thanks for looking into this so promptly. i have tested a couple files so far and everything looks to be working as we expected....we are in the process of moving from YA**o Groups and were trying to

That makes complete sense and 'claiming' is a great solution! Still not what Joseph seems to be talking about. But if it is, I agree with you and Maria that the claiming mechanism fills the bill.

I've run into a similar situation a time or two. I can't quite decide if the message should be posted, rejected, or deleted. As group owner, I sometimes claim it until I've had time to think it

Claiming a message satisfies a lot of goals (or "use cases," as Joseph puts it). But it seems irrelevant to the one Joseph is alluding to of mods ignoring a message. If they claim it, they're not

Agree with you J that the proposed addition appears unnecessary - plus, don't pending messages expire after a certain window of time anyway? Claiming a message could be an interim solution if you

I understood claiming to be for the purpose of preventing two moderators from working on the same message at the same time, but it certainly seems that it would be the answer for this inexplicable

Curiouser and curiouser....yes, "claiming" is great feature, but in this case, why would they go to the bother of claiming it if they just want to get rid of it? Why not just delete it? And Joseph has

Also a moderator can "claim" the message on this system so that other mods don't touch it and accidentally approve it. Another great groups.io feature, which I think would resolve the issue you

But why couldn't they just delete or reject the message? This sounds like a moderator behavior issue rather than something calling for a software solution. J Sent from my iPhone -- J Messages are

Hi, There might be times when a moderator or an owner may simply ignore a message, say, from a moderated member who posts a message that is considered off-topic. Another use case is to ignore spam

I'm trying to understand this proposal, strictly out of curiosity. What do you mean that the message 'was not supposed to go to the list,' unless a moderator had already seen and rejected it? I'm not

Hi, The following was observed on one of the lists I manage: an associate owner approved a message that was more than several days old and was not supposed to go to the list, causing confusion for

Thanks, Mark. I noticed that greenfizzpops wrote But I've now tested this in my test group, and it works fine for me.-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author. Especially the fishy ones. I

A group moderator with at least one of the following permissions also has access to individual member pages: - Approve Pending Members - Remove Members - Ban Members - Set Member Subscription

Since the most common extension on photos is jpg, maybe disallow that in the File area? And possibly note that they must go in the Photo area when an attempt is made? Duane

So it seems that only group owners have access to the individual member pages. Mark, I would suggest changing the wording in caveat on the member's "notes" section, which currently reads: "Notes are

In the group I am a Co-Owner of, we got around whether a moderator can see owner messages by making the 3 or us all Co-Owners. Doug

p.s. It's odd. I just did a test in my test group by making a test member into a moderator. That member can see the members list, but can't click on any member's page and see it. The member pages are

Hello Mark and all Is there any way to stop members from uploading photos to the file sections? I spend way too much time sending members to the wiki for instructions (which of course they either

Oh, ok. I don't know the answer to that. -- 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