Date   

moderated Re: One day's difference in date shown on member page vs member download #bug

Bruce Bowman
 

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 11:47 PM, Rick Nakroshis wrote:
I just found a member that is shown as joining the group on January 29th, 2020, but in the member download, she is listed as having joined on January 28th, 2020.
Rick -- Dates and times displayed on the web site are adjusted for your own local time zone, while the group export is likely done in whatever groups.io's native time zone is (looks like Pacific time -8:00). Check the entire date/timestamp and make appropriate adjustments when comparing the two.

Bruce


moderated Re: System allows multiple, identical tags on a message #bug

 

Also, the bug is the fault of the system, not of email, because in my test I created the topic online, not via email. The system removed the duplicate in the web version of the message, but sends out the first and all subsequent emails in the topic with the duplicate.


On Jan 31, 2020, at 5:51 AM, J_Catlady via Groups.Io <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

In response to Duane, I see nothing about only the online version being fixed. The bug mentioned by the OP still exists in the email version of the messsges. So I’m confused by what you’re saying. 


On Jan 31, 2020, at 4:57 AM, Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 11:31 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
I ran a test and find that this happens only in the email.
The online indicator was fixed last week.  First item on https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/23941

Duane

--
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


moderated Re: System allows multiple, identical tags on a message #bug

 

In response to Duane, I see nothing about only the online version being fixed. The bug mentioned by the OP still exists in the email version of the messsges. So I’m confused by what you’re saying. 


On Jan 31, 2020, at 4:57 AM, Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 11:31 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
I ran a test and find that this happens only in the email.
The online indicator was fixed last week.  First item on https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/23941

Duane

--
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: System allows multiple, identical tags on a message #bug

Duane
 

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 11:31 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
I ran a test and find that this happens only in the email.
The online indicator was fixed last week.  First item on https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/23941

Duane


moderated Re: One day's difference in date shown on member page vs member download #bug

Samuel Murrayy
 

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 05:47 AM, Rick Nakroshis wrote:
I just found a member that is shown as joining the group on January 29th, 2020, but in the member download, she is listed as having joined on January 28th, 2020.
What do you mean by "the member download"?

Samuel


moderated Re: System allows multiple, identical tags on a message #bug

 

Funny, I saw the double #bug #bug tag on this message in the email but it's not in the web version. I thought at first that maybe Mark deleted the duplicate, but I ran a test and find that this happens only in the email.
--
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: suggested change to use hashtag to control sending megs #suggestion

KWKloeber
 

Bob 

the suggestion wasn’t meant to be perfect, and I’m sure others could have stated it more clearly the first time  

virtually any message circulation function could be handled by exchanging emails among a defined list. So why join Gio?  Just “reply all”. 

this is just a suggestion that would be very easy to direct msgs to certain lists of group members that would be clunky doing it via subgroups. Could it be done via subgroups? Sure, but one could also say why hashtags?  Just create a subgroup for different groups of topics. That’s an absurd example but it meant just to point out that anything can be done another way, even if that other way is more clunky.   

(Believe it or not one of our Y! group members got fed up and started his own site a few yrs ago — and set up separate message exchanges for about two dozen types of topics (essentially hashtags). Mannnn what a PITA mess that turned out to be.) 


moderated System allows multiple, identical tags on a message #bug

Rick N
 

See the subject line.  The system should only allow single use of a tag on a subject line.


moderated One day's difference in date shown on member page vs member download #bug

Rick N
 

I just found a member that is shown as joining the group on January 29th, 2020, but in the member download, she is listed as having joined on January 28th, 2020.


moderated Re: suggested change to use hashtag to control sending megs #suggestion

KWKloeber
 

Ronaldo 
no, no, no.  No member would be required to pick from hashtags.  Merely, if, just say for example, a message was to be sent to only one select group, the members in that group could be in a list that IDs  them as part of that group.  Simple exampe

say there’s 25 moderators. 

thr could be on a list, for example I’ll call it “mod-list” 
I’m suggesting a feature that using a hashtag, a post could be easily directed to that list and only that list. 

so a topic might look like this example (I’m using a different tag symbol $$ just so it’s obvious). 

Special meeting notice $$mod-list. 

(“message body”)

the message would be sent out to everyone on the “mod-list”. 

the lists could be for any purpose or purposes that any group found helpful for their use. It would make sense to limit the number of lists to a reasonable number (say 5 for example).)


moderated Bouncing Member List Management screen enhancement #suggestion

Christos G. Psarras
 

Hi Mark,

The way the Bouncing Member
list management screen works currently, unless if one has anything but maybe 5-6 list entries, if there is a bunch to go though and check the bounce history screen, the constant back and forth can be cumbersome and time-consuming, even if using both mouse and keyboard shortcuts and/or doing it in multiple tabs.

It would be helpful when one is at the list level, to have some indication of why the members are bouncing, since one could then do a quick first-pass this way and eliminate the ones that are dead (unknown addresses, etc); this should help cut down in the time needed to do the maintenance.  Since it seems all the member management screens share the same underlying functionality so modifying columns may be not desirable, a low-impact way to do this could be to have the blue and red Bouncing badges display not just the "Bouncing" or "Bounced" text, but also the latest entry from the "Recent Bounces", something to this effect:




Cheers,
Christos


moderated Re: suggested change to use hashtag to control sending megs #suggestion

Bob Bellizzi
 

After reading the previous original plus 6 replies, I feel we need to identify a few things first.
What is Groups.io?  It is an entity that provides the ability to build online groups that may also function as mailing lists.

Ken, what you are asking for is the ability to have preset list to allow members of a group at groups.io to send emails to a subset of the members of a group (or subgroup?).
To me that is the current definition of a subgroup.
Or, much more simply, it is the definition of a mailing list i.e.a list of people's email addresses kept as a single unit on or available to one's own computer(s).

As J's postings and the lack of  conversation/interest about the subject indicate to me:
Your idea/suggestion is quite incomplete, lacks clear & complete definition.
Why complicate groups.io's current operating mode with this "feature" when it's easily defined through functions in current email applications?

Bob Bellizzi 


moderated Set Moderator Privileges does unexpected behavior #bug

Su
 

When setting moderator permissions, the next to last one says:

|_| Set Moderator Privileges (also allows access to the member list and allows setting member subscription options)

But yet I read in GMF Wiki that this will allow the moderator to change anyone to or from the Owner role. Even can demote the current owner to not an owner after promoting himself to be an owner. The description doesn't say anything about that.

Only an Owner should be able to add or remove owners.

If how it actually behaves is intentional, then it should be labeled properly to reflect that. Otherwise many group owners are not going to understand that is how it works. Maybe not till someone makes himself an Owner and removes the real Owner.

Thanks,
Su


moderated Group owners manual reviewers #misc

 

Hi All,
 
I have a first, rough draft of a group owner's manual. I'd like to get it in front of a couple experienced group owners for feedback: is it going in the right direction, are there any glaring missing sections, etc. 
 
If you are interested in helping, please contact me off-list. I am only looking for a couple people right now, so please understand if I don't get back to you right now. When the docs are further along, I'll open review up to more people.
 
Thanks!
Mark


moderated confirm or change language in 14-day expiration of pending subscription #suggestion #fixed

 

The Pending Subscription Notification currently reads:
"If you do not take action within that time, the pending subscription will be automatically rejected."

If the subscription request is simply deleted (rather than rejected), I would change "rejected" to "deleted." Only if "rejected" includes the sending of any active rejection notice would I keep the word "rejected." 
--
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: Banned not in Banned list #bug

 

On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 10:44 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Now, banning by entering an email address behaves the same way as the other banning: we keep their member notes, messages to moderators, join date, etc. Previously we did not.
Mark,

1. Bad news: this is still not working. I just banned someone using their email address, and their notes are gone in the banned list.

2. There is a further remaining mismatch: the banned list contains the banned member's email delivery history, but their "history" shown in the past members list does not. (This is not a biggie, but the mismatch is still disconcerting.)

3. While I'm at it, a suggestion: the banned list provides checkboxes and actions, but the past members list does not. It would be helpful to add actions to the past members list. For example, you might remove someone and decide only later to ban them. But currently, you can't ban someone from the past members list; the only way to ban a past member (who was not banned at the time of removal) is to use their email address. 
--
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 forcing digests

ro-esp
 

From: Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 23:01:54 CET
I currently force digests every night (with the caveat > that if someone had recently gotten a digest, a new one > doesn't go out).
Does "recent" have a definition?

I always assumed that digests were sent out whenever the oldest message in waiting had been there for 24 hours...or as soon as there were 12 messages in the queue

But otherwise digests can go out at any time,
depending on messages sent to a group. And I've been > contemplating changing the forcing of digests so that > it would work more like summaries do, so that a digest > would be forced at 6am based on a user's timezone, instead of everyone getting forced at 10:30pm pacific time.
If we're going down that road, maybe make it a subscribers' option, something like: "send me a digest with remaining messages at [preferred time UTC] every day"

BTW 22.30 pacific means 29.30 or 30.30 UTC, which is 06.30 where I live. So for me the change would be moot


groetjes, Ronaldo


moderated Re: suggested change to use hashtag to control sending megs #suggestion

ro-esp
 

On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 11:05 PM, Ken Kloeber wrote:


  the message would be turned around
what does that mean?
It means that your email to a group doesn't get delivered directly to members. 
then why send it?

GIO is an email bounce service
I don't think so. If I send a message to a group, I want it to be forwarded, not bounced back

-- A very busy Nome inside reads
your message and types it out onto another piece of paper and mails it to
members (opposed to reading the message on the website GUI.)
Do you mean gnome?

My suggestion is that a #TAG in the email subject could be used to set
(determine) which members the message is sent to.
So any subscriber would have to visit a list of allowed hashtags and pick which ones to (not) follow?
Sounds like it makes sense. I have no experience with hashtags, and don't know how they are used in groups.io now

groetjes/ĝis, Ronaldo


moderated Re: section links #suggestion

bchesneau@...
 

mmm no I mean header in github wiki like “# Header” when exported to html has an anchor added to it :  <h1>< a href=“#Header” />Header</h1> So you can link them easily

Benoît

On 29 Jan 2020, at 23:33, Christos G. Psarras <christos@...> wrote:

Could you explain what you mean exactly?  After all, you can have links (of pretty-much any kind) in Wiki, do you really mean have the ability to hover over a link and turn it into a "preview" link?

Cheers,
Christos


moderated Re: section links #suggestion

Bill Hazel
 

I too noticed this when looking at https://help.github.com/en/github content.

That is one reason I promote the idea of using a Table of Contents (ToC) for longer pages.

The page you reference uses similar functionality, it even has it's own "ToC" at the top although it is in a different format. Not sure how it differs in the underlying code but if you are looking for the functionality, the ToC works like a charm.

Bill