Date   

moderated Re: New search indexing is down

 

Hello,

It took much longer than I thought, but the new search cluster is now live and we are mostly caught up with indexing messages. One catch is that Files search currently only works on PDFs (not Word docs, etc). I will be fixing that soon.

Thanks,
Mark


locked Re: categorisation

Duane
 

On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 10:25 PM, Ant No wrote:
I have looked at the drop down menu of tags.
There is not a drop down on the Publicly Listed Group page and tags are not a site search.  The only way to find a particular group is to hope that the owner included a keyword in the description that would be somewhat limited among groups.  I searched for 'widget' and found exactly one group.  A more generic search for 'group' found over 9000.

Duane


moderated Additional Storage tiers #suggestion

Eric di Domenico
 

I would like to have additional storage tiers or something.

We expect to hit the 10gb storage limit.

We are just a group of people with a shared interest, so we don't have the budget for the 200$ a month plan, and we probably don't need 1TB of data.

But having 50gb as part of the premium (or at a reasonable additional cost) would be very helpful.


moderated Re: Migrate Groups to Subgroups

Ant No
 

Thanks, that might solve the problem with the group I'm still worried about. I've posted it to the group, hopefully just under the last post wire.

Night night.

Ant👣


locked Re: categorisation

Ant No
 

Hello Ronaldo

I'm actually trying to get away to my new groups but have to ask; how would the tag system have helped me find the group I mentioned? Given I didn't even know it existed and would not be looking for it specifically. But was glad to find it as it is part of my own core beliefs. Not one I would expect to find a group on.

I have looked at the drop down menu of tags. None of them looked useful to me personally. None of them attracted me or seemed interesting to pursue.

I can't favour any system that doesn't facilitate finding the obscure group who wants like minds to find them. It's hard enough being part of a minority without being hidden from each other.

Mine was a purely pragmatic suggestion. It would work to make it easier. That's all I want. Something that works. It's not an ideological belief. It's an observation based on slogging through several thousand groups the hard way over a couple of days 6320 of the most popular plus 680 new groups, serendipitously an even 7000. How things work is my major thing, most of my many other interests branch from that.

Tagging seems more like a belief you wish would work rather than one which currently does. I'm not saying it couldn't, just that after several years of unstructured organic growth it doesn't yet. Or not for me. If you know the secret please tell me.

A science fiction author once wrote that the future needed eclectic synthesists who could connect the dots. I believed him. I do my inadequate .best.

Beyond a bit tired. Sleepy now.

Goodnight.

Ant👣


moderated Re: email privacy

Judy F.
 

The owner/moderator has to set that in Settings then look through the various options.  It is there.
Judy F.
SW Florida - USA


locked Re: categorisation

ro-esp
 

oops, forgot to trim there.

PS Ideally we would be able to choose whether the tags would be picked up by search-engines outside groups.io


groetjes, Ronaldo


locked Re: categorisation

ro-esp
 

On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 11:14 PM, Ant No wrote:


As I understand it there are three main opinions.

A massively detailed hierarchy such as the dewy decimal.

20 or so broad categories.

A bottom up tagging system.

The greatest support seems to be for number two but mark favours number three.
So do I. Yahoogroups could have attracted a lot more users if the search had worked. What went wrong is that some porn-spammers created group after group with the same huge list of tags, and yahoo wasn't willing to do anything about it.

Do we need to have tag-lists approved by a human before the group can be used? Limit the amount of tags per group to 10 or 20?

groetjes, Ronaldo





I feel number one would be a lot of work and counterproductive in just making
it easier to find things you might not know exist but appeal when you see
them.

I favour number two myself.

In particular for group types that have large numbers of groups attached.
Really, after reading through the most popular third of the whole list, the
first five struck me as being a lot to read through if they're not what your
looking for. That could change as the new groups come on line.

They may well be a large part of the two thirds classed as unpopular because
they're new and not yet fully signed up or used.

A system based just on how many groups are in a category is practical and
casts no judgement. If anything it's an affirmation of how popular the
category is.

From what I've seen so far I could live with the top five of mine  plus
other. I can slog through to a fair extent. The others were mostly ones I
noticed to a lesser extent number wise or personal preferences.

Subject to change as all the new groups get fully functional.

The third option has had several years to organically materialise but didn't
help me while I was wishing I could exclude some high instance group types
while attempting an exhaustive search. That may be my ignorance but if so
please enlighten me. Bearing in mind I don't always know what I want until I
find it.

We are all one at some level of existance. I see you all as aspects of a
greater whole that I am also a small part of. One of the groups I would never
have thought to search for holds to the same belief. I found it, amongst
others, only after great labour wading through the high interest areas.

The esoteric need not be occluded. Minorities matter.

Ant👣


moderated Re: email privacy

Ant No
 

Hello Duane

I passed your wisdom on to the upset member. Hopefully he will be reassured. I suggested he check if he can see everyone else's full email to determine the current setting.

If he can I'll talk the owner through how to change it by following your instructions.

I'm a bit tired now so I'm going to leave these intensive threads until I've had time to check in and say hello to my new groups.

I prefer the positive cheerleader role most of the time. These have been an effort.

I may be some time...

Ant👣


moderated Re: Narrow formatting in Digests?

ro-esp
 

On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 06:12 PM, Phil Smith III wrote:

groups.io seems very nice so far except for one thing: Digests are formatted
in silly narrow columns.
I am not seeing narrow digests in this group, but have seen it in another. I'm not sure why.

I do agree that "classic" digests are a lot better

groetjes, Ronaldo


locked Re: categorisation

Ant No
 

Hello again Duane

I read those two links but not the even older links the first one referenced.

As I understand it there are three main opinions.

A massively detailed hierarchy such as the dewy decimal.

20 or so broad categories.

A bottom up tagging system.

The greatest support seems to be for number two but mark favours number three.

I feel number one would be a lot of work and counterproductive in just making it easier to find things you might not know exist but appeal when you see them.

I favour number two myself.

In particular for group types that have large numbers of groups attached. Really, after reading through the most popular third of the whole list, the first five struck me as being a lot to read through if they're not what your looking for. That could change as the new groups come on line.

They may well be a large part of the two thirds classed as unpopular because they're new and not yet fully signed up or used.

A system based just on how many groups are in a category is practical and casts no judgement. If anything it's an affirmation of how popular the category is.

From what I've seen so far I could live with the top five of mine  plus other. I can slog through to a fair extent. The others were mostly ones I noticed to a lesser extent number wise or personal preferences.

Subject to change as all the new groups get fully functional.

The third option has had several years to organically materialise but didn't help me while I was wishing I could exclude some high instance group types while attempting an exhaustive search. That may be my ignorance but if so please enlighten me. Bearing in mind I don't always know what I want until I find it.

We are all one at some level of existance. I see you all as aspects of a greater whole that I am also a small part of. One of the groups I would never have thought to search for holds to the same belief. I found it, amongst others, only after great labour wading through the high interest areas.

The esoteric need not be occluded. Minorities matter.

Ant👣


moderated Re: Direct Add

Ann Wild
 

I suggest sticking with the transfer process. It went through so smoothly for our group, and everything transferred.

Ann


moderated Operating a moderated group

David Tuma
 

I set up a moderated group after transferring from Yahoo Groups.  It was pretty simple for members to send me an email to be posted by the moderator - they just replied to the posting or they sent one to me as the owner.  I don't see how to do that with Groups.io.  I've tried sending emails from my non-owner/moderator account but either they get returned because I'm not the owner/moderator or they just don't seem to go anywhere if I send them to the owner.  Where I can find out how to do this.

Also, who does a "special" notice go to and what does it look like when it goes out?

Thank you


moderated Re: email privacy

 

Ellen I am pretty sure I saw an option for masking or not masking, your choice. I’ve made offline friends because I could see their address In the email. I wouldn’t post my personal email to a message board. 
Susan B





Susan B 


On Oct 27, 2019, at 2:50 PM, Ellen Moody <ellen.moody@...> wrote:

Is it true that members of a list cannot see the whole email of other members? As list"owner" (moderator), I can see emails of everyone. I would personally prefer everyone to be able to see one another's emails -- this way if people want to become friends offlist they can. If there is some rule that has been promulgated and prevents this I can say nothing but I prefer openness.  Ellen

Ellen

On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 2:43 PM Ant No <cmpaqp1100@...> wrote:
I agree Chris but remember that at the moment owners are trying to rescue a cat from a burning building and IT may not be their forte.

The data Holder, ie groups.io, has a data privacy obligation in law irrespective of how we feel.

Ant👣


locked Re: fees

Ant No
 

I'm trying to be civil and cogent. I politely asked privately. But I feel it reasonable to ask what falsehood or error I'm accused of.  I don't accept ambiguous assertions one cannot or will not clarify.

If I am in error fair enough. We all make mistakes.

I agree it shouldn't be a pi$$ing match but I'm half Vulcan and this is just how I honestly express myself.

I have nothing personal against RCordona I don't know him or her.

The majority of people in these places are genuinely good people even if they disagree sometimes.

I don't take against someone just for disagreeing with me. We all have opinions and that's fine.


moderated Re: email privacy

Ant No
 

You may be right Duane but where is that exemption stated?

In fact my old groups did function that way because the group acted as an anonymising intermediate.

Believe me when I say I have mixed feelings about data privacy interfering with good things like hobby groups.

GDPR is meant to protect individuals from the likes of Facebook, Verzion etc not from small special interest groups like these. However it does not make that distinction.

One should not assume it's all been done for you if you're a group owner. It sounds to me as though it actually has, but the owners share responsibility. Ideally both are aware.

Apart from actually protecting the data being desirable, I seriously doubt any group owner would ever face prosecution. No money in it and group members might get upset and cancel but are very unlikely to sue.

It's one of those legal technicalities that's unlikely to be enforced.


moderated Re: email privacy

Duane
 

On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 01:51 PM, Ellen Moody wrote:
Is it true that members of a list cannot see the whole email of other members?
Unless you make the Members List available to Subscribers, no one can see it.  They can put themselves in the group Directory, if you've enabled that, with information that they want other members to see.  If they don't add themselves, they also can't see any that are there.  Any email that is sent to people, either individual or digest, will have the email address of the person that posted it (that's the nature of email lists ;>)

BTW, GDPR does NOT apply to email lists because they couldn't function.  The site is in compliance though.

Duane


moderated Re: email privacy

Ellen Moody
 

I presume the members were or are told (somewhere on the site). I did not set up my listserv. I can only repeat what I said.  Ellen


On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 3:11 PM Ant No <cmpaqp1100@...> wrote:
Hello Ellen

In an ideal world you are of course correct.

In this world data is harvested for profit which leads to spam and an undesirable level of covert surveillance.

For this reason Europe has enacted data protection laws that apply to any data held on European citizens regardless of where the servers are situated.

Names with emails are such data.

Members who wish to converse directly may choose to exchange emails through the existing channels with no special effort on anyone's part.

As you control whether that data is available it is also your legal responsibility to ensure each member has an informed choice on how their data is made available.

Regards

Ant


locked Re: fees

KWKloeber
 

Is there a way we can discuss issues w/o it turning into pi$$ing matches and turning into a locked topic so that it shuts down conversation?  Is it possible that we can act as adults.


locked Re: categorisation

Ant No
 

Well, objectively, you can't call something wholly unnecessary when there are many thousands of of groups to get through.

The search function is fine if you are on rails and know what you want to find. But strolling through the landscape to see what unanticipated wonder you stumble across also has merit.

An important point is that you can choose not to use it and include all categories in your sort or search. So you lose nothing while others gain something. It limits nothing and adds flexibility.

It's about the greatest choice for the greatest number. You can still do things your way. Those that want to can do it another way.

Ant