yet they are not
sending the message to themselves.
I'm not fond of "Send to Sender" either, for much the same reason.

How about just "Send", with a fuller explanation in text below the button:
"Send your reply to the group" (button background is green).
"Send your reply only to the individual" (button background is blue).

Shal


moderated Re: Trying to add member notice with existing type and name fails to issue warning, does nothing, navigates poorly #bug

 

Mark,

One observation, I don't know if the notice list screen is supposed to remember what column sort the user has selected, but no matter what sort one selects, after updating or deleting a notice the list reverts back to the default sort of Type-Ascending.  Or alternatively, the parameter list displayed on the URL when one selects a column sort is not remembered or retained after notice update or delete.

Cheers,
Christos


moderated Re: Trying to add member notice with existing type and name fails to issue warning, does nothing, navigates poorly #bug

 

>>> what order are these sent out

Did some testing, and for whoever is interested and wants to control in what order the welcome notices are sent out, they are emailed oldest to newest, or same order shown onscreen if you sort on Updated ascending.

Cheers,
Christos


moderated Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply #suggestion

 

I think “Send to Sender” sounds weird for a specific reason, which is that it creates a chronological conundrum, namely: the person doing the “Send” in “Send to Sender” is, at that point in time, himself or herself the “Sender.” Yet they are not sending the message to themselves. So I think this is  a mistake.


On Oct 7, 2021, at 5:52 PM, Christos Psarras <christos@...> wrote:

I was going to second "Send Private Message" as it's unambiguous (just as "Send to Group" is also unambiguous) but I see Mark already set it to "Send to Sender", so too late I guess :)

We could though change the laconic "Private" to "Private Message", or leave it as such and add "Private Message" as a tooltip.  That's closer to the PM acronym on social media.

Cheers,
Christos

--
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: Button Label Clarification for web site reply #suggestion

 

I was going to second "Send Private Message" as it's unambiguous (just as "Send to Group" is also unambiguous) but I see Mark already set it to "Send to Sender", so too late I guess :)

We could though change the laconic "Private" to "Private Message", or leave it as such and add "Private Message" as a tooltip.  That's closer to the PM acronym on social media.

Cheers,
Christos


moderated Re: Non-members becoming Past members? #misc

Andy
 

On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 08:28 PM, Christos Psarras wrote:
Wait, I thought they did show up, isn't that what Mark's statement means?

Hmm.  I even checked before writing what I did.  None of the banned members I checked are in the Past Members list.  However, there are other previously-banned members who are among Past Members, so I guess "it depends".  I lost track (too many bits for my feeble brain to hold onto), but I think there were changes to this policy, weren't there?  The most recently banned members are NOT on the Past Members list.

Andy


moderated Re: Non-members becoming Past members? #misc

 


On 2021-10-07 19:49, Andy via groups.io wrote:
Personally, I find it puzzling that previous members who are banned, do not appear on the Past Members list.  But that's just me.  I guess there's a policy reason for ignoring them when it comes to past members.

Wait, I thought they did show up, isn't that what Mark's statement means?

"Currently, when you ban an existing member of your group, that generates a past member record."

I haven't had the need to ban a member (so far), so to see what happens, I did a quick test with a test address I joined to one of my groups, then banned it, and it does show up in Past members.

Cheers,
Christos


moderated Re: Non-members becoming Past members? #misc

Andy
 

Personally, I find it puzzling that previous members who are banned, do not appear on the Past Members list.  But that's just me.  I guess there's a policy reason for ignoring them when it comes to past members.


moderated Re: Non-members becoming Past members? #misc

 

On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 04:42 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
My proposal is to eliminate the creation of a past member record when you unban someone. That fixes Andy's problem.
Unless it creates coding headaches and such, I'd suggest to finetune the proposal instead of doing it wholesale:  Eliminate the creation of a past member record only if you unban a banned address which was originally banned proactively (wasn't a member when banned+no past member record creation)

This leaves those out of the past member list screen entirely so it would still take care of Andy's problem, but would also preserve past member list inclusion for unbanned folks who were members when they were banned hence they should appear in that past member list screen.

Cheers,
Christos


moderated Re: Button Label Clarification for web site reply #suggestion

 

I don't like "Send Privately." I could live with "Send Private Message."

On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 3:26 PM JohnF via groups.io <johnf1686=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
How about "Send Privately"?

JohnF






--
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: Button Label Clarification for web site reply #suggestion

 

How about "Send Privately"?

JohnF


moderated Re: Non-members becoming Past members? #misc

Andy
 

On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 04:42 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
My proposal is to eliminate the creation of a past member record when you unban someone. That fixes Andy's problem.

I think that matches my expectation.  (Then again, what I think often does not jibe with what others think, or with the reasons behind something.)

If someone wasn't ever a member, I would think they should not appear on a list of members, past or otherwise.  Using the word "member" implies actual group membership, even if it really only means that you have a record of that address.

If this is being done only to satisfy my strange peculiarities, I'd say don't do it just for me.  Maybe it's a good thing to keep that record of an email address that was banned and unbanned.

Andy

 

781 - 800 of 31020