Date   

moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

 

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 10:27 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
either non-moderation or NuM a condition of that.
Or at least a very strong suggestion.
 
--
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
Note on an occupational hazard: I comment frequently in beta based on my desire for the betterment of groups.io as a product. Only a fraction of the time are my comments and suggestions specifically a matter of self-interest. Don't assume the latter when the former may be the case.


moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

 

I feel very strongly about GMF being set to NuM *if* it is going to continue to be the officially mandated help group for groups.io (which you can't really argue that it's not, even given the existence and simultaneous mentioning of Group_Help). I appreciate that Mark can't mandate how GMF runs itself, but he *can* decide whether to officially ad routinely direct his members/clients/customers there for help. And he has the power make either non-moderation or NuM a condition of that.
--
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
Note on an occupational hazard: I comment frequently in beta based on my desire for the betterment of groups.io as a product. Only a fraction of the time are my comments and suggestions specifically a matter of self-interest. Don't assume the latter when the former may be the case.


moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

 

Group Help doesn't really have critical mass.


On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 10:22 AM Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 11:54 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
if GMF stays the "officially mandated" help group
Group_Help also offers to help other users and is NuM.  Mark has suggested both that and GMF as sources of assistance.

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
Note on an occupational hazard: I comment frequently in beta based on my desire for the betterment of groups.io as a product. Only a fraction of the time are my comments and suggestions specifically a matter of self-interest. Don't assume the latter when the former may be the case.


moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Duane
 

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 11:54 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
if GMF stays the "officially mandated" help group
Group_Help also offers to help other users and is NuM.  Mark has suggested both that and GMF as sources of assistance.

Duane


moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

 

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 09:41 AM, Bärbel Stephenson wrote:
I really like the idea of having 3 separate groups for those various strands.
One problem is "enforcement" (or "encouragement") of disallowing basic help questions and bugs to be posted on beta. This occurs frequently and nobody likes playing cop and telling people, especially naive, well-meaning newcomers, to "take it to GMF."

Another problem is that whereas beta is run by groups.io (i.e., Mark), GMF is not. I assume that if there is a separate group for bugs it would be have to run by Mark. I don't belong to GMF or Help because of moderation (and other) issues. If there were an "official" (run by groups.io) or unmoderated Help group I would probably join. I do peek into GMF from time to time (since it is public), see misinformation sometimes being propagated there, and wish that I could make the corrections. But I don't because I don't belong to moderated groups (etc.). So I would appreciate it if some thought could go into who would run these various groups, and if GMF stays the "officially mandated" help group, that Mark specifies that it be unmoderated or, at minimum, NuM instead of moderated.
 
--
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
Note on an occupational hazard: I comment frequently in beta based on my desire for the betterment of groups.io as a product. Only a fraction of the time are my comments and suggestions specifically a matter of self-interest. Don't assume the latter when the former may be the case.


moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Bärbel Stephenson
 

I really like the idea of having 3 separate groups for those various strands.
 
As the owner of a couple of free groups (I transferred my groups to io when it was still free, yahoo group owner for 15 years), I feel that I have plenty of experience, but feel shut out with Canny.
 
Barbara 
 

-------Original Message-------
 
From: Duane
Date: 12/26/2019 17:22:48
Subject: Re: [beta] Feature requests/Canny after two weeks
 


I would recommend limiting suspected bugs to support (or a user-to-user help group) though.  I think having the 3 separate resources would help us all - beta for suggestions, support for actual bugs, GMF or Group_Help for assistance.

Duane
_._,_._,_


moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

 

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 09:22 AM, Duane wrote:
I think having the 3 separate resources would help us all - beta for suggestions, support for actual bugs, GMF or Group_Help for assistance.
Yes, please try not to allow beta to be overrun with help requests again.
I also wonder about the name "beta." Maybe should be renamed "gamma." :)
--
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
Note on an occupational hazard: I comment frequently in beta based on my desire for the betterment of groups.io as a product. Only a fraction of the time are my comments and suggestions specifically a matter of self-interest. Don't assume the latter when the former may be the case.


moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

Duane
 

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 11:03 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
I thought of another way we could address this, using just the beta group and hashtags. We could use a designated hashtag for feature requests (and maybe another for bugs). That would make it easy to address the first issue above; if someone posts a feature request without the correct hashtag, I can just add it. To view all feature requests, just filter on the hashtag. The one main thing that doesn't provide is the ability to sort by popularity (ie likes). However, I could add something like that to the search results page (he says without thinking it through completely).
 
(Also, I would add 'status' hashtags, like #closed, #planned, etc)
 
What do you think?
I like the idea of using this group for everything.  It keeps it all in one place, thus easier to follow.  And with the addition of (moderator only) #closed, #planned, etc, it would duplicate much of the functionality of canny, as well as removing that expense.  (BTW, canny still unceremoniously dumps owners of unpaid groups back to the site without a message when clicking any of the Login links.)

I would recommend limiting suspected bugs to support (or a user-to-user help group) though.  I think having the 3 separate resources would help us all - beta for suggestions, support for actual bugs, GMF or Group_Help for assistance.

Duane


moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

 

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 09:03 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
and maybe another for bugs
Are you saying that bug reports would start going to beta again instead of to support? I'm all for this, simply because sometimes the difference between a bug and a feature is unclear, and also because sometimes I come across a bug and wonder how widespread it is and whether others have experienced it. In the "old days," there was a "bug" hashtag, so this would be like old times. 

I would add 'status' hashtags, like #closed, #planned, etc
I like this idea because you could have more statuses than are available on canny (e..g, "not in a million years would this ever be considered" ;) (or something showing that the suggestion will not be implemented, it's closed to comments, etc.) (I supposed "closed" on canny incorporates both "done" and "won't be done, forget about it"?)

There are some aspects of canny that I like, but as the suggestions list grows, it seems like it would get unwieldy. So I would favor going back to beta 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
Note on an occupational hazard: I comment frequently in beta based on my desire for the betterment of groups.io as a product. Only a fraction of the time are my comments and suggestions specifically a matter of self-interest. Don't assume the latter when the former may be the case.


moderated Re: Breaking out calendar event reminders to send at a specific time vice other messages sent as a digest/daily summary

Howard Waxman, WZ4K
 

Thank you Duane, Yes, on the groups/events I own I have the reminder set to the day before the event to mitigate this issue. That is not as effective as getting the reminder, say, 30 minutes before the event - thus my request/suggestion.


moderated Feature requests/Canny after two weeks

 

Hi All,

So, it seems that some people are using Canny to submit feature requests and that it can be a useful tool for doing so. I do see a few drawbacks:

- There are still a bunch of posts to beta that would be more appropriate instead as Canny feature requests.
- There is no notification of new posts to Canny on beta. So it can be difficult to know when new things are posted to Canny.
- People who don't run premium groups cannot post to Canny.

I can address the second issue with a custom email summary sent to beta on a regular basis, but that will require some development effort on my part. My main problem with Canny is with the first issue; people will still post feature requests on beta, and the discussion about those feature requests will still happen on beta.

I thought of another way we could address this, using just the beta group and hashtags. We could use a designated hashtag for feature requests (and maybe another for bugs). That would make it easy to address the first issue above; if someone posts a feature request without the correct hashtag, I can just add it. To view all feature requests, just filter on the hashtag. The one main thing that doesn't provide is the ability to sort by popularity (ie likes). However, I could add something like that to the search results page (he says without thinking it through completely).

(Also, I would add 'status' hashtags, like #closed, #planned, etc)

What do you think? I'm willing to continue using Canny if you all think it's a good solution. Or we could switch to something like my proposal. Or something else if someone has a better idea.

Thanks,
Mark (still on vacation)


moderated Re: Testing new feature request/tracking system

 

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 08:32 AM, Duane wrote:
I certainly don't envy him the job of trying to prioritize these things!
It is definitely a sisyphean one!
 
--
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
Note on an occupational hazard: I comment frequently in beta based on my desire for the betterment of groups.io as a product. Only a fraction of the time are my comments and suggestions specifically a matter of self-interest. Don't assume the latter when the former may be the case.


moderated Re: Testing new feature request/tracking system

 

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 07:26 AM, Rush Kester wrote:
I suggest deferring the ability of all users to request new features until the backlog of requests from paid subscribers via their moderators has been worked down.
Only moderators (of premium groups) can log into canny anyway, so I don't know what you mean. Do you mean on beta? This thread is about feature suggestions on canny. Plus, the "backlog" of requests from anyone, moderators or other, will never be "worked down." Stick around for awhile. :)
 
--
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
Note on an occupational hazard: I comment frequently in beta based on my desire for the betterment of groups.io as a product. Only a fraction of the time are my comments and suggestions specifically a matter of self-interest. Don't assume the latter when the former may be the case.


moderated Re: Breaking out calendar event reminders to send at a specific time vice other messages sent as a digest/daily summary

Duane
 

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 09:27 AM, Howard Waxman, WZ4K wrote:
I always receive an event reminder 1 day late - apparently due to my Digested email setting for that group.
If the reminder is set to be sent sooner, it would come out in the digest from the previous day.  Sometimes the digest isn't considered by the person setting the reminder, so they set it for 5 minutes instead of 1 or 2 days.

Duane


moderated Re: Testing new feature request/tracking system

Duane
 

On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 09:26 AM, Rush Kester wrote:
I suggest deferring the ability of all users to request new features until the backlog of requests from paid subscribers via their moderators has been worked down.  When the development team has the capacity for additional improvements, they should be submitted via the group's moderator.
One of the problems I see with that is that some requests may be easily implemented and don't really need to be delayed.  Based on past experience, Mark is open to all suggestions and, if worthwhile, will add them as time allows.  I certainly don't envy him the job of trying to prioritize these things!

Duane


moderated Breaking out calendar event reminders to send at a specific time vice other messages sent as a digest/daily summary

Howard Waxman, WZ4K
 

I always receive an event reminder 1 day late - apparently due to my Digested email setting for that group. Since I don't own the event/group I'm unable to adjust the reminder settings. Can the ability to break out Calendar Event reminders so they are received timely be added v. other messages that would be received only in the daily digest? This is having a measurable effect on event participation. Being able to break out calendar event reminders would help this issue. Perhaps there is a setting the event/calendar owner can set for events already to override Subscription  Digested.Daily messages? I don't see such an option. Do Special Notices override Digested/Daily summary Settings? Thanks for your support, Howard


moderated New feature request

Kristen James Eberlein
 

It would be useful to be able to search not only for messages to which a specific hashtag has been applied, but for the messages that are in the intersection of two or more hashtags.

For those of us who want to use hashtags for taxonomic classification, this would be very useful.

Best,
Kris

Kristen James Eberlein
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting
www.eberleinconsulting.com
+1 919 622-1501; kriseberlein (skype)


moderated Re: Testing new feature request/tracking system

Rush Kester
 

I suggest deferring the ability of all users to request new features until the backlog of requests from paid subscribers via their moderators has been worked down.  When the development team has the capacity for additional improvements, they should be submitted via the group's moderator.   Group owners (who created their group with a purpose in mind) can decide if the new feature is consistent with their group's goals.  

Rush Kester 
[Be Green] Please do not print this email unless necessary


-----Original Message-----
From: J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...>
To: main <main@beta.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Dec 26, 2019 8:01 am
Subject: Re: [beta] Testing new feature request/tracking system

I agree with Chris and had the same thought. This separation seems likely to cause a deluge of requests on canny by people completely unfamiliar with the product and who likely should be taking many of their concerns to GMF. There are already a few such requests. OTOH, it’s no problem for Mark to ignore such requests, and there seems to be no easy way around it besides possibly a restriction to having had a premium group for at least a certain amount of time. 


On Dec 26, 2019, at 4:20 AM, Chris Jones via Groups.Io <chrisjones12@...> wrote:

On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 12:22 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
I've restricted the login ability to people who are moderators or owners of premium groups only.
Mark; a large part of me fully understands this limitation (not least because of the possible costs involved inwidening it) but the "remainder" is a little concerned.

It seems to give an edge to those recently migrated from Yahoo who had to pay to relocate, and in many cases they may be reluctant Premium Group Owners, and almost by definition they are probably "inexperienced" group owners, at least as far as groups.io is concerned.

Meanwhile Basic Group Owners & Moderators, who are likely to be more experienced and possibly even more committed to the smooth operation of their Groups and by extension Groups.io itself, are locked out.

I hesitate to shout "isn't fair" for obvious reasons but I sincerely hope that the outcome is that any skewing of the suggestions that make the cut and get adopted simply doesn't happen.

Chris

--
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
Note on an occupational hazard: I comment frequently in beta based on my desire for the betterment of groups.io as a product. Only a fraction of the time are my comments and suggestions specifically a matter of self-interest. Don't assume the latter when the former may be the case.


moderated Re: Testing new feature request/tracking system

 

I agree with Chris and had the same thought. This separation seems likely to cause a deluge of requests on canny by people completely unfamiliar with the product and who likely should be taking many of their concerns to GMF. There are already a few such requests. OTOH, it’s no problem for Mark to ignore such requests, and there seems to be no easy way around it besides possibly a restriction to having had a premium group for at least a certain amount of time. 


On Dec 26, 2019, at 4:20 AM, Chris Jones via Groups.Io <chrisjones12@...> wrote:

On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 12:22 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
I've restricted the login ability to people who are moderators or owners of premium groups only.
Mark; a large part of me fully understands this limitation (not least because of the possible costs involved inwidening it) but the "remainder" is a little concerned.

It seems to give an edge to those recently migrated from Yahoo who had to pay to relocate, and in many cases they may be reluctant Premium Group Owners, and almost by definition they are probably "inexperienced" group owners, at least as far as groups.io is concerned.

Meanwhile Basic Group Owners & Moderators, who are likely to be more experienced and possibly even more committed to the smooth operation of their Groups and by extension Groups.io itself, are locked out.

I hesitate to shout "isn't fair" for obvious reasons but I sincerely hope that the outcome is that any skewing of the suggestions that make the cut and get adopted simply doesn't happen.

Chris

--
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
Note on an occupational hazard: I comment frequently in beta based on my desire for the betterment of groups.io as a product. Only a fraction of the time are my comments and suggestions specifically a matter of self-interest. Don't assume the latter when the former may be the case.


moderated Re: Testing new feature request/tracking system

Chris Jones
 

On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 12:22 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
I've restricted the login ability to people who are moderators or owners of premium groups only.
Mark; a large part of me fully understands this limitation (not least because of the possible costs involved inwidening it) but the "remainder" is a little concerned.

It seems to give an edge to those recently migrated from Yahoo who had to pay to relocate, and in many cases they may be reluctant Premium Group Owners, and almost by definition they are probably "inexperienced" group owners, at least as far as groups.io is concerned.

Meanwhile Basic Group Owners & Moderators, who are likely to be more experienced and possibly even more committed to the smooth operation of their Groups and by extension Groups.io itself, are locked out.

I hesitate to shout "isn't fair" for obvious reasons but I sincerely hope that the outcome is that any skewing of the suggestions that make the cut and get adopted simply doesn't happen.

Chris