|
locked
Re: Special messages
Marlin47
Mark, years and years ago, when I was new at running groups, I actually paid attention to who was on "no mail". Today, I could not possibly care less, even if I tried. I remember back when I cared, I contacted a few people and asked why they were on no mail, I remember I had one reply that stood out, a guy told me that he was not allowed to use his computer at work for personal things. So, he would access the web site and read the mail and post from the web site when the boss was away. He said he could not afford to risk the possibility of getting mail from the group while at work. I often wondered why he didn't use an online email address but, I figured that was his business, anyway he said that if he had to go to something other than no mail, he would have to leave the group. He was one of the most active posters. I suggest leaving the situation to where the individual members make their own choice. I don't think it is any of the group owner's business how the member has his setting set. Now, if you absolutely have to do something, make it impossible for the group owner to know if a member is on "no mail", problem solved. Marlin
On 1/15/2015 7:41 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
|
|
|
|
locked
Today's updates
#changelog
Changes to the site today: - Fixed a crash bug when accessing integrations page when not subscribed to the group. - Changed all search icons to be clickable. - Backend work for special posts. - When switching between archive message views (single message, list of messages, expanded messages), we remember where you are and what the sort direction is. Also, jumping to an individual message stays in your current message view. Basically, things are much better. I've seen two instances today where the web site froze up. I have not yet tracked down the bug, but I am on it. Mark
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Special messages
Shal, On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 12:39 AM, Shal Farley <shal@...> wrote:
Thanks for your summary of the arguments. I'm really torn on this. I understand the people that want 'no mail' to mean no mail. I also understand the need from time to time for moderators to get in touch with users. And we make it easy enough for moderators to contact individual users from the website, regardless of their subscription setting. I'm tempted to make no mail mean no mail except special messages, if for no other reason than it's simpler, and we already have a billion subscription options. If anyone feels very strongly in the other direction about this, please speak up now. Thanks, Mark
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Special Messages
On 1/15/2015 9:09 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Just FYI, the reason the other message doesn't show up correctly in theAnd another FYI - it came through fine to my email - TBird, set up to read HTML, but only compose in ascii. dg
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Special messages
Dano,
He'd reply to on-list comments from that same address with the fullWere the message archives in that group set to "moderators" or "off"? If not he might have been reading and replying from the group's pages. A full inbox (or otherwise bouncing status on the email address) isn't necessarily a problem from the member's point of view. That wouldn't apply, of course, if he was email-only (no Yahoo ID listed for his membership). -- Shal
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Site updates
#changelog
Laurence Taylor
On 15 Jan 2015 09:42, Feathered Leader wrote:
Message Numbers!I don't see tham at all. -- rgds LAurence <><
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Special Messages
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 7:01 AM, D R Stinson <dano@...> wrote: Linda - I wonder if Replies Only shouldn't say "Only messages in threads you start OR POST IN are emailed to you." Dano Thanks, Mark
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Special Messages
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 5:14 AM, Linda Star-Freedman <donlin2@...> wrote: Hi, Just FYI, the reason the other message doesn't show up correctly in the archives is that you cut and pasted HTML radio button widgets. We strip out any input widgets (along with a lot of other stuff) before we display messages to prevent malicious activity. Mark
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Special messages
Hi
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I don’t think anyone mentioned this - but Special Messages would be rare. On our travel group, Linda (list-owner) sends out one a year. Frances
On Jan 15 15, at 11:50 AM, CatWoman <diana@catsandme.net> wrote:
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Special messages
On 1/15/2015 8:32 AM, Jim Fisher wrote:
The system should not be too quick to remove memberships based on messagesThat's the issue with YG - they have a bounce list, but unless a mod or owner checks it regularly - or someone complains about no longer receiving mail, the email is effectively set to nomail. What MailMan does is send out a message the 1st of every month - just basically a reminder to the person that they are subbed to the group (a special notice, in effect). Bounce notices are sent to the owner address and I think the person is set to nomail. LSoft sends out an annual probe - but it will remove any email that bounces more than <X> times (Since I no longer run any LSoft lists, I can't remember if the value of X is set by the list owner or the system admin). What I'd like to see is something between MailMan and Yahoo - don't wait for the special message - but don't just stick the email in a bounce list. Send a notice to the owner that mail to <email> is bouncing. This may be a place where, depending on the list, you may want to store a phone number - or have an alternate email address for members - so you can find out if they know they are bouncing. We still have issues with this on a list I own with one member and (presumably) DMARC, because she gets some messages, but not all. dg
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Special messages
The system should not be too quick to remove memberships based on messages
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
bouncing, even for people who have chosen to receive messages either singly or as digest. Messages can bounce for a number of reasons, such as mailbox temporarily full or, as happened to my wife recently, because of some system glitch putting it out of action for a few days (in my wife's case it was out for about 12 days because of a host service mix up with the DNS system making her email, and my web site, inaccessible - corrected today). I don't remember seeing anything on here about how bounced messages are treated by groups.io (may be my memory - I haven't checked archives). Jim Fisher
On 14 Jan 2015 at 21:18, Shal Farley wrote:
dg,I know Yahoo doesn't do that - it just relies onThat's sort-of the point. --
http://www.jimella.me.uk - my personal web site covering many subjects http://jimellame.tumblr.com - My thoughts on freedom http://jimella.wordpress.com - political snippets, especially economic policy http://jimella.livejournal.com - misc. snippets, some political, some not Forget Google! I search with https://duckduckgo.com which doesn't spy on you
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Special messages
On 1/15/2015 12:39 AM, Shal Farley wrote:
On the whole I do side with "No Mail is my right". Even though an email address is required to establish a web-access membership, there's no reason to force the member to receive anything at that address. I just don't see any cause to get huffy about it: if you want to access the group's content but the owner is a control freak, set a filter. Done.In my lists, several folks have more than one email address, and all but one are set to nomail. I do - in Yahoo it's a good idea to have an alternate address to get mail from if your primary is compromised. Or if you have device-dependent email (gmail for an android device, something else for your iPhone, and a 3rd for a computer - some people still use the POP option). Or if you are going to be away and don't want mail piling up. And some folks are more comfortable reading on the web IOW - I agree that NoMail is a valid option - I just wouldn't want _it_ to be a requirement. dg
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Special Messages
Linda -
I wonder if Replies Only shouldn't say "Only messages in threads you start OR POST IN are emailed to you."
Dano
|
|
|
|
locked
Posting bug?
Just a note on my previous message #766. The two lines with '>' at the front had hard returns after them. I'm seeing that all the hard returns in the message were deleted. I'm assuming this is a bug, but did I perhaps do something wrong instead. I'd like to be able to reply to any message in plain text, but I'm not sure if this is plain text or RTF.
I'm one of those people who think that if you can't say something and get your point across in plain text, no amount of typography is going to make it any better. Thankfully we can set our groups to plain text, because we have some guys who would make their posts unreadable, either with outrageous formatting or text that was set so big it would all run off the page. Dano
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Special messages
> Even though an email address is required to establish a web-access membership,
> there's no reason to force the member to receive anything at that address.
Shal, this is to address your line I've quoted above. It's just a story. It doesn't need a response. We ran into a problem with a member a year or so ago. I dont remember the particulars, but we needed to contact him off-list and he was hard bouncing because his mail box was full. We tried several times both on and off list. He'd reply to on-list comments from that same address with the full inbox, so there was no way we could get a reply back through to him. We finally dumped him from the group. He resubscribed - without ever emptying his mailbox. We finally dropped him a second time. We left a message on the list that if anybody knew him, to explain he was welcome to come back if he'd just empty his mail box. Long story short, yes there is a reason to be able to contact people. But allowing special messages wouldn't have made any difference there either. As Ron White says, "You can't fix stupid."
Dano
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Special Messages
Linda
Hi,
I don't know why the following showed up only in View Original. I'll retype it in Plain Text to make sure it gets through. This is my suggested list of mail options. Please see No Email description in particular. * All Email Every message is mailed to you. * First Message Only The first message of every thread is emailed to you, along with all messages from threads you start. You can decide to receive additional messages from threads you're interested in. * Replies Only Only messages in threads you start are emailed to you. * Daily Digest Group messages together as one email instead of individually. * No Email. You will receive no emails except Special Notices What do you think? Linda
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Special messages
Linda
Hi,
What do you think about these mail
options?
Please pay particular attention to the last one: All Email
Every message is emailed to you. First Message Only The first message of every thread is emailed to you, along with all messages from threads you start. You can decide to receive additional messages from threads you're interested in. Replies Only Only messages in threads you start are emailed to you. On the website you can specify threads that will be emailed to you. Daily digest:
Group messages together as one email instead of individually. No Email
You will receive no emails except Special Notices. Linda
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Site updates
#changelog
Message Numbers! Ooooh! Now I see them in the site AND in mail! AWESOME! Brenda
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Database Wishlist
#suggestion
Shal, I was thinking about the french girl that had all the database problems. She created the database and others simply used it, if I recall. Brenda
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Site updates
#changelog
|
|
|