Date   

locked add setting(s) to allow invites by members or log access by mods #suggestion

 

I have one group in which I want to allow everyone to view the members list and invite others to the group. I can currently do that by making everyone a moderator and giving them only the permission to "invite members." And since they're moderators, they can see the members list.  So far, so good. (Even by not making everyone a mod, I could allow everyone to see the members list by setting the "members viewable by" setting to "subscribers and owners.")

This seemed a good solution until I realized that making everyone a moderator gives them access to all the activity logs (members' and the group's). Is that correct? If so, here is my wishlist item: 

(1) add a setting for "who can invite members" (with options "subscribers and moderators" or "moderators and owners" - just like other settings of that ilk); 

OR

(2) add moderator permission settings for allowing them to view activity logs or not.

I like (1) better.

J


locked Re: Bouncing member

Duane
 

This was discussed a little the past couple of days:
https://groups.io/g/beta/thread/614351

It probably means that the ISP involved doesn't like the encryption used to send emails.

Duane


locked Bouncing member

weebeequilting <weebee.1@...>
 

What does remote handshake error mean?

Janice B

AZ


locked Re: cancelled invite still shows as "sent" and not logged #bug?

Duane
 

I removed one just now on a couple of groups. They're gone from the Sent Invitations list, but there's no entry in the Activity logs.

Duane


locked Re: Code of conduct

 

Mark B,

Add to this that in X amount of time Groups.io will double in size, then
double in size again, and sometime soon -- if it's successful -- it will
have tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of users.
Over 24,000 users, as of mid December, if I'm reading the "tea leaves" right.

(But last time I hazarded a guess Mark said the total user base was "considerably higher".)



Shal
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum


locked cancelled invite still shows as "sent" and not logged #bug?

 

What is supposed to happen if I select an email address in "sent invitations" and click on "cancel/remove invite"? After doing that, the email still shows as "sent" and nothing is recorded in the moderator activity. Is anything actually happening, or is it just not being recorded and displayed properly?

J


locked Re: question about advanced search

Green Fizzpops
 

Thank you Mark :)

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
I was able to make much more progress than I had anticipated, and it should be fixed now.

Thanks,
Mark

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
This is a bug throughout the system. I'm doing some research on how to fix it, but it may take some time (days).

Thanks,
Mark




locked Re: member changing subject via email results in splitting thread

 

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:35 PM, J_catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

The issue I'm raising is, what should happen when a user DOES change the subject line via email? Should the thread split into two, as it does now, in effect allowing a user to split a thread (and causing the moderator to go in and merge them back together if s/he wanted the thread to stay in one piece)? Or should the thread stay one thread and but with a new title, effectively allowing the user to edit the thread by changing the title? 


With many email clients, including Gmail IIRC, when you change the subject in a reply, they don't include a References field linking the message to the thread, so there's no way we'd be able to figure out that it was part of an existing thread.

Mark


locked Updates to Trello

Beta Integration <beta@...>
 

[Beta] New comment on card "We are not handling quoted strings in searches correctly." by Mark Fletcher:

Fixed.


[Beta] The card "We are not handling quoted strings in searches correctly." was archived.


locked Re: question about advanced search

 

I was able to make much more progress than I had anticipated, and it should be fixed now.

Thanks,
Mark

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
This is a bug throughout the system. I'm doing some research on how to fix it, but it may take some time (days).

Thanks,
Mark



locked Re: Code of conduct

 

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 02:37 pm, Mark Bielecki <msb05001@...> wrote:
hundreds of thousands of users.  

Sounds like a potential nightmare! LOL.

J

 


locked Re: Code of conduct

 

Hi J_catlady,

To be clear, I don't believe that Mark F. has anything but good intentions.  However, as you just discovered, it's very easy for something that at first reading seems innocuous to be read in an entirely different (and perhaps unintended) manner that turns it into something problematical. It's especially "fun" if you're trying to make trouble for somebody, which happens all the time online.  Add to this that in X amount of time Groups.io will double in size, then double in size again, and sometime soon -- if it's successful -- it will have tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of users.  If Groups.io doesn't staff appropriately (both in the number of employees as well as the qualifications of the employees) before one knows it there are clueless "kids" with no real understanding of the issues making decisions about what is and what is not acceptable under the code of conduct -- just like at Yahoo! right now.  And for those who aren't careful the next thing you know you're banned from your own group for offering to sell Al's balls.

Best,

Mark Bielecki



On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 11:37 am, J_catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Mark B, I'm re-reading the intellectual property part again and see that at minimum, this is ambiguous. You're right. I guess I just assumed that Mark F would not suggest a rule forbidding the description of or links to someone else's IP because that would be weird, since it's not illegal, as you say. 

So at this point, I'm in total agreement with you. The CoC as a whole, as innocuous (your word) and warm-and-fuzzy as it seems at first glance, is really problematic.  You're right, I agree.
J

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 17, 2016, at 10:52 AM, J_catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

[Edited Message Follows]
[Reason: added footnote]

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 10:02 am, Mark Bielecki <msb05001@...> wrote:
"You may not post descriptions of, links to, or methods for stealing someone’s intellectual property"

 In my opinion this is fine. It reads very clearly as disallowing "descriptions of," "links to," and "methods for" the stealing of intellectual property, not as disallowing descriptions of or links to intellectual property itself. (As you say, those are not forbidden under copyright law.) 

The rest of your points I find very compelling, especially the part about implementation, so to speak. Even if one agrees in principle with these rules, you might run into problems a la Facebook(*), where some random person could report you and make your life miserable.

J

(*) referring to FB's ill-conceived "real name" policy

 


locked Re: question about advanced search

 

This is a bug throughout the system. I'm doing some research on how to fix it, but it may take some time (days).

Thanks,
Mark


locked Updates to Trello

Beta Integration <beta@...>
 

[Beta] New card "We are not handling quoted strings in searches correctly." was added to list "Bugs".


[Beta] The red label "Bug" was added to the card "We are not handling quoted strings in searches correctly.".


[Beta] The description of card "We are not handling quoted strings in searches correctly." was changed to:

We are not doing phrase matches on quoted phrases.


locked Re: Greylisting?

 

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 1:36 AM, Green Fizzpops <greenfizzpops@...> wrote:

After transfer, some of my members are bouncing. I checked one and it said something about greylisting and a url.
What does this mean?

Most likely, everything is working as they intend. Grey listing is a technique to prevent spam. Here's how it works: the first time we try to send a message to them, the server responds telling us to try again later. We then try a second time a few minutes later, and the message is accepted. Grey listing relies on the fact that spammers want to get their spam out as fast as possible, and usually don't bother trying to send their messages a second time. Anyone who does bother trying to send the message a second time is usually not a spammer.

Mark


locked Re: +Wiki+Page+question

Janice B <weebee.1@...>
 

She didn’t want to include all the “junk” as she called from the left side.  The pages she was wanting to print contained a list of vendors and links to their websites.  I was able to select all items on the page and paste them into a Word document and give her what she wanted.   When I tried printing from the browser, it created 5 pages, the last three pages being non-relevant material probably related to the buttons that appear on the left.  Having a print option would be nice sometime down the road.

 

Janice B

AZ


locked Re: Owner not receiving messages

 

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 12:46 pm, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
Your ISP only supports an old encryption cipher called RC4-SHA. This is an algorithm for encrypting emails. There are many different algorithms to do so. This one was cracked a few years ago, and is now prohibited from being used 'officially'. I've updated our email sending software to support sending messages using this cipher if nothing else works, so you should start receiving your email again. But I'd lean hard on your ISP to upgrade their software.

 Although... (here I am looking the gift horse in the mouth :-), messages ARE starting to come through, but most of them are coming through twice.



locked Re: Owner not receiving messages

 

Thanks, Mark, will do!



locked Re: question about transferring a Google Group

 

Hi RichardTE,

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 10:27 AM, RichardTE <xg3@...> wrote:

I think I may have misinterpreted what it means to 'transfer' a group.  I had thought it meant to copy the old group's message archive to the new group.  But it's appearing that it means to copy the list of members/subscribers to the new group.  Have others misread this as well?  Wishful thinking on my part.  


We support transfer of archives from Yahoo Groups. Google Group archives are much trickier unfortunately. I discovered just yesterday that crawling of Google Groups archives can lead to malformed emails, because of a bug in the G Groups website. Specifically, when viewing an individual message in Google Groups, click the "Show Original" link and then click the "Show only message" button, to get the raw email. For at least some types of emails, some MIME headers will be missing, which screws us up. I have not done any additional investigation to see if we can recover from that problem, because we just haven't had many requests for G Group archive transfers (and I just found it yesterday).

We have done G Group archive imports where the person has saved all the emails that were sent out through the group, and that works ok.

Cheers,
Mark


locked Re: Owner not receiving messages

 

Everett,

Here's what I found out. Your ISP only supports an old encryption cipher called RC4-SHA. This is an algorithm for encrypting emails. There are many different algorithms to do so. This one was cracked a few years ago, and is now prohibited from being used 'officially'. I've updated our email sending software to support sending messages using this cipher if nothing else works, so you should start receiving your email again. But I'd lean hard on your ISP to upgrade their software.

Thanks,
Mark

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 10:35 AM, Everett Kaser <everett@...> wrote:
Thanks, Mark. I'll send an email to my domain host's support group and see if they have any feedback on the problem, too.  If I hear anything, I'll let you know.