|
moderated
Automatically mark "idle" members in Admin Members list
#suggestion
Suggestion: Automatically detect and add a label in the Admin Members list for members who are "idle". What that means is:
1. The group has at least one message per month. Otherwise, the group is idle, and there's no need to mark all members. 2. A member is set to No Email, or has been hard bouncing for more than 30 days. 3. If the member is No Email, the member also has no Groups.io web activity in the last 30 days. This will enable proactive administrators to more easily remove members who "aren't really there" from groups that have membership limits. There is otherwise no penalty for being "idle", just a label to help owners and moderators keep their membership lists clean if they so choose. If an idle member posts or has web activity, the label is removed. "Special Notices" members wouldn't get marked idle, even if the group never sends special notices. If an administrator wishes to remove members who are Special Notices only, that can already be easily done. Thanks, JohnF
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Pricing Changes
#update
Hi All, Ads are not an option. Email-based ads simply aren't available, and even if they were, they would not pay nearly enough to justify including them. Thanks, Mark
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Pricing Changes
#update
This service costs money, and someone has to pay for it. There is no getting around it. Basic groups are riding on the backs of those who pay, and their very existence cuts into groups.io's profit margin. By that measure, Mark is within his rights to place any restrictions on them that he deems necessary.
GMF and Group_Help actually contribute to the groups.io experience. These forums provide support so the proprietor doesn't have to. Other than that, I'm not very receptive to the notion that any group is providing such a public service that it should be exempt from contributing to the bottom line. As a group Owner, you either believe in what you're doing -- to the extent that you are willing to support it financially -- or you don't. Expecting groups.io as a business to pony up so an Owner doesn't have to simply flies in the face of logic. Full disclosure: I do have a couple of Basic groups with grandfathered features. I also have a Premium group, for what that's worth. Regards, Bruce
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Pricing Changes
#update
On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 07:07 AM, toki wrote:
What is an unobtrusive add?That sounds like a koan. (I think he meant "ad.") -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Pricing Changes
#update
Dan Halbert
I recently helped move a group of parents of special-needs children from Yahoo Groups to groups.io. The groups has been in existence since 2001, so many of those original children have grown up, but the parents never unsubscribed. Many of them I believe created @yahoo.com addresses solely to subscribe to the group. When we sent out groups.io invitations to the ~880 members, over 270 of those bounced as inactive or invalid email addresses. Ultimately about 110 accepted the invitations, after multiple prompts.
If we had to move to Premium, I assume we'd use the Donations mechanism to round up some contributions, but yes, it would be nice if this was automated in some way.
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Pricing Changes
#update
On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 07:18 AM, Drew wrote:
as group owners we are like Chichikov in Gogol's "Dead Souls"-- continuing to pay a tax on the inhabitants of our estates even though they may have "moved on" since the last census was taken years ago.That makes me wonder (going off-topic here) if there could or should be a feature wherein we can ask members to actively confirm that they want to stay in the group. I know we have a bunch of deadwood (not, as you say, to be morbid) as well. The monthly guidelines, which we send as a special notice, often results in one or two people unsubscribing because they haven't been active for years, and the special notice gives them an easy way to unsubscribe. But I'm sure there are countless other inactive mebers who no longer have any interest in the group, and simply ignore emails, never look at the site, etc. Particularly if there's going to be a charge based on member count, this seems like it would be a helpful feature. -- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Pricing Changes
#update
toki
On 18/12/2020 14:58, ro-esp wrote:
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 11:55 PM, M K Ramadoss wrote:And once more, a non-USAmerican fails to understand the huge difference between what 501(3)(c) status means, and what non-profit status means, under US law.I suggest that "If you are legally recognized as a non-profit organization" beand once again, a USAmerican doesn't grasp the concept "rest of the world"... To be snarky, I'll point out that IKEA is, in Europe, a non-profit organisation, but in the US it emphatically does not have 501(3)(c) status. Phrasing it as "non -profit organization with 501(3)(c) status, or the functional equivalent in the country in which the organization is legally incorporated and domiciled" would be more appropriate wording. Mark might have to rewrite the criteria for qualifying for the educational discount, because accreditation is not dependent upon 501(3)(c) status. (Most accredited educational institutions in the US are not 501(3)(c) entities.) jonathon
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Pricing Changes
#update
Drew
We are a 6,000+ membership international group going back 15 years. I have no idea how many of those members are actively reading the group; or, not to be morbid, are even still alive, but their email addresses continuing to live on...
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Even though we will supposedly remain a free group I'd welcome the ability for interested subscribers to easily pay a few cents a year to subscribe, and be automatically removed if they don't pay the token fee. But there is no easy mechanism to accomplish this and no way for us to do so without spending much time and effort that could easily be valued in additional hundreds of dollars. [ Humorous aside for literary types: as group owners we are like Chichikov in Gogol's "Dead Souls"-- continuing to pay a tax on the inhabitants of our estates even though they may have "moved on" since the last census was taken years ago. ] Drew
On 12/18/20 05:44, Samuel Murrayy wrote:
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 11:40 PM, Drew wrote:
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Pricing Changes
#update
On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 09:58 AM, ro-esp wrote:
Ronaldo, the point about non-US non-profits was already made. The snark is unnecessary - folks are doing their best to contribute meaningfully.
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Pricing Changes
#update
toki
On 18/12/2020 04:46, Russell Courtenay via groups.io wrote:
I think that is a good, legitimate question, I really wouldn’t mind unobtrusive ads to help defray the cost, I really hate begging lost members to support us.What is an unobtrusive add? jonathon
|
|
|
|
moderated
Strip digital signatures (smime.p7s)
#suggestion
Mark -- It's come to our attention that some mail clients now add digital signatures by default. These are carried as attachments, causing problems with attempts to post to a group that does not allow attachments. It might be beneficial if groups.io simply stripped these signatures instead of applying the group's attachment policy to them.
Thanks for your consideration, Bruce
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Pricing Changes
#update
ro-esp
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 11:55 PM, M K Ramadoss wrote:
I suggest that "If you are legally recognized as a non-profit organization" beand once again, a USAmerican doesn't grasp the concept "rest of the world"... groetjes/ĝis, Ronaldo
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Pricing Changes
#update
txercoupemuseum.org
My personal experience is substantially identical.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
My two Ercoupe (aircraft) groups date back to early 2000 and a computer talented enthusiast that then hosted them on his personal server. Several years later, he sold his plane, but generously continued to host (if not effectively moderate) these two groups. Eventually the time came when he turned the leadership over to another computer talented enthusiast, who moved them (mostly) to Yahoo Groups. I became an active group member in 2002. Some years later, having suffered a major and continuing health issue and selling his plane, he asked me to assume ownership. Being only minimally "computer talented”, I pretty much “led” passively until the debacle with Yahoo Groups raised its ugly head, at which time I (with the help of others) moved them to Groups.io. At the time one of these groups was believed to have over 1,000 members. This was an illusion, built upon a “free” membership system that never removed people who sold their planes and did not require “member participation”. The few times we had earlier occasion to raise funds, the same twenty (or so) individuals would step forward. This was again the case when we needed to repay me personal funds advanced for a timely move to Groups.io almost two years ago. It seems that the reality is that such “organizations” of “lurkers” are caught in a “catch-22”. Today, after the “weeding out” process of eliminating no longer functional or duplicate email addresses, we have 875 members. Were we to adopt financial or activity requirements, our constituents would likely be perhaps 25% of that, or 219 members. The cold, hard truth is that in most “communities, aviation included, a 875-member group enjoys four times the credibility of a 219-member one. So that’s not an option consistent with credibility. Instituting a “dues structure” of any sort will have identical effect; again, not a viable option for our credibility. Our “lurkership” is, in the overall, much like oysters. They satisfy their perceived needs anonymously, from gleaning the flow of information from discussions initiated by or responded to by others. Such groups DO serve a “public purpose” as a conduit for credible and verifiable information that is valuable (in terms of general aviation operational safety, personal responsibility and personal safety). We are the rare voice that tells the Emperor the truth about his new clothes. Independent of government funding, my forums, in addition to the as the “loyal opposition” to government agencies such as the Federal Aviation Administration. For many years the Civil Aviation Authority promoted and facilitated the expansion general aviation. of innovation and participation by aircraft owner/operators effectively use their aircraft to one that has almost single-handedly destroyed general aviation on the period following the “glory days of 1945-1980. By every credible metric, whether planes built, planes sold, or pilots licensed, general aviation today is but a shadow of what it once was. The FAA long ago divorced its operations from any responsibility to “promote” general aviation. So yeah, we’re here, on Groups.io, as “grandfathered” free groups; but for how long? If not here, then where? What is the future of such groups when there are no more sponsors that will host them without excessive cost (which would prevent most from ever forming or becoming relevant)? Our society’s fate seems increasingly to become one that knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. Best! WRB —
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Pricing Changes
#update
I think that is a good, legitimate question, I really wouldn’t mind unobtrusive ads to help defray the cost, I really hate begging lost members to support us.
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Pricing Changes
#update
The good news:
Premium and Enterprise groups subsidize Free groups. As Free or paid groups consume more of the costs ("the larger the group, the more it costs us to host"), something has to give. You can limit the resources consumed by Free groups or charge paid groups more or some combination of both.
Revenue from all groups must at least recover costs. Mark has set some points in his business model pricing which allow him to do this, and hopefully make a reasonable profit. I think we can discuss how the new pricing might be accepted, pricing relative to competitive services, impacts for quiet vs busy groups, additional options for supporting GIO such as donations, how group members might contribute to groups costs, etc. However, only Mark is in a position to determine what is sustainable for his business.
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Allow members to mute other members
#suggestion
Nextdoor has implemented this already so there is a precedent.
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Database Permissions Not Working Per Owner's Manual?
#bug
Duane, I read the Owner's Manual at https://groups.io/helpcenter/ownersmanual/1/customizing-settings-for-premium-and-enterprise-features/database?single=true and assumed that was the limit of permissions assignment capability. I never saw the permissions within the table and didn't know they existed.
I would ask Mark to have Nina change that section of the Owner's Manual to include and highlight the further permissions capabilities within a table. -- Jim
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Combination of "hashtags required" and "messages moderated" sometimes causes posts to disappear
#bug
Mark -- Some follow-up to my comment on "other obscure combinations of settings."
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
If the group itself is not moderated, but the hashtag I add to the held draft has the Moderated flag set, the same thing happens. I get a green-banner message saying that the message will post after moderation, but it instead vanishes without a trace. The reason for moderation does not seem to matter with respect to this. I have not [yet] tested other scenarios that might lead to an incoming email being held as a draft (like Storage Limit Reached > Bounce Messages with Attachments). FYI, Bruce
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 01:41 PM, Bruce Bowman wrote: If you require hashtags in the group and an incoming email does not meet those criteria, the message is held as a Draft until that person logs in and corrects the subject line. But if the message is also supposed to be moderated, it does not go into moderation after being fixed, nor does it bypass moderation and post. It simply disappears.
|
|
|
|
locked
Re: Pricing Changes
#update
Chris Jones
On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 10:44 AM, Samuel Murrayy wrote:
In other words, the proposed (or ideal) model of operation for such groups would be to have a committee that does fund raising (e.g. donations from long-time members who don't want to see the group die) and then pay for the group from that.Much as I would like that to work a recent example suggests otherwise. I am a member of a "large" group (>1600) which I joined by default when it adopted another group of which I am a member as a subgroup when both migrated from Yahoo. The large group is Premium, and its owner recently put out an appeal for funds to renew it. Over the next few days he put out public acknowledgements of those who donated. Now he may since have been overwhelmed by donations (via Paypal) so stopped those acknowledgements, but up to that point (over several days) the number of donations received was depressingly small; less than a couple of dozen. By all accounts that was not the first occasion on which that had happened to him. Getting money out of members is not straightforward, however easy it may be "technically". Chris
|
|
|
|
moderated
Re: Database Permissions Not Working Per Owner's Manual?
#bug
On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 04:30 AM, Duane wrote:
There are several settings that can be changed when a database is created to control edits and suchMore detail at https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum/wiki/690#Create-New-Table---Heading The default for View Table, Edit Table, Add Rows, and Edit Rows is Member, so anyone could change things. The setting on the Settings page only controls who can create tables/databases. Duane
|
|
|
