Date   

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



moderated Re: Why not allow Edit w/o resending

Scott Chase
 

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


moderated Re: Deleting attachments when out of space #update

SP4149
 

For some lists I monitor the attachment image storage for storage that has gotten out of control.  It is not possible to review and search all attachments conveniently.

For example, video files eat up a lot of space and are not subject to the size limitations for image attachments, they don't show-up in the e-mail photo album, very cumbersome to find

and when found it is impossible for an owner/moderator to strip the attachment and save the message.

Before taking Draconian messages, it would be prudent to analyze what files are found stored as attachments and perhaps ban/restrict certain file types that are currently stored in attachments,

but are not controlled by current image size restrictions.

ken clark

www.shastasprings.com



moderated Re: Moving Topics To Subgroups

Scott Chase
 

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: change or add "updated" date for updated files

 

I support that request. It would be very helpful in one of my groups which uses
a lot of small files with frequent updates to some of them.

On 7 Jan 2020 at 9:34, J_Catlady wrote:

It might be helpful to see the date a file was updated, instead of or in
addition to the original date it was uploaded (which is all that shows now in
the display). -- 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
--
http://jimellame.tumblr.com - My thoughts on freedom (needs updating)
http://jimella.wordpress.com - political snippets, especially economic policy
http://jimella.livejournal.com - misc. snippets, some political, some not
Forget Google! I search with https://duckduckgo.com which doesn't spy on you


moderated Re: Deleting attachments when out of space #update

 

On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 02:17 AM, Duane wrote:

Not to get too far offtrack, but it might be better if the Out Of Space choice said "Bounce Messages With Attachments" to make it clear.  As is, "Bounce Messages", sounds like all messages would be bounced (though I know they wouldn't.)

I've made this change.

Thanks, Mark


moderated Re: change or add "updated" date for updated files

 

Hi All,

The Files section now displays the Updated date in the 'Uploaded' column.

Cheers,
Mark


moderated Re: Deleting attachments when out of space #update

Leeni
 

If attachments are going to be deleted when allotted space is met, is there a way that inserted images can retain the name of the image that is being inserted? Right now if you insert an image in the body of the message and then go to retrieve it from the group's site, it shows up as a number and not the name of the image. The attachments I am showing in this email shows what I am talking about.
 
The image with the 0 as it's name was inserted in the body of the email and saved from the inserted graphic. The image with the tags name was retrieved from the attachment.
 
In many cases the artist of these images want the file name to stay as it was written. But saving it from the body of the email right now doesn't do that.
 
Leeni
 
 
 
 
 

-------Original Message-------
 
Date: 1/8/2020 11:28:14 AM
Subject: Re: [beta] Deleting attachments when out of space
 

On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 05:29 AM, Bruce Bowman wrote:

Mark -- Thanks for the heads-up...such is generally my understanding of how the "Out of Space" setting was intended to function. I'm assuming the extra 5% is to allow file and photo uploads to continue to work?

Yes, that's correct.

What happens if 95% of your quota is being used by other items -- would ALL of the group's attachments then be deleted? Not saying that's wrong behavior, but want to clarify.

Yes, all attachments would be deleted.

Also, will upload restrictions now be enforced at the quota level (exactly 1 GB, 10 GB, etc)? In the past, some have reported substantial "grace storage" before such uploads were actually inhibited.

Yes. The "grace storage" was only for attachments, because this process wasn't working. It's always been the case that if your group is over the limit, you could not upload additional photos or files.

Thanks, Mark

 


moderated Re: Deleting attachments when out of space #update

 

On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 09:21 AM, D R Stinson wrote:
In my experience, this is the source of much of the wasted space. We have members who read and share by email, and they just click on reply. The result is the duplication of the same image a number of times. Even if the system just checked for the same image more than once in a thread would be an improvement.
Yes!
 
--
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: Deleting attachments when out of space #update

 

I would really not like to have log entries for individual attachments deleted, ever. It would serve no purpose in my group and could just deluge the log. So if individual entries could not happen at all, or be a group option, that would be great.
--
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: Deleting attachments when out of space #update

 

On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 05:29 AM, Bruce Bowman wrote:

Mark -- Thanks for the heads-up...such is generally my understanding of how the "Out of Space" setting was intended to function. I'm assuming the extra 5% is to allow file and photo uploads to continue to work?

Yes, that's correct.

What happens if 95% of your quota is being used by other items -- would ALL of the group's attachments then be deleted? Not saying that's wrong behavior, but want to clarify.

Yes, all attachments would be deleted.

Also, will upload restrictions now be enforced at the quota level (exactly 1 GB, 10 GB, etc)? In the past, some have reported substantial "grace storage" before such uploads were actually inhibited.

Yes. The "grace storage" was only for attachments, because this process wasn't working. It's always been the case that if your group is over the limit, you could not upload additional photos or files.

Thanks, Mark


moderated Re: Deleting attachments when out of space #update

 

How about deduplication first? Eliminate multiple instances of
the same file . . .
Right, that too would be very valuable. If I understand it correctly
your idea is roughly equivalent to (3) here:
https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/15545
In my experience, this is the source of much of the wasted space. We have members who read and share by email, and they just click on reply. The result is the duplication of the same image a number of times. Even if the system just checked for the same image more than once in a thread would be an improvement.

I also agree as well about posters who put a small image in their signature. By itself they add very little, but they can add up quickly and some posters don't understand they're not saved with the message, but separately. I'm wondering if any image in a signature shouldn't be stored in a members profile where it could be accessed by the system, and all images otherwise in signatures be deleted automatically.

Another 2¢ worth.

Dano


moderated Re: change or add "updated" date for updated files

 

On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 08:49 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
The request is inapplicable to them.
I should say the request *as stated* is inapplicable to them. There's nothing preventing having an optional update notification for Group Guidelines, if Mark sees fit to implement that. But I'd say it's in the "don't hold your breath category." The request as stated here is a five-second fix.
 
--
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: change or add "updated" date for updated files

 

On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 08:46 AM, Ann Wild wrote:
I agree as well.  I have updated our Guidelines several times
I'm talking about Files, not Member Notices. There's already an update date at the bottom of the Guidelines and members don't see any "upload date" for Member Notices anyway. The request is inapplicable to them. 
 
--
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