Date   

moderated Re: non-member applying to subgroup should not get main group’s pending notice #suggestion

Michael Pavan
 


In order to join a subgroup, you must be a member of the main group. It's not possible to just be a member of a subgroup. So, given a public subgroup, should the Join button be shown to non-members of the parent group? Or should it be a pointer to the parent group? Or something else?
A pointer to the main group, with the explanation that only users who belong to the main group may ask to join a subgroup.


moderated Re: non-member applying to subgroup should not get main group’s pending notice #suggestion

 

Mark,


So, given a public subgroup, should the Join button be shown to non-members of the parent group? Or should it be a pointer to the parent group? Or something else?

I thought this had been deliberately streamlined, so that the attempt to join the subgroup would cause a join of the primary group also. The idea being to simplify the flow rather than make the user stop and go do something else (join the primary group) and then come back to join the subgroup.

Maybe the issue is more one of making sure that the Notices sent are sensible, even merged as was done for Direct Add to the primary that includes one or more subgroup checkboxes.

To answer J's original issue, perhaps the Pending Notice of the primary group should be suppressed in this case, allowing the group managers to write the Pending Notice for the subgroup with wording that clarifies that the person is (implicitly) requesting membership in the primary group as well; or has joined the primary group, in the case of a primary group without membership restriction.
Shal


moderated Re: change title "Public Groups" on search groups page #suggestion

 

On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 6:27 PM Marv Waschke <marv@...> wrote:
I am for "Publicly Listed Groups" -- wordy, but it reduces ambiguity.

Changed.

Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Re: non-member applying to subgroup should not get main group’s pending notice #suggestion

 

Hi All,

In order to join a subgroup, you must be a member of the main group. It's not possible to just be a member of a subgroup. So, given a public subgroup, should the Join button be shown to non-members of the parent group? Or should it be a pointer to the parent group? Or something else?

Thanks
Mark


moderated Re: Numbered accounts at qq.com

Douglas Swearingen <dougiebehr@...>
 

Thank You Mark for all you do for groups.io.  Have Great Holiday time with family and friends.


From: main@beta.groups.io <main@beta.groups.io> on behalf of Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io>
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2018 1:55 PM
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Numbered accounts at qq.com
 
Hi All,

I've just turned on the code to block all emails from numbered qq.com addresses. Also, if someone tries to register such an email address through the website, an error is returned.

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: Numbered accounts at qq.com

 

Hi All,

I've just turned on the code to block all emails from numbered qq.com addresses. Also, if someone tries to register such an email address through the website, an error is returned.

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: Numbered accounts at qq.com

James Homuth
 

By all means. Perhaps then I’ll get fewer than 150 messages to the owner address per day.

 

Alternatively, any plans to make the ability to block domains at the group level a free feature?

 

From: main@beta.groups.io <main@beta.groups.io> On Behalf Of Mark Fletcher
Sent: December-12-18 12:56 PM
To: beta@groups.io
Subject: [beta] Numbered accounts at qq.com

 

Hi All,

 

I would like to block all emails from numbered accounts at qq.com (ie 123455@...). I'm seeing a ton of spam attempts from those types of accounts, and no actual valid email. Please let me know if you know of any exceptions to this.

 

Thanks,

Mark


moderated Re: non-member applying to subgroup should not get main group's pending notice #suggestion

 

On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 03:32 PM, Jim Higgins wrote:
And if not a main group member, tell them they need to join the main group first.
The reason I said showing the button was "debatable" was because I think most or many group owners with subgroups (not me, I've avoided using subgroups) want people to know what's available, including subgroups, even including non-members. So they probably want the subgroups to be visible to non-group members. So my guess is that's the origin of showing the "join" button - owners want the subgroups visible, and no changes were made to take into account that viewers may be non-group members.

So whether or not the join button is visible to non-group members, I think an explicit and easily viewable caveat, in conjunction somewhere with showing the subgroup, that only members of the main group can join the subgroup is imperative. You can show the "join" button or not. But if you do show it, I think there needs to be better messaging on that end as well.
 
--
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: non-member applying to subgroup should not get main group's pending notice #suggestion

Jim Higgins
 

Received from J_Catlady at 12/12/2018 10:15 PM UTC:

ps I also think it's debatable whether "join this group" should even be visible for subgroups when someone is logged in as a non-member of the main group.

Yep, that's where I'd say any fix needs to be made.

At some point memberhip in the main group has to be determined before joining a subgroup, so might as well make that determination BEFORE showing a Join Subgroup button. And if not a main group member, tell them they need to join the main group first.

Jim H


moderated Re: non-member applying to subgroup should not get main group’s pending notice #suggestion

 

It is confusing with the current messaging. This is something that actually happened.

I have no issue with either (a) suggesting that the person apply to the main group when they apply to a subgroup, or (b) telling them explicitly that their application to the subgroup has resulted in an application to the main group and that they should ignore (or whatever) if they dont want to become a member.

The problem is that they are not told. They simply get a message saying ‘thank you for applying to bla-de-bla main group, please complete this questionnaire’ (or whatever the main group’s pending message happens to say), when in fact they have NOT intentionally applied and are given no explanation.

On Dec 12, 2018, at 2:52 PM, Robert Kingett <@blindjourno> wrote:

I actually want this to happen, them joining the main group when applying to a sub-group. every time someone applies to a sub-group of mine. I don't want them subscribing only to the sub-group and not the main group. I actually want this to stay as is.


--
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: non-member applying to subgroup should not get main group’s pending notice #suggestion

 

I actually want this to happen, them joining the main group when applying to a sub-group. every time someone applies to a sub-group of mine. I don't want them subscribing only to the sub-group and not the main group. I actually want this to stay as is.


moderated Re: non-member applying to subgroup should not get main group’s pending notice #suggestion

 

ps I also think it’s debatable whether ‘join this group’ should even be visible for subgroups when someone is logged in as a non-member of the main group.

On Dec 12, 2018, at 2:01 PM, J_Catlady via Groups.Io <j.olivia.catlady=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

If a non-member of a restricted main group applies via web to a subgroup by clicking on ‘join this group,’ they correctly get a banner saying that only members of the main group can join the subgroup. However, afterwards they also *incorrectly* (IMO) receive the main group’s pending subscription notification, even if they had no intention (or desire) to join the main group.

You might say that they had an unknown desire to join the main group by applying to the subgroup, but I would not buy that. There are cases where people have heard of a subgroup (if Helen is reading, a case in point is the tanyackd Loss subgroup) and wanted to join, but who actively do not want to join, and whi have no real business being in, the main group.

If this groups.io behavior is intentional and thd idea is to give them the *opportunity* to apply to the main group, that seems admirable and desirable. But I think that to act as if they HAVE ALREADY applied to the main group is not only wrong but can be hella confusing.

So perhaps, instead of acting like they’ve already applied and sending what could be a confusing pending notice, an informative message could be sent telling them how to apply.


--
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


--
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 non-member applying to subgroup should not get main group’s pending notice #suggestion

 

If a non-member of a restricted main group applies via web to a subgroup by clicking on ‘join this group,’ they correctly get a banner saying that only members of the main group can join the subgroup. However, afterwards they also *incorrectly* (IMO) receive the main group’s pending subscription notification, even if they had no intention (or desire) to join the main group.

You might say that they had an unknown desire to join the main group by applying to the subgroup, but I would not buy that. There are cases where people have heard of a subgroup (if Helen is reading, a case in point is the tanyackd Loss subgroup) and wanted to join, but who actively do not want to join, and whi have no real business being in, the main group.

If this groups.io behavior is intentional and thd idea is to give them the *opportunity* to apply to the main group, that seems admirable and desirable. But I think that to act as if they HAVE ALREADY applied to the main group is not only wrong but can be hella confusing.

So perhaps, instead of acting like they’ve already applied and sending what could be a confusing pending notice, an informative message could be sent telling them how to apply.


--
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: Numbered accounts at qq.com

Kenny Paul
 

Oh, sorry. Mixed bag no objections.
--
Kenny Paul, Technical Program Manager for ONAP
The Linux Foundation
Pacific Time Zone


moderated Re: Numbered accounts at qq.com

Kenny Paul
 

qq.com is a mixed bag. I've got a number of legitimate Chinese users from there on my lists, all from numbered accounts.

… but yeah, lots of spam attempts. 

 

 

Best Regards, 
-kenny

 

 

 

From: <main@beta.groups.io> on behalf of Jim Higgins <HigginsJ@...>
Organization: Quasimodo Software, LLC
Reply-To: <main@beta.groups.io>
Date: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 at 10:25 AM
To: <main@beta.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [beta] Numbered accounts at qq.com

 

Received from Mark Fletcher at 12/12/2018 05:56 PM UTC:

 

I would like to block all emails from numbered accounts at

ton of spam attempts from those types of accounts, and no actual valid

email. Please let me know if you know of any exceptions to this.

 

 

I see no problem with blocking qq.com . Please do.

 

Jim H

 

 

 

 


--
Kenny Paul, Technical Program Manager for ONAP
The Linux Foundation
Pacific Time Zone


moderated Re: Numbered accounts at qq.com

Jim Higgins
 

Received from Mark Fletcher at 12/12/2018 05:56 PM UTC:

I would like to block all emails from numbered accounts at <http://qq.com>qq.com (ie <mailto:123455@...>123455@...). I'm seeing a ton of spam attempts from those types of accounts, and no actual valid email. Please let me know if you know of any exceptions to this.

I see no problem with blocking qq.com . Please do.

Jim H


moderated Re: Numbered accounts at qq.com

 

None I can see, so I say block away!

On 12/12/2018 11:56 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Hi All,

I would like to block all emails from numbered accounts at qq.com (ie 123455@...). I'm seeing a ton of spam attempts from those types of accounts, and no actual valid email. Please let me know if you know of any exceptions to this.

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Numbered accounts at qq.com

 

Hi All,

I would like to block all emails from numbered accounts at qq.com (ie 123455@...). I'm seeing a ton of spam attempts from those types of accounts, and no actual valid email. Please let me know if you know of any exceptions to this.

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: ability to disable "Like" feature #suggestion

Jim Higgins
 

Received from J_Catlady at 12/12/2018 03:41 PM UTC:

Or, maybe we are just a contentious bunch. :)

No, we aren't! ;-)

Jim H


moderated Re: ability to disable "Like" feature #suggestion

 

Or, maybe we are just a contentious bunch. :)
--
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