Date   

moderated Re: Terminology change #update

Duane
 

On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 05:49 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Please let me know if you have any questions.
You didn't catch it on the member record where it says "Override: new user moderated" under Posting Privileges. ;>)

Duane


moderated Terminology change #update

 

Hi All,

As part of the writing process for the manual, our tech writer has been suggesting some changes to make things more consistent. In the group settings page, for example, I use the terms users, members and subscribers for the same thing. I've changed them all to members. The only real change other than the group settings page is that the setting formerly known as NuM or new user moderated is now NMM, or new member moderated.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks, Mark


moderated Re: Ad blocker warning #misc

Duane
 

On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 04:46 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
The more you know...
We went through something similar almost 5 years ago with the GIO login page, https://beta.groups.io/g/main/topic/47008  My fault that time.

Duane


moderated Ad blocker warning #misc

 

Hi All,

A group owner was having a problem. There were some links in messages that were just not showing up in their browser, both when reviewing pending messages on the website and when viewing the archives on the website. The links were googleadservices.com links, of the type where the text is the same as the URL itself. The links really were in the messages, but the group owner could not see them in their browser. The owner figured out the problem; they were running an ad blocker, and the ad blocker was removing the links.

I would not have been able to figure this out myself. So if you ever come across something like this, it could be an ad blocker.

The more you know...

Mark


moderated Re: sbcglobal.net blocking us #update

West Coast Compañeros Staff
 

Mark & All,

I just received this message from AT&T in response to the complaint I lodged yesterday (2/6/20). I also gave all my AT&T users (att.net, sbcglobal.net, pacbell.net, etc.) some boilerplate text to use to send their own complaints and shared it also with the GMF group. (See https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum/message/29053.) I hope AT&T removes the block sooner than 24-48 hours, but I'm glad that they are at least responsive to our complaints. (I've munged the abuse_rbl e-mail address below.)

Robert R.

Thank you for contacting the AT&T Postmaster.

The mail-server IP address(es) associated with your request will be removed from the block list within 24-48 hours from the date of this letter.  AT&T and its affiliates do NOT intentionally block legitimate mail in the course of our anti-spam initiatives and regret any inconvenience this may have caused.  If the IP that was recently blocked begins to exhibit the characteristics of a compromised network object or is compromised by an offender of Acceptable Use Policies, the IP address will be blocked again.

ADMINISTRATORS:  Please thoroughly check your IP logs before requesting removal.  You must determine that all traffic from the blocked IP is actually from your mail servers to ensure your network is not compromised.  Administrators who fail to do this may experience subsequent and more resolute blocking.

Thank you for helping AT&T Internet Services network combat spam in all its forms.

Regards,


AT&T Postmaster
Chief Security Organization
abuse_rbl@ abuse-att.net
https://www.att.com/postmaster/


moderated Re: sbcglobal.net blocking us #update

Jim Wilson
 

There was a post yesterday regarding this discovery on GMF.

The only thing that can be done is to send emails to:

    abuse_rbl AT abuse-att.net <<< (the email address cannot be hot-linked here 🙄)

In your email, you should request that they please whitelist the Groups.io email server, web01.groups.io at 66.175.222.12 because it is a legitimate server used by tens of thousands of users and groups.

The more people who send an email, the sooner it will be resolved, IMHO.

Jim


moderated Re: sbcglobal.net blocking us #update

William Halte
 

Mark, 

My users at prodigy.net are getting the same message as the sbcglobal.net accounts. The error message " ff-ip4-mx-vip1.prodigy.net: 553 5.3.0 flpd575 DNSBL:RBL 521< 66.175.222.12 >_is_blocked.For assistance forward this error to abuse_rbl@...".  I have directed my users to contact AT&T as directed by the message. 

Hopefully, they will be more responsive then Cox.net in fixing the issue.

Bill 


On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 11:34 AM Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
Hi All,

Since yesterday mid-day, sbcglobal.net has been blocking us. I have attempted to contact them, but no response so far. If you are an sbcglobal.net user, I ask that you contact them as well.

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: sbcglobal.net blocking us #update

Duane
 

On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 12:34 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
sbcglobal.net has been blocking us
This also includes the related domains such as att.net  (lots of complaints on GMF about this ;>)

Duane


moderated sbcglobal.net blocking us #update

 

Hi All,

Since yesterday mid-day, sbcglobal.net has been blocking us. I have attempted to contact them, but no response so far. If you are an sbcglobal.net user, I ask that you contact them as well.

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: A 554 Bounce code not recognized as bouncing on first occurrence #bug #fixed

 

Duane,

Or in other words, according to what you wrote, the probe bounces are possibly not *supposed* to be tracked in the Activity Log; but the experience now (the bug I'm bringing up) is they are currently, for whatever reason, actually triggering  "is bouncing" entries there.
 
--
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: Need for Better Quality Photo Viewing #done

Duane
 

On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 10:10 AM, epiplan wrote:
There must have been, originally, a reason to do this, I'd guess to do with bandwidth, but is that reason still valid with today's superfast optical broadband, 5G, unlimited data contracts and cheap data storage?
It's been this way for almost 5 years, https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/2366  You may have an unlimited, high-speed connection, but not everyone does, including me.  You also need to remember that GIO has to serve these images, so that could be part of the concern.  I'd rather that pictures be a bit distorted in the view mode than to have serious delays when reading/responding to messages.  If I need more detail, which I seldom do, I just select Download.

Duane


moderated Re: A 554 Bounce code not recognized as bouncing on first occurrence #bug #fixed

 

On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 09:34 AM, Duane wrote:
The bounces of the probes wasn't logged in the Activity Log, but was logged in the member's Email Delivery History as of July/August last year.
Thanks for the sanity check. I remember someone having requested that they be tracked, and tracking bouncing of the probes could indeed be very useful (as I just wrote in the separate thread about this specific situation, separate from 554). I think the Activity Log tracker did not, before that change, have to worry about being triggered for further bounces until the probes themselves started being tracked, because there were no furhter bounces *of group messages* (since none are sent). But that could be exactly the problem: now that the probes themselves are handled by the bounce system, an "is bouncing" status gets triggered for them, too. 
 
--
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: A 554 Bounce code not recognized as bouncing on first occurrence #bug #fixed

Duane
 

On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 10:58 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
If I recall the ancient history correctly (and I may not), bouncing of bounce probes themselves did not used to be tracked/logged.
Based on my limited investigation, you're partially correct.  The bounces of the probes wasn't logged in the Activity Log, but was logged in the member's Email Delivery History as of July/August last year.

Duane


moderated Re: Bounce handler adds "is bouncing" log entry for bounce from another group, when member already blue B in the group #bug

 

On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 09:15 AM, Chris Jones wrote:
Bounce Probes show up in the individual member's Email Delivery History.
Yes, and that's one more reason why you don't need or want further "is bouncing" entries in the group activity log. However, a group activity log entry to the effect that the member is actually bouncing the probes themselves (without having to look in their delivery history) would be very useful. I used to click "send bounce probe" every time I saw "is bouncing." Knowing specifically (and easily) that even the probes are bouncing would be useful.
 
--
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: Bounce handler adds "is bouncing" log entry for bounce from another group, when member already blue B in the group #bug

Chris Jones
 

On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 05:13 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
I think as moderators we do want to know when a bounce probe itself has bounced, so that we can not send any more of them.
Bounce Probes show up in the individual member's Email Delivery History.

Chris


moderated Re: Bounce handler adds "is bouncing" log entry for bounce from another group, when member already blue B in the group #bug

 

Mark,
Sorry for the dribble of thoughts. Things keep occurring to me, but I will stop after this. I think as moderators we do want to know when a bounce probe itself has bounced, so that we can not send any more of them. So perhaps a special log entry could be created called "bounced a bounce probe," or something to that effect, rather than the repeated "is bouncing" entry.
--
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: A 554 Bounce code not recognized as bouncing on first occurrence #bug #fixed

 

John et al,

I'd already started a separate topic for the multiple "is bouncing" entries bug. I just posted an update in it, but I'll repeat quickly here and then move over there from now on: After an account is marked as Bouncing, the system stops sending group emails to it. The subsequent multiple "is bouncing" log entries I/we are seeing are due to bounce probes themselves bouncing. If I recall the ancient history correctly (and I may not), bouncing of bounce probes themselves did not used to be tracked/logged. And as long as they weren't, the "is bouncing" trigger did not have to be checked for subsequent messages, because there were none. But with the probes themselves being tracked by the bounce system, I think the trigger should be calmed to not activate for a bounce probe message.
--
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: Need for Better Quality Photo Viewing #done

epiplan
 

Charlie, this confirms my experiment above.

The question is, can anybody do anything about the 720x720 downsampling?

There must have been, originally, a reason to do this, I'd guess to do with bandwidth, but is that reason still valid with today's superfast optical broadband, 5G, unlimited data contracts and cheap data storage?

Peter


moderated Re: Need for Better Quality Photo Viewing #done

Charlie Behnken
 

Forgot about this with all the holiday stuff.  

I will make a simple statement that the same photos on Yahoo were displayed without any issues.  It is not the photos.    To be precise, I did not transfer photos from Yahoo.  I uploaded the same image files from my computer to Yahoo.

And as far as upsizing, I checked again, and  the image displayed when selected  does not fill up the entire screen leaving white space and part of the breadcrumb visible. The downloaded image (1280 x1278) when shown on my desktop is slightly larger filling the screen space top to bottom with no white space.  If I upload the photo at 720x719 size, the selected image is the same size as the 1280x1278, then the downloaded image is smaller.

Don't know if any of this helps, but the images on Groups.io are blurry, and there is nothing I can do about it.

Charlie


moderated Re: Bounce handler adds "is bouncing" log entry for bounce from another group, when member already blue B in the group #bug

 

Mark,

The more I think about it, the more I wonder whether the problem lies in the part of the code that handles bounces of bounce probes, rather than the part that handles bounces of group messages. In my example, the extra "is bouncing" log entries stemmed from bounces of bounce probes. IIRC (and I may not), tracking bouncing of bounce probes was a later add-on. Just a thought.
--
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

4081 - 4100 of 27945