|
That issue is not specific to this bug or this posting status and is a question about moderated topics in general. Maybe take it to GMF?
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On Jun 7, 2020, at 8:20 AM, Chris Jones via groups.io <chrisjones12@...> wrote:
-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
Chris Jones
On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 02:46 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
A member of my group is on "moderate every message of every topic this person starts" but the topics aren't showing the "moderated" icon.Although I was aware of the moderation options under discussion I have no personal experience of either, and thus have "no skin in this game". To me the precise wording of the options seems clear enough, but I would agree that there being no "Moderated" icon against the topic does seem a bit odd. I also find myself wondering how the use of the "moderate all messages..." option appears to those members who operate by email, which (anecdotally) is most of them. I suspect that the messages sent by Groups.io have no clue in them that the topic is fully moderated, in this case by virtue of the identity of the person who started it. In a generally unmoderated group members will be accustomed to seeing their posts "come back" more or less immediately after they have sent them. If, however, they respond to a topic that is fully moderated there will be a delay of indeterminate length before their message is actually posted and the associated email dispatched. Do they find themselves sitting there wondering "where has my post gone"? In the absence of any flag either on the web UI or within the dispatched emails I would have expected that they would do exactly that, with accompanying head - scratching. Has anyone got any practical experience of this, either way? Asking for a friend and all that... :) Chris
|
|
|
|
I think now you're saying the topic does get moderated but the icon doesn't display and the option to moderate is still there. So it seems like just a lack of some cleanup. I haven't tested it.
-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 07:54 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
an additional bugor rather, a slightly more serious bug -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
Good catch on the topic not being moderated at all, an additional bug. In the case I encountered, the OP was also NMM and the responder was on mideration, so both posts came through pending anyway and I assumed the topic moderation was happening.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
The wording, IIRC, came from an attempt to distinguish the status from MF, which is moderation of the first (rather than every) message in topics the member starts. I agree that changing it to “moderate every topic the member starts” might be incrementally clearer to some, but less clear to others. I have no opinion on it.
On Jun 7, 2020, at 7:36 AM, Andy Wedge <andy_wedge@...> wrote:
--
J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 02:02 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
so I know exactly what it does, regardless of wording. It is topic-level moderation.Well I've gone back and read the option text again and also done some of my own testing. I can see that messages from other members get moderated so it does indicate that the topic is moderated. In addition to the moderated icon not being displayed as you mentioned, the topic drop-down menu shows a 'Moderate topic' option suggesting that the topic is not moderated which is also incorrect in this case. I have to admit I've learned something new here but I still think the wording on the moderation option "Override: moderate all messages of every topic this person starts " could better indicate that this impacts the topic regardless of who posts rather than just the member where the option is changed. Andy
|
|
|
|
On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 06:04 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
moderating any individual topic is not a group actionOr you can call it a group-level action but that's just semantics. You can also call it a "topic-level action" that happens to be based on who starts the topic. It doesn't really matter what you call it. There are good reasons for this feature and if it doesn't suit some group's particular needs, they can ignore it. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: On Group Home Page, move Group Email Addresses block to same area as Group Information and Group Settings blocks
#suggestion
#done
I second that.
-- Jim
|
|
|
|
Yes seeing your second message now. It moderates every topic the person starts. This is a simple bug with a thirty second fix. Not worth discussion. It does affect anyone else who posts to the topic, of course, but it is definitely not a group option, just as moderating any individual topic is not a group action. Nuf said. Let’s not rehash this feature?
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On Jun 7, 2020, at 1:34 AM, Andy Wedge <andy_wedge@...> wrote:
-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
Actually, I was the person who requested, and fought for (lol), that feature, so I know exactly what it does, regardless of wording. It is topic-level moderation.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On Jun 7, 2020, at 1:24 AM, Andy Wedge <andy_wedge@...> wrote:
-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Add option to Bcc Moderators when banning or rejecting pending requests
#suggestion
Chris Jones
On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 09:08 AM, Andy Wedge wrote:
Are you suggesting removing that option from there too?No; I have never used bcc: me other than as a test, but as you say others might use it. My main point is wondering whether Membership Reject and Ban Member should be in the list of "optional" Notifications or simply be covered by an optional bcc All Moderators. The group I moderate rarely does either so we don't have any pro forma messages set up for these occasions, not least because I doubt if we find a "one size fits all" wording for either eventuality. Chris
|
|
|
|
On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 09:24 AM, Andy Wedge wrote:
"Override: moderate all messages of every topic this person starts"Having sat at looked at the wording of this option again I can see how 'all messages of every topic' it might be construed to mean that the the topic should be moderated but given that the option itself relates to an individual member that cannot be the case. Moderating a new topic based on the post of a member would then impact other members' ability to post to that topic and I think moderating a topic should be seen as a group level activity rather than one propagated to the group based on a member's settings. Andy
|
|
|
|
On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 02:46 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
A member of my group is on "moderate every message of every topic this person starts" but the topics aren't showing the "moderated" icon.The specific wording of that option is "Override: moderate all messages of every topic this person starts" so it's a message level moderation option rather than a topic level option. Andy
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Add option to Bcc Moderators when banning or rejecting pending requests
#suggestion
On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 10:28 AM, Chris Jones wrote:
As a moderator I have the option of being notified when anyone joins or leaves a group from the pick list of Notifications. Should the rejection of an application or the banning of a member also be on the same pick list or should they be at the discretion of whoever does the rejection or banning via the bcc mechanism? Both might be a bit messy and I have no fixed view on which might be better.Chris, a very good point. If I reject a pending message I get the option to Bcc: my fellow moderator and the message text used appears in the activity log. We do always try to remember to use the Bcc: All Moderators checkbox so we are both kept informed of the other's activities but on rare occasions we have both forgotten to do that. In that instance, I guess a checkbox in our own options to say we want to receive those notices would remove that element of risk The other option when sending a message is to 'Bcc: Me'. Personally, I don't generally use that kind of option on any platform but I'm sure that some do. Are you suggesting removing that option from there too? I guess leaving it in place would keep some consistency with the 'BCC Me' option when sending a private reply via the web UI. My main concern in raising this is that I don't get a copy of the text used if a pre-defined noitce is used and that given that the text is not recorded in the activity log, and that a pre-defined notice can be changed after a message is sent, I have no audit trail or any way that I can see of working out what message was sent. Regards, Andy
|
|
|
|
Self-explanatory. A member of my group is on "moderate every message of every topic this person starts" but the topics aren't showing the "moderated" icon.
-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
moderated
On Group Home Page, move Group Email Addresses block to same area as Group Information and Group Settings blocks
#suggestion
#done
On the home pages of my groups, the Group Email Address list/block is at the bottom of the page, often "below the fold" and Message History. I suggest this list be moved up to be at the same area/panel as Group Information and Group Settings.
This would be also be helpful for new members who visit the home page to see all the group information in one place. I note that on the Beta Group, all these group lists/blocks are below the Message History. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Add option to Bcc Moderators when banning or rejecting pending requests
#suggestion
Chris Jones
On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 06:22 PM, Andy Wedge wrote:
However, when performing actions like banning or rejecting a member a message is also sent to the member (if an active notice is defined} but there is no option to Bcc: anyone.Andy; a very worthwhile observation IMHO. There is, however, another related anomaly lurking in the background! As a moderator I have the option of being notified when anyone joins or leaves a group from the pick list of Notifications. Should the rejection of an application or the banning of a member also be on the same pick list or should they be at the discretion of whoever does the rejection or banning via the bcc mechanism? Both might be a bit messy and I have no fixed view on which might be better. I certainly think your suggestion is worthy of inclusion whichever method is considered. Chris
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Site updates
#changelog
On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 05:05 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
NEW: Hashtag list view shows mute/follow duration. Also, redid the mute/follow hashtag screens.Hi Mark, I like the new addition on the hashtag list view and the modified mute/follow hashtag screen when arrived at via Groups.io icon in the top left corner. However, a Mute #hashtag link in an email footer contains a subid parameter and using this I get a different screen where the group name that the Mute applies to is not shown. At the very least it's confusing to have different layouts and if muting via a link in an email footer is supposed to apply to all groups it needs to be clear. Regards, Andy
|
|
|
|
moderated
Site updates
#changelog
Changes to the site this week:
Take care everyone. Mark
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: New notifications proposal
#misc
Hi Shal, On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 02:12 AM, Shal Farley wrote:
As are the file upload notifications. We've already got this mix of messages and notifications. What that also means is that the message archive is also the activity feed for the group, the place where a member can go to see everything that has happened in the group (yes, ignoring for the moment notifications that do not yet exist, like wiki updates). For better or worse, this is also how Facebook Groups is structured. I think the concept of an activity feed is important for the group, and if we end up pulling all the notifications out of the message archive, then I think we would need to create a new activity feed view somewhere.
Yes, that's correct. Muting would just be another form of notification control.
I've added a new list view to the group hashtag page, and that preference is remembered automatically. I'm definitely open to suggestions for how to better structure that page should we go the hashtags-for-notifications route, including adding bulk operation controls. I have tried to think of other ways to do notifications, and I have been unable to come up with anything better or more straightforward. Take #cal-invite messages, for example. If the notification and hashtag muting settings are separate (and in separate areas of the site), you'd end up with some duplicate functionality. If I want nothing to do with #cal-invite messages, I'd have to mute the hashtag, and then I'd also have to go and make sure I'm not receiving any notifications about them. Also, adding hashtags to existing moderator notifications makes it a little easier to identify which notification is which when changing the notification setting. I'm definitely open to considering other ideas, but I haven't been able to come up with anything else that feels as straightforward as this. Please let me know what you think. Thanks, Mark
|
|
|
