This is related to my question (two posts back) about the difference between this method and the current method, wherein the user gets an email with a resubscribe link. Currently, after someone

The wiki editor does not appear to support inline styles (they are stripped when you save). Even things like {float:right} are stripped. Because of this, I've had to resort to long-deprecated HTML

I'm getting confused here. it seems to be like this: Some email-message from groups.io lands in somebody's spambox. His/her ISP sends some message to groups.io requesting to stop messages. When

That sounds good 👍

Yes

I understand what's being proposed. What I don't understand is the advantage of it over unsubscribing the member, especially when the resolution of it is so unclear. Is the advantage that the person

I've changed the NC badge to be orchid. Thanks, Mark

J, What's being proposed is a mechanism that does not unsubscribe the member when a feedback loop spam report message comes in. The member remains subscribed but sending email to them is on hold

I'm sure I'm missing the subtleties but right now all a removed user has to do to be reinstated is click on the resubscribe link. They can conceivably do that any number of times, causing repeated

Final point. With over half million users and over 7000 groups (last count I remember) we would have scads of people, majority untrained, attempting what many professionals don't know how to do. --

Tom, The effect of a message being classed as spam by the receiving ISP is far more serious than a message rejected for no such account. The initial labeling of a message as spam sets up a watch on

Good point Bob. I know it makes it more complex, but maybe it could have a counter and the 3 time it happens then the moderator gets involved. And when the message is sent to the blocked user, there

Allowing the user to simply reset the suspension is problematic. The majority of members in groups, is unlikely to be experienced in the steps that might be needed to clear a spam flag their ISP set

Correct. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones. I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu

"Spam Report Hold" is better than “Suspended.” Peace, Tom

slammed :-) -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones. I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu

Good idea, Shal! I would suggest "Spam Report Hold" to clearly indicate why email is suspended. Also, there needs to be a way to view the report that came from the mailbox provider. As time goes on,

Shal, That is a great idea! How about "Email suspended" for a setting name? Are you thinking the user could clear (un-check) it, or would that require the moderator? I would vote for the user. If

Chris, For the record, I've since decided that modifying the member's Email Delivery setting is the wrong approach. Rather, I would have a new status, similar to "Bouncing" but operating on a

The option to disable ‘no email’ was an extremely hard-won battle and removing it would be unacceptable. Moderators need to be able to ensure that they can reach all members with a special notice.