Date   

moderated Re: Premium groups now have more storage, basic group subgroups change

txercoupemuseum.org
 

Hi Mark,

You have a one-time surge of Premium Groups created out of the financial realities of the Yahoo meltdown that were promised they could revert to free group status at the end of their original Premium Group paid period.

I would presume these groups' paid premium status allows them to create subgroups until they actually exercise their right to revert to 
‘Free/Basic Group” status, and that any subgroups they might choose to create with “premium” privileges in the interim you would similarly recognize as “grandfathered"?

Best!

WRB— 

On Jan 10, 2020, at 4:00 PM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

Hi All,

Starting now, all premium groups have double the storage, 20GB, up from 10GB. Basic and Enterprise group storage levels are the same as before, at 1GB and 1TB, respectively.

Basic groups created after Wednesday morning, 1/15/20 at 9AM, will no longer have the ability to create subgroups. Existing basic groups will be grandfathered in.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Cheers,
Mark
_._,_._,_


moderated Premium groups now have more storage, basic group subgroups change

 

Hi All,

Starting now, all premium groups have double the storage, 20GB, up from 10GB. Basic and Enterprise group storage levels are the same as before, at 1GB and 1TB, respectively.

Basic groups created after Wednesday morning, 1/15/20 at 9AM, will no longer have the ability to create subgroups. Existing basic groups will be grandfathered in.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Cheers,
Mark


moderated Re: Why not allow Edit w/o resending

RickGlaz-WEB <rickglaz4742435@...>
 

Thanks JC and Duane.
The easiest thing for me to do is just (only) post from my
WEBmail hosting servers and hope people limit editing like
the real-time pop-up warning says <grin>.

Don't get me wrong, I like the Group.IO poster page, but it
has some limitations -- So, to each his or her own...

Rick

On January 10, 2020 at 12:33 PM J_Catlady <@J_Catlady> wrote:


On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 07:11 AM, RickGlaz-WEB wrote:


Glad I edit my own stuff sparingly
and generally right away...
Sometimes a moderator, rather than the member, may edit messages much later, for various reasons.

That said, your statement gives me a couple of ideas that could solve much or all of this. In no particular order, and with no suggestions as to whether or not to make them standard or group options:

1. Specify an "edit window," as do comments sections of news sites, such as "3 minutes" (or whatever - could be standard, could be optional, could be zero if the group wants to turn off editing, etc) in which non-mod members can "save don't send."

Instead of or in conjunction with (1):

2. All non-mod "save don't send" edits could be moderated.

In any case, just as they do in other media, all edited messages should still keep their place in the conversation and not move around simply because of an edit.

--
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: Why not allow Edit w/o resending

 

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 07:11 AM, RickGlaz-WEB wrote:
Glad I edit my own stuff sparingly
and generally right away...
Sometimes a moderator, rather than the member, may edit messages much later, for various reasons.

That said, your statement gives me a couple of ideas that could solve much or all of this. In no particular order, and with no suggestions as to whether or not to make them standard or group options:

1. Specify an "edit window," as do comments sections of news sites, such as "3 minutes" (or whatever - could be standard, could be optional, could be zero if the group wants to turn off editing, etc) in which non-mod members can "save don't send."

Instead of or in conjunction with (1):

2. All non-mod "save don't send" edits could be moderated.

In any case, just as they do in other media, all edited messages should still keep their place in the conversation and not move around simply because of an edit.
 
--
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: More attachment size selections requested

 

On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 11:21 PM Glenn <v+gio@g.nevcal.com> wrote:

 Yes, and I have my browser set to delete cookies on every exit, to avoid reduce tracking. A user-friendly email-based group shouldn't require keeping a login active on the host server.
_._,_._,_

1) We don't track users. 
2) If we didn't require a login to access attachments, that would be a rather large security hole for private groups.


Mark


moderated Re: Why not allow Edit w/o resending

RickGlaz-WEB <rickglaz4742435@...>
 

Duane, Thanks. Not what I was expecting. Glad I edit my own stuff sparingly
and generally right away...

Rick

On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 06:14 PM, Duane wrote: (that)

On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 04:38 PM, RickGlaz-WEB wrote:
If you (another poster)  "continuously refine" your posts I hope/(guess?) they *move up*
in the timeline on the Group site. I never tried to notice how that
worked.
Actually, they don't.  They're sorted by the original posting time, so only those on email are really aware that an edit was made.  (I believe that those on Digest only get the most recent version when the digest is sent.)  That has bugged me sometimes, but not enough to raise an issue.

Duane


moderated Re: More attachment size selections requested

Glenn
 

On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 07:08 PM, Duane wrote:
Only if they've logged out or deleted cookies.  You'll stay logged in indefinitely as long as you visit the site at least once every 30 days and don't delete cookies.  In that case, the file pops up immediately when the browser opens.

Duane

 Yes, and I have my browser set to delete cookies on every exit, to avoid reduce tracking. A user-friendly email-based group shouldn't require keeping a login active on the host server.


moderated Re: More attachment size selections requested

Glenn
 

As you point out, whether or not it is already downloaded is a function of settings in the email client. My Thunderbird is set to always download attachments, so there are there when I get to the computer, which has been faithfully checking for new email regularly while I am doing other things. And the setting you mention is only available to IMAP clients not POP3 clients, which always download attachments.

If this thread has gone off topic, it is because you keep making suggestions that stray from the original point, in an attempt to convince me that the original point isn't valid, and I keep pointing out that your preferences are not universal, and that other people have different settings and opinions and processes. While your suggestions have some relationship to the original point, none of them have been convincing to me thus far.


moderated Dropbox Integration #suggestion

Charlie W
 

I would really like to have Dropbox integration.
The google integration doesn't work, and it's got a Dropbox logo, so why not Dropbox?

It looks like you had API v1 integration at one time:
https://www.dropbox.com/developers/reference/migration-guide?_tk=guides_lp&_ad=deepdive8&_camp=v2

https://www.dropbox.com/developers/reference


moderated Re: Why not allow Edit w/o resending

 

On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 03:14 PM, Duane wrote:
They're sorted by the original posting time... That has bugged me sometimes
I wanted to expand on why I think it's so important to maintain the posted-date, rather than the edited-date, sort order of messages in the message list. I especially want to contrast this with the display of updated date of files, which I myself recently requested, and which (I think correctly) implemented. Messages, unlike files, are part of a flow of conversation. If I edit a message a week or a month after it was posted to, say, fix a spelling error, it should emphatically NOT move up a week out of its place in the conversation. That (IMHO) would be crazy and could very possibly make conversations very hard to follow. Not everyone quotes snippets of the message they're responding to in order to make it clear; many people, including those posting via email, simply post their answer. Imagine what would happen if their reply jumped a month, or a year, out of place because of a small edit. 

Updates to files, on the other hand, are a different beast. They are not part of chronological conversations, as I've already said, and updates to files would, or might, normally consist of more major changes in content than edits to messages.
 
--
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: Moving Topics To Subgroups

Scott Chase
 

Hi Christos,
Eventually, post migration, all the members will become unmoderated after four posts, or as I open it up. And the replies come pretty fast after a everyone sees a new Topic. So, I would expect that it would be a series of messages associated with a Topic, by the time I can get to it.  But, I'd also like to be able to move some Topics that came over during the Yahoo migration, too. Our group is growing, and so I'm trying to stay ahead of the curve and keep things as tidy as possible.

Scott


On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 4:57 PM Christos G. Psarras <christos@...> wrote:

Scott,

While I also see a value to be able to move a topic with all the associated replies to a subgroup (and also the corollary could also be valuable), I'm curious, when you want to move a topic in your case, is it after it had several replies, or do you want to move it as soon as you see it?

If the latter, there is a roundabout way of doing what you want to do, but before I post the way, I want to make sure to save me the typing!

Cheers,

Christos




On 2020-01-09 00:01, Scott Chase via Groups.Io wrote:
I really need to be able to move Topics to Subgroups, too. Our "main" group is for general discussion. And we use Subgroups to group specific genetic discussions and with only a subset of interested members. If a Topic is started in our "main" group that is specific to just a piece of a gene, I need to be able to move it to the appropriate Subgroup. Otherwise, the main group will get too broad and noisy, and some members will unsubscribe if the get too many Subgroup-type detailed e-mails.

Thanks,
Scott Chase, Owner of the "GCH1-Discussions" Group


moderated Re: Moving Topics To Subgroups

Christos G. Psarras
 

Scott,

While I also see a value to be able to move a topic with all the associated replies to a subgroup (and also the corollary could also be valuable), I'm curious, when you want to move a topic in your case, is it after it had several replies, or do you want to move it as soon as you see it?

If the latter, there is a roundabout way of doing what you want to do, but before I post the way, I want to make sure to save me the typing!

Cheers,

Christos




On 2020-01-09 00:01, Scott Chase via Groups.Io wrote:
I really need to be able to move Topics to Subgroups, too. Our "main" group is for general discussion. And we use Subgroups to group specific genetic discussions and with only a subset of interested members. If a Topic is started in our "main" group that is specific to just a piece of a gene, I need to be able to move it to the appropriate Subgroup. Otherwise, the main group will get too broad and noisy, and some members will unsubscribe if the get too many Subgroup-type detailed e-mails.

Thanks,
Scott Chase, Owner of the "GCH1-Discussions" Group


moderated Re: Why not allow Edit w/o resending

 

On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 03:14 PM, Duane wrote:
not enough to raise an issue
I recall it having been raised (perhaps not by you) and debated at length. I've found a couple of prior topics (threads) referring to it but not yet the original. Here's one of them
https://beta.groups.io/g/main/topic/2231163
 
--
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: Why not allow Edit w/o resending

Duane
 

On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 04:38 PM, RickGlaz-WEB wrote:
If you "continuously refine" your posts I hope/(guess?) they *move up*
in the timeline on the Group site. I never tried to notice how that
worked.
Actually, they don't.  They're sorted by the original posting time, so only those on email are really aware that an edit was made.  (I believe that those on Digest only get the most recent version when the digest is sent.)  That has bugged me sometimes, but not enough to raise an issue.

Duane


moderated Re: Deleting attachments when out of space #update

Duane
 

On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 12:06 PM, SP4149 wrote:
and when found it is impossible for an owner/moderator to strip the attachment and save the message.
Quite easy actually.  Follow the instructions for deleting attachments at https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum/wiki/Deleting%20attachments,%20files%20and%20photos

Duane


moderated Re: Why not allow Edit w/o resending

RickGlaz-WEB <rickglaz4742435@...>
 

OTHERS Editing does not affect me (I guess). I mostly read and write
on the Group.io site so I don't see older versions unless I dig into
the edit logs....

If you "continuously refine" your posts I hope/(guess?) they *move up*
in the timeline on the Group site. I never tried to notice how that
worked.

Rick

On January 9, 2020 at 4:46 PM Samuel Murray <@ugcheleuce> wrote:


On 09/01/2020 20:54, RickGlaz-WEB wrote:

It sounds like your members edit to move the thread forward or
some reason I do not understand...
Speaking for myself, on other online forums, if editing is allowed, I
make good use of it to continuously refine my post. I want my post to
make a good impression to readers who read it, and in many web-based
forums, most readers don't read the post within seconds after it is
created. I sometimes add paragraphs to clarify things, or I delete
paragraphs that I feel detract from the central message that I was
aiming for. So, yes, my posts may change significantly after people
responded to my post, but that's their own fault for not quoting.

I do not regard making edits to a post, even significant edits, as
malicious. Sure, there will always be people who change their post to
say the exact opposite, after lots of folks "liked" their post or posted
"I agree", but forum designers should have thought about that before
they allowed editing.

A nice touch is if anyone can see a history of edits. Or, people can
write a comment about why they edited the post, and if a moderator feels
that their reason isn't valid or is misleading, they can take action
against that user, if they care enough.

The fact is that users who are used to editing on other platforms may
edit on Groups.io without realising that it has unintended, devastating
consequences for mail users.

An alternative idea to re-posting the entire edited message would be
that Groups.io post a short notice, "So-and-so edited this message,
click this link to see the latest version of this message", ONCE ONLY
(even if the user edits his message several times) to alert other users
that the message that they see in their mail programs is not the one
that the poster intended them to respond to.

Samuel




moderated Re: Why not allow Edit w/o resending

Duane
 

On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 12:07 PM, Scott Chase wrote:
I am already a bit frustrated and disappointed that every single time a member edits a message, another e-mail goes out to hundreds of members again, and again, and again. It got noisy fast, and I had some members already quit.
You could do as other groups do, such as this one, and disable editing - no more problems.

Duane
PS  This isn't FB - thankfully.


moderated Re: Why not allow Edit w/o resending

 

On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 01:54 PM, Samuel Murray wrote:
A nice touch is if anyone can see a history of edits.
That already exists by clicking on the blue "EDIT" button (with the caveat that moderators have the ability to delete prior revisions in case they contain material requiring deleted for some reason such as privacy or copyright).

The fact is that users who are used to editing on other platforms may edit on Groups.io without realising that it has unintended, devastating consequences for mail users.

Not unless they're not paying attention to the banner warning that comes up. 
 
--
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: Why not allow Edit w/o resending

Samuel Murrayy
 

On 09/01/2020 20:54, RickGlaz-WEB wrote:

It sounds like your members edit to move the thread forward or
some reason I do not understand...
Speaking for myself, on other online forums, if editing is allowed, I make good use of it to continuously refine my post. I want my post to make a good impression to readers who read it, and in many web-based forums, most readers don't read the post within seconds after it is created. I sometimes add paragraphs to clarify things, or I delete paragraphs that I feel detract from the central message that I was aiming for. So, yes, my posts may change significantly after people responded to my post, but that's their own fault for not quoting.

I do not regard making edits to a post, even significant edits, as malicious. Sure, there will always be people who change their post to say the exact opposite, after lots of folks "liked" their post or posted "I agree", but forum designers should have thought about that before they allowed editing.

A nice touch is if anyone can see a history of edits. Or, people can write a comment about why they edited the post, and if a moderator feels that their reason isn't valid or is misleading, they can take action against that user, if they care enough.

The fact is that users who are used to editing on other platforms may edit on Groups.io without realising that it has unintended, devastating consequences for mail users.

An alternative idea to re-posting the entire edited message would be that Groups.io post a short notice, "So-and-so edited this message, click this link to see the latest version of this message", ONCE ONLY (even if the user edits his message several times) to alert other users that the message that they see in their mail programs is not the one that the poster intended them to respond to.

Samuel


moderated Re: Why not allow Edit w/o resending

RickGlaz-WEB <rickglaz4742435@...>
 

How would anyone know what was edited or when?
In a Group I'm in, I try to never edit, or limit it to one time to
correct a significant typo or an error/mis-communication.
Something that should not stand/stay in the archives.

It sounds like your members edit to move the thread forward or
some reason I do not understand...

Rick

On January 9, 2020 at 1:03 PM Scott Chase <@ScottChase> wrote:


Hi,
I am a new group owner. I am already a bit frustrated and disappointed that every single time a member edits a message, another e-mail goes out to hundreds of members again, and again, and again. It got noisy fast, and I had some members already quit.

If I unmoderate a member, I already trust them. I personally see no reason that a trusted, unmoderated member can't have the "Save Without Sending" button, too. People are used to Facebook Groups, which allow members to edit their own messages. I don't like the idea of turning editing off, because people like being able to edit spelling, typos, etc.. And I think accurate content in the database is important.

As a group owner, I'd like to have full control over the buttons my members can use in my own group, like "Save Without Sending".

Scott, Owner of GCH1-Discussions