Date   

moderated Preventing the export of a table by non-owners #suggestion

Peter Cook
 

One of my groups is limited to the residents of my community. It contains database that is an opt-in directory of residents, including some who are actually group members. (It's a holdover from the days when we used to publish a hardcopy directory of everyone in the neighborhood and provide one to every household.) We're grappling with privacy issues here and want to minimize this data getting out into the world, at least in a wholesale way.

So my request is to have the option in the Permissions section of a table to disallow anyone other than the table owner, the groups owner, and/or the group moderators to export the contents of the table.

Thanks for your consideration.

Pete


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Ellen Moody
 

Thank you, Mark.  And as merry a Christmas to you as you can manage, Ellen


On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 8:49 AM Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 4:25 AM Ellen Moody <ellen.moody@...> wrote:
Just to be clear:  I own/moderate 3 lists, one is 234 members (Trollope&Peers), another, 148 (18thCenturyWorlds), the third, 133 (WomenWriters, femnist); we began March 2002; we have 
no special features that I know of.

So I take it we are to be grandmothered (I'm a woman) in to be for free, even though all three are above 100.  I do not expect any gigantic increases for the foreseeable future. I haven't 
checked but my impression is maybe 5-10 people join a year, but then we also lose some people. We think we are valuable: we are literary lists, reading and studying literature and art 
subdivided in three different ways together.

That is correct. Your groups would be considered legacy and nothing would change.

Thanks,
Mark 


moderated RSVP Waitlist Promotion Issues #bug

Charlie Behnken
 

I've had two reports of issues with the promotion from the Waitlist to Attending recently - both on the same event.

This is a small event with a limit of 10 people.  Most are singles, but a few are +1s.  The invite was sent out on December 16th and about 23 people RSVP'd as Will Attend.  The 10th person to respond was a +1 and was put on the Waitlist.  Unexpectedly, to us,  the next person to respond was accepted as an attendee. 

Others have told me that they have seen in the past where the +1s on the Waitlist never get accepted since the attendees are primarily singles and only one spot at time opens up.  The +1 stay at the top of the Waitlist while others are promoted past them.   So even if 2 or more change to Will Not Attend over the course of time, the +1s never get promoted.  To be fair, the spot should remain open until another person changes to Will Not Attend  allowing the +1 to be accepted. (Yes, this could become an issue if the +1 is a +5 and open spots just sit there, but the organizer can manually add people).

The second one was on the same event where there were about 12 people on the Waitlist when on December 17th a response was changed to Not Attending.  In this case no one was promoted and the spot remained open until on December 18th a totally new response was received.  This person should have been the 13th on the Waitlist, but instead they were immediately accepted and filled the 10th spot.  This is definitely a bug, and the leader had to reach out to them, explain the system incorrectly accepted their response, and manually remove them from the  event.

We get a lot of flack from members who don't get accepted to events, and we can't have the system not promoting in they order they respond..

Thanks for looking into this,
Charlie


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

 

On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 4:25 AM Ellen Moody <ellen.moody@...> wrote:
Just to be clear:  I own/moderate 3 lists, one is 234 members (Trollope&Peers), another, 148 (18thCenturyWorlds), the third, 133 (WomenWriters, femnist); we began March 2002; we have 
no special features that I know of.

So I take it we are to be grandmothered (I'm a woman) in to be for free, even though all three are above 100.  I do not expect any gigantic increases for the foreseeable future. I haven't 
checked but my impression is maybe 5-10 people join a year, but then we also lose some people. We think we are valuable: we are literary lists, reading and studying literature and art 
subdivided in three different ways together.

That is correct. Your groups would be considered legacy and nothing would change.

Thanks,
Mark 


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Ellen Moody
 

Addendum from Ellen:  are all three of my lists added together or are they counted separately?  If added together, I could delete 18thCenturyWorlds which has very little traffic.  
I would regret doing that and/or could ask members there to move to one of the other two.  That would bring the total down to under 500.  E.M.


On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 7:25 AM Ellen Moody <ellen.moody@...> wrote:
Just to be clear:  I own/moderate 3 lists, one is 234 members (Trollope&Peers), another, 148 (18thCenturyWorlds), the third, 133 (WomenWriters, femnist); we began March 2002; we have 
no special features that I know of.

So I take it we are to be grandmothered (I'm a woman) in to be for free, even though all three are above 100.  I do not expect any gigantic increases for the foreseeable future. I haven't 
checked but my impression is maybe 5-10 people join a year, but then we also lose some people. We think we are valuable: we are literary lists, reading and studying literature and art 
subdivided in three different ways together.

Ellen



locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Mike Hanauer
 

I believe Groups.io is an important resource for our society. 

How about considering becoming a non-profit and asking for donations similar to what Wikipedia does to fill in the shortfall, at least for those who are not profit making businesses?

Consider Better, not Bigger. So many advantages. Just ask. USA adds a Chicago to our overpop each year.
"Still more population growth is not our way to a healthy community, a healthy planet, OR enjoyable cycling."

    ~Mike


On Monday, December 21, 2020, 08:08:59 AM EST, Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:


On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 04:50 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Free
Up to 100 members
1GB storage
Single mailing list only
Something about this level popped into my head this morning.  Would there be a possibility of a fee for additional users (Basic+?) at this level?  Say $5/mo per each 500 or 1000 additional members?  Some types of groups work well enough with messages only and minimal storage.  If worth doing, it might be acceptable to groups that just can't come up with the fee for Premium.  This might tie into an a la carte menu for additional features later.  Of course it would only take 1 or 2 additions to make Premium more palatable considering the extra features and storage included.

Duane


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Duane
 

On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 04:50 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Free
Up to 100 members
1GB storage
Single mailing list only
Something about this level popped into my head this morning.  Would there be a possibility of a fee for additional users (Basic+?) at this level?  Say $5/mo per each 500 or 1000 additional members?  Some types of groups work well enough with messages only and minimal storage.  If worth doing, it might be acceptable to groups that just can't come up with the fee for Premium.  This might tie into an a la carte menu for additional features later.  Of course it would only take 1 or 2 additions to make Premium more palatable considering the extra features and storage included.

Duane


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Ellen Moody
 

Just to be clear:  I own/moderate 3 lists, one is 234 members (Trollope&Peers), another, 148 (18thCenturyWorlds), the third, 133 (WomenWriters, femnist); we began March 2002; we have 
no special features that I know of.

So I take it we are to be grandmothered (I'm a woman) in to be for free, even though all three are above 100.  I do not expect any gigantic increases for the foreseeable future. I haven't 
checked but my impression is maybe 5-10 people join a year, but then we also lose some people. We think we are valuable: we are literary lists, reading and studying literature and art 
subdivided in three different ways together.

Ellen



locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Dave Wade
 

On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 10:50 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:


Hi All,

I mentioned a year ago that I was considering changing to a per-member based
pricing scheme for new groups.
This would align our revenue with our costs; the larger the group, the more it
costs us to host. It's also industry standard.
As Dilbert once said "Industry standard" roughly equates to "average"


- The non-profit Enterprise discount will continue; $100/month or $1100/year,
with the per member pricing being either $0.10/member/month or
$1.10/member/year.

Please let me know if you have any questions.
I am a member of many groups that offer peer support for users of a particular price of free software or are enthusiasts about a particular piece of Vintage hardware. Such groups are essentially "not for profit" but they don't have any formal constitution. Probably the only money they have is that raised specifically to pay for the groups.io bill. I assume these will be treated as commercial.

In the UK there are many forms of "not for profit", so "Charitable" , "Company Limited by Guarantee" and "un-incorporated clubs and societies". How would you treat those. I personally find it incongruous that some UK Charities are in effect huge businesses who now concentrate more on making money than they do in fulfilling their charitable aims.

For example in the UK the "National Trust" a charity that is supposed to "preserve" yet makes more from its coffee bars and souvenir shops than it does on admission fees and pays its chairmain something like $300,000 a year.

Thanks,
Mark
Dave Wade


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

 

ken,

Apparent list target sizes :
Free - 100 members
Premium - 400 members
Enterprise - 1000 members
I don't believe these are targets. Merely the number that are included in the base price of the plan.

The new pricing policy effective Jan 18th establishes that list of
2000 members should be an Enterprise subscription at $4400 per year.
Again I don't think that's what is intended. There's no reason a group of 2000 members should bump up to Enterprise unless they want the extra Enterprise features.

In the current pricing they would pay $220 + $0.55 * (2000 - 400) = $1,100/yr as a Premium group.

The implication is that a grandfathered Basic list of 2000 members is
costing (lost revenue) groups.io $4400 a year. That is not a tenable
plan.
I think you're reading the figures incorrectly.

I don't know how Marks' cost break down, but remember that even the grandfathered basic groups have less storage, fewer features, and no (official) support available to them as compared to Premium groups. And I doubt the operational costs of even a Premium group are as high as the fee - that would defeat the whole point of the new pricing structure.

Shal


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

M K Ramadoss
 

TechSoup does the verification legwork and maintains a file copy of the IRS determination letter. Tech Soup is a company that handles the verification process for small US based business as well as the larger, global businesses such as Microsoft, Adobe, Zoom and Google. Where verification costs are concerned, those are typically built into the pricing model and admin fees of the company offering a discount. 

No need to use third parties to verify tax exempt status. Applicants can be asked to provide a copy of the IRS determination letter. In addition, using EIN  current tax exempt status can be verified online at IRS.GOV.
I prepare tax returns and need to verify if contributions are qualified and do no use any third parties.

With so many pricing suggestions received from customers, the simplest approach is for keep current pricing plan for next six months and review the bottom line is as well as growth of customers.

MKR



On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 6:38 PM Sandi D <sandi.asgtechie@...> wrote:
Mark, thank you for finding a way at this time to grant legacy groups a free service. I volunteer for a few GIO groups covered personally with the current grandfathered option and I know first hand what a valuable resource you are providing for 501c3's with memberships in the 100-300 person range. I remain hopeful that someday a Premium discounted level might one day be offered to accommodate their minimal needs. 

Since 2018 I have encouraged "child NPs" to use GIO. It's been a slow process for the 3 "Parent-Child" 501(c)(3) organizations that I volunteer for. Likely because their "child chapters" located throughout the US consist of the elderly, those with special needs and those with accessibility needs. 

I have brought perhaps 10-15 small NPs over to GIO. Their forum feature expectations are modest. Posts range about 10-80 times a month. They don't use storage for attachments and photos.

The Premium model holds an attraction because of the ability to have a main group for their members and a subgroup for their governance board and committee chairs. Without a NP discount for the Premium group some are creating 2 or 3 free groups: one group for their Board and/one for their Chairs and/or Volunteers.

These NPs do not have the revenue to pay the $20 a month needed to bring their 100+ members into one GIO group. I will continue to recommend the free GIO tier for their board members, chairs and volunteers if they are not in need of a general membership forum.

I am involved with three different US based 501(c)(3)s who operate under an Umbrella framework. In other words the "Parent" is the fiscal sponsor in regards to the IRS "paperwork" and the local "Child Chapters" of the "Parent" operate under their own EIN and within their own budget. 

The "Child-Chapters" I am familiar with vary in size from 20 members to 200+ members with the average being around 125 members. They fall into the educational category and their members offer services free of charge in their local communities. Revenue for operations is most often met soley by a handful of membership making donations to meet their expenses as 80% of their members are on a fixed income.

TechSoup does the verification legwork and maintains a file copy of the IRS determination letter. Tech Soup is a company that handles the verification process for small US based business as well as the larger, global businesses such as Microsoft, Adobe, Zoom and Google. Where verification costs are concerned, those are typically built into the pricing model and admin fees of the company offering a discount. 

I welcome suggestions from others who may know about simplistic, private, free or budget friendly forum services that are available to non-profits having 100-300 members operating on a shoe string budget. I've also posted this need to the forum on Tech Soup in the hopes that other suggestions will turn up.

Workgroup Google Groups seems to be the only affordable option I can find for the NPs with 100+ members at this time. I will return to what I did prior to 2018: Help them get their domain set up on Workgroups (formerly G-Suite for non profits) and then use a Google Groups domain set up. (Workgroups offers the privacy and security not available to those using a Google Group tied to a free Google account.)

It's a more complicated process than creating a GIO group and requires ongoing Administrative tasks. I don't mind the extra work on my part for the set up but the ongoing Admin role is something I can't do for them. Finding an easy to use, forum service that respects privacy is getting more difficult. People today are asking for more forum "bells and whistles" than I ever could have imagined. And that rasies the learning curve of how to use it. 

I know of one other free forum service called Group Works. While private and secure, it does not offer topic discussion over email. They are strictly web based. 

I appreciate the discussions of GIO operational costs. Until recently I did not know that the email communication component was one of the most significant costs. It makes sense that to be sustainable, GIO pricing structure has to change. I don't envy any business (or non profit) having to make these difficult revenue-expediture choices. 

-- 
Sandi Dickenson


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Charles Roberts
 

I think Mark is smart enough to figure out how to set his charges.  I just think he needs to see how many different TYPES of groups there are. Some types can easily bear charges, some not so easy..  

I've not seen my type described yet so here goes.
We are a gathering of front line Cold War Veterans, both military and civilian that served years on the remote Radar and Communication sites all over Alaska.  The system has changed now and many of the facilities no longer exist...except in our memories and in our groups.  We have many pictures and files for future generations to peruse, and a fair listing of messages and stories from Members who have passed....for those interested in the future to see......an actual picture or message written by your Great Grand Father....think about that.
Well, most of us are 80+, not really in to too much high-techie stuff, and certainly not looking for new ways to spend what money we have left.  So, high fees, however derived, exceeding what one person (owner) can reasonable come up with to support his group will surely signify the end of the group, or prevent a similar type from ever signing on.  Ours is a labor of love. 

Just saying......
Chuck, CABGx3



On Dec 20, 2020 1:09 PM, PurplePenny <purplepenny@...> wrote:

I understand that this service has to pay for itself, and luckily my group is grandtfathered so this won't affect it.  However, if I were just thinking of moving to G.Io this would cost me nearly $2000 a year which would be prohibitively expensive for me.  I can' ask members for contributions: many of them are struggling finacially as it is.  One member sold her car to pay her vet bills, others do without their own healthcare to pay for their cats.  They just couldn't afford to donate, and I couldn't afford to pay $2000 from my own pocket.

As other have asked, I wonder which aspect is the most costly.  Could a lower cost per member with a tiered system for added benefits work?  For instance, my group only averages about 5 messages a day, but we do need to use photos and files. We do need occasionally need the message archive going back to the start of the group in 1999 (I had to do one just today!), but I think most message searches are within the last 5-10 years.

Penny



locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Sandi D <sandi.asgtechie@...>
 

Mark, thank you for finding a way at this time to grant legacy groups a free service. I volunteer for a few GIO groups covered personally with the current grandfathered option and I know first hand what a valuable resource you are providing for 501c3's with memberships in the 100-300 person range. I remain hopeful that someday a Premium discounted level might one day be offered to accommodate their minimal needs. 

Since 2018 I have encouraged "child NPs" to use GIO. It's been a slow process for the 3 "Parent-Child" 501(c)(3) organizations that I volunteer for. Likely because their "child chapters" located throughout the US consist of the elderly, those with special needs and those with accessibility needs. 

I have brought perhaps 10-15 small NPs over to GIO. Their forum feature expectations are modest. Posts range about 10-80 times a month. They don't use storage for attachments and photos.

The Premium model holds an attraction because of the ability to have a main group for their members and a subgroup for their governance board and committee chairs. Without a NP discount for the Premium group some are creating 2 or 3 free groups: one group for their Board and/one for their Chairs and/or Volunteers.

These NPs do not have the revenue to pay the $20 a month needed to bring their 100+ members into one GIO group. I will continue to recommend the free GIO tier for their board members, chairs and volunteers if they are not in need of a general membership forum.

I am involved with three different US based 501(c)(3)s who operate under an Umbrella framework. In other words the "Parent" is the fiscal sponsor in regards to the IRS "paperwork" and the local "Child Chapters" of the "Parent" operate under their own EIN and within their own budget. 

The "Child-Chapters" I am familiar with vary in size from 20 members to 200+ members with the average being around 125 members. They fall into the educational category and their members offer services free of charge in their local communities. Revenue for operations is most often met soley by a handful of membership making donations to meet their expenses as 80% of their members are on a fixed income.

TechSoup does the verification legwork and maintains a file copy of the IRS determination letter. Tech Soup is a company that handles the verification process for small US based business as well as the larger, global businesses such as Microsoft, Adobe, Zoom and Google. Where verification costs are concerned, those are typically built into the pricing model and admin fees of the company offering a discount. 

I welcome suggestions from others who may know about simplistic, private, free or budget friendly forum services that are available to non-profits having 100-300 members operating on a shoe string budget. I've also posted this need to the forum on Tech Soup in the hopes that other suggestions will turn up.

Workgroup Google Groups seems to be the only affordable option I can find for the NPs with 100+ members at this time. I will return to what I did prior to 2018: Help them get their domain set up on Workgroups (formerly G-Suite for non profits) and then use a Google Groups domain set up. (Workgroups offers the privacy and security not available to those using a Google Group tied to a free Google account.)

It's a more complicated process than creating a GIO group and requires ongoing Administrative tasks. I don't mind the extra work on my part for the set up but the ongoing Admin role is something I can't do for them. Finding an easy to use, forum service that respects privacy is getting more difficult. People today are asking for more forum "bells and whistles" than I ever could have imagined. And that rasies the learning curve of how to use it. 

I know of one other free forum service called Group Works. While private and secure, it does not offer topic discussion over email. They are strictly web based. 

I appreciate the discussions of GIO operational costs. Until recently I did not know that the email communication component was one of the most significant costs. It makes sense that to be sustainable, GIO pricing structure has to change. I don't envy any business (or non profit) having to make these difficult revenue-expediture choices. 

-- 
Sandi Dickenson


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Marv Waschke
 

I think 2020 will mark the beginning of the great free online services shakeout. The services aren't free and the current methods of paying for them are all pretty flaky: selling ads that most people regard as annoyances, selling information for targeting ads, subsidizing free services by paying for them out of paid services. This last is the Groups.io model.

The economics of online services are unfamiliar and strange to most folks. The biggest costs are upfront development before the first customer signs on. Next comes infrastructure rollout and system maintenance. The marginal cost of adding a new group or member to  Groups.io is probably very low, almost zero, which makes it tempting to offer free services. But when enough new groups or members are added, a breaker trips and a new round of software and infrastructure is required and that costs big. I suspect this is happening all over the online services industry as covid has driven everything online.

My guess is Groups.io is facing this now with the rush from Yahoo Groups.  I've been concerned about Groups.io's business model from the day the groups I work with moved here and it appears a day of reckoning is on the horizon. I hope Mark can come up with a sustainable plan under which users pay their fair share.

My preference (wishful thinking?!) is for a pay-as-you-go business model under which there is always an adequate reserve fund to pay for required expansion. Perhaps a relatively large entry fee, which would be designed to fund future expansion and modest monthly fees based on usage, which would be designed to keep the lights on in the data center.

I recognize that there are many many deserving groups that have no means to pay for the services I envision, but I would not saddle Groups.io with deciding which groups deserve what. I'm not sure Groups.io is in a good position to judge. Keeping a service running, paying the bills, planning and implementing for the future is a hard job, and the skills to do that are not the same as the skills necessary for equitably managing a charity. Maybe there should be a Groups.io Foundation for managing free services to deserving groups. The foundation would raise and manage funds to pay Groups.io fees.

So, yeah, a switch to a model like this would be rough, but from my vantage point. we're already in rough times that could get rougher if this stuff is not sorted out. I'd hate to see Mark throw up his hands, shutter Groups.io, and take a signing bonus to go to work for the big three.

Best, Marv Waschke


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

 

On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 04:08 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
What does the new pricing structure have to do with the members of a group needing to be informed of whether the group is basic or premium or whatever?
I would be extremely opposed, as I was the last time around, to groups having to state on their home page whether they're premium or basic.
 
--
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. - Desmond Tutu


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

 

On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 03:59 PM, SP4149 wrote:
Now that the pricing structure is radically changing to a fee per member. I feel that the Home page should be changed to show if a list is Basic (Free), Premium or Enterprise.
What does the new pricing structure have to do with the members of a group needing to be informed of whether the group is basic or premium or whatever? Nothing. Maybe you are thinking about the suggestion that the members themselves are charged per group. But I doubt that idea will go far. If the members themselves are charged (which I highly doubt will happen) AND if they are only charged to belong to basic groups (even more unlikely), then of course the groups need to state what kind they are. But that all of that is so extremely unlikely that we don't need to worry about 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. - Desmond Tutu


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

SP4149
 

Now that the pricing structure is radically changing to a fee per member.  I feel that the Home page should be changed to show if a list is Basic (Free), Premium or Enterprise.

Mark has not indicated if in the future all lists will be charged a per member fee if their membership is over the target size for their type of list.

Apparent list target sizes :

Free - 100 members

Premium - 400 members

Enterprise -1000 members

I am co-owner of one list that has paid for Premium subscription but on the billing page - Group features shows image storage at 1 GB, same as it was when the list was Basic(Free)

Neither Owner is down as a payor, instead it is the moderator designated as the only payor.

Now that lists on groups.io are headed into a new pricing scheme, more transparency on list status is needed.


The new pricing policy effective Jan 18th establishes that list of 2000 members should be an Enterprise subscription at $4400 per year.  The implication is that a grandfathered Basic list 

of 2000 members is costing (lost revenue) groups.io $4400 a year.  That is not a tenable plan.  E.G I do not expect a twenty year old Basic list with 2,000 members to remain fee free more than a couple of years.

Now it would be more likely that a Premium (Paid) list might avoid a fee per member surcharge for a longer time.  So do I upgrade to Premium in the next couple of weeks to avoid the high fee per member

charges that could be coming in the future?

ken clark

www.shastasprings.com


1d. 
Re: Pricing Changes
From: J_Catlady
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 09:29:12 PST

That won't work because a decision was made (which I strongly agree with) a long time ago not to let members know which groups are paid and which ones are not.


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

 

Thanks Bill. I was joking. This thing has gone wildly (but entertainingly) off track. 😊


On Dec 20, 2020, at 2:50 PM, billsf9c via groups.io <OOWONBS@...> wrote:

Google IPV6.
IP4 has fewer groups kf bits to define an  address.

IPV6 has significantly more, 
This allows more.addresses, and closer tracking too and.purportedly.serious beneficial ramifications for gov't surveillance, of a type... even suggesting backdoors.

BillSF9c

--
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. - Desmond Tutu


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

billsf9c
 

Google IPV6.
IP4 has fewer groups kf bits to define an  address.

IPV6 has significantly more, 
This allows more.addresses, and closer tracking too and.purportedly.serious beneficial ramifications for gov't surveillance, of a type... even suggesting backdoors.

BillSF9c


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

 

This was referring to Andy’s point about people using the same computer.


On Dec 20, 2020, at 2:41 PM, J_Catlady via groups.io <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Exactly right, another good point. Bad idea overall.
--
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. - Desmond Tutu


--
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. - Desmond Tutu

2581 - 2600 of 29686