Date   

moderated Re: Bewildered by log entries #misc

David Grimm
 

On Sun, Dec 6, 2020 at 08:06 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Click the unsubscribe link in a footer. Then click the resubscribe link in the email we send you telling you you've been unsubscribed. 
 
Which then raises the questions  - Why did I not get that email when I unsubscribed my test account via the web? and Why would it say 'left group via web' if they left via an unsubscribe button on an email? Shouldn't it say 'unsubscribed via email'?

Dave


moderated Re: Bewildered by log entries #misc

 

On Sun, Dec 6, 2020 at 10:31 AM Bruce Bowman <bruce.bowman@...> wrote:
Folks -- Some disconcerting log entries have recently been reported in GMF. It involves the following sequence:

<email address> left via web
<same email address> resumed membership via web

Click the unsubscribe link in a footer. Then click the resubscribe link in the email we send you telling you you've been unsubscribed. 

If they didn't click the unsubscribe button, perhaps they forwarded an email to someone else who did click the unsubscribe button? There may be a rare case of an anti-spam system automatically clicking these unsubscribe links (and then also clicking the verification link on the web page).

Hope this helps.
Mark 


moderated Re: Make sequence of mods receipt of pending member notice more consistent #suggestion

 

On Sun, Dec 6, 2020 at 04:28 PM, Shal Farley wrote:
I'm sure you know the answer to both of these, but are asking "in the voice of" the confused group owners, in order to emphasize the inconsistency.
Yes, exactly. They were all rhetorical questions.

I'll paraphrase the saying: let not the consistent be the enemy of the practical.
 Which is exactly why I tried to emphasize that I don't want consistency for consistency's sake. I want it because the current inconsistent situation is a hot, confusing mess.
--
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


moderated Re: Make sequence of mods receipt of pending member notice more consistent #suggestion

 

J,

I'm sure you know the answer to both of these, but are asking "in the voice of" the confused group owners, in order to emphasize the inconsistency.

Why do you sometimes see an NC member, and sometimes not?
The NC appears only for unconfirmed email addresses.

I believe that can only be seen for members who joined/requested via the web.

For those who joined/requested by email, their response to the +subscribe confirmation also confirms their email address. So you (the group manager) either don't see them at all or you see them as confirmed.

Why are you sometimes notified of an application to your group right
away, and sometimes not until the member confirms?
That was the prior message.

My suggestions are either to (a) ALWAYS require a confirmation of
interest in joining a group, regardless of whether the application is
via email or via the web; and/or (b) NEVER or ALWAYS notifiy the group
owner before the member confirms.
I'll paraphrase the saying: let not the consistent be the enemy of the practical.

I think option (a) is a worse experience for members joining by web. Especially those who joined by web because they're having issues with email.

The NEVER clause of (b) is a worse experience for members and mods because mods can't help web applicants who might otherwise be helped.

The ALWAYS clause of (b) is a worse experience for mods who may have to sort through scores, hundreds, or thousands of bot-generated +subscribe requests that would otherwise have been culled by the confirmation requirement.

Shal
Dispelling hobgoblins since 2007


moderated Re: Make sequence of mods receipt of pending member notice more consistent #suggestion

 

Here are a couple of other/alternate suggestions. The main problem for me is the lack of consistency, and not just for consistency's sake, but because it is confusing to group owners currently. Why do you sometimes see an NC member, and sometimes not? Why are you sometimes notified of an application to your group right away, and sometimes not until the member confirms?

My suggestions are either to (a) ALWAYS require a confirmation of interest in joining a group, regardless of whether the application is via email or via the web; and/or (b) NEVER or ALWAYS notifiy the group owner before the member confirms.
--
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


moderated Re: Make sequence of mods receipt of pending member notice more consistent #suggestion

 

Shal,

I like all of those suggestions.

And as an added bonus, let’s please clarify the language. People with existing gio accounts DO currently have to respond to an email asking them to “confirm” their request to join a group. Yet every time this issue comes up, we’re distracted by shouts of “no, people with existing accounts don’t have to confirm” or “that’s not a confirmation message.”

Well, it walks like a confirmation message snd it quacks like a confirmation message. It’s identical in every way, shape, and form to the “real” (yuck, yuck) confirmation message. The title is the same and the message body is the same. So if we have to call them something besides a confirmation message to avoid being pedantically corrected every time, let’s distinguish the two in some way. “Verify” your irterest instead of “confirm”? Something, anything. Otherwise we are forced to refer to two identical objects differently simply because they were generated by distinct processes.

On top of that, because of the (incorrect) statements here that current account holders don’t have to confirm, some group owners wrongly state in their home page that “only if this your first gio group, you will have to respond to an email to confirm” your interest. This is particularly a-factual for restricted groups with a pending member questionnaire as well. Only non-current account holders are warned that they must look for and reply to TWO messages if they happen to apply via email.
On Dec 6, 2020, at 2:54 PM, Shal Farley <shals2nd@gmail.com> wrote:

J,

It's déjà vu all over again.

Case 1: member with an existing gio account applies via email --> mod
does NOT receive the pending notice unftil after the member confirms
(Possibly this is intentional?)
...
Case 3: person withot an existing gio account applies via email ...
I believe it is intentional, because hobgoblins and spambots. That is, all email commands (except +help and +owner) require confirmation before they do anything, +subscribe follows the majority.
https://groups.io/helpcenter/membersmanual/1/additional-information/standard-group-email-addresses

The intent is to keep the group managers (and unrestricted groups) from being flooded by spambot-generated +subscribe requests.

I can see two improvements that could be made.

1) Eliminate the confirmation requirement when the From address passes reasonable authentication criteria. For +subscribe the group managers can be notified of the request immediately (as with web requests).

Replace the request message with a notice that the command was received (where appropriate). This would be a boon for all of the email commands.

2) Maybe notify the moderators immediately in Case 1. While it is possible that a spambot may have spoofed an already registered address, it may be sufficiently less likely as to not represent the problem that general addresses would.

Shal




--
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


moderated Re: Make sequence of mods receipt of pending member notice more consistent #suggestion

 

J,

It's déjà vu all over again.

Case 1: member with an existing gio account applies via email --> mod
does NOT receive the pending notice unftil after the member confirms
(Possibly this is intentional?)
...
Case 3: person withot an existing gio account applies via email ...
I believe it is intentional, because hobgoblins and spambots. That is, all email commands (except +help and +owner) require confirmation before they do anything, +subscribe follows the majority.
https://groups.io/helpcenter/membersmanual/1/additional-information/standard-group-email-addresses

The intent is to keep the group managers (and unrestricted groups) from being flooded by spambot-generated +subscribe requests.

I can see two improvements that could be made.

1) Eliminate the confirmation requirement when the From address passes reasonable authentication criteria. For +subscribe the group managers can be notified of the request immediately (as with web requests).

Replace the request message with a notice that the command was received (where appropriate). This would be a boon for all of the email commands.

2) Maybe notify the moderators immediately in Case 1. While it is possible that a spambot may have spoofed an already registered address, it may be sufficiently less likely as to not represent the problem that general addresses would.

Shal


moderated Re: Bewildered by log entries #misc

Chris Jones
 

On Sun, Dec 6, 2020 at 09:11 PM, David Grimm wrote:
I can provide email addresses of the three members who did this in my group, if it helps.
Moi aussi, but from a different group.

Chris


moderated Re: Topic count still incorrect (too low, sometimes goes negative) #bug

 

Right, it's coming back to me now! You were the first to report this, and it has to do with the topic count after splitting a topic.
--
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


moderated Re: Bewildered by log entries #misc

David Grimm
 

On Sun, Dec 6, 2020 at 01:31 PM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
I have personally never witnessed the "resume membership" thing unless the person involved had previously "reported a message as spam;" but this same left-and-resumed sequence has since been verified in the logs of a second group.
I can provide email addresses of the three members who did this in my group, if it helps.

Dave


moderated Re: Topic count still incorrect (too low, sometimes goes negative) #bug

Gilbert Coville
 

Here are the step-by-step instructions on how to reproduce this:

https://beta.groups.io/g/main/topic/74055557#24922

Gilbert

On Dec 4, 2020, at 10:05 AM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@gmail.com> wrote:

This group
https://groups.io/g/IMDCD/topics
shows "1 topic" on the home page but there are three topics. Before the addition of two topics, it was showing "-2" topics.
This bug (negative topic count) was mentioned years ago and I don't remember what happened with it, but it's evidently still around.


moderated Bewildered by log entries #misc

Bruce Bowman
 

Folks -- Some disconcerting log entries have recently been reported in GMF. It involves the following sequence:

<email address> left via web
<same email address> resumed membership via web

The unsettling thing about this is that the group is Restricted, and the owners do not report reviewing a new join application or sending a subsequent invitation or otherwise allowing these people to rejoin. I have personally never witnessed the "resume membership" thing unless the person involved had previously "reported a message as spam;" but this same left-and-resumed sequence has since been verified in the logs of a second group.

Is there a default Member Notice of some kind that contains a renew link? If so, why do they get back in without going through Pending status? Generally, I'm not aware of any GIO feature that would allow someone to resume group membership "via web." Rejoin yes...resume, no.

Any insight into what member activities could produce this would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Bruce


moderated Re: Account subscribed...but it's not #bug

Bruce Bowman
 

On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 09:54 AM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
This morning, that address is no longer subscribed to my test group; but when I attempt
to send it an invitation, I get an error message that it is "already subscribed.
[And so on...]
False alarm. At some point I had set up the problem address as an alias to another one, and had forgotten that I had done so. Might be helpful if the "already subscribed" notice said something to that effect. I hope this exchange helps others that may encounter similar symptoms. Other than that, my apologies for taking up the bandwidth.

Regards,
Bruce


moderated Re: Site updates #changelog

Mark Murphy
 

Thank you, Mark, for you quick responses and changes. I can't think of any other online app which gets this kind of attention and responsiveness to users.


moderated Re: Update the favicon #suggestion

Duane
 

On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 10:01 PM, Laurence Marks wrote:
At the [GMF] group I was advised to hashtag this as a #suggestion, but it doesn't seem to be getting appropriate attention. I'll be adding the #bug hashtag to raise its visibility.
As long as it's been posted here, it's getting all the attention it deserves.  Not all suggestions are implemented quickly.  Based on Mark's previous comments, it depends on how useful it will be to the most people, with an emphasis on paid groups.  Since it's not a bug, reposting with that hashtag may not get approved.

Duane


moderated Site updates #changelog

 

Changes to the site this week:

  • DOCS: Updates from Nina.
  • INTERNAL: More work on converting templates to quicktemplate.
  • CHANGE: The RSVPed Only button in the calendar will no longer show events you've RSVPed no to.
  • CHANGE: Moved the Discard button in the New Topic and Reply pages to the right side of the screen.
  • BUGFIX: Time column search results in a database would not display the correct time.
  • BUGFIX: After updating a moderator note on a past member, you were redirected incorrectly to the Members page.
  • NEW: Added a confirmation dialog when saving a photo album edit and moved the Notify Members checkbox into it, for hobgoblins.
  • CHANGE: Revamped the groups search page to propagate the search term when filtering the results.
  • BUGFIX: Unchecking the Cover Photo checkbox when editing a photo did nothing.
  • CHANGE: Removed the timezone line when hovering over an event in the calendar. The time in that display is in the user's timezone, and showing the (possibly different) event timezone is confusing/wrong.
  • INTERNAL: Made it easier to test specific webservers.
  • SYSADMIN: Updated all machines.

Take care everyone.

Mark


moderated Re: Update the favicon #suggestion

Laurence Marks
 

Chris wrote: "The above was taken while I was writing this message; note that the 2 right hand "unselected" tabs use a white background for the envelope; the icon in the left hand one (and "this" tab if I select a different one) are transparent making the icon hard to see.

Quite what triggers the difference is a complete mystery to me."

And in Chrome, the active tab (when crowded) only contains an X (close tab indicia). That makes sense, since you have the whole page to look at.

At the [GMF] group I was advised to hashtag this as a #suggestion, but it doesn't seem to be getting appropriate attention. I'll be adding the #bug hashtag to raise its visibility.


moderated Re: view/change plan #bug

Duane
 

On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 03:26 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
- Only the person 'on the hook' to pay for the group should be able to change the group plan.
- If you want to set yourself as the person paying for the group, we need a credit card. That's how it works when you initially upgrade your group. If we don't have a credit card, we can't charge you
I do see the logic here, though it may need to be tweaked a little.  I believe that the group we were discussing on GMF wanted to downgrade to Basic, but the owner had died.  First, the 'new' owner removed the member, but wasn't sure that would keep the card from being charged.  There was a flurry of activity to be sure the credit card he used was canceled, even though his widow was using the same card.  The 'new' owner couldn't understand why he needed to enter CC information to downgrade.  All worked out okay though.  He entered the CC, did the downgrade, and removed the CC.  Now we should be prepared with the correct information if/when it happens again.

Thanks,
Duane


moderated Re: Site updates #changelog

 

On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 12:18 PM Alwin <n6atf@...> wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 09:46 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
The RSVP Only button in the Calendar
in calendar format view, still displays RSVPs that you have set to Will Not Attend. "RSVP Only" should only show Will Attend and Not Sure?
_._,_._,_
I've made this change.

Cheers,
Mark 


moderated Re: view/change plan #bug

 

On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 6:53 AM Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:
Based on your (Mark's) reply at https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/27017 I've done a little further checking (with assistance from Shal).  It turns out that if anyone has made a payment for a group, none of the other owners can see the View/Change Plan page without entering a CC number to set themselves as payor, removing the original payor.  Until a payment is made, any owner can see the page.

Yep, you're right. I had mis-read my own source code (I blame my glasses). Here was my thought process:

- Only the person 'on the hook' to pay for the group should be able to change the group plan.
- If you want to set yourself as the person paying for the group, we need a credit card. That's how it works when you initially upgrade your group. If we don't have a credit card, we can't charge you....

Hope this makes sense.

Thanks,
Mark 

2621 - 2640 of 29452