Mark, Will you also retain the Easy Group Transfer from Yahoo even when you're out of beta?

This was just asked in a support message, but I figured it'd be better answered here. There will always be the free version of Groups.io, even when we're out of beta. Thanks, Mark

Mark, Thanks for the reply. September seems reasonable to me. I'll alert a few Yahoo groups to be ready for the move. Mark Fletcher wrote: "I don't have a hard date yet, but my guess is it'll be in

Hi, I don't have a hard date yet, but my guess is it'll be in September. That'll mark 2 years of being in beta, which I think is long enough. :-) The biggest remaining item is the Enterprise version,

Obviously, Safari says to itself, 'Wait, that's Mark Fletcher! I better behave myself!' No, it doesn't work for me and hasn't in a long time. I've reported this before. When I get home I'll do a

I just tried this on Safari. Go to New Topic, start typing in a message, type in something that looks like a URL, like http://groups.io, then keep typing my message and the URL is automatically

Mark, They do not linkify for me either, from either safari or Firefox. The link appears in emails but not on the web unless I specifically use the link button. Sent from my iPhone -- J Messages are

LeeAnne, You're referring to posting on the website, where typing in something that looks like a URL automatically linkifies it? I tried to get it to not linkify something and couldn't reproduce the

Maria, What you say makes perfect sense if you have that many subgroups. It would be interesting, though far more coding work [which I'm not proposing, by the way], to do something like

Just by way of explanation, the reason I don't feel the top list will work for groups like ours is that we have over 50 subgroups. So putting the link and recent activity on top of the main group

Unless I'm somehow the exception, when using the topics view, which is all I use, it is as though subgroups do not exist. There is no way when you land on the topics page to know that there are

(Making this in to a separate suggestion from the sub-group and member directory threads) Would it be possible to separate the menu options which are visible to both members and owners/mods from

At minimum I think it's worth revisiting the order of the menu items in the owner/mods view. We currently have options that are not visible to members intermixed with options that are. I'd put all

Could one idea perhaps be that on the menu the admin/owner options are listed under an ADMIN menu that then has sub-menu items? So that even if there are 2 possibly similar menu items (member

I am not keen on the example Brian offered either. I don't like the idea of the main group design/interface being altered and I find the example provided unattractive. In my view, all we need is a

The only thing to consider is that it's a page that Mods/Owners would need to refer to, to: 1- edit it to add info perhaps (unless it's all automatically entered - which would be cool) 2- provide the

Maria, Understood, and I agree. I'm not sure I would go as far as Brian's sample screen shot, which looks to me like having the subgroups listed at the top of the Topics View page, but having them

Maria, Understood. I was addressing what I think would be Mark's same question (#10632): how do mods/owners see the members' version if it has the same name as the existing Subgroups button.

By "all available" I mean, any that are available / visible to members of the parent group but that may be sub-groups that only those approved may post to. My main concern is making sure that a

I am envisioning a sub-group menu item that is more of a "subgroup directory/listing" not a place to do admin work as the current subgroup menu item for mods/owners is. What I mean is just a page