Date   

moderated Re: When editing a pending message, allow selection of notices when rejecting the message #suggestion

 

Why would you want both "edit" and "reject" simultaneously? 

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 7:36 AM Andy Wedge <andy_wedge@...> wrote:
Hi Mark,

If I use the check box next to a pending message and then click Reject, or view the message by clicking on the subject and then click Reject, I get the option to select one the pre-defined rejected message notices. However, if I edit the message and then click Reject, I do not get the option to select one of the pre-defined notices.  Can we include that selection option while editing a pending message please?

Thanks
Andy


--
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: Merge subject retention problem and/or Broken threading problem #bug

 

I noticed this "mess" (I'd agree with the term;) a long time ago but did not go to as much trouble as you have gone to in sorting it all out. I just stopped merging whenever possible.

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 7:36 AM Christos Psarras <christos@...> wrote:
Hi Mark,

I was trying to move some of the messages of one topic into another one as they had gone off-topic.

Part-1:  There is a bug somewhere in the merge process that causes merged messages to remember their previous (pre-merge topic) subject and use that to pre-fill the subject field when replying online.

To replicate this: (happened in an unmoderated group)

1. Split let's say half of the messages in a topic (eg. TopicA) into another one, let's say TempTopic

2. Merge the new TempTopic into another one, let's say TopicB

3. Go now into TopicB.  If you online-reply to any of the original already-existing TopicB messages, the subject gets correctly pre-filled with Re:TopicB.

4. But if you online-reply to any of the merged messages from the old TempTopic, the subject gets incorrectly pre-filled with Re:TempTopic instead of the correct Re:TopicB.  Then for this case:

  4a - If one doesn't notice this erroneous pre-filled subject and leaves it as such, the online reply does correctly thread under TopicB (and the email does go out with Re:TopicB).  But, any subsequent online replies to this online reply still persist in pre-filling the subject with the incorrect Re:TempTopic, unless the cycle is broken by correcting the reply subject, and going forward.  The previous merged messages and uncorrected-subject replies still keep remembering the incorrect subject if one online-replies to them later on.
  4b - If one email-replies to the email sent out from the 4a online reply, and one online-replies to this emailed reply, it now correctly pre-fills with Re:TopicB and the cycle is broken going forward.
  4c - If one notices and restores the subject to the correct one in their 4a online reply, online-replying to that reply pre-fills the correct subject now and the cycle is broken going forward.


Part-2: Another weird thing also happened with this topic merge so I included it in here even if it may not be directly related.  It broke threading, and it could be a side-effect from a recent fix.

Namely, one used email to reply to one of the original TopicA messages which by now had gotten moved (through the merge) to TopicB.  Their emailed reply of course still has TopicA in the subject.  You'd think it would thread under TopicA due to having the same subject and stop there, but maybe because the reply message's InReplyTo value is referencing a message which now belongs to a different topic and therefore subjects no longer match between those two, something didn't work right in threading so it just created a brand new topic, with the same exact TopicA title.

 

So there's a bit of a mess going on and I put these topics in moderation so I can manually adjust the subjects as they come in, or at least that's the idea.  This happened yesterday and so far I haven't gotten any new replies to either TopicA, TopicB, or cloned TopicA, so I don't know yet if changing the subject will help thread correctly into them going forward.  I was going to merge the cloned TopicA back into the original TopicA but I left it there for now for your examination if needed.

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 When editing a pending message, allow selection of notices when rejecting the message #suggestion

Andy Wedge
 

Hi Mark,

If I use the check box next to a pending message and then click Reject, or view the message by clicking on the subject and then click Reject, I get the option to select one the pre-defined rejected message notices. However, if I edit the message and then click Reject, I do not get the option to select one of the pre-defined notices.  Can we include that selection option while editing a pending message please?

Thanks
Andy


moderated Merge subject retention problem and/or Broken threading problem #bug

 

Hi Mark,

I was trying to move some of the messages of one topic into another one as they had gone off-topic.

Part-1:  There is a bug somewhere in the merge process that causes merged messages to remember their previous (pre-merge topic) subject and use that to pre-fill the subject field when replying online.

To replicate this: (happened in an unmoderated group)

1. Split let's say half of the messages in a topic (eg. TopicA) into another one, let's say TempTopic

2. Merge the new TempTopic into another one, let's say TopicB

3. Go now into TopicB.  If you online-reply to any of the original already-existing TopicB messages, the subject gets correctly pre-filled with Re:TopicB.

4. But if you online-reply to any of the merged messages from the old TempTopic, the subject gets incorrectly pre-filled with Re:TempTopic instead of the correct Re:TopicB.  Then for this case:

  4a - If one doesn't notice this erroneous pre-filled subject and leaves it as such, the online reply does correctly thread under TopicB (and the email does go out with Re:TopicB).  But, any subsequent online replies to this online reply still persist in pre-filling the subject with the incorrect Re:TempTopic, unless the cycle is broken by correcting the reply subject, and going forward.  The previous merged messages and uncorrected-subject replies still keep remembering the incorrect subject if one online-replies to them later on.
  4b - If one email-replies to the email sent out from the 4a online reply, and one online-replies to this emailed reply, it now correctly pre-fills with Re:TopicB and the cycle is broken going forward.
  4c - If one notices and restores the subject to the correct one in their 4a online reply, online-replying to that reply pre-fills the correct subject now and the cycle is broken going forward.


Part-2: Another weird thing also happened with this topic merge so I included it in here even if it may not be directly related.  It broke threading, and it could be a side-effect from a recent fix.

Namely, one used email to reply to one of the original TopicA messages which by now had gotten moved (through the merge) to TopicB.  Their emailed reply of course still has TopicA in the subject.  You'd think it would thread under TopicA due to having the same subject and stop there, but maybe because the reply message's InReplyTo value is referencing a message which now belongs to a different topic and therefore subjects no longer match between those two, something didn't work right in threading so it just created a brand new topic, with the same exact TopicA title.

 

So there's a bit of a mess going on and I put these topics in moderation so I can manually adjust the subjects as they come in, or at least that's the idea.  This happened yesterday and so far I haven't gotten any new replies to either TopicA, TopicB, or cloned TopicA, so I don't know yet if changing the subject will help thread correctly into them going forward.  I was going to merge the cloned TopicA back into the original TopicA but I left it there for now for your examination if needed.

Cheers,
Christos

 


moderated Re: Allow manual sending of Monthly Reminder as a "notice type" in send member message #suggestion

 

Tried again. All I get is Group Guidelines and Pending Subscription. Odd. This topic should change to #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: Allow manual sending of Monthly Reminder as a "notice type" in send member message #suggestion

 

I'm using the Member page, too. I'll try again. I've run a dozen tests already. Not sure what's going on...

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 7:07 AM Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 08:58 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
system would have to present them by name rather than by type
Yes, they're presented by Name.  I'm using the member page to Send Message, not the pending page, so that may be the difference, though it should be the same.  I have 4 of them that I use regularly.

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: Allow manual sending of Monthly Reminder as a "notice type" in send member message #suggestion

Duane
 

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 08:58 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
system would have to present them by name rather than by type
Yes, they're presented by Name.  I'm using the member page to Send Message, not the pending page, so that may be the difference, though it should be the same.  I have 4 of them that I use regularly.

Duane


moderated Re: Allow manual sending of Monthly Reminder as a "notice type" in send member message #suggestion

 

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 04:36 AM, Duane wrote:
that can be selected from the list.
Well, they don't show up in the selections I see when I try to do Send Message. Maybe the issue is that, just as with Monthly Reminders, there can be more than one of them, so the system would have to present them by name rather than by type, and as of now, notices in Send Message are presented by type? So neither Monthly Reminders or Message to Members are showing up in Send Message? That would have to change to allow them be sent as a pre-fabbed message, i.e., they would have to be selected by name rather than by type. I think it's very worth doing. In fact, how, really, is the Message to Member type of any use at all if you can't choose it in Send Message?

Am I missing something crucial here? I don't see either one showing up.
 
--
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: Allow manual sending of Monthly Reminder as a "notice type" in send member message #suggestion

Duane
 

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 11:36 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
Send Message  only allows the pending member notice and the group guidelines as notice type to be sent
Just FYI, you can also create Message To Member types that can be selected from the list.

Duane


moderated Re: Automatic message deletion #misc

 

Topics are deleted, not individual messages. There's no individual member to notify. There is an activity log entry when the topic is deleted.
--
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 Allow manual sending of Monthly Reminder as a "notice type" in send member message #suggestion

 

I finally decided to take advantage of the Monthly Reminder feature. I went to great pains to create a notice in Word, pasted it in, and found that was not going to fly (monumental formatting screwups). So I typed it all in by hand. Then, just to be sure it was going to come out right, because I did use some formatting (although using the editor here), I tried to send it to myself as a notice using Send Message. I was surprised to find that Send Message  only allows the pending member notice and the group guidelines as notice type to be sent. So could this be added? It seems pretty akin to the group guidelines, which, like the monthly reminders, are sent monthly (or can be) but which can also be sent manually to any member at any time.
--
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 Automatic message deletion #misc

Tom Vail
 

In couldn't not find the answer to the question of when a message is automatically deleted via a hashtag message expiration, does the member get any notification of the action?

Example:  I post a message with a hashtag which says to delete the message after a year.  When that time comes around, am I notified it was deleted?

Thanks for your help.

Tom


moderated Re: Purging personal info per UKGDPR #misc

Bob Bellizzi
 

However, since we require a fairly comprehensive Join Form from applicants I did delete her record from that database.
--

Bob Bellizzi
FuchsFriends@groups.io online  support  group for corneal dystrophy patients & caregivers
The Corneal Dystrophy Foundation 


moderated Re: Purging personal info per UKGDPR #misc

Bob Bellizzi
 

Thank you, Mark, for that answer.

We've had hundreds of people join our group from the UK during our more than 20 years of operation  her and on Yahoo and never had a person formally request conformance.
An  only 3 day member doing this raises my hackles.  Is this her new career, bugging the Colonials?
(Remember yahoo?  They snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.)
How many remember who that phrase was first applied to in the computer biz and when?
--

Bob Bellizzi
FuchsFriends@groups.io online  support  group for corneal dystrophy patients & caregivers
The Corneal Dystrophy Foundation 


moderated Re: Purging personal info per UKGDPR #misc

Noel Leaver
 

> That always made sense to me. I thought GDPR info referred to info *about* the person, not info posted *by them*.  I remember a former discussion about this here.
 
I had a problem that when I proposed migrating from Yahoo to groups.io one person said they refused permission for their messages to be copied/moved. Which is a rather different issue.

 

Noel


moderated Re: Purging personal info per UKGDPR #misc

 

On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 07:35 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
we also don't have to remove any messages the person posted to the group
That always made sense to me. I thought GDPR info referred to info *about* the person, not info posted *by them*.  I remember a former discussion about this here.
 
--
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: Purging personal info per UKGDPR #misc

 

Hi All,

According to the GDPR lawyers I worked with, we don't have to remove that information (and we also don't have to remove any messages the person posted to the group).

Cheers,
Mark


moderated Re: Purging personal info per UKGDPR #misc

Andy Wedge
 

On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 07:10 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
Work email addresses are considered personal info,
Any data or combinations of different data that allow you to identify someone can come under the category of personal data. The name 'Mark Fletcher' may not be considered as personally identifiable as there are probably lots of Mark Fletchers in the world but if you combine that with Groups.io then it identifies just one person. See https://gdpr.eu/eu-gdpr-personal-data/ if you want to read a bit more.

@Bob, as Bruce pointed to the Compliance page, one thing you can get you ex-member to do is to delete her Groups.io account.

Andy


moderated Re: Purging personal info per UKGDPR #misc

Bruce Bowman
 


moderated Re: Purging personal info per UKGDPR #misc

Malcolm Austen
 

On Mon, 11 Oct 2021 04:05:33 +0100, Bob Bellizzi <cdfexec@...> wrote:

Technically, the Past Member Record should be purged.

IANAL but I don't believe that is the case Bob. GDPR allows you to keep a record that you previously had a working relationship with a person. As GIO identifies by email address, then that address can remain in a past member record.

You are, of course, allowed to keep a record of the GDPR request and your actions on it.

Malcolm.

--
Malcolm Austen - email: malcolm.austen@...

761 - 780 of 31052