p.s. "P" members' edits would, of course, bypass the moderation. -- 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

Mark, An admittedly unusual situation, but I've a group where many non-member posters have their email address duplicated in the Display Name field of the From they post with. This causes their full

Currently, the only option a group has for controlling edits is to completely disable editing. The suggestion is to create another option, "edits moderated," that causes message edits to go through

If you or someone edits a message and the edit comes through pending (due to some moderation setting), it's possible to edit the content from within the pending queue, but not the "reason." You can

So Reply to OP may not be completely intuitive either as the FUNCTION of the Private button IS what I'm after. It just needs to be clear what its for and IMO needs to be clear its a reply function at

Changes to the site this week: INTERNAL: Better tracking of which mechanism a user is added to the system, to aid in spotting shenanigans. SYSADMIN: Added a lot of storage to increase the amount of

Haha. I don’t mind, either. I think it actually may have been your post about the “catching up” that pinged my brain this morning. 😊 -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author,

J, >>> Correct, I just sent that in as a bug/suggestion. Havent seen it come thru yet. Yours did come through; mine said the same thing pretty-much (except I tagged it as #bug) and probably came

Christos, Correct, I just sent that in as a bug/suggestion. Havent seen it come thru yet. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones. My humanity is bound up in

I just received an invitation to join a group. I accepted the invitation by clicking the link that said accept the invitation It redirected me to a page with options and then when I scrolled down to

Currently, when you explicitly choose to follow a topic, you're sent all the prior emails in that topic (you "catch up" with it). But if you are on autofollow replies, and you reply to a topic, you

J, >>> Realized that since I’m FF, I saw the original message but not Mark’s, and replied to the original message before seeing Mark’s. Later I saw Mark’s reply online and was momentarily

I totally agree that it's hard to find. There was a long debate over allowing an explicit "PM" (or whatever you want to call it) button that appears contemporaneously with the Reply button, rather

OK, if that is what it does is a direct reply to the OP then yes - I never noticed it down on the corner like that so it's not intuitive - So I'lI change the ask to move that to a pull down option

Realized that since I’m FF, I saw the original message but not Mark’s, and replied to the original message before seeing Mark’s. Later I saw Mark’s reply online and was momentarily flummoxed.

Just seeing Mark’s reply belatedly. I think I’m missing msgs on my phone. In any case, I had the same reaction: use Private Reply, or I’m missing something. -- J Messages are the sole opinion

Mark is vetting new topics, and has vetted this one, so I’m confused because it seems the Private Reply option in creating the reply already exists and covers this need. -- J Messages are the sole

There's already a button labeled Private that lets you send the message to the sender instead of the group. Or am I missing something? Thanks,Mark

The current wording makes it appear as if this was something that the user had initiated and performed, and it would be nice if the wording made it clearer that this was something that was done by the

There are Reply settings with options for reply to: Sender Group Sender and groupWhat I think is needed is an option for Sender OR Group Maybe select a default for one or the other in the