Date   

locked Re: Add country flag for users

ro-esp
 

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 01:53 am, Laurence Taylor <g7mzh@gmx.co.uk> wrote:


ro-esp <ro-esp@dds.nl> wrote:

Doesn't seem very urgent/crucial to me, but would be a nice addition,
provided people could choose their own flag regardless of whether it
belongs to an officially acknowledged country or not.
Like Sealand? :-)

Or, for users in the UK, the choice of the Union Flag or their own country's flag.
Exactly: Bretagne, Catalunya...and US users could use their state's flag, Germans use their lands flag , etc

groetjes, Ronaldo


locked Re: Can individual emails have html reply to links? #suggestion

John Green
 

Forget it – just been looking at our group and most email addresses, but not all, are visible. Must be having a senior moment at the end of a long day!

 

Sorry.

 

John G

 

From: beta@groups.io [mailto:beta@groups.io] On Behalf Of John Green
Sent: Monday, 16 May 2016 20:46
To: beta@groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Can individual emails have html reply to links? #suggestion

 

Having asked whether it is possible to reply direct to sender, I've been told I can, but I must be totally thick as I can't find a way to do this. I can see a way to do it by going onto our page and replying to a message and then selecting reply to sender, but I can't see how to do it from an email - and I guess that most of our group members handle everything by email. This is one thing, and one thing only, that we could do using the dreaded and unmissed Yahoo Groups that I can't seem to work out how to do in Groups.io though some obviously can do it!


John G


locked Re: Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

Maria
 

Yahoo! groups does this too BTW.

Our members have just learned to write email addresses out with an (at) instead of @

In the digests the full email comes across - it's just the web version truncates them for the reasons others have listed.

Maria


locked Re: Can individual emails have html reply to links? #suggestion

John Green
 

Having asked whether it is possible to reply direct to sender, I've been told I can, but I must be totally thick as I can't find a way to do this. I can see a way to do it by going onto our page and replying to a message and then selecting reply to sender, but I can't see how to do it from an email - and I guess that most of our group members handle everything by email. This is one thing, and one thing only, that we could do using the dreaded and unmissed Yahoo Groups that I can't seem to work out how to do in Groups.io though some obviously can do it!


John G


locked Re: Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

 

On 16 May 2016 at 20:08, John Green wrote:

> I’m using Microsoft Office 365 – Outlook to look at emails from
> Groups.io. Nowhere is there a link to email the message sender direct
> and it is the major thing that I dislike about Groups.io.

That must be a "feature" of Office 365.  I use Pegasus Mail and it displays the From: address as sent by groups.io and makes it available for reply.

I'm cc'ing you on this message just to show that groups.io does indeed include the sender's address in the From: field.  I included selected headers from your message below.  You need the ability to "Reply to From".

--
Jim
Poston@...

<<              He's got a magnet!!!  Everybody BACKUP!!!!!!!!               >>




From: "John Green" <john.green@...>
To: beta@groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 20:08:26 +0100
Sender: beta@groups.io
List-Id: <beta.groups.io>
Mailing-List: list beta@groups.io; contact beta+owner@groups.io
Reply-To: beta@groups.io
  


locked Re: Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

 

John,

The "reply to sender" via email issue was the subject of this thread:

https://groups.io/g/beta/thread/1453785#7819


--
J

It's dumb to buy smart water.


locked Re: Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

John Green
 

I notice on my email that my email address is given in full, but it doesn’t appear on every email in full. This wouldn’t matter too much if there was a link right at the bottom to “reply direct to sender”. Could that be done please?

 

John G

 

From: beta@groups.io [mailto:beta@groups.io] On Behalf Of John Green
Sent: Monday, 16 May 2016 20:08
To: beta@groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

 

I’m using Microsoft Office 365 – Outlook to look at emails from Groups.io. Nowhere is there a link to email the message sender direct and it is the major thing that I dislike about Groups.io. I often want to reply direct and offlist to something that someone on one of my forums has writer, and it is the same here on beta@groups.io

 

John G

 

From: beta@groups.io [mailto:beta@groups.io] On Behalf Of J_catlady
Sent: Monday, 16 May 2016 17:42
To: beta@groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

 

Here I have to agree with Brian. The masking if email addresses is a ginormous inconvenience, *especially* when you combine it with the inability to reply to sender via email. It's a double whammy with the result worse than the sum of the parts. No longer can I, or a group member, simply request in an onlist post that someone respond offlist (to give, say, a vet or clinic name or other information that's not permitted onlist in our group). Instead, you have to do the thing with [dot]. It's fine to say 'ok, well just do that.' But the fact is that most members are unaware that any email address they post is blocked, so they are *unaware* that they have to do this. The result is having to post a message to group members explaining this trip hazard and hope they see it. I think the combined issue results in a huge hit on usability.


Sent from my iPhone


On May 16, 2016, at 9:30 AM, Brian Vogel <britechguy@...> wrote:

James,

         Sorry, but I disagree completely, and mainly because it's a grand PITA for someone to take a support [at] place [dot] com and tweak it rather than click through or even be able to do a direct copy and paste of a correctly formatted address.

         Groups.io is the only forum on which I participate that is as stringent as it is about masking e-mail addresses.  I don't mind that it does that as a matter of course, but there should be a way for the end-user to force the unmasking of a specific address.

         The public e-mail addresses of companies are plastered all over the internet, including their own websites.  There is zero concern from my end about them being visible at yet another location on the web.  The convenience to the person I'm trying to direct there is far more important to me.

Brian


--
J

It's dumb to buy smart water.


locked Re: Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

 

Again clarifying that the issue brought up here is the masking of email addresses within the text of a message *body*. (I just want to avoid confusion, not control the thread.) The issue of replying to sender via email is also an jssue, but it's completely separate from this one and there are several previous threads about it.

Sent from my iPhone

On May 16, 2016, at 12:08 PM, John Green <john.green@...> wrote:

I’m using Microsoft Office 365 – Outlook to look at emails from Groups.io. Nowhere is there a link to email the message sender direct and it is the major thing that I dislike about Groups.io. I often want to reply direct and offlist to something that someone on one of my forums has writer, and it is the same here on beta@groups.io

 

John G

 

From: beta@groups.io [mailto:beta@groups.io] On Behalf Of J_catlady
Sent: Monday, 16 May 2016 17:42
To: beta@groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

 

Here I have to agree with Brian. The masking if email addresses is a ginormous inconvenience, *especially* when you combine it with the inability to reply to sender via email. It's a double whammy with the result worse than the sum of the parts. No longer can I, or a group member, simply request in an onlist post that someone respond offlist (to give, say, a vet or clinic name or other information that's not permitted onlist in our group). Instead, you have to do the thing with [dot]. It's fine to say 'ok, well just do that.' But the fact is that most members are unaware that any email address they post is blocked, so they are *unaware* that they have to do this. The result is having to post a message to group members explaining this trip hazard and hope they see it. I think the combined issue results in a huge hit on usability.


Sent from my iPhone


On May 16, 2016, at 9:30 AM, Brian Vogel <britechguy@...> wrote:

James,

         Sorry, but I disagree completely, and mainly because it's a grand PITA for someone to take a support [at] place [dot] com and tweak it rather than click through or even be able to do a direct copy and paste of a correctly formatted address.

         Groups.io is the only forum on which I participate that is as stringent as it is about masking e-mail addresses.  I don't mind that it does that as a matter of course, but there should be a way for the end-user to force the unmasking of a specific address.

         The public e-mail addresses of companies are plastered all over the internet, including their own websites.  There is zero concern from my end about them being visible at yet another location on the web.  The convenience to the person I'm trying to direct there is far more important to me.

Brian


--
J

It's dumb to buy smart water.


--
J

It's dumb to buy smart water.


locked Re: Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

John Green
 

I’m using Microsoft Office 365 – Outlook to look at emails from Groups.io. Nowhere is there a link to email the message sender direct and it is the major thing that I dislike about Groups.io. I often want to reply direct and offlist to something that someone on one of my forums has writer, and it is the same here on beta@groups.io

 

John G

 

From: beta@groups.io [mailto:beta@groups.io] On Behalf Of J_catlady
Sent: Monday, 16 May 2016 17:42
To: beta@groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

 

Here I have to agree with Brian. The masking if email addresses is a ginormous inconvenience, *especially* when you combine it with the inability to reply to sender via email. It's a double whammy with the result worse than the sum of the parts. No longer can I, or a group member, simply request in an onlist post that someone respond offlist (to give, say, a vet or clinic name or other information that's not permitted onlist in our group). Instead, you have to do the thing with [dot]. It's fine to say 'ok, well just do that.' But the fact is that most members are unaware that any email address they post is blocked, so they are *unaware* that they have to do this. The result is having to post a message to group members explaining this trip hazard and hope they see it. I think the combined issue results in a huge hit on usability.


Sent from my iPhone


On May 16, 2016, at 9:30 AM, Brian Vogel <britechguy@...> wrote:

James,

         Sorry, but I disagree completely, and mainly because it's a grand PITA for someone to take a support [at] place [dot] com and tweak it rather than click through or even be able to do a direct copy and paste of a correctly formatted address.

         Groups.io is the only forum on which I participate that is as stringent as it is about masking e-mail addresses.  I don't mind that it does that as a matter of course, but there should be a way for the end-user to force the unmasking of a specific address.

         The public e-mail addresses of companies are plastered all over the internet, including their own websites.  There is zero concern from my end about them being visible at yet another location on the web.  The convenience to the person I'm trying to direct there is far more important to me.

Brian


--
J

It's dumb to buy smart water.


locked Re: Feedback about Moderating Messages #suggestion

 

On 16 May 2016 at 10:54, Jim Poston wrote:

> Not sure I understand what you mean by duplicated.

I understand now.  You want the behavior to be duplicated, where the next message is displayed whether you do anything with the current message or not.  In other words, if you Approve or Delete, or just Cancel, you get the next message.

Makes sense to me, but there would have to be another control to exit the queue for when you really want to get out of moderation completely 9exit the list).


--
Jim
Poston@...

<<              Optimist: Hyundai owner with a radar detector.               >>
  


locked Re: Feedback about Moderating Messages #suggestion

 

On 16 May 2016 at 8:46, HR Tech via Groups.io wrote:

Yes, I'd like the way it behaves is you "edit' one pending post to be
duplicated even if you don't edit so that you can just click through each
message without having to go back to the pending list each time.

Do you agree Jim?

Not sure I understand what you mean by duplicated.

The way it behaves for me is that I edit or delete a message, and after the
I Save & Approve or Delete, the next message in the list comes up to be
edited or deleted. It works for me because I do something with each
message the first time I see it in the queue. I don't save for later.

If I Cancel while a message is displayed, I'm brought back to the list of
moderated messages.

--
Jim
Poston@vch-nv.us

<< Do Not Remove This Tag (Under Penalty of Law) >>


locked Re: Editing a post resulting in duplicate messages to e-mail subscribers

 

A group, such as is provided by Groups.io and Yahoo groups, is not a forum or a
mailing list, although it incorporates many of the attributes of each. Unlike
either of those, it also provides storage for files and photos, calendars, etc.
To my mind a group is far more useful than either a mailing list or a forum for
most purposes.

Incidentally. simple mailing lists (such as Rootsweb) also provide usually
on-line archives.

Jim Fisher

On 16 May 2016 at 6:59, Brian Vogel wrote:

The fact is that what we have as an online forum archive is a hell hole and
that's in large part because people can't make what are normal edits, which can
sometimes be multiple and occur over hours, on technical posts that would be
greatly improved "for the record" by that tweaking.

Even I will admit that a short hold won't solve that problem, but it could solve
quite a few "sender's remorse" issues that can be easily tweaked.

As Shal has mentioned, and my own experience on the forums I'm on an this one,
too, indicate that the vast majority of interaction, and particularly where
e-mail is involved, is not in anywhere near to real time.  A several minute
delay is a short one, and they're usually longer.

I do not even try to get users that are e-mail regulars to learn how to search
these forums because the of the content mess that comes back is sheer hell to
wade through in almost all instances.

The e-mail list and online forum us an unholy wedding that makes for some very
thorny situations that really are not particularly good for either side of the
equation.  And so long as the attitude is that "both sides are equal" that mess
will continue, unabated.   To get something that comes close to what most
online forums are you would have to make the online interface have primacy with
the e-mail side as "an available option."   The mindset and behaviors that go
with mailing list participation are very, very different than for forum
participation and for good reason:  mailing lists don't form online archives
like forums do - they're the cyber equivalent of paper ephemera.

To my view, that's the core difference between the two, and the forum format has
the unquestionable advantage of forming an excellent archive of information if
and only if the content is editable by the original poster and that endless
bottom quotation of previous material is not the norm.

Brian
--
http://www.jimella.me.uk - my personal web site covering many subjects (not
currently working - hosting company problems)
http://jimellame.tumblr.com - My thoughts on freedom
http://jimella.wordpress.com - political snippets, especially economic policy
http://jimella.livejournal.com - misc. snippets, some political, some not
Forget Google! I search with https://duckduckgo.com which doesn't spy on you


locked Re: Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

 

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 10:36 am, Ro <recarlton@...> wrote:
You can however, always want what you get,

LOL. True. 
--
J

It's dumb to buy smart water.


locked Re: Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

Ro
 

thank you Brian.  Of course I did not mean to include deliberate hijacking of threads.  As you say, sometimes there is a natural progression to side topics that are still somewhat related to the main thread subject.

I have already learned here in Beta that I frequently cant get what I want!  LOL,, a good exercise in patience and tolerance.  You can however, always want what you get, but thats a little too zen for me!


Ro

with Sally and Silk also not wanting what they get, and requesting a different choice from the pantry of multitude cat food cans, and Handy, Feliz &  Police Kitty patrolling in the Great Beyond.





Subject: Re: [beta] Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?
To: beta@groups.io
From: britechguy@...
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 10:29:51 -0700

Ro wrote, "Not sure that its relevant at this point what the original purpose of the thread was, as its about whatever it ends up being."
Only if one is intentionally disrespectful of threads rather than having natural thread drift, which does occur and with which I have zero problems.
As the original poster I have made it quite explicit, at this point, what my perceived issue is with how groups.io handles e-mail addresses that are included as a part of the message body.  Those in charge can now consider that, or not, as they see fit.
The whole purpose of the beta group is the exchange of ideas about what we, as users of the service, would like to see (or stop seeing, as the case may be).  As adults we do understand that, in the immortal words of the Rolling Stones, "You can't always get what you want."
Brian


locked Re: Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

Ro wrote, "Not sure that its relevant at this point what the original purpose of the thread was, as its about whatever it ends up being."

Only if one is intentionally disrespectful of threads rather than having natural thread drift, which does occur and with which I have zero problems.

As the original poster I have made it quite explicit, at this point, what my perceived issue is with how groups.io handles e-mail addresses that are included as a part of the message body.  Those in charge can now consider that, or not, as they see fit.

The whole purpose of the beta group is the exchange of ideas about what we, as users of the service, would like to see (or stop seeing, as the case may be).  As adults we do understand that, in the immortal words of the Rolling Stones, "You can't always get what you want."

Brian


locked Re: Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

 

Ro,

I know your message was in response to my comment, and it made sense! I was simply trying to take the fall for possibly dragging the thread OT. :-)

--
J

It's dumb to buy smart water.


locked Re: Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

Ro
 

I was replying to your comment that there is no way for people to figure out how to reply to the sender.   My comment was to state that the emails addresses are there, on every email, whether or not they can be included in the body of the email without being blocked.    Whether people choose to use that method or not, is of course, up to them.   I recognize that you want to be able to post your email in the body of of the post.    Not sure that its relevant at this point what the original purpose of the thread was, as its about whatever it ends up being.   I feel my comment was on point.   But then, I always see people fussing in the Beta group about things that seem unimportant to me, which is why I seldom post.  

I frankly dont want my group to have an easy way to reply to sender. I want discussions to stay within the group.   Going private is discouraged.  And I have belonged to Yahoo Groups where going private was strictly forbidden.

 Off group discussions end up with either bad advice not being corrected, or good advice not being given to the whole group.  yeah, yeah, if they want to go private, I want them to have to work at it, but not be impossible.  And I know I am a minority here, which is why I havent entered the previous discussions on the "reply to sender" issues. 


Ro

with Sally and Silk waiting at their feed dishes, and Handy, Feliz &  Police Kitty patrolling in the Great Beyond.





Subject: Re: [beta] Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?
To: beta@groups.io
From: j.olivia.catlady@...
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 10:10:36 -0700

Ro,
This unfortunately got combined (due to my combining it) with another issue that's not the subject of this thread. The subject of *this* thread is being able to *state* an email address within the text of a post without it being blocked.
I then combined that issue with the other (previously discussed) issue about accessibility of email addresses within headers, which you are talking about here, and the ability (or lack thereof) to respond to them. If that makes any sense....;)
I still think the two issues combined (no explicit "reply to sender" within emails, plus email addresses being blocked within message bodies) is bad. But the latter is what this thread is about...
--
J

It's dumb to buy smart water.


locked Re: Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

 

Ro,

This unfortunately got combined (due to my combining it) with another issue that's not the subject of this thread. The subject of *this* thread is being able to *state* an email address within the text of a post without it being blocked.

I then combined that issue with the other (previously discussed) issue about accessibility of email addresses within headers, which you are talking about here, and the ability (or lack thereof) to respond to them. If that makes any sense....;)

I still think the two issues combined (no explicit "reply to sender" within emails, plus email addresses being blocked within message bodies) is bad. But the latter is what this thread is about...
--
J

It's dumb to buy smart water.


locked Re: Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

Ro
 

Ok, I am on individual emails, always am.  I took a look at my group emails.   MSN, Outlook, Gmail.  those addresses are always there and readable for anyone posting to the group.

   yahoo addresses are wierd. They come out as similar to "feing@...".  Why that happens I have no idea   Yahoo addresses like this translate to:
"feing@...".

so I have no problem at all, on direct email, obtaining and using individual emails for people.  I am not sure why others are experiencing difficulty. You DO have to use the down arrow in the address line to see the full email address.


Ro

with Sally and Silk waiting at their feed dishes, and Handy, Feliz &  Police Kitty patrolling in the Great Beyond.





Subject: Re: [beta] Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?
To: beta@groups.io
From: j.olivia.catlady@...
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 09:49:13 -0700

p.s. To clarify that: If I want to send a message asking for vet names in Pittsburg, PA (which I just did last night), I can no longer write, "Please respond to me offlist if you have a vet to recommend." That's not sufficient, because for members using email, there is pretty much no way for them to reply to sender (without going through contortions, as previously discussed). Therefore, I have to include my email address in the post for those members using only email. And I can't do that, because it gets blocked. It's like a comedy of errors. (And worse, as I said, most group members are totally unaware that they even have to do either of these. They say, "Respond to me offlist," and nobody using email can do it, because they haven't posted the explicit email address. And even if they do try to post the explicit email address. it's blocked.) 
--
J
It's dumb to buy smart water.


locked Re: Is there any way to force an e-mail address to NOT be masked?

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

James Homuth wrote:  "Your confusion stems from the fact you see this as strictly a web forum."

Er, no.  I am not confused at all, as the practice of routinely obscuring e-mail addresses included in message bodies as part of the message text is the exception, not the rule, pretty much everywhere.  I am accustomed to e-mail address hiding as far as the originator's private e-mail address is concerned, but that's not what I was talking about, which is pretty clear from the original context.

Also, it makes no sense for an e-mail recipient to have direct access to a given address while a web participant does not when that address is an integral part of the message body.

Brian