Date   

moderated Re: Pending message queue problems #bug

Malcolm Austen
 

On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:18:56 +0100, Bruce Bowman <bruce.bowman@...> wrote:

Should groups.io moderators be allowed to Reject (as opposed to Delete) a message from a non-member? Seems that most such messages would be spam, and rejecting it (which sends back a response to the sender) would just encourage more spam.

Yes Bruce, if the message got through the initial GIO spam filters then the list owner/moderator should be allowed to decide which to press. The message might be from an alternative (but not aliased) address for a member in which case [reject] is an essential option.

Malcolm.

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


moderated Re: Really lock a topic #suggestion

 

Bruce,

Based on Andy's suggestion, here's your solution: make your locked topics moderated as well as locked. That will require any posts to it to go through moderation. I justed tested and confirmed 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: Really lock a topic #suggestion

 

Not a bad idea. 


On Oct 31, 2021, at 9:05 PM, Andy <AI.egrps+io@...> wrote:

I'm not following this thread closely, but I want to suggest another option (I think):

When a Moderator attempts to reply to a Locked topic, make that reply Pending.

Then another Moderator can accept it or reject it.  Even the Moderator who posted it can accept it; but that additional step should make them stop and think, and realize that it was locked and maybe they should not have tried to reply.  Not foolproof, but it's better than now where a Moderator posts a reply without realizing that it was locked.

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: Really lock a topic #suggestion

Andy
 

I'm not following this thread closely, but I want to suggest another option (I think):

When a Moderator attempts to reply to a Locked topic, make that reply Pending.

Then another Moderator can accept it or reject it.  Even the Moderator who posted it can accept it; but that additional step should make them stop and think, and realize that it was locked and maybe they should not have tried to reply.  Not foolproof, but it's better than now where a Moderator posts a reply without realizing that it was locked.

Andy


moderated Re: Really lock a topic #suggestion

 

Here are a few practical options/alternatives:

1. Put the mods on moderation who you don't want to post to locked topics. They can still upload their files, etc.
2. Have a hashtag called #Locked that you can put on topics where you want it to be very obvious they're locked, and instruct your mods not to post to those. Presumably they can read.
3. Create a new moderator permission called "Post to locked topics."
--
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: Really lock a topic #suggestion

 

On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 04:49 PM, Donald Hellen wrote:
I can see a good case for J_Catlady's side
This does not need to be relitigated! I don't have a "side." I don't care if Mark implements a disable option for this. But I assume it's not going to be completely redone on the basis of a few uncontrollable moderators. If anything needs to be done, it should, and I assume would, be simply the disable option that Bruce is asking for. Which is absolutely fine with me.
 
--
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: Really lock a topic #suggestion

Donald Hellen
 

Bruce . . .

On Sun, 31 Oct 2021 14:11:53 -0700, "Bruce Bowman" <bruce.bowman@tds.net> wrote:

I wish I didn't have so many Moderators. Unfortunately, I'm kinda stuck with it.
If you're the group owner, can't you just remove moderators you wish were not
moderators?

Feelings aside, sometimes that is necessary. Maybe getting rid of the moderators
who might post to locked topics might be a better solution than changing the way
this works?

I can see a good case for J_Catlady's side and allow you to lock the topic
FIRST, then make an announcement it's locked.

Donald


----------------------------------------------------
Some ham radio groups you may be interested in:
https://groups.io/g/ICOM https://groups.io/g/Ham-Antennas
https://groups.io/g/HamRadioHelp https://groups.io/g/Baofeng
https://groups.io/g/CHIRP https://rf-amplifiers.groups.io/g/main


moderated Re: Really lock a topic #suggestion

 

On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 02:11 PM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
the only way I can do that is to make them all Mods. 
BTW, you could put them on moderation. You probably don't want to do that, but it's not true that all mods necessarily have blanket permission to post. They could still do all their uploads.
 
--
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: Really lock a topic #suggestion

 

In addition to the locking problem, sometimes it’s useful to issue some sort of final pronouncement or piece of info on a locked topic, without opening it all up again (and without having to change it to moderated, etc). But this case was all made before and Mark made his decision, so I’m not going to make the case all over again. 


On Oct 31, 2021, at 2:23 PM, J_Catlady via groups.io <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Not sure what you’re saying. The topic IS “existing” once it’s created, n’est ce pas? So what’s the difference, functionally? You’ve got a locked topic (even if there’s only a single message in it) and you don’t want certain mods to post to it because of their annoying habits (or whatever). I need the functionality of allowing mods to post to locked topics. So make your case to Mark  for the ability to disable that. :-)


On Oct 31, 2021, at 2:11 PM, Bruce Bowman <bruce.bowman@...> wrote:

On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 03:51 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
Without a mod's ability to post to a lock topic, any time you wanted to lock a topic, assuming you wanted to announce that it was locked - and I usually do, you had to post the announcement FIRST, and then rush to lock it before anybody posted to it. You can now lock it and then announce that it's locked.
Ah, you're talking about sequential posts to an existing topic. I remember some discussion along those lines. For creating new topics locking with a hashtag seems a lot simpler.

I wish I didn't have so many Moderators. Unfortunately, I'm kinda stuck with it. We have a lot of contributors to the group (a Secretary who uploads meeting minutes, a Membership Coordinator who maintains backup Excel files, etc). I want them to be able to [mainly] use the file repository without giving that permission to everybody, and the only way I can do that is to make them all Mods. 

Regards,
Bruce

--
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: Really lock a topic #suggestion

 

Not sure what you’re saying. The topic IS “existing” once it’s created, n’est ce pas? So what’s the difference, functionally? You’ve got a locked topic (even if there’s only a single message in it) and you don’t want certain mods to post to it because of their annoying habits (or whatever). I need the functionality of allowing mods to post to locked topics. So make your case to Mark  for the ability to disable that. :-)


On Oct 31, 2021, at 2:11 PM, Bruce Bowman <bruce.bowman@...> wrote:

On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 03:51 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
Without a mod's ability to post to a lock topic, any time you wanted to lock a topic, assuming you wanted to announce that it was locked - and I usually do, you had to post the announcement FIRST, and then rush to lock it before anybody posted to it. You can now lock it and then announce that it's locked.
Ah, you're talking about sequential posts to an existing topic. I remember some discussion along those lines. For creating new topics locking with a hashtag seems a lot simpler.

I wish I didn't have so many Moderators. Unfortunately, I'm kinda stuck with it. We have a lot of contributors to the group (a Secretary who uploads meeting minutes, a Membership Coordinator who maintains backup Excel files, etc). I want them to be able to [mainly] use the file repository without giving that permission to everybody, and the only way I can do that is to make them all Mods. 

Regards,
Bruce

--
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: Really lock a topic #suggestion

Bruce Bowman
 

On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 03:51 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
Without a mod's ability to post to a lock topic, any time you wanted to lock a topic, assuming you wanted to announce that it was locked - and I usually do, you had to post the announcement FIRST, and then rush to lock it before anybody posted to it. You can now lock it and then announce that it's locked.
Ah, you're talking about sequential posts to an existing topic. I remember some discussion along those lines. For creating new topics locking with a hashtag seems a lot simpler.

I wish I didn't have so many Moderators. Unfortunately, I'm kinda stuck with it. We have a lot of contributors to the group (a Secretary who uploads meeting minutes, a Membership Coordinator who maintains backup Excel files, etc). I want them to be able to [mainly] use the file repository without giving that permission to everybody, and the only way I can do that is to make them all Mods. 

Regards,
Bruce


moderated Re: Really lock a topic #suggestion

 

On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 12:14 PM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
J -- My use case, if that helps:
That should be addressed to Mark. I don't care if there's an opt-out. Whether he thinks it's worth implementing the disable option is up to him.
 
--
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: Really lock a topic #suggestion

 

On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 12:14 PM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
I would be interested in hearing more about the "battle" you are referring to.
Without a mod's ability to post to a lock topic, any time you wanted to lock a topic, assuming you wanted to announce that it was locked - and I usually do, you had to post the announcement FIRST, and then rush to lock it before anybody posted to it. You can now lock it and then announce that it's locked. Immediately after it was implemented, I noticed that even Mark started to take advantage of it, by first locking a topic and then making the announcement.
--
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: Really lock a topic #suggestion

Bruce Bowman
 

On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 12:47 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
This was a long and hard-won battle...
J -- My use case, if that helps: 

We have a Moderator who posts a weekly "news note." It's an announcement; she doesn't want any replies. So I created a hashtag to lock the topic immediately. Nonetheless, it seems that every week one of the other Mods posts a well-meaning "thank-you" message or something of the sort. Short of taking away their Mod privileges, I have to way to prevent them from doing this.

For my edification, I would be interested in hearing more about the "battle" you are referring to. 

Regards,
Bruce


moderated Re: App features needed to avoid Email use #suggestion

 

Bruce noted:
There have been suggestions for similar group settings in the past, to wit:
-- An "mailing list" option, which disables the online message archive and posting via the web.
-- A "web forum" option, which puts everyone on "no email" and disables posting by email.

While I'm not particularly fond of Joe's rationale, the suggestion of a similar "app-only" option seems no less reasonable.

Regards,
Bruce
________________________________

It is certainly not unreasonable to suggest anything to the group. However enacting such a thing is another thing entirely.

If this were a problem with everyone, or even a majority on a group I might agree. But since this is a problem with an individual email provider, I feel that it is more on the shoulders of the member to resolve. There are a number of different options for email providers at low or no cost. Requiring that everyone give up their preferred way of accessing the group for the sake of one or two members seems unreasonable.

It is good to bring the issue up to make others aware of possible problems and solutions, but the solution should benefit the many, not just a few.

Dano


moderated Re: App features needed to avoid Email use #suggestion

 

Agreed. I even have a new Samsung Note 20 and still prefer email access. For me, phone access is for when I'm away from home and on the go.

Dano
__________________

Hear, hear!

Best,

Glenn
_______________________

... If there is an issue with spam and the like with some providers they should be addressed as such and there should never be a requirement to tell users how to access the service.

Dave


moderated Re: App features needed to avoid Email use #suggestion

Glenn Glazer
 

On 10/31/2021 08:53, Bruce Bowman wrote:
There have been suggestions for similar group settings in the past, to wit:

-- An "mailing list" option, which disables the online message archive and posting via the web.
-- A "web forum" option, which puts everyone on "no email" and disables posting by email.

While I'm not particularly fond of Joe's rationale, the suggestion of a similar "app-only" option seems no less reasonable.

Regards,
Bruce

I'll be consistent and say that I'm not a proponent of the first two, either.

Best,

Glenn

--
#calcare
PG&E Delenda Est


moderated Re: Really lock a topic #suggestion

 

This was a long and hard-won battle but I don’t see a problem with an option to disable.


On Oct 31, 2021, at 9:33 AM, Bruce Bowman <bruce.bowman@...> wrote:

Locked topics can still be posted to by Mods and co-Owners. It would be nice if there was some Message Policy setting to disable this.

Thanks for your consideration,
Bruce

--
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 Really lock a topic #suggestion

Bruce Bowman
 

Locked topics can still be posted to by Mods and co-Owners. It would be nice if there was some Message Policy setting to disable this.

Thanks for your consideration,
Bruce


moderated Re: App features needed to avoid Email use #suggestion

Bruce Bowman
 

There have been suggestions for similar group settings in the past, to wit:

-- An "mailing list" option, which disables the online message archive and posting via the web.
-- A "web forum" option, which puts everyone on "no email" and disables posting by email.

While I'm not particularly fond of Joe's rationale, the suggestion of a similar "app-only" option seems no less reasonable.

Regards,
Bruce

1581 - 1600 of 32028