Date   

moderated Re: Paid vs free policy- request

Barry_M
 

Could it be a dog?  More specifically perhaps a labrador retriever puppy like the one attached? Even cat people like labs.  Labs are the eminently agreeable and peace-making dogs.


moderated Re: Paid vs free policy- request

 

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 12:29 PM Shal Farley <shals2nd@...> wrote:

I happen to agree with the OP Ken (Kloeber) on his point, and would be happy to share my reasoning. If not here, where? Does beta need a subgroup for such side discussions? Or do you prefer to take them individually and privately?

Can we keep this a short discussion? If so, I think having it here would be fine (my initial gut reaction was not to have it here, but creating a subgroup feels ... heavy). My concern would be that I wouldn't want the discussion to devolve into a debate over politics, which it seems would be easy enough to do. Maybe I put a time limit on the discussion to a couple days? And after that I replace any new post with a picture of a cat.

Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Re: Paid vs free policy- request

KWKloeber
 

Shal

I didn't find anything paradoxical or zenish about your statements -- succinct and logical.  
I would appreciate a further discussion of the appropriateness of ANY discrimination left/right/up/down.  To ass/u/me that I lean one way or the other based on a disagreement about a discriminatory policy is, well, assinine. 

And TY for not (falsely) equating a discovery/observation/request, to some inane thought that one doesn't appreciate Mark's hard work, nor doesn't wish io the greatest success going forward.  THANK YOU, Mark.  Passion about something means one cares deeply about its success.  When one DOESN'T care where something is headed, is when one doesn't give a crap about its success.  Don't confuse those two -- for the sake of expediency in beating down a request for neutrality.  We can agree or disagree with policies without either kissing @ss or being disagreeable, and to ass/u/me that I wish io some kind of failure is, well, just assinine on its face.

And if all REALLY want to encourage political openness, then don't discriminate -- encourage open meaningful and honest discussion on both sides and not discriminate. Prefer plain old neutrality in this biosphere, there's too much division (and Indivisible does not promote unity, it promotes defeat by garnering greater numbers, which leads to more division and gridlock.)


moderated Re: message number in emailed version #suggestion

 

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 06:43 PM, Rex A wrote:
No idea how I missed that. I'm not usually that clueless.
A likely story 
 
--
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: message number in emailed version #suggestion

Rex A
 

Oops. Sorry.

No idea how I missed that. I'm not usually that clueless.


On 5/20/2019 4:32 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
The message # is at the bottom of the email.
--
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: Paid vs free policy- request

Maria
 

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 10:56 AM, Barry Winer wrote:
Thank you, Mark. And, thanks to all of you who help manage and support this forum. Beyond the web and keyboards, groups.io matters quite a lot and that importance and relevance will only grow with time.  Personally, I hope Groups.io becomes as big and successful as the founder and owner wishes it to be.  
Amen. Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth - am losing count... THIS!

And all the other points Barry made.

I will add one more point: after what Facebook allowed 3rd party companies to do with user data, and everything we now know about how that company's data was used, how it was a platform for fake news and much more, I completely support a private for profit business like groups.io making whatever upfront and out in the open decisions about whose premium fee is waived. In the future, Groups.io could be adding other organizations to that list for free upgrades - and that's fine. Organizations need a viable alternative to facebook. One they can trust - and everything else Barry said in his second paragraph.

Maria


moderated Re: message number in emailed version #suggestion

 

Rex,


Could the message number be added to the emailed version somewhere, even if just in a custom email header?

Look in the footer:
View/Reply Online (#21167)

Shal


moderated Queued emails prematurely deleted

 

Hi All,

When we send an email, if we're unable to send it at the moment we get it, we put it in a queue and periodically retry sending it for 7 days, using an exponential backoff algorithm. Unfortunately, due to a programming error on my part, I accidentally deleted many of these queued messages this afternoon before their 7 days were up. Many of these messages would never have been delivered, due to receiving machine issues, but some would have (I don't have exact numbers available). I have fixed the bug and added additional checks to make sure this won't happen again. I sincerely apologize for the screwup.

Mark


moderated Re: message number in emailed version #suggestion

 

The message # is at the bottom of the email.
--
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 message number in emailed version #suggestion

Rex A
 

I follow most groups mainly via email. As far as I can tell the emailed version of a posted message does not include the assigned message number in that group.

Sometimes it would be nice to look at an old, saved email version and get the message number to refer to the online message.

Could the message number be added to the emailed version somewhere, even if just in a custom email header?


moderated Re: Paid vs free policy- request

 

Shal, 
Your comment reads like a koan. :)
--
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: Paid vs free policy- request

 

Mark,


I'm happy to continue discussing, but beta probably isn't the place for it. I'll be locking the topic soon.

I happen to agree with the OP Ken (Kloeber) on his point, and would be happy to share my reasoning. If not here, where? Does beta need a subgroup for such side discussions? Or do you prefer to take them individually and privately?

I also happen to agree with him that beta is an appropriate place for having made his suggestion: it would be an improvement (in my eyes at least) to the Groups.io service to avoid putting such offers (or any other form of discrimination) on its official pages (cf: Excluding selected members from Yahoo Group transfer). However, I also agree with you that beta may not a good place a detailed discussion of why it is or is not a good suggestion or even an appropriate suggestion.

Shal


moderated Re: Paid vs free policy- request

Nancy Funk <funkmomma71@...>
 

I'm at the opposite side of the political spectrum than Mark, but I fully respect the freedom he had to support whoever he wishes. I certainly wouldn't want someone telling me who or what I can support with my hard earned money. 

We need more freedom of speech and association not less. 


moderated Re: Paid vs free policy- request

Barbara Byers
 

Hi Mark,

I agree with Ken, and thank you!

Barb

 


On 2019-05-20 12:59 PM, Ken Schweizer wrote:

Hi Mark,

 

This is one Ken who is appreciative of what you have done and made available to us. I have never been accused of being a progressive, but this is your endeavor and you have a right to charge or not charge whoever or whatever you want. All of us who use the service you are providing always has the option to leave if we really disagree with your policies, but those who just want a free pass should either keep their thoughts to themselves or outright say "me too".

 

Again, thanks.

Ken

 

"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." God

 

From: main@beta.groups.io [mailto:main@beta.groups.io] On Behalf Of Mark Fletcher
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 11:25 AM
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Paid vs free policy- request

 

Hi Ken,

 

On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 7:50 PM Ken Kloeber via Groups.Io <KWKloeber=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:


Is your group associated with Indivisible? Please contact support, and we will upgrade your group to Premium for free.

VERY inappropriate!  And suggest/request it be removed. Or rename the io platform to make it clear that it is a politically oriented platform.

I don't think I can add anything that hasn't already been said much better by others, especially Barry's comment about companies and the decisions they make.

 

I will say that I've tried to make it easy for groups and users to export all their data should they want to leave. I don't want anyone to feel hoodwinked and trapped. No shenanigans here.

 

I'm happy to continue discussing, but beta probably isn't the place for it. I'll be locking the topic soon.

 

Thanks,

Mark

 


moderated Re: Paid vs free policy- request

Ken Schweizer
 

Hi Mark,

 

This is one Ken who is appreciative of what you have done and made available to us. I have never been accused of being a progressive, but this is your endeavor and you have a right to charge or not charge whoever or whatever you want. All of us who use the service you are providing always has the option to leave if we really disagree with your policies, but those who just want a free pass should either keep their thoughts to themselves or outright say "me too".

 

Again, thanks.

Ken

 

"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." God

 

From: main@beta.groups.io [mailto:main@beta.groups.io] On Behalf Of Mark Fletcher
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 11:25 AM
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Paid vs free policy- request

 

Hi Ken,

 

On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 7:50 PM Ken Kloeber via Groups.Io <KWKloeber=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:


Is your group associated with Indivisible? Please contact support, and we will upgrade your group to Premium for free.

VERY inappropriate!  And suggest/request it be removed. Or rename the io platform to make it clear that it is a politically oriented platform.

I don't think I can add anything that hasn't already been said much better by others, especially Barry's comment about companies and the decisions they make.

 

I will say that I've tried to make it easy for groups and users to export all their data should they want to leave. I don't want anyone to feel hoodwinked and trapped. No shenanigans here.

 

I'm happy to continue discussing, but beta probably isn't the place for it. I'll be locking the topic soon.

 

Thanks,

Mark


moderated Re: Feature Request: Zapier Integration #suggestion

Bob Fulton <pastpresident@...>
 

www.Zapier.com is a popular plug-and-play integration builder with over 1,500 apps participating so far. It would involve a simple configuration around your existing API to be one of the participating apps. Others, like myself, could then build “Zaps” between the various apps. Would add a lot of value to your Premium offering.

 

From: main@beta.groups.io <main@beta.groups.io> On Behalf Of Mark Fletcher
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 10:27 AM
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Feature Request: Zapier Integration #featurerequest

 

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:09 AM Bob Fulton <pastpresident@...> wrote:

Like no doubt many in the user base of groups.io, we are a closed membership organization. We are investigating utilizing groups.io in parallel with our membership system. While the email interface is a flexible tool, it inherently allows only one-way integration (into groups.io)

Are there plans or interest in a Zapier integration option to automate group.io membership functions?

_

I only have a cursory familiarity with Zapier. Is it something that could be configured to use our API, which is at https://groups.io/api?

 

Thanks,

Mark 


moderated Re: Feature Request: Zapier Integration #suggestion

 

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 9:09 AM Bob Fulton <pastpresident@...> wrote:

Like no doubt many in the user base of groups.io, we are a closed membership organization. We are investigating utilizing groups.io in parallel with our membership system. While the email interface is a flexible tool, it inherently allows only one-way integration (into groups.io)

Are there plans or interest in a Zapier integration option to automate group.io membership functions?

_
I only have a cursory familiarity with Zapier. Is it something that could be configured to use our API, which is at https://groups.io/api?

Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Re: Paid vs free policy- request

 

Hi Ken,

On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 7:50 PM Ken Kloeber via Groups.Io <KWKloeber=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

Is your group associated with Indivisible? Please contact support, and we will upgrade your group to Premium for free.

VERY inappropriate!  And suggest/request it be removed. Or rename the io platform to make it clear that it is a politically oriented platform.

I don't think I can add anything that hasn't already been said much better by others, especially Barry's comment about companies and the decisions they make.

I will say that I've tried to make it easy for groups and users to export all their data should they want to leave. I don't want anyone to feel hoodwinked and trapped. No shenanigans here.

I'm happy to continue discussing, but beta probably isn't the place for it. I'll be locking the topic soon.

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Feature Request - Excluding selected few members and their posts, files and photos

Prasad <ad_prasad@...>
 

Mark

Can you add a feature where a Yahoo Group owner gives a list of members who have declared their opposition to the move to GIO and therefore, they are excluded from the transfer including all their identifiable data such as their email addresses, posts, files, photos, etc.? 

Adding this feature will facilitate us to initiate a move to transfer a Yahoo Group that has 9800 members. We are ready with crowd funding financing to pay for the Premier level group but we are hesitating due to politically charged environment caused. 

My apologies if this is a re-post. I had tried posting a while ago but unable to find my post. 

Prasad

[Mod note: Beta is set to moderate new users, which is why your original post didn't appear right away]


moderated Feature Request: Zapier Integration #suggestion

Bob Fulton <pastpresident@...>
 

Like no doubt many in the user base of groups.io, we are a closed membership organization. We are investigating utilizing groups.io in parallel with our membership system. While the email interface is a flexible tool, it inherently allows only one-way integration (into groups.io)

Are there plans or interest in a Zapier integration option to automate group.io membership functions?

8481 - 8500 of 29466