Dave, They can post messages to the group using whichever interface they like. It is only email commands (including messages to +owner) that are afflicted by synchronoss' error. Whose web interface

Sorry; I think that is unfair. If + is supposed to be acceptable character under the terms of RFC 2821 then using it was a perfectly reasonable decision. The fact that a particular combination of

Peter, Gmail is another. It uses + in the user part as the lead-in for an alias address. That feature won't work properly with messages sent from a synchronoss afflicted service. You can add to

Um, the idea of btinternet users only posting via the web interface is surely a non starter. I have no statistics but I sense on the groups I moderate that probably 80% of users, including a LOT of

Mark/Shal: The fact that gmail ignores dots in the leftside of email addresses, is not relevant to this discussion. Gmail ONLY do this on emails coming into the gmail domain, and that's reasonable.

Mark, Thanks. I would make the following changes. I am including here the phrase "via email," which currently is appended to the log entry (but not included in your message) if the message was sent

Bryce, I wrote: After Re-reading the prior topic, and some consideration, I retract my suggestion. Instead I think that Hide Topic (and possibly Hide

Mark, Indeed. ;-) I too do not favor changing it. Or even aliasing it. I thought of that but realized it wouldn't solve the problem - the people who need to use the alias wouldn't know about it.

Many thanks, Mark! Best, Glenn

Late replying to this. I'm wary (used it right this time Shal!) of changing this, especially to a period. It's not like periods aren't interpreted differently by different mail servers. Gmail, for

There are 3 associated activity log messages: "LogLine": "{{(ActivityUserDisplay .Activity true $.Group)}} sent message \"{{.Activity.Subject}}\" without any tags, has been asked to update

I have added this. Cheers, Mark

Bryce, I think this is a good suggestion, as I don't think the feature exists (yet). In the More menu under each message is a Report This Message item which can be used to report the message to the

<<<>It's impractical to be able to remove all traces of someone who has participated in a discussion group." >>> Removing posts (‘er, messages) is not equal to hunting down and removing ALL traces

Howdy,.,. I am fairly new to Groups.io so this may have been discussed or hashed already, but I would like a feature to able to Hide Topics/Messages. An example is we have a former member of our group

Shal, Totally disagree but I’m done here. -- 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 human together. -

J, The only impractical cases I know of I excluded already [beta #22312]. "Hopelessly impractical" is your claim to defend. That's like saying that a car warranty must be upheld under ALL road

The EU is not requiring it. -- 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 human together. - Desmond Tutu

Since when was something being "hopelessly impractical” ever a reason for the EU not to mandate it… … also if you delete your Facebook account all posts, likes, comments will be removed. If

At the very least, the phrase "via email" should not be separated from what it refers to. It's very confusing. Thanks for the other info. I would still like to see the message the user receives. But I