Received from J_Catlady at 9/28/2018 10:55 PM UTC: I guess one could make that argument, but it's a really well running flying lawn mower. And from the myriad of feature suggestions I'd say there are

It’s unclear whom you’re quoting. I am strongly in favor of the anonymous group concept, however it’s implemented. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy

Received from J_Catlady at 9/28/2018 08:48 PM UTC: Only if "the next step up" is to deny membership via email, thus disenfranchising a lot of otherwise worthwhile members. There's a better

Received from ro-esp at 9/28/2018 08:36 PM UTC: That may very well come to be but it's not a good reason to reject the notion of an anonymous group to those who want one. Group Owners would need to

Mark, I wrote: Never mind. It turns out I can do this with Direct Add on the primary group. I get an error for each member who's already in the primary group, but they do get added to the subgroup

Following on the comments in the other photo thread, about deleting photos one by one: I embarked on a cleanup project for my group's emailed photos and have quickly become bogged down in an

Mark, I wrote: It occurs to me that this also applies to normal group postings coming from services that do not require the DMARC mung of their From address. So maybe that workaround on the outbound

Toby, I think this is a bad idea (unless you mean the group's +owner address). The problem is that the receiving service will look at who delivered the message (Groups.io) and who is named in the

The verbiage would be different and, in the member's mind, they may not even know they got unsubscribed so would confuse them to get an invite to a group they are already in. Also, no subsequent

How is this functionally different from an invitation to the group? -- 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

There has been much discussion which I won't repeat. Many commented that, for certain users, getting them to click a link in an email is a challenge (and I understand that). I have 2

I've noticed that the 3 day limit really has some stretch in it. One of my members went almost 4 full days and successfully rejoined using the link -- Bob Bellizzi Founder, Fuchs Friends ® Founder

I'd like to point out that the partial word matching only works on "words" separated by spaces or non-alpha characters in the file name. It does not do a search for a string of characters anywhere in

It has been suggested that the 3 day expiration of the resubscribe link be extended to 7 or 10 days. Some folks don't check email daily, so may not see or find the notice for awhile and it could have

Yeah, I've had to work with that several times. It looks like it's because the photos in the album get renumbered when one is deleted, so the identifier is incorrect. Not a problem if deleting in

It is, however, a slight PITA if you're on a mission to clean up the photos pages. You can conveniently delete only one photo at a time...-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially

That's what I was thinking. I guess this is considered ok and I won't send Mark the example since it's reproducible. Thanks. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy

It has been that way for awhile. You need to refresh the page after each delete. Then when you click on an image it will show the correct one. Drew

Mark, I was thinking that it was probably an existing bug. I'll have to figure out the best way to send you an example and will do that soon. Thanks. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the

Changes to the site this week: NEW: Photo search. CHANGE: Cleaned up and modernized all the photos pages. CHANGE: Ignore any autoreply headers if the message is to an email integration (normally we