Shal i prefer MY. “My Computer” My subs or my groups. The second is My Settings for This Group. How to shorten this? Certainly not by changing the meaning to Subscription. I know I’m

Ken, Meh. That is a list of your subscriptions. Aka your group memberships. Aka Your Groups. I'd actually prefer to have that tab be named Your Subscriptions, or even Your Memberships, but long ago

(continuing to complain) ;-), THIS is "SUBSCRIPTIONS": and THIS is "MY SETTINGS," not "my subsription"

***any of the following subject replies didnt tie in to the1st subject*** Are you saying that allof the subsequent posts (after made the hashtag change) are under one separate/different (non

BTW it was Helen's idea, and a brilliant one at that. It is so useful that I want to make it an optional group setting, since I now set all my group members to it and have to do that by hand. (My own

Please understand that I am not arguing against it. I'm arguing against its ultimate value. I have nothing against adding it, and if it turns out it gets implemented and I like it, I'll use it, and if

Not at all true. Some people initiate a bad thread using a new subject line. Others initiate a thread (bad or good) by hijacking an existing one. In both cases, a new thread is started, and has gone

typo, order of magnitude And actually, regarding the assumption that hijackers reply to more topics than they start, I think it's almost by definition, since they tend to hijack topics rather than

They’re not analogous because of the magnitudes involved. The “price” of putting a member on full mod whose common issues are with new topics is probably an order or magnitude greater than the

https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/18123 Bruce

I see those as not analogous. But go for 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. -

That same argument was put forward -- in reverse -- for the topic origination overrides...didn't stop it from being implemented. Bruce

Yes, it's definitely on the TODO list. Right now, as evidenced by recent #changelogs, I'm focused on development of the App (and the API needed to support it). I'm paying a consulting group to build

From my own viewpoint that would be the easier option. Once a "troublesome member" realised that they could start a topic unmoderated, but that replies were held for moderation, they might start

Technotronic, That's because although both posts are inside the same hashtag, they have different subjects (with the first having no subject at all from what I understood).

Oh, I see. But how often do they start topics as opposed to replying to other topics? Presumably an order of magnitude less? And if so, what would be the real downside in simply putting them on

Exactly. If they start a new topic, everything is fine. It's when they use reply for a post totally unrelated to the topic they've replied to (hijacking the thread) that a problem occurs. I've got

Noticed a while back that after I tagged a post with a subject with no hashtag, with one that is related, any of the following subject replies didnt tie in to the 1st subject , even with the initial

I think the recent new types (moderating all topics a person starts and moderating the first message of all topics a person starts) make sense and are useful. I don't see the usefulness of the request

It looks like we could add an infinite number of new moderation types for an infinite number issues, where and when should we just use the basic "Override Moderated"? "And if any man shall take