>>> superfluous or confusing<<< If you think in a logical linear fashion, not at all. A bug isn’t confirmed until Mark receives the email and verifies it’s a bug (or is not.) The prefix

Exactly, so the adjective is either superfluous or confusing, depending on who is using it. It serves no purpose. 😊 -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones. My

>>>On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 07:51 AM, J_Catlady wrote: LOL, I’m not that presumptuous to be certain enough that a “potential” bug, is an “actual” bug.

Drat, faulty memory. Should be "moderator_notes". Duane

While playing with various things the last few days, relative to some questions that have been asked recently, I realized that it would be beneficial to have some additional information included when

For an email address, you could use the term bugreport. -- 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

Bug reports in the bug forum could be required to be tagged from a set of defined hashtags that relate to specific features, plus an #other tag. That would help. -- J Messages are the sole opinion

Hashtag, email address, whatever. It’s the qualifier “potential” that’s the problem. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones. My humanity is bound up in

I posted in another thread how it would be useful to have a "bug" group. The reason being, I was interested in following their reporting and which ones were being addressed. I had no idea that bugs

Hello I have tested whether a user can join a subgroup directly after responding to an invite, and yes: he can. However, if a user tries to join a subgroup directly via e-mail, Groups.io sends out

Hello In a test, a user who accepted an invitation to a subgroup is told to use the plus-style address for posting to the subgroup (see image attached). This is not ideal. I suspect the template for

>>>On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 04:37 PM, J_Catlady wrote: Ok I can buy into the benefit of a bug-specific forum. (BUT good luck with the above caveat.) Arrrgh.

>>>I don't think a hashtag like that will be effective.<<< In response to Sandi’s comment about both bugs and support questions addressed to <support@>, <potential-bug@> (or whatever@) would be an

I don't think a hashtag like that will be effective. You'll get a plethora of people using it identically to #bug, either sometimes or all the time, either because most bugs *are* still potential

Ok, so for one, “potential-bug@“ could differentiate general support vs bug reporting. I do agree a forum to browse bugs MIGHT be helpful, but (hopefully) anything posted/searched/browsed for on

Have you been reading my mind? :) This will be in my proposal to Mark as it would result in a much smaller and tidier library of hashtags in beta. Chris

You could use the MF feature ("moderate the first message of every topic this member starts"), but you would have to apply it to every member, and that is practical only if you make MF a group option,

Mark, Happy New Year! I am posting this on beta, although it's a bug, only because I am no longer sure that bug reports are getting through to support. The problem I am reporting here is that for the

And hashtags also only really work for viewing on the web. Email recipients may gain some advantage but the threaded views in email clients largely make them superfluous - if only people would use

Members can add hashtags when they start a topic. However, at present the library of hashtags is (IMHO) a complete mess that is badly in need of rationalisation; if you don't believe me go and look at