Date   

Re: Add ability to reply to specific message #suggestion

Donald Hellen
 

On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 12:57:54 -0800, "J_Catlady"
<j.olivia.catlady@gmail.com> wrote:

You can make it clear what message you're responding to quoting all or part of it. To do that from the site, simply copy the section you want to quote into your browser and then click "Reply." Your quoted text will automatically be pasted into the top of your response, with an attribution referencing the author of that message.
Yes, what Catlady says, and I'll add that most of your members are
going to post, read, and reply by email and not on the web site.

The reply feature works for the rest of those who reply on the web
site and not by email, so I doubt Mark would want to make changes to
it.

Donald


----------------------------------------------------
Some ham radio groups you may be interested in:
https://groups.io/g/ICOM https://groups.io/g/Ham-Antennas
https://groups.io/g/HamRadioHelp https://groups.io/g/Baofeng
https://groups.io/g/CHIRP https://rf-amplifiers.groups.io/g/main


Re: Add ability to reply to specific message #suggestion

 

And if you're replying via email, and you reply directly underneath a specific message within the thread, that specific message will be quoted in your reply (although encapsulated in ellipses saying "show hidden text").
--
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


Connect past deleted-account member history with current if resubscribed under same email address #suggestion

 

A past member of my group just resubscribed after a number of years under the same email address. Usually when this happens, the member's history comes back automatically. But in this case, it's blank, which I'm assuming/guessing is because in the past members page, her account shows as "Deleted Account." I can find the member's history by clicking on "Deleted Account," which is somewhat helpful, but it is not, as is usually the case, connected with the new membership.

Is it possible to resurrect history in a resubscription under the same email address, as usually happens, even when the member left due to deleting their account? The history is still there, but is just not hooked up to the email address.
--
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


Re: Add ability to reply to specific message #suggestion

Duane
 

On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 02:53 PM, <mgeisler02@...> wrote:
when I click on the Reply arrow for a specific message, my reply shows up at the end of the list instead of showing up underneath that message
And if you don't want to highlight the info to quote when you click Reply under the message, the reply box will open under the message so you can easily refer to the original, though a bit more difficult on a phone or tablet.  You can also click Reply, then click the Quote Post icon to copy in the entire thing.  There are many, many features here that may take some getting used to.  Reading the Owners Manual (for group settings) and/or the Members Manual (for things that apply to everyone, such as replies) can answer a lot of questions you may have.

Duane


Re: Add ability to reply to specific message #suggestion

 

You can make it clear what message you're responding to quoting all or part of it. To do that from the site, simply copy the section you want to quote into your browser and then click "Reply." Your quoted text will automatically be pasted into the top of your response, with an attribution referencing the author of that message.

I don't think anything in particular needs, or even should, be done to implement the request beyond what already exists. I think it could actually cause confusion.
--
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


Add ability to reply to specific message #suggestion

Marisa-ATLAS
 

I just set up a new account and am exploring the features to see if it will work for our group. One thing I can't do it respond to a particular message within a topic; when I click on the Reply arrow for a specific message, my reply shows up at the end of the list instead of showing up underneath that message--so it's impossible to see what exactly I'm replying to. Is there any chance that this will ever be changed? It's pretty important in order to follow what's being commented upon. Thanks for considering!


#bug Reply area blank #bug

Hank Seamon
 

When I choose to REPLY in out Roadtrek CyberRally, I can see the topic, my FROM, but the area to type a reply is blank.

this is in  rti.groups.io 

As you are noticing, I do not have this  problem with this Beta Group.

Here is a clip of what I see:


--
Hank S.
Littlestown, PA
One mailbox from a Gettysburg address


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Joseph Hudson
 

John, you could easily use the mute this topic button in any of the threads if you were no longer interested. Which it sure seems like you're not.

On Dec 30, 2020, at 6:51 AM, John Wirtz SF <john@sorefingers.co.uk> wrote:

I think what would be really useful as the thread now becoming slightly confrontational is that Mark bring this discussion to a close with a statement either re-iterating his pricing structure going forward or letting us know it is still under review.

If I worked for Mark, and I was tasked with sorting this out, this would be my approach:

Groups.io isn’t in the business of assessing how much of a service each individual group provides to its subscribers. It exists to maintain and improve the platform.
So collecting subscriptions from individual subscribers is a non-starter.

When one creates a group, it might be simple support group restricted to a number of subscribers of, as suggested up to a hundred who want an easy way to communicated.
On the other hand, if you’re creating an interest group that is likely to attract 10,000, then you might need to reconsider the status of the group and make a small charge for membership. That is the group administrators responsibility, no that of Groups.io.

I don’t think that beyond a hundred members, there should be free groups and I would recommend that an intermediate package – if commercially realistic – was offered to smaller groups who relied on member subscriptions.

But, it is up to group creators and owners to take responsibility for their groups and charge their subscribers, not the platform provider.

One final point about income. Yahoo, Google, etc have many income streams, not least by sharing your personal data, so they can afford to offer free groups. Group’s io have only one source, payments for premium and enterprise packages. He needs more of the group to pay for the service. Simple.

But, please kill or close this boring thread, there’s been enough opinion and it’s getting tiresome now.

John Wirtz






From: main@beta.groups.io <main@beta.groups.io> On Behalf Of Chris Jones via groups.io
Sent: 30 December 2020 11:37
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Pricing Changes

On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 11:04 AM, Samuel Murrayy wrote:
I think we can be clear that the purpose of Groups.io is to make money,
And why do you go to work, exactly? I would argue that the purpose of Groups.io is to provide a service. At some point in the chain providing that service costs money, and the person coordinating everything (Mark) has to put food on the table. What is so dreadfully wrong with persons using a service being the people who pay for it?

Not many businesses survive very long by losing money.

Chris


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Susan Fox
 

Coming a little late to the support box, but just wanted to throw in my appreciation for what Mark has done for my community of over 6,000 members which started on Yahoo Groups in 2002.  We also have a membership platform but they are not half as responsive to our needs despite charging exponentially more for their services.

 

About 7 years into running Park Slope Parents I had to make a decision to charge members to join Park Slope Parents because I couldn’t keep volunteering my time—my kids needed a college savings account. There were so many people who felt like things should be free, and Gawker and the press shamed us, but we’ve never looked back and also never been stronger.


THREE CHEERS FOR MARK!

 

Susan Fox

Founder, Park Slope Parents

Susan@...

 

 

 


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

 

On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 11:49 AM, Glenn Glazer wrote:
we may have gone off topic and into the weeds.
Haha. But maybe the weeds are fun. Mark has provided us with some great entertainment during these awful winter doldrums! Right?
 
--
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


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Glenn Glazer
 

I would like to suggest that at the point where we start debating economic philosophies, we may have gone off topic and into the weeds.

Best,

Glenn

--
PG&E Delenda Est


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Jeremy H
 

On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 11:36 AM, Chris Jones wrote:
On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 11:04 AM, Samuel Murrayy wrote:
I think we can be clear that the purpose of Groups.io is to make money,
And why do you go to work, exactly? I would argue that the purpose of Groups.io is to provide a service. At some point in the chain providing that service costs money, and the person coordinating everything (Mark) has to put food on the table.
There is a difference between providing a service, and hence making money, and making money by providing a service, I think Mark is, to his credit, trying to do the former: but needing to make enough money, and finding it difficult, under his current businsess plan, to do so.
 
What is so dreadfully wrong with persons using a service being the people who pay for it?
Nothing. The problem is that Mark's business plan (current and future) is that group owners are the people who make the payments.

But they are not the the people using using the service: those are the group members (and Mark's future pricing plan, based on 'per user' pricing, reflects this)

Some group owners, for some groups, are, and will be, willing and able to pay for their groups, because they make money from their members (somehow - by charging for a greater membership, or selling stuff, or... ) or (occasionally) just have money to burn (and these are likely to be put off by an open ended per member price, when the old $110 pa unlimited members premium group charge might have been acceptable).

But others are not: while they are willing to put in the effort of setting up and running groups, they have neither the funds, nor (easily) the means of raising them, to be able to pay for them. And while $0.55 per member per year is not a lot - so you might ask why can't they just pay out of their pocket - it mounts up: 100 members is $55, 1000 $550. And I would suggest that most do not set up groups without at least the hope, if not the expectation, of achieving those sorts of numbers.

So the Achilles heel of Groups.io comes down to the difficulty, and cost, of taking (and accounting for) such small payments (c$0.50 pa) - whether by Groups.io, or group owners... 

And, if you believe that 'free' (or minimal cost) and open basic groups are a 'good thing', It is a pity - in the absence of alternative suggestions - that the suggestion of soliciting donations from members, or charging them (perhaps an annual charge $5 for 'some' groups, extras a bit more) has been rejected. 

A further point: that - in all these posts - the implications of 'excess' members becoming (for future groups) a cost, rather than a benefit (or something that could just ignored), for group owners haven't really been discussed, as owners come to face the issue. 

Jeremy


Re: Include Email Aliases in Member List #suggestion

 

Mark,

Bruce wrote:
... Failing that, if you attempt to invite or direct add an aliased address, the error message could say something more helpful, along the lines of "already a member (as an alias of xx@ yy.com)."

I'd vote for that as the primary suggestion. Then the moderator wouldn't have to search for it.

Shal


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

 

On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 10:06 AM, John Wirtz SF wrote:
I find the thread tiresome
As Chris said, all you have to do is stop reading! Or what about learning about the "mute" and "unfollow" features, so that you can completely strike from your vision this tiresome thread that you are continuing to contribute to? :)
 
--
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


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

John Wirtz SF
 

Ellen wrote:

 

There is no way I'm going to charge "my subscribers."  I do not own anything in groups.io; if I was forced to pay, I might see myself as

a renter, a tenant. That's the analogy. Google groups would not do because they have no archives, no files (we do share essays) and no photos

(which we share with one another) -- they are part of the 3 different groups' identities, their memory as it were.

 

This paragraph doesn’t make any sense whatsoever!

 

I find the thread tiresome because the sentiment that is coming across is that the owners of free groups want those who pay for premium or enterprise to subsidise the free/basic groups.

Sorry, that’s not fair trading.  As far as I can see, Mark has set out a pricing plan and isn’t going to change it.

 

John Wirtz


Re: Include Email Aliases in Member List #suggestion

 

I second this.


On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 9:34 AM Bruce Bowman <bruce.bowman@...> wrote:
Email aliases can confound group Owners, who often don't even realize such a feature exists. For example, it's very disconcerting to attempt to invite or direct add an alias address and have the system tell you that address is already a member. 

"??? I don't see it in the Member List..."

Even if you do already know about aliases, this leaves you with the frustrating task of painstakingly opening every member record one by one to find out which account is using the alias. 

To that end, it might be handy if all aliases were listed right there in the Member List, perhaps indented below the subscribed address and in a different color (or bearing a new status badge or something along those lines...haven't thought that completely through). Failing that, if you attempt to invite or direct add an aliased address, the error message could say something more helpful, along the lines of "already a member (as an alias of xx@ yy.com)."

A final thing I would like to open for consideration is the ability of Owners of Premium groups to edit a subscriber's email aliases (as they already can for the primary address).

Thanks for your consideration,
Bruce


--
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


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

txercoupemuseum.org
 

Hi Duane,

You’re way ahead of most group owners in your understanding of “how things work”.  In reading this latest, I must confess I cannot relate much of what you say to my rudimentary comprehension of my own situation.  I’m not going to change the “Subject” (hashtag?) because the Groups.io server doesn’t seem to like that.

My iPhone, personally purchased, operates on the Verizon network.  For a monthly fee, it “works” and I operate on the lowest level “data plan” without a problem so long as I do my web surfing on WiFi.

My “internet”, via WiFi, is supplied by Century Link for a nominal fee.  It is a “wired” service, like I once got through Sprint.  Because I live and have my office in a metal building, my WiFi and cellphone service are severely attenuated, so Verizon provides me with a “Network Extender” that has an outside antenna and brings my Verizon “service” inside and at maximum signal strength.

My email comes from FatCow, where I have a personal domain and email address (my only one, although I can originate more).  Again, there is a monthly fee for email hosting (POP account), and they also handle my domain registration (nominal separate fee annually).

My groups were transferred here from Yahoo about a year and a half ago.  These are, to the best of my knowledge, “email groups” with relatively few participants but many “lurkers”.  One has 875 members at present, the other 777.

In checking our “email burden” under group activity I find my larger group, by far the most active, lists 196 messages so far during December.  Of These, 21 were via “Web” and 175 were via “email”, roughly 1% versus 99%.

You are saying that emails “sent from the site” (presumably groups.io?) represent a “large load” (data stream?) but those sent by “web interface” also represent a “large load”.  To my way of thinking, my email “load” is on the FatCow server (POP account) and I fail to see how that is in any manner a “burden” on Groups.io unless this relates to the presumably separate functions of “send" and “receive”.

Specifically, my email address “sends" and “receives” via the Fatcow server; but when I send a message to my Group.io account, that is then re-broadcast to my 875 members by Groups.io.  In such context, above 175 “email” messages in December were each “re-broadcast” 875 times, for a total of 153,125 messages.  Obviously the same would seem true of  the 21 “web” messages, times 875 equalling 18,375.

To the best of my knowledge none of these messages contained pictures, although several did transmit an attachment of 1 8-1/2 x 11 black and white table.  I can see that groups that transmit attachments constantly, particularly color ones, could represent quite an additional “load” on Groups.io servers.  

It is no t obvious how those emailing via “web” would differ in “load” from those using email.  They aren’t “web surfing”.  On the other hand, one of my members does have a web site on which he hosts hundreds of drawing scans related to our aircraft which would “respond” to an member query much like other web sites. But those queries are individual…the response is individual…it doesn’t get re-broadcast like an email attachment does.

Additionally, I have no idea how those using POP accounts (where the email is downloaded from, in my case, Fatcow, and then eventually deleted) and those using IMAP accounts (where they reside, presumably forever, on Fatcow servers) affect Groups.io other than the “rebroadcast” burden.

Perhaps you could share your comprehension to clarify mine?  (Comments by others also most welcome)

Best!

WRB

— 


On Dec 29, 2020, at 10:41 AM, Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:

On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 09:52 AM, Mike Hanauer wrote:
This feels like profit creep, like bait and switch.
I don't believe I've ever felt this was the case.  Yes, things change, BUT Mark has always kept his word to existing groups.  Though he doesn't have to (and I'm sure the record keeping would be a lot simpler without it), he's managed to maintain the terms that a group agreed to when they joined up or upgraded (other than increasing features for Premium groups in some cases.)  I keep in mind that these changes would only apply to groups created after January 18.  If someone creates a group then, they agree to the terms in effect at that time.

While I'm here, I'd like to mention something I've been thinking about.  I've been operating under the assumption that those using email create the larger load on the system.  It dawned on me that it may be those online, or more evenly distributed anyway, that create the load.  While there are a lot of emails sent from the site, ~200 per second on average by my guesstimate, using the web interface results in a large load as well.  Each time someone clicks on a link, that page and it's contents must be retrieved and displayed.  While the system may handle things well on average, it's the peak load that determines what infrastructure is needed to support the site, and that has a cost.  I'll continue to support Mark and GIO as much as I can.

Duane


Include Email Aliases in Member List #suggestion

Bruce Bowman
 

Email aliases can confound group Owners, who often don't even realize such a feature exists. For example, it's very disconcerting to attempt to invite or direct add an alias address and have the system tell you that address is already a member. 

"??? I don't see it in the Member List..."

Even if you do already know about aliases, this leaves you with the frustrating task of painstakingly opening every member record one by one to find out which account is using the alias. 

To that end, it might be handy if all aliases were listed right there in the Member List, perhaps indented below the subscribed address and in a different color (or bearing a new status badge or something along those lines...haven't thought that completely through). Failing that, if you attempt to invite or direct add an aliased address, the error message could say something more helpful, along the lines of "already a member (as an alias of xx@ yy.com)."

A final thing I would like to open for consideration is the ability of Owners of Premium groups to edit a subscriber's email aliases (as they already can for the primary address).

Thanks for your consideration,
Bruce


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Chris Jones
 

On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 12:51 PM, John Wirtz SF wrote:
But, please kill or close this boring thread, there’s been enough opinion and it’s getting tiresome now.
I suggest that you stop reading it then. IMHO it is still worthwhile.

Chris


locked Re: Pricing Changes #update

Ellen Moody
 

I don't find the thread tiresome.  It has begun to interest me since I discovered all new "free" groups must have under 100 members.
If you don't like what's being said, don't read it.

There is no way I'm going to charge "my subscribers."  I do not own anything in groups.io; if I was forced to pay, I might see myself as
a renter, a tenant. That's the analogy. Google groups would not do because they have no archives, no files (we do share essays) and no photos
(which we share with one another) -- they are part of the 3 different groups' identities, their memory as it were.

Ellen

_

601 - 620 of 27857