For general Groups.io questions, please see the Group Managers Forum and Group_Help groups. Note: those groups are volunteer-led and are not officially run by Groups.io.
|
locked
Re: about contacting the mod of a group
Ronaldo, We could configure it to point back to groups.io, and have it use our webmail client to send a message to the owners. But you'd still have to log into groups.io to do that. Would that be better than what's there now? Thanks, Mark
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:38 PM, ro-esp <ro-esp@...> wrote: markf@corp.groups.io sendis:
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: about invites
Ronaldo, The group home page, at https://groups.io/org/groups.io/GROUPNAME is always viewable, even for people not logged in, and that contains the group description. The invite emails themselves should probably include the group description. I've added that to the todo list. Thanks, Mark
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:30 PM, ro-esp <ro-esp@...> wrote: When we (moderators) send someone an invitation to join our group, or simply add them, will they be able to read the description of the group without logging in?
|
|
|
|
locked
about contacting the mod of a group
ro-esp
markf@corp.groups.io sendis:
- Addition of groupname+owner@groups.io address in email footers (actuallyI can see the "contact group-owner" button, but when I click it my computer asks me to configure that email-program that I never use. That is very unpractical. If I'm using webmail, especially when I'm on someone else's computer, I want to send messages from my webmail. Would that be possible/programmable? and wouldn't it be more honest to call it "contact the moderator(s)" groetjes, Ronaldo -- http://www.esperanto.net http://www.moneyasdebt.net
|
|
|
|
locked
about invites
ro-esp
When we (moderators) send someone an invitation to join our group, or simply add them, will they be able to read the description of the group without logging in?
groetjes, Ronaldo -- http://www.esperanto.net http://www.moneyasdebt.net
|
|
|
|
locked
Site
#changelog
Changes pushed to the site today: - Fix for search on groups message page, and fixed an HTML escaping issue with the search indexes. - Tweaked snippets in group search to show more of the group description. - Links in digests to reply to messages now require the user to be logged in, and they display the reply box by default now. - Switched to a different HTML editing widget that works better, especially for paragraphs and blank lines. - Improved error messages on group post. Mark
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: question
Cherrill <cdjamieson@...>
thank you for your reply.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I have changed the settings on the group to private archives. I have 3 computers, the hairdos are cut off on all 3 including the Apple. To my knowledge, my screens are not zoomed, however, hopefully anyone else looking at our home page will be able to see it all. Cherrill
On Oct 17, 2014, at 9:19 AM, Linda <lin.zine@...> wrote: Hi Cherrill, Publicly viewable Archives can be seen by the public-at-large. If you want to confine viewing to the members of your group, you will have to show that you understand that the decision is irrevocable. A cover photo at 900 x 300 will fit correctly IF you do not have your screen zoomed to make it easier to read. In other words, the photo will not adjust to the adjustment you make for your individual viewing habits. Try zooming out and you will not have the hairdos cut off.Hope that helps, Linda P.S. Please use more specific words for you Subject. "Question" doesn't help at all. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Threads
Good point! I've changed it so that if clicking the Reply link from a digest (all digests from now on, since it's a slightly different URL), it will make sure you're logged in first. It will also open the reply box and set focus to it. Thanks, Mark
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:22 AM, Frances <travel@...> wrote: You can't reply to the whole digest email, but it looks like you have set it up so you can reply to a specific message in the digest. I clicked on the Reply to this Message. in the email and it works as long as you are signed in to Groups..io on the web.
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: question
Linda
Hi Cherrill,
Publicly viewable Archives can be seen by the public-at-large. If you want to confine viewing to the members of your group, you will have to show that you understand that the decision is irrevocable. A cover photo at 900 x 300 will fit correctly IF you do not have your screen zoomed to make it easier to read. In other words, the photo will not adjust to the adjustment you make for your individual viewing habits. Try zooming out and you will not have the hairdos cut off.Hope that helps, Linda P.S. Please use more specific words for you Subject. "Question" doesn't help at all. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Threads
You can't reply to the whole digest email, but it looks like you have set it up so you can reply to a specific message in the digest. I clicked on the Reply to this Message. in the email and it works as long as you are signed in to Groups.io on the web.
If you are not, you don't see the "groups reply" button. It would be useful if it brought you to a login screen if you weren't already logged in, then you can login and then go to the specific message. Each message does have its own URL, so this should be possible!
|
|
|
|
locked
question
Cherrill <cdjamieson@...>
Under Privacy on our new group, we have a choice of Listed in Directory, publicly viewable archives or private archives.
Does publicly viewable archives mean that all the people on the group can view the archives or that every single person who has a group on groups.io can view the archives. I would like the archives to be viewable only to our members; but it gives me a warning each time I click on that one that it is not reversible. Secondly, we are having a bit of trouble with our cover photo. We think we have it at 900 x 300 but its cutting off the hairdos of the ladies. Can you offer some advise on how to get it the correct size?? thank you Cherrill "the most important thing in life is to learn how to give out love and to let it come in"
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Threads
Mark,
You cannot reply to digests on groups.io, the replies are blackholedIn Yahoo Groups the "Fully featured" digests each message has a mailto: link that allows one to reply to that message. The mailto: URL syntax allows them to provide To, Subject, and even body text, but I don't know that it could allow the placement of a In-Reply-To or other arbitrary field. The other option for the reader of a digest is a link to reply via the web site. That brings one to the message in the archive, possibly with the reply compose window already open. That could work, as the normal reply would have the necessary field. -- Shal
|
|
|
|
locked
Site changes on 10/16/14
#changelog
Changes to the site today: - Several issues involving message processing for plain text only groups were fixed. - Email with multiple text parts in multipart/mixed or multipart/related chunks was not processed correctly, leading to only the last part being shown. That's been fixed. - Improved stripping of Groups.io footers from replies. - A couple of tweaks to the website HTML. - Addition of groupname+owner@groups..io address in email footers (actually happened Tuesday afternoon).. Mark
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: suggestion: subgroups (was private hashtags)
#suggestion
I hadn't thought about the +owner parallel. That makes me like the group+subgroup@groups.io idea more. I agree with you about being about directly add people from the group into the subgroup; that makes sense. I will put this on the TODO list. Thanks, Mark
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 10:57 PM, Shal Farley <shal@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Threads
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 5:27 AM, ro-esp <ro-esp@...> wrote:
You cannot reply to digests on groups.io, the replies are blackholed (ideally they should bounce back; it's on the todo list). Mark
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Threads
From all the data I've seen (mainly the email corpuses I assembled when I started working on groups.io back in January), In-Reply-To and/or References are more or less universally supported by email clients, and have been for at least a decade. So, I'm pretty comfortable relying on them. Plus, I'm not crazy about having an arbitrary time factor. Mark
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Shal Farley <shal@...> wrote: Mark,
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Threads
ro-esp
markf@corp.groups.io sendis:
Frances,that's how it should be If someone sends a completely new email (compose instead of reply)That could be somewhat problematic when someone replies to part(s) of a digest, wouldn't it? groetjes, Ronaldo -- http://www.esperanto.net http://www.moneyasdebt.net
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Threads
Mark,
If someone sends a completely new email (compose instead of reply) thatHmm, using the absence of the In-Reply-To or References fields to mark a new thread has the problem that neither field is mandatory. I don't know if there are any major email services/clients that don't support one or the other (or both), but that was the usual motivation for using "Or" logic rather than "And" (the subject matches or the field matches an existing member of the thread). But maybe that's no longer (much of) an issue. I like the way using "And" neatly solves the "stale thread" problem without having an ad-hoc time limit. -- Shal
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: suggestion: subgroups (was private hashtags)
#suggestion
Mark,
Hmm. At first blush doesn't feel like it should be a #hashtag thing, but Well, the owners and moderators of a group are a natural example of a sub-group; one partially supported via the groupname +owner@groups.io address. The usual reason that Yahoo Group moderators create a separate group for the mods/owners is to keep an archive of the messages, and possibly files and other resources, which isn't available via the +owner email forwarding. Another take on that idea would be to make the groupname+subgroup addresses (including +owner) fully instantiated groups, but with lowered (different) join ceremony. Specifically the +owner subgroup would come into existence automatically, and members promoted to moderator or owner role could be joined to it by virtue of that promotion. Other subgroups could be created ad-hoc by a moderator (with that privilege) or an owner, and the moderator/owner would be able to selectively add members to the subgroup without the overhead of invitation. I don't think it should be possible to join the subgroup(s) without being a member of the root group. It could be an option in each subgroup whether members can see the existence of the subgroup; and joining could be controlled by an option with the usual three choices (any root member can join, any root member can request membership, membership by anointment only). Hmm... there's a namespace collision problem with +subscribe, +unsubscribe or any future email commands. There are probably other problems, I haven't thought this through for longer than it took to type this. -- Shal
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Searching archive
Hmm, it does appear there's a bug there. I'll fix it. Thanks, Mark
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Frances <travel@...> wrote: Hi again
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Inbox, Archive and muting
Frances, I agree that it is a little confusing right now. And you are correct, right now in the Group view, there is no way to mute a thread. I will add that to the TODO list. Right now the only place to unmute a thread is going to the home page/Inbox view, and clicking on Muted Threads. I use Inbox view to refer to all the messages from all the groups you're subscribed to. And I use Archives to refer to messages from a particular group. Do you (or anyone here) have any suggestions for better words for these? Thanks, Mark
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Frances <travel@...> wrote: Hi Mark,
|
|
|