On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 04:18 AM, Chris Jones wrote:

I simply cannot see what forcing A to Y to be moderated in the above case achieves or why it it is seen to be necessary.

I don't think you understand the concept of a moderated thread. They are extremely useful.
 
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu

Now looking to some other prior replies I missed before, I think the language "by the member" suggested by people above is inconsistent with the current language of the posting privilege options, which is why I left it out. I think it's clear from the context (i.e., we're in the member page) that the setting refers to topics started BY THE MEMBER.
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Chris Jones wrote:

J's initial case did not specify if she was looking for a setting to apply to specific members or all members. I also cannot see why subsequent replies would also need to be moderated, if the problem lies in the way new topics are started, especially in the way the subject line is designed.

I don't know why I missed these updates to this thread. First, yes I did specify that the setting would be on a per member basis. Otherwise, it would make no sense (having it apply to all members would essentially turn the group into a moderated group). Second, the reason I am asking for the entire thread to be moderated for any thread the person starts is that some people tend to create inappropriate threads, period. Not the subject line, the thread topic itself. (Of course, the subject lines in those and other cases can be problematic, but that's not the issue I'm addressing with this request.)

In answer to Mark's question below, about how to implement both Helen's and my requests without confusing the heck out of people, I'm sure there would be a way to word it. I haven't thought about it, but off the top of my head, I think something like this would work:

[checkbox] Override: moderate the first message of every topic
              [if above checkbox is checked, then display sub-checkbox] Also moderate all replies to every topic started 

 
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu

This thing starts to make sense now. Yes, it can be a nuisance when people use the reply-button for things that are not replies.

However, a "new threads moderated" feature won't solve that...

groetjes, Ronaldo

Changes to the site this week:

• INTERNAL: Tested database backups.
• INTERNAL: Changed the internals of the database APIs to better deal with the new connection pooling system.
• CHANGE: Tweaked the wording of 'Default Post Policy' and 'Default group policy' to be more clear.
• BUGFIX: Couldn't delete a topic that had previously had a hashtag that had been deleted.
• BUGFIX: Fixed a race condition in the test topics page when deleting topics.
• CHANGE: In the Files section, display the Updated field instead of the Created field for Uploaded date.
• CHANGE: Disable Action button on Members page if no members are selected.
• CHANGE: Tweaked URL text in confirmation email to match the URL itself.

Have a good weekend everybody.

Mark

--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu

J, that's a  really great idea.  It would work well for our online support group.  There is an occasional person who needs total deprivation to get them to understand how important their posts can be.
I would envision it as another dropdown list in Members
--

Bob Bellizzi

Founder, Fuchs Friends ®
Founder & Executive Director, The Corneal Dystrophy Foundation

--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu

There have been at least a few people mention that this would be handy for various reasons, usually related to a paid membership in a club/group.  One question that comes to mind is how long this status would remain?  Or would the suspended member need to be removed manually?

Duane

One step beyond putting a member on moderation would be to temporarily "suspend" their membership. Suspension would entail the person not having access to the group, as if they were not a member at all, until the membership is restored. This would be very useful in some cases in our group. Since we are a premium group, we have the ability to effect this by removing the member and then direct-adding them back in. But suspension would be more desirable, because they could be restored with one click and would not be treated like a new member again, with the welcome and direct-add messages.
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu

Actually I just rechecked the log to see if maybe I *was* being picky. :) I found that it looks fine. So either Mark fixed it with the speed of light, or I misread it. 
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu

On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:32 AM, J_Catlady wrote:

The current log entry for when a member changes their email address reads "[new email address] changed their email to [new email address]." It would be more informative if it could read "[old email address] changed their email to [new email address]."

Well, now you're just being picky! 
 
--
Gerald

The current log entry for when a member changes their email address reads "[new email address] changed their email to [new email address]." It would be more informative if it could read "[old email address] changed their email to [new email address]."
--
J

 

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu

More generally, I would suggest 'Topic (thread) starting posts' as general moderation option, that can be set both for group and member (and for new members for first n), alongside the more general 'any post' moderation (which obviously includes 'first in topic' posts).

And that (if not already there), 'moderate topic' be present as a standard option on moderating messages.

Jeremy 

On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 11:37 AM, Helen wrote:

How about Moderate First Post In Any Threads Started By This Member?

(My Bold!)

Now that does make sense IMHO. I could not - and cannot - get my head around the idea that in a group of (say) 26 people A to Y could start and reply to topics without moderation, with Z being able to reply without moderation to topics initiated by A to Y, while any topic started by Z was not only moderated but forced A to Y to be moderated in their replies.

I simply cannot see what forcing A to Y to be moderated in the above case achieves or why it it is seen to be necessary.

Chris

Thanks, Mark. Obviously I can't speak for what Janet wants, I originally thought we wanted the same thing, but having re-read the thread, i agree she may well have been asking for something other than what I would like.

Yes, what I would like please is the ability to moderate the first post in any thread started by certain members. You are correct that I don't mind if they then can respond without moderation within their own threads, and I am happy for them to be unmoderated when responding to other people's threads.

This is purely because I have a number of members who are incapable of using subject lines correctly. For example, they just use a list of hashtags. (I believe such posts weren't allowed through previously, which I preferred, but it seems the subject line now becomes the hashtags). I also insist upon meaningful subject lines, but certain members can't manage those either. So I go and change them, but then people responding via e-mail end up in the original thread with the original subject line, and then I have to keep merging the threads.

In terms of confusion, I take your point. How about Moderate First Post In Any Threads Started By This Member?

Many thanks.

Helen

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 06:22 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:

And if so, how can I set this up so that it isn't completely confusing?

 

I don't think you can; I am almost completely bewildered, but in my case it doesn't matter because I don't have to try to find a way of implimenting "it" whatever "it" actually is.

Helen's case is clear (at least it seems so!) in that specific members are prevented from starting Topics without a Moderator releasing them. J's initial case did not specify if she was looking for a setting to apply to specific members or all members. I also cannot see why subsequent replies would also need to be moderated, if the problem lies in the way new topics are started, especially in the way the subject line is designed.

It would be a lot easier if suggestions specified the exact problem they were trying to address rather than propose some sort of solution to a problem that has not actually been defined.

Chris