Confirmed...working now.

Thanks!

I would think of these NC “accounts” as placeholders. It’s probably just easier for Mark to create an “account” before the dust has settled, but it’s not a “real” account yet.

--
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

Funny this application for membership happened just today.  It shows that an account with an incorrect email address is created and changed without being admitted to the group or being confirmed.  It's still in NC and pending emails to both addresses bounced.

Small typo above...

When trying to navigate directly to a message thread ... if I AM already logged in, it works fine. 

Thanks.

Yes, agree with Duane, I just replied before seeing this. It’s nothing to do with their “account” being logged into groups.io as an account.

--
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

I think the term “logged in” might be somewhat loose as well. I think (of course Mark would have to confirm - no double entendre intended) that the notification text is really just talking about where and how they’re accessing the site, “logged in” or not. I still suspect it’s really just talking about how they’re logged into the internet.

--
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

On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 11:00 PM, Peter Mott wrote:

Please consider adding an optional system footer that does not contain any http/s links for members who are connected to the Internet over slow speed HF radio or satellite links and are only able to send and receive email.

Peter -- Set your group to Plain Text Only (Message Formatting block) and no clickable hyperlinks will be sent.

Regards,
Bruce

On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 05:56 AM, Chris Jones wrote:

what purpose is served by "Logged in" appearing in any membership application? It would seem to be (at best) irrelevant.

It should more correctly be labeled something like "Accessing the web from".  It was this information, a couple of months ago, that allowed group owners to determine that there were unscrupulous characters attempting to join a large number of groups.  When a group is mainly for local people, it makes no sense when someone from Timbuktu, Mali attempts to join a group in Aberdeen, Scotland.  This bit of information is a tool that group owners can use in their arsenal against the 'bad guys'.  It's not perfect since it only applies to those that are online when applying for membership, but every little bit helps.

Duane

On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 02:42 AM, J_Catlady wrote:

I think the problem is semantics.

You might well be right! :)

The language used for NC members is that they "don't yet have an account." That should read "don't yet have a confirmed account."

That makes sense. However, what purpose is served by "Logged in" appearing in any membership application? It would seem to be (at best) irrelevant.

Chris

On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 02:38 AM, Shal Farley wrote:

When a person uses the Sign Up procedure (and enters an email address that hasn't already been registered with the system) an account for that address is created on the spot, and the user is logged into that account. The user of that new account can set a password and other items in the account's settings and profile, can find an join (or apply to join) groups via the web, even create groups.

So, an account that Groups.io has not received confirmation from is allowed to create groups?  Interesting. I'm not sure I see the logic of allowing that.

Andy

On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 03:44 AM, Bob Bellizzi wrote:

My response to you is that the proper place to report a bug is here, on Beta.

I am fully aware of where to report bugs

 a discussion on GMF, which I follow daily

If you had read it carefully you would have seen that I quoted the support ticket number showing that it had previously been raised as an issue.

[GMF], is not a substitute for reporting a bug via Beta.

I didn't say it was.

I fail to understand why you commented as you did about my bug report, which Mr. Fletcher acknowledged and acted upon.

As I said previously, just to make you (and others) aware that this issue has happened before.  Mark 'acted upon' my bug report last year. The fact that some people are still seeing ghost reminders suggests either that the issue wasn't fixed or perhaps it was fixed at the time but something has changed to make it reappear.

Enough said.

Andy

My 2 yr old group has a single subdomain, which was added last year. I don't know if the start of this issue coincides with that or not.

When trying to navigate directly to a message thread (like clicking on the View/Reply Online footer link in a message email notification), if I'm not already logged in, it works fine. But if I'm not already logged in, I'm prompted to do so. Upon logging in via Google, Groups redirects back to the message, but drops the subdomain from the URL, resulting in the "Sorry, but that group does not exist" error.

This issue doesn't seem to affect either username/password or Email me a link login options.

Repro steps:

1. Logout of any active Groups web sessions
2. In a Groups email notification message, click the View/Reply Online footer link (example: https://[group].groups.io/g/main/message/1234)
3. When prompted to login, choose Google option

Expected result: Browser redirects to the original URL exactly
Actual result: Browser redirects to the original URL, minus the subdomain (https://groups.io/g/main/message/1234), which isn't valid and Groups displays an error.

On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 02:20 PM, Andy Wedge wrote:

My comment was to make you (and others) aware that this bug is a long standing issue and hardly warrants a 'so what' response.

My response to you is that the proper place to report a bug is here, on Beta.
Mr Fletcher, the owner of Groups.io has stated for at least the 5 years I've had groups hosted here, that he does not monitor GMF, therefore, a discussion on GMF, which I follow daily, is not a substitute for reporting a bug via Beta.

I fail to understand why you commented as you did about my bug report, which Mr. Fletcher acknowledged and acted upon.
 
--

Bob Bellizzi

I think the problem is semantics. The language used for NC members is that they "don't yet have an account." That should read "don't yet have a confirmed account." I don't know all the places that language exists, but it floats around here and there and should probably be clarified.
--
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

Chris,

Quite a few of those to apply to the group I co - own are shown on the
email notification as being "Logged in", which suggests that they are
already Account holders when they apply to join. At the same time they
are (sometimes) flagged up on the web UI as NC.

It isn't actually a contradiction. The NC status only means that the user hasn't confirmed that they own the email address they entered when they signed in.

When a person uses the Sign Up procedure (and enters an email address that hasn't already been registered with the system) an account for that address is created on the spot, and the user is logged into that account. The user of that new account can set a password and other items in the account's settings and profile, can find an join (or apply to join) groups via the web, even create groups.

However, that account remains NC until the person receives and replies to the confirmation request sent to that email address. This prevents accidents (or abuse) that would send group messages to an address that this user does not own.

Shal

On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 08:02 PM, Bob Bellizzi wrote:

I was aware of the GMF conversation but so what?
The problem persisted after that which indicated it's a bug

My comment was to make you (and others) aware that this bug is a long standing issue and hardly warrants a 'so what' response.

Andy

Peter wrote:

Please consider adding an optional system footer that does not contain
any http/s links for members who are connected to the Internet over
slow speed HF radio or satellite links and are only able to send and
receive email.

This sounds like a candidate for the Advanced Preferences panel of each member's Subscription page. Next to the Max Attachment Size option, which is also intended for the benefit of members with slow and/or metered connections.

It could be a checkbox named "Use email addresses in footers" or something of that sort, with an explanatory sentence. It could apply to both Individual Messages and Plain Text Digests. Maybe Fully Featured digests also, but that seems a poor choice for the target users.

Shal