Date   

moderated Re: Change "Moderated" hashtag new topics so only the replies are moderated #suggestion #bug

 

Mark,

LOL. As long as it's inconsistent, I just think the documentation has to be very clear in the documentation. This behavior really came as a shock to me, so much so that I couldn't even believe it was happening. For example, the doc for "Locked" says the topic is "immediately locked." Which, of course, means that it's locked after the first message goes through. So for the others, I think it's important to state that the behavior attaches even to the first message in the topic. I never would have guessed in a zillion years that Moderated would apply even as the person creates the topic (or attempts to).

I would further make sure the documentation explains that it's not the hashtag itself (in all of those cases) that's moderated: it's the topic bearing the tag that's moderated.
--
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: Change "Moderated" hashtag new topics so only the replies are moderated #suggestion #bug

 

On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 9:43 AM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
Since this just came up in docs, I want to add here a point I made there but did not sufficiently emphasize here: If a hashtag marked "Locked" is applied to a topic on topic creation, only the replies are locked (i.e., bounce), which is correct behavior. Because imagine what would happen if Locked behaved the same way as Moderated currently does, namely, if it applied even to the first message. In that case the first message itself would bounce, locking even the topic itself out of existence.  You couldn't even create the topic. So at minimum, the behavior of a hashtag with these two attributes is inconsistent.

But..... the behavior is consistent with the No Email, Special and Use by Mods Only flags. You could say that it's the Locked flag that's inconsistent. :-) As you know, I do love me my consistencies, but I think in this case, everything is as it should be.

I'm happy to add/change the descriptions of the various flags to make them more clear, but I don't see a compelling case to change the existing behavior.

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: Moderator function has a #bug

 

Hi All,

I have changed it so that a moderator cannot remove an owner from a group.

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: Strip winmail.dat file from incoming group messages #suggestion

KWKloeber
 

>>> Only other Outlook clients do anything with it.<<< ***


Though annoying, the .dat file serves one useful purpose if one knows/understands what happened, and could then #suggest (ie, “extend an invitation”) to the emailer to post the file thru the web or another email client. 

If it could be stripped then I #suggest a warning be added to notify that there “should have been” a real attachment with the message. 

*** #aside: I’m not sure that’s accurate.  If the original email is “misconfigured” as an RTF, my Outlook client still receives a useless .dat file.  My recollection is that I would receive the intended file on my AOL app, but garbage thru my Outlook PC. As least that’s my recollection?
Oh the dreaded .dat file!!!!

Ken K


moderated Re: Strip winmail.dat file from incoming group messages #suggestion

Bruce Bowman
 

Within a business environment where everyone else is using Outlook then these winmail.dat files can and do serve some purpose. In a mailing list where the client of the recipient is not standardized I still assert that they are superfluous and should be deleted.

If a sender "should" configure Outlook to keep it from sending them that's fine, but it's not part of my #suggestion.

If groups.io is capable of parsing this file and translating it all into html that's also fine, but it's not part of my #suggestion.

Regards,
Bruce


moderated Re: Strip winmail.dat file from incoming group messages #suggestion

Andy Wedge
 

On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 11:34 PM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
Outlook inserts a winmail.dat file in virtually every outgoing message. Only other Outlook clients do anything with it.
I understand that these are generated when the Sender is using Rich Text Format and the answer would seem to be to switch to HTML or Plain Text.  https://gcits.com/knowledge-base/how-to-fix-the-winmail-dat-attachment-issue/ 

Regards
Andy


moderated Re: Strip winmail.dat file from incoming group messages #suggestion

Dave Sergeant
 

They are I understand a result of misconfigured Outlook. But they are
INTENDED attachments and often the very reason why the post was made in
the first place. There are online tools to decode them and convert them
into normal files. The sender should be encouraged to change his
Outlook settings instead of just deleting things which he really does
want us to see.

Dave

On 8 Nov 2021 at 15:15, Bruce Bowman wrote:

Outlook inserts a winmail.dat file in virtually every outgoing message.
Only other Outlook clients do anything with it.

I suggest stripping these so they do not continue to proliferate as
useless attachments.

http://davesergeant.com


moderated Re: Strip winmail.dat file from incoming group messages #suggestion

Steve Hayes
 

On 8 Nov 2021 at 15:15, Bruce Bowman wrote:

Outlook inserts a winmail.dat file in virtually every outgoing message. Only
other Outlook clients do anything with it.

I suggest stripping these so they do not continue to proliferate as useless
attachments.
Yahoo mail sometimes also has incomprehensible attachments, though they don't
seem to be in a separate file.


--
Steve Hayes
E-mail: shayes@...
Blog: https://methodius.blogspot.com/
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Phone: 083-342-3563 or 012-333-6727
Fax: 086-548-2525


moderated Strip winmail.dat file from incoming group messages #suggestion

Bruce Bowman
 

Outlook inserts a winmail.dat file in virtually every outgoing message. Only other Outlook clients do anything with it.

I suggest stripping these so they do not continue to proliferate as useless attachments.

Thanks for your consideration,
Bruce


moderated Separate space for update description when updating/replacing a file #suggestion

 

When you update a file by replacing the file, and notify members, there's no place to describe what changes were made to the file itself. I had to add a description of the changes to the description of the file, just for purposes of the notification, and later go in and remove that text from the file description.

The suggestion is to add a separate space for an optional description of changes when a file itself is replaced (or, to keep it simple, in any case).
--
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 narrowing down the search... #suggestion

ro-esp
 

Yesterday I was directed to a group on groupspaces, but that service seems to have shut down. Thinking it might have moved to groups.io I tried the search, and found 26 alphabetical lists, some of them containing well over a thousand groups...with numbered pages. It would be nice to be able to narrow it down by *letters*, so you won't have to guess where a group is listed if you know more than one letters that the name starts with.


Another idea is to list by language. Even having a choice between seeing "all-english", "partly english" and "non-english" groups would help a lot

groetjes/ĝis, Ronaldo


moderated Re: Moderator function has a #bug

Bruce Bowman
 

On Sat, Nov 6, 2021 at 12:35 PM, Andy wrote:
Q:  If a moderator has enough privileges to remove an owner, does that also give them the power to promote someone to owner?
No. That was changed last year (after a few false starts). 

https://beta.groups.io/g/main/topic/71147681 

Regards,
Bruce


moderated Re: Moderator function has a #bug

Andy
 

When I wrote the owner, I referred to the owner in question.

It makes sense that a moderator can't remove the last owner if as a rule there must always be at least one owner.

Q:  If a moderator has enough privileges to remove an owner, does that also give them the power to promote someone to owner?  (I think not, based on limited past experience.)

Andy


moderated Re: Moderator function has a #bug

Duane
 

On Sat, Nov 6, 2021 at 10:22 AM, Andy wrote:
If the owner's account has become compromised, or if the owner's intentions became devious, it might be better for moderators to step in and remove the owner.
I think that's a whole different situation since a mod can't remove the last owner.  BTW, I notice that you and some others refer to the owner when it's possible to have more than one.  If there's only one, a mod couldn't remove them anyway.

Duane


moderated Re: Moderator function has a #bug

Andy
 

On Sat, Nov 6, 2021 at 11:09 AM, Duane wrote:
...  However, I still think it's a #bug that they can remove ANY owner.

In some cases, it might be desired.  If the owner's account has become compromised, or if the owner's intentions became devious, it might be better for moderators to step in and remove the owner.  If it's a free group, Mark might not intervene to help you.

At some point, you have to trust someone.

A moderator who has all privileges should be someone who can be trusted.  She/he was given all the keys.  If you didn't want that, don't hand them the keys.

Andy


moderated Re: Moderator function has a #bug

Duane
 

On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 09:00 AM, Duane wrote:
I didn't try it with the last owner
I created a test group this morning specifically to check into this.  A mod with all permissions CAN NOT remove the LAST owner.  This would allow the remaining owner to take care of the problem - demote that mod and reinstate other owners - though it could be a bit time consuming.  However, I still think it's a #bug that they can remove ANY owner.

Thanks,
Duane


moderated Site updates #changelog

 

Changes to the site this week:

November 4, 2021:

  • CHANGE: When going to a chat, we no longer scroll to the latest message. We return you to the last message you read, and pop up an unread counter/scroll to latest arrow button.

November 3, 2021:

  • BUGFIX: The Database Import button was not functional if there were no existing database tables.
  • BUGFIX: The chat member display dialog would only display one member of the chat.
  • CHANGES: Changes to the chat window formatting, including: increasing the size of the chat window, aligning the buttons at the bottom, and preventing the window from horizontal scrolling.

November 2, 2021:

  • BUGFIX: Chat messages with long lines (like URLs), would cause the App/Mobile site to horizontally scroll.
  • BUGFIX: Exporting a group with many subgroups could lock many activity database rows, causing a cascading effect resulting in all activity database connections to be exhausted, resulting in timeouts on the website and other services and some activity log entries not being saved.

The next #changelog will be sent on Friday, November 12th.

Take care everyone.

Mark


moderated Re: Really lock a topic #suggestion

 

I’ve already suggested that as a mod permission. 


On Nov 5, 2021, at 10:20 AM, Chris Jones via groups.io <chrisjones12@...> wrote:

On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 05:15 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
One of the mods in MY block group, OTOH, is actually malicious…but I’m stuck with her and can just use Moderated
Ah... interesting. In your case the solution might be an additional per moderator permission: Allow to post to Locked Topic

Wouldn't help Bruce though.

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: Really lock a topic #suggestion

Chris Jones
 

On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 05:15 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
One of the mods in MY block group, OTOH, is actually malicious…but I’m stuck with her and can just use Moderated
Ah... interesting. In your case the solution might be an additional per moderator permission: Allow to post to Locked Topic

Wouldn't help Bruce though.

Chris


moderated Re: Really lock a topic #suggestion

 

True but Bruce said they’re just unaware, not malicious. (One of the mods in MY block group, OTOH, is actually malicious…but I’m stuck with her and can just use Moderated, and she’s not a co-owner.) I doubt Bruce’s co-owners would even know how to un-disable it, or go to the trouble if they did.


On Nov 5, 2021, at 10:09 AM, Chris Jones via groups.io <chrisjones12@...> wrote:

On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 04:48 PM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
Two of the worst offenders are co-Owners, not Moderators.
Would that not mean that they could disable the disable function as and when the mood suited them? Once that they had found it, that is...

The additional function would seem to be immediately vulnerable to being subverted.

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

1941 - 1960 of 32460