Date   

moderated Re: User-friendly message rejection after attempt to post to a locked thread #suggestion

Glenn Glazer
 

On 4/26/2019 23:40, Marv Waschke wrote:
I should add that I fully defer to the arguments that locked threads are necessary and a user friendly response is desirable, but I won't endorse a solution that relaxes security because Groups.io is too obscure to be worth defending. I will wait for a solution that maintains the current level of security and supports the desired functionality. Put some heart into both security and functionality.

IMHO, the problem with this line of reasoning is seeing groups.io as a single thing. Such an attack would target a single group because a locked thread belongs to one and only one group. If the customized lock message was a preference that each group could turn on and off, those that benefit from the feature could use it even as other groups turned it off as they found necessary.

Best,

Glenn

--
We must work to make the Democratic Party the Marketplace of Ideas not the Marketplace of Favors.

Virus-free. www.avast.com


moderated Re: User-friendly message rejection after attempt to post to a locked thread #suggestion

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 11:55 PM, Duane wrote:
Please see https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/20525

Duane
Sorry, Duane, this is a legitimate discussion.  And it has nothing to do with shooting down a suggestion.   There are technical issues that have been under discussion and that deserve airing.

I stand by everything I've said.   The concerns expressed about the potential for a very remote possibility do not warrant active defenses.  The removal of the original message from any "This topic is locked" message is more than adequate to address any concern expressed so far.

You don't need, nor, for that matter, do you want, "Fort Knox to protect a broken bicycle."   That's precisely what the initial objections were, and even if the original message were to be included in a locked message, still are.   This is just not a part of the "spamming repertoire" as it currently exists and is very unlikely to ever become a part of it.
 
--

Brian - Windows 10 Pro, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763  

     Presenting the willfully ignorant with facts is the very definition of casting pearls before swine.

              ~ Brian Vogel


moderated Re: Custom invitation message changes the Member Notice

 

On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 10:05 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
The invite is a notice type already. 
...but does not behave as some of the others, where you can pick which one you want at the time of the invitation. So maybe that's all that needs to be changed.
 
--
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: Custom invitation message changes the Member Notice

 

Oops, I just checked and this is already the case. The invite is a notice type already. 
--
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: Custom invitation message changes the Member Notice

 

Although the invite is not really a member notice yet, possibly (at some point in the future) it could be made into one, and there could be more than one invite "notice" per group so that you could choose which one to use at the time of sending, as with some of the other notice types.

I agree that the current situation is a bit of a PITA. 
--
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 Custom invitation message changes the Member Notice

Bruce Bowman
 

Sometimes when I send a group invitation, I change the canned wording to customize it for the invitee. After sending the invitation, I then have to return to my Member Notices and edit it back to what it was.

I would be grateful if edits to the inserted text in the invitation screen did NOT automatically modify the Member Notice.

Thanks for your consideration.

Bruce


moderated Re: User-friendly message rejection after attempt to post to a locked thread #suggestion

 

On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 08:55 PM, Shal Farley wrote:
That payload exists today, and could be exploited and would be if it were worth the effort.
 
No, it does not.
Shal,

That's true, but  I agree with everything else Brian said, and the "payload" need not exist if a polite rejection message were to be send without the inclusion of the original message. What is the payoff in sending a "This topic is locked" message, even if to servers besides the miscreant's? This payload of the original message is the only thing anyone in this thread has pointed to as the real downside. I do see that it would be a downside. A spammer could send an actual spam message, which would then be sent to the spoofed email address in the form of a rejection notice. But not if the rejection notice doesn't include it.
 
--
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: User-friendly message rejection after attempt to post to a locked thread #suggestion

Marv Waschke
 

I should add that I fully defer to the arguments that locked threads are necessary and a user friendly response is desirable, but I won't endorse a solution that relaxes security because Groups.io is too obscure to be worth defending. I will wait for a solution that maintains the current level of security and supports the desired functionality. Put some heart into both security and functionality.


Re: Members Removed for Marking Messages as spam AUTO-Message suggested modification

ro-esp
 

On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 10:54 PM, Ken Schweizer wrote:


Another confusing factor with the Auto-Message is that it appears to be coming
from the Owner of the member's group rather than from GROUPS.IO itself as can
be seen in the FAQ sample message. In our case that was a major factor in the
member's reaction. I find it unusual and confusing for the "email group
service" to send a message in the name of one of its groups.
Yes. Since there is no owner/moderator activity involved, it would be better to have it read something like "system@groups.io" as sender

groetjes, Ronaldo


Re: Members Removed for Marking Messages as spam AUTO-Message suggested modification

Dave Sergeant
 

As well as the points already discussed, it is worth pointing out that
the process of being removed for marking as spam and the resulting
email exchange is as far as I know unique to groups.io. I know of no
other email list service, or forum for that matter, that does this. So
to get a strange email, from an address that in itself is different
from normal list postings, with this rather strange content and
instructions can only be confusing, even to those who are computer
savvy.

I know the reason Mark has added this process to groups.io but why does
nobody else do similar?

Dave

http://davesergeant.com


moderated Re: "Likes" revisited

dave w
 

On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 02:38 AM, Brian Vogel wrote:
Another head scratcher.  I've said it before, and I'll say it again, it doesn't go with the medium.  It's an insane workaround.  
The same could be, and is, said for inane sig lines and witticisms some think are humorous in messages.
Another reason I have never subscribed via email- either here at at Y* on near 30 groups of interest.

My only reason for reading this thread is the apparent banning of an inane feature, that, ostensibly does nothing to or for groups anyway. It massages an ego but you have to look for it on the site.

I've been waiting to see some effort to quantify likes- my own or others- as there's no other way to highlight useful/ efficient/ accurate information contained in or attached to messages, other than copying each and every piece of documentation/ text out to a separate dbase.

FWIW, contrarily,
d


moderated Re: User-friendly message rejection after attempt to post to a locked thread #suggestion

Duane
 

On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 06:59 PM, Brian Vogel wrote:
Taking active measures against something like this is a waste of time.
Please see https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/20525

Duane


moderated Re: User-friendly message rejection after attempt to post to a locked thread #suggestion

 

Brian,


That payload exists today, and could be exploited and would be if it were worth the effort.

No, it does not.
As things are now nothing is sent "back" to anyone. The server that is attempting to deliver the message is told "no", and given the error code and short text at connection time. There is no possibility of backscatter because Groups.io does not create and send a new message. The importance of that statement is that there's no way for a miscreant to cause the error text to go to any server but his own.

Shal


moderated Re: User-friendly message rejection after attempt to post to a locked thread #suggestion

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 12:46 PM, Marv Waschke wrote:
solutions that reduce security become mistakes.
Except it doesn't.   The request to remove the original message from the locked message eliminates "the payload" as described entirely.   That payload exists today, and could be exploited and would be if it were worth the effort.

There's a big difference, huge in fact, between actually doing something that reduces security and acknowledging that a known security risk should probably be way, way, way down the list of worries.  

The hemming and hawing about backscatter is about something that is not happening, could easily be made to happen as things stand now (and not just here), and is not happening because it's not worth the effort at the present time.  Taking active measures against something like this is a waste of time.
 
--

Brian - Windows 10 Pro, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763  

     Presenting the willfully ignorant with facts is the very definition of casting pearls before swine.

              ~ Brian Vogel


Re: Members Removed for Marking Messages as spam AUTO-Message suggested modification

Sharon Villines
 

On Apr 26, 2019, at 5:27 PM, Brian Vogel <britechguy@gmail.com> wrote:
I agree with all your points — and just as soon as we learn what we are doing, things will change again. I groan every time Apple updates the iOS. I use the iPhone minimally and don’t need almost any of the wonderful new features that actually just make reentry difficult.

They also tend to have a fear factor related to computers of the "if I do {insert virtually anything here} will I break it!} type.
This is one problem with HTML in wikis. The people in my cohousing community are very good at entering information about facilities repairs and replacements. The love it. But if I use a wiki that has any HTML on the screen, they are convinced the whole thing will crash if they put their cursor in the wrong place.

It’s like a visual block.

Sharon
----
Sharon Villines
Takoma Village Cohousing, Washington DC
http://www.takomavillage.org


Re: Members Removed for Marking Messages as spam AUTO-Message suggested modification

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 03:57 PM, Sharon Villines wrote:
Older people have a huge problem understanding all the routing and who does what in email. I still can’t get direct answers when I ask “Do you read on the web or do you download messages to an email program.” I have to ask "what browser do you use” and that totally confuses the Outlook users. Then the confusion about yahoo the email account, yahoo the website, etc. Google is a nightmare.

As people die, this problem will go away
Sharon, what follows is not, in any way, intended as an argument with what you've said but really reinforcing its core points while tossing out a few of the "around the edges" assertions.

I am in my mid-50s, and had my degree in computer science granted in 1984.  I have been involved in IT in some capacity ever since, sometimes more so than others, but it's been continuous in one way or another.

It's not just older people who have the problem understanding the "under the hood" aspects of computing in general and e-mail in particular.   There is an age demographic, of which I am a part, that came of "computer age" when the end of punch cards was drawing nigh and the birth of the PC was just beginning.  Nothing was really "automatic" at that point and if you intended to use computers you had to have at least a decent knowledge of how to be a "software mechanic" at the very least.

I've always understood why those 60 (at the very lowest end, probably) and up have no real knowledge of any "under the hood" aspects of computers because they came to them, if they came to them, after things had become very automated (say, the Windows 7 era and on), and so didn't need to.  They also tend to have a fear factor related to computers of the "if I do {insert virtually anything here} will I break it!} type.

Now we have the demographic significantly younger, I'd say under 40 for the most part, that came of age when their entry point was after everything was automatic.  They tend to be end users extraordinaire, but they often have little knowledge of the correct terminology for anything (e-mail client?  What's an e-mail client? though they tend to get webmail as a concept but cannot fathom that Gmail on their Android phone is not webmail, but an e-mail client or something very similar anyway).   If anything goes wrong they're like most people are with their cars, on the phone to someone to get it fixed without ever thinking about what goes into fixing it.

I don't think that these issues are going to go away due to "die off," at least not the core issues of not knowing, not understanding, and not caring to do either and getting frustrated when those attempting to assist require way more precise information than, "It's not working!!," in order to do so.   I get the generic, "It's not working!!," from both my elderly clients and college students.   I seldom do from those above 40 and under 60 at this point in time, and of course both of those end points are constantly shifting up and "the dinosaurs among us" who get this stuff will soon enough be dying off.   I wonder just how much of a very small "dark art" working in nuts and bolts hardware and software manipulation and repair, the "under the hood" knowledge and ability to apply it, is going to become?
 
--

Brian - Windows 10 Pro, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763  

     Presenting the willfully ignorant with facts is the very definition of casting pearls before swine.

              ~ Brian Vogel


Re: Members Removed for Marking Messages as spam AUTO-Message suggested modification

Ken Schweizer
 

Another confusing factor with the Auto-Message is that it appears to be coming from the Owner of the member's group rather than from GROUPS.IO itself as can be seen in the FAQ sample message. In our case that was a major factor in the member's reaction. I find it unusual and confusing for the "email group service" to send a message in the name of one of its groups.

From: groupname+owner@groups.io

To: (Whom it may concern)
Subject:
You have been removed from ...

Ken

 

“If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.” — Winston Churchill

 

 


Re: Members Removed for Marking Messages as spam AUTO-Message suggested modification

Sharon Villines
 

On Apr 26, 2019, at 11:48 AM, Ken Schweizer <kensch888@outlook.com> wrote:

I don't think we can be too simplistic when telling a member that they have been removed from a group. I'd like to suggest a few small changes, including strategic CAPITALIZATION, to the message to ensure our members read it as intended.

You have been automatically removed from GROUPNAME because "YOUR" Email Service Provider reported to us that one or more messages "SENT TO YOU" from GROUPNAME has been marked as spam "BY YOU OR YOUR E-MAIL PROVIDER and NOT DUE TO ANY POST FROM YOU". We suggest that you check your spam box as soon as possible to see if "YOUR" Email Service Provider has diverted legitimate messages into it.
The age of list members makes a huge difference on email lists. I have a range of people from 90 to 21. Older people have a huge problem understanding all the routing and who does what in email. I still can’t get direct answers when I ask “Do you read on the web or do you download messages to an email program.” I have to ask "what browser do you use” and that totally confuses the Outlook users. Then the confusion about yahoo the email account, yahoo the website, etc. Google is a nightmare.

As people die, this problem will go away but I have people in their 40s who get stressed and confused, so that time is still out there some place in the future. A deadline to meet when your email goes down can produce frenzy. And the more Groups.io has enterprise accounts, the more frequent this will be.

One of the best ways to emphasize a statement is white space between short sentences and center them.

bbbbbbbbb

cccc

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Sharon
----
Sharon Villines
TakomaDC@Groups.io
"Neighbors Talking to Neighbors”
Takoma Park DC and MD


Re: Members Removed for Marking Messages as spam AUTO-Message suggested modification

Ken Schweizer
 

Brian,

 

I would agree with not using caps if we were only dealing with cyber savvy people, but in many cases our members have no idea the caps suggest they are being yelled at, but it does bring their attention to the words and their meaning.

 

Yet, you make a good point.

 

Ken

 

“Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless.

Not to speak is to speak.

Not to act is to act.”

Dietrich Bonhoeffer

,_._,_


Re: Members Removed for Marking Messages as spam AUTO-Message suggested modification

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

Personally, I don't like the use of all caps because it is considered yelling in cyber parlance.

Yet, I like the idea you have.  The use of bold, italic, and/or underline as appropriate in the phrases you have capitalized should give as much, if not more, emphasis than the all caps does.
--

Brian - Windows 10 Pro, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763  

     Presenting the willfully ignorant with facts is the very definition of casting pearls before swine.

              ~ Brian Vogel

8781 - 8800 of 29680