Date   

Chat text entry field hidden on mobile #bug

Bruce Bowman
 

Mark -- Someone in Group_Help recently reported that the text entry field for the chat function is hidden under the menu items on their mobile device. Just resize to a narrow enough window and it disappears.

I don't know if this is also happening in the app.

Regards,
Bruce


Re: Two activity log records created when a pending message is viewed before approval #bug

 

On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 07:11 AM, Duane wrote:
I don't see that it creates a problem as is, just an extra entry in the log that's not needed.
I agree with that. And it depends on what you mean by "needed" as applied to log entries. I feel it's appropriate to create a log entry for any significant action, even if you're not sure whether or not the logging changes anyone else's behavior. Sometimes you just want to know what's been happening in the group.
 
--
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: Beta Group Guidelines #meta

Glenn Glazer
 

On 05/31/2021 23:15, Andy Wedge wrote:
On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 06:26 AM, Glenn Glazer wrote:
Like does not work in email in either direction: I cannot like a post by email and I do not see likes in my email.
If you reply to a post by email and just put +1 as your message text, it will be recorded as a Like. You cannot see Likes unless you use the Web UI though.

Andy

Oh, thanks. I didn't know that. TIL.

Best,

Glenn

--
#calcare
PG&E Delenda Est


Re: Two activity log records created when a pending message is viewed before approval #bug

Duane
 

On Sun, May 30, 2021 at 05:43 PM, Andy Wedge wrote:
If I select the checkbox next to a pending message and approve it, I get one activity log message saying I approved the message. However if I view (not edit) the message first and then approve it, I get a message saying I claimed it and then another saying I approved it.
I had a chance to use this just now.  I feel it's a matter of placement of the claim function in the processing.  If I'm reading a message to make a decision, there's no need for a 'claim' if approved, only if I select the Reject button.  It's useful there because it can take a minute or two to create the reason for rejection, especially if there's not a canned notice, and another mod could happen to access the message during that time.  I don't see that it creates a problem as is, just an extra entry in the log that's not needed.

Duane


Re: Beta Group Guidelines #meta

Andy Wedge
 

On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 06:26 AM, Glenn Glazer wrote:
Like does not work in email in either direction: I cannot like a post by email and I do not see likes in my email.
If you reply to a post by email and just put +1 as your message text, it will be recorded as a Like. You cannot see Likes unless you use the Web UI though.

Andy


Re: Beta Group Guidelines #meta

Glenn Glazer
 

On 05/31/2021 21:21, KWKloeber via groups.io wrote:

Adding to list below:

- It likely would be helpful to cut down on unnecessary chafe in replies by avoiding reminding us that "it's Mark's business" or that  "Mark can implement a #Suggestion (or not) as he sees fit," or that "Mark can decide whether a #Suggestion will benefit enough members," and so on and so forth. 
It's intuitively obvious that Mark can do whatever he wants - we neither need to be reminded nor do we need to remind others.


I have most often seen this as a response to criticism. If we cut down on that, I think much of this sort of comment will be unnecessary.


Here is a prior msg to Mark (just copied verbatim so forgive my not fine-tuning it) when we had been discussing the "new" beta group back in Jan 2020.  Could we use this as a jumping-off point for interested-others to add to and suggest guidelines to Mark he could fine tune to whatever will help him the most?

Will you be publishing guidelines - specifically referring to what is most helpful to you and want to see added (or refrained from) re: discussion of a #suggestion.  Some thoughts if you decide to go that route:

- "I agree" and "me too" be forever banned (unless Beta is intended to be a popularity poll.)  "LIKE" works.

Like does not work in email in either direction: I cannot like a post by email and I do not see likes in my email. I for one, almost never use the web interface and I do not believe I am unique in this.

- "No one will use that" -  no one has enough foresight to definitively predict what the average user (or non-average) will or will -

- "That would cause a mess" or "cause more confusion than now" or "can't be implemented"  or ..... similar type replies.  

- For the most part "opinions" have little value and add to unnecessary chaff on Beta.  Everyone has one and every one (just as everyone) is as valid as another.

- "Fact-based" -  discussions/additions/clarifications that are fact-based and add to understanding or clarification (or forbid improvement) of someone else's suggestion, not leading to needing to defend one's opinions (rather than presenting or clarifying facts,) which adds tons of chaff.

The rest of these seem good.

Best,

Glenn


--
#calcare
PG&E Delenda Est


Re: Beta Group Guidelines #meta

KWKloeber
 

Adding to list below:

- It likely would be helpful to cut down on unnecessary chafe in replies by avoiding reminding us that "it's Mark's business" or that  "Mark can implement a #Suggestion (or not) as he sees fit," or that "Mark can decide whether a #Suggestion will benefit enough members," and so on and so forth. 
It's intuitively obvious that Mark can do whatever he wants - we neither need to be reminded nor do we need to remind others.


Here is a prior msg to Mark (just copied verbatim so forgive my not fine-tuning it) when we had been discussing the "new" beta group back in Jan 2020.  Could we use this as a jumping-off point for interested-others to add to and suggest guidelines to Mark he could fine tune to whatever will help him the most?

Will you be publishing guidelines - specifically referring to what is most helpful to you and want to see added (or refrained from) re: discussion of a #suggestion.  Some thoughts if you decide to go that route:

- "I agree" and "me too" be forever banned (unless Beta is intended to be a popularity poll.)  "LIKE" works.

- "No one will use that" -  no one has enough foresight to definitively predict what the average user (or non-average) will or will -

- "That would cause a mess" or "cause more confusion than now" or "can't be implemented"  or ..... similar type replies.  

- For the most part "opinions" have little value and add to unnecessary chaff on Beta.  Everyone has one and every one (just as everyone) is as valid as another.

- "Fact-based" -  discussions/additions/clarifications that are fact-based and add to understanding or clarification (or forbid improvement) of someone else's suggestion, not leading to needing to defend one's opinions (rather than presenting or clarifying facts,) which adds tons of chaff. 


Re: group URL doesn’t display in safari #misc

 

Thanks! I think that just shows how old my *old* safari was. 😊I never noticed that before this new computer and update. I just checked and it’s the same on my iPhone.


On May 31, 2021, at 2:15 PM, Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote:

On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 03:05 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
Anyone know what might be going on?
Apparently it's been that way for a long time, https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/safari-view-full-url

Duane

--
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: group URL doesn’t display in safari #misc

Duane
 

On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 03:05 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
Anyone know what might be going on?
Apparently it's been that way for a long time, https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/safari-view-full-url

Duane


group URL doesn’t display in safari #misc

 

I just (two weeks ago) got a new MacBook Pro and today, accessed groups.io via safari for the first time. (I normally use Firefox.) I noticed that only in safari, the URL for groups doesn’t display at the top. Just “groups.io.”
Anyone know what might be going on?


--
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: Two activity log records created when a pending message is viewed before approval #bug

Andy Wedge
 

On Sun, May 30, 2021 at 11:48 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
I think it makes sense to mark it as claimed once you so much as open it, so other mods know that you may be working on it and don’t try to do that concurrently.
If I open it for edit then I agree and this is what happened previously. It was marked as claimed but the 'claim' wasn't recorded in the Activity Log.  I can view a pending message by clicking on the subject and then use Skip or Cancel and that doesn't mark it as claimed (in the same way that viewing a pending subscription request does not mark in as claimed). Marking something as claimed is only useful if there is a delay between the 'claim' and the approval/rejection so that another Mod knows you are dealing with it.  What's happening here is that the claim and approval are being logged at the same time so there's no chance that another Mod would even see that in the millisecond or so that it exists before approval.

Andy


Re: Two activity log records created when a pending message is viewed before approval #bug

 

I think it makes sense to mark it as claimed once you so much as open it, so other mods know that you may be working on it and don’t try to do that concurrently.


On May 30, 2021, at 3:43 PM, Andy Wedge <andy_wedge@...> wrote:

Hi Mark,

If I select the checkbox next to a pending message and approve it, I get one activity log message saying I approved the message. However if I view (not edit) the message first and then approve it, I get a message saying I claimed it and then another saying I approved it. I've raised this as a bug as I cannot see the need for the 'claim' entry when I have not edited the pending message.

Regards
Andy

--
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


Two activity log records created when a pending message is viewed before approval #bug

Andy Wedge
 

Hi Mark,

If I select the checkbox next to a pending message and approve it, I get one activity log message saying I approved the message. However if I view (not edit) the message first and then approve it, I get a message saying I claimed it and then another saying I approved it. I've raised this as a bug as I cannot see the need for the 'claim' entry when I have not edited the pending message.

Regards
Andy


Retain original update field data during database export/import #suggestion

Peter Cook
 

When I export a database to a JSON and then import it to another database, the "updated" field for every record changes to the date/time of the import. I'd like to be able to move a database from one group to another but retain the original update field date/time information. This is for a database that tracks membership in a neighborhood directory, and the date/time of the last update for each record is important to us.

Pete


Re: "All messages by this member" #bug

 

I tried it and get the same bug. I think my group was also basic at the time the member left (we upgraded shortly after), and it was around the same timeframe you mention. Maybe has to do with maintaining records for "past members" in premium vs. basic groups?
--
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


"All messages by this member" #bug

Duane
 

I think this is more of a Hmmm thing than important, at the moment anyway.

While trying to find some information this morning, I selected "All messages by this member" below a message.  I got back a list of all group messages.  I then tried the same procedure on other groups which worked properly.  Additional info:
In all cases, the person was no longer a member of the group.
The original search was for a member that left 5 years ago (2016), the others for more recent departures.
All were done on Basic groups created in 2014/15.

Thanks,
Duane


Re: Beta Group Guidelines #meta

Glenn Glazer
 

On 05/29/2021 14:46, Duane wrote:
It's Mark's group (as well as his site), so it's up to him how 'hard' any enforcement should be or is. 

Yes, of course. But he also asked for our thoughts, so I gave mine.

Best,

Glenn

--
#calcare
PG&E Delenda Est


Re: Beta Group Guidelines #meta

Duane
 

On Sat, May 29, 2021 at 03:15 PM, Glenn Glazer wrote:
I'm fairly agnostic to what the group rules are or will be, but I object to hardline enforcement techniques. 
It's Mark's group (as well as his site), so it's up to him how 'hard' any enforcement should be or is.  I know in the past he has warned some people, then moderated them, then I believe he banned them (but only he knows for sure.)  If he does publish guidelines, we have the choice of accepting them in order to post or of not posting, same as with any group.

Duane


Re: Beta Group Guidelines #meta

Glenn Glazer
 

On 05/29/2021 12:22, Marv Waschke wrote:
In general, this is a well-intentioned and polite group. For me, keeping it that way is guideline number one!

THIS.

I'm fairly agnostic to what the group rules are or will be, but I object to hardline enforcement techniques.  I feel they stifle conversation and actually make things less polite or at least, less respectful of contributors.

Best,

Glenn

--
#calcare
PG&E Delenda Est


Re: Beta Group Guidelines #meta

Marv Waschke
 

I was a development manager for large software projects for many years and I designed and implemented several defect/enhancement tracking systems. Here are my suggestions, which are not original. Some of them have been mentioned before, all are commonplace among development managers.

  • One issue per thread. Don't add new issues to existing threads. Think hard before piling additional features onto others suggestions.
  • Keep in mind three general classes of issue and try to make clear where your issue fits when you post it.
    • Defects. The system is performing contrary to specification, documentation, or reasonable expectation. Remember that what one person sees as a reasonable expectation, another person may see as an enhancement.
    • Design flaws. The system is performing to specification, but the spec is inconsistent or fails to comply with the overall design and intent of the system.
    • Design enhancements. Suggestions for improving the system.
  • Describe the issue in a way that makes it reproducible. Just saying that something is wrong without describing exactly how to make it happen is worse than useless to developers because they waste time guessing how to reproduce the problem, and often end up fixing the wrong issue. Don't report an issue until you have figured out how to make it happen again. When describing enhancements, describe the results you want. Resist the temptation to tell the developer what to do rather than the result you want. Let them figure out how to implement a solution. They know more about the system works than you do, but they don't know how you use it or want to use it.
  • Developers have to decide what to work on next. Help them by explaining how urgent or important the issue is. How often does the issue appear in your group or groups? When it does appear, how disruptive is it in real terms? Not how angry or upset people are, but how are they materially affected? Are all groups subject to the disruption, or does some special characteristic of your group make it vulnerable? If you are upset about an issue, wait until you have calmed down to report. The system has been working for years. The sky won't fall if you wait a day or two.
In general, this is a well-intentioned and polite group. For me, keeping it that way is guideline number one!
Best, Marv

81 - 100 of 29421