Responding to Maria, Shal, et al re which’s groups are “partisan”: yes, Indivisible is partisan. No, groups.io is not partisan simply because, with all else that it does, and its primary

I agree with these ideas.

First, Mark can run his business any way he wants to as long as he does not break the law. Groups.io is a business, not a public service or even, as far as I know, a non-profit. As many people have

Thanks Maria for your reasoned elaboration. That’s going along the lines of one way I had suggested. Alternately, and again this has NO bearing on that or any other cause, I wouldn’t expect

Thank you for your thoughts Shal, The wording used was: to “finance the promotion of the left-wing political view”. At best it's an exaggeration. It's a broad statement about the company as a

PS: I didn't realize, but Indivisible is now a registered 501(c)(4) ( I don't think it was back in 2017 when it was just a grassroots thing ). The groups that are associated with it are probably

How about a living will for groups? I mean, the owner of the group fills in information about who may be considered the owner of the group in case he fails to respond himself. The form can specify

Hello Victoria, thank you for your comments and I agree with you. In my case there was absolutely no discussion of what was wrong between me and my co-owner I just found that I could no longer log in

Yes. 1- Fix the link to Indivisible so that it redirects properly to Indivisible :) In all of this - no one noticed that actually that link is broken. ( the www. needs to be removed) 2- Move : "Is

Maria, What difference does it make how many members have spoken up (so far)? In any (U.S. based) apolitical group there are potentially quite a few members (approximating half) that may oppose

jonathon, Luckily Thunderbird lets me search on Message ID, or I'd have been lost. Actually, I'm sort of lost anyway - that message doesn't seem to bear on my assertion about my PTA

There is nothing anyone else but Mark can do about the subject. Can we let it die???

It's telling (I think) that we continue to stray from the central issue, and continue mentoring Mark on what a certain policy change might or might not do. Focus elsewhere when you can't solve the

I’ve continued following this thread just amazed at the sheer volume of comments. I’ll add one more thought since the puppy pics haven’t appeared yet and. somewhat surprisingly, I think it

Just addressing what Ken K calls being “in your face” about supporting any particular cause: it bears keeping in mind that, as Maria points out about cause advertising, you may also garner more

Mark Following up on Shal's. Let's be honest that "advertising" or "not advertising" supporting any cause, left right or center, isn't going to make or break you or IO. However, you stated the

Mark . . . wrote: Shal has a point, but I think you could support that organization behind the scenes. Instead of advertising on GIO that you will give free premium group status to their members,

Same here. AND (sorry, caps) I don't think it will compromise profits in any way, shape, or form in any case. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones. My

In light of Mark's message dated 20190521 14:33:45 -0700, Message ID <CAEO096pBb3J5VbwNRsxR4ux4QTH5N=7jSueAN-aOojA4kcLe_g@...> ), can you elaborate on how that would work? jonathon

Not Shal - but some thoughts and suggestions below: Having now read the post in GMF that Ken K is referring to in his posts, and gotten over my initial annoyance with the tone of the original post in