Alexis,

Might it be possible to have a 'fixed width formatting' option when
viewing messages on the web front end.

I second that motion.

If it is possible, might you be able to make a setting in each
member's profile so they view all messages in this format, or if not,
how about within each group's setting's details.

I'd rather have it be handy, as a view option when looking at messages. I'd have it apply to all the text/plain message bodies being displayed on the current page. I'd like to have it remembered as you navigate the site.

That is, I'd rather not have it tucked away in my profile where I have to go find it to change it, nor would I (as a member) want to have to pester the group admins to change it on a group-wide basis.

Shal

On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 08:15 pm, Steve wrote:

Can the cat pictures.

That would be unacceptable! >_<
 
--
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

I can not get this group (beta) to give me just a daily summary of messages.  I have reset it several times, gone back to summery, but to no avail.

I know I must just be holding my mouth wrong, but can someone help me out?

On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:31 am, Mark Fletcher wrote:

We do strip a lot of inline styles, but (hopefully) none of the ones used by the editor. So if you're just using editor functions to format things, it should all work ok. Are there specific CSS attributes you would like to see not stripped? (we mainly strip to prevent attack vectors).

I'm using the "Source Code" editor to insert inline styles. It's these that are subsequently stripped. I want to use styles that do not seem to be available via the editor. For example, when I insert an image, I can change dimensions only via the editor, I can't scale it to a fraction of the page width, I can't float it to the right margin, etc.

I'm not looking for anything elaborate. Just basic stuff like text-align, float, width, border, etc.

It's my understanding from discussions in GMF that GIO uses a "bootstrap" set of style sheets (getbootstrap.com). Unfortunately I've not been able to find these in human-readable form. Simply knowing what styles are already defined so I could implement the classes via the source code editor would help as a first approximation. I was already able to do that with aligning an image to the right margin using class=pull-right. 

I hope that makes things more clear.

Thanks,
Bruce

and as I suspected, viewing this message online removes the 'alignment' :)

Thanks for your response Gerald


Here is an example

VHIQR 20180501 1201 XA0000 (GBLXRS BIZ) (BIZ-FLIGHT)
CGDPF 20180501 1821 XA0000 (CL60 BIZ) (BIZ-FLIGHT)
OYMSI 20180501 0918 XA0000 (GBLX BIZ) (BIZ-FLIGHT)
CGWHF 20180501 1503 XA0000 (GBLXRS BIZ) (BIZ-FLIGHT)
GWIRG 20180501 1844 ZD0000 (E135BJ BIZ) (BIZ-FLIGHT)
VPCRA 20180501 1247 ZD0000 (E135BJ BIZ) (BIZ-FLIGHT)

If I create this on the website then the 'column' alignment disappears due to the width of each character. But creating it, like i have now using thunderbird, set to plain text, is appears fine.

The original when posted, came through in my inbox just fine, when viewed online was all over the place, BUT when I went to view source, the alignment re-appeared.

Looking at the source coding for the website, this appears to be because when viewing the source the <PRE> tag is used. So that is all I am asking, that we have the option to 'add' the <pre> tag to all messages we view online rather than having to scroll to the bottom of some 4,000+ line emails and then click on 'More' and then 'view source' :)
I realise this would not affect most people's groups, but as it would mean an extremely minor addition to the coding, I ask :)

btw, the bulk of the messages being posted to my lists are not posted via web clients, or web front ends, rather directly from purpose built software, and generally just use the basic email headers

Cheers
Alexis

I searched several times and could not find a thread to see what Management's opinion on this was, if I missed it I apologize.

Could it be looked into to develop/share a method of securing certain folders, and allowing members to modify another? 

Example:

• Folder 1, only moderators can modify.
• Folder 2, any member can modify.
• Folder 3, only one person can modify (and the moderators/owner).

Thoughts? 

-Jerry

On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 03:17 pm, Toby Kraft wrote:

unsubscribing the member (which to many seems rather draconian). 

But again, my comparison was not with respect to the user experience. I understand that the proposed method is better in terms of user experience. My question is, and has always been: how does the proposed method solve the (perceived) problem? In other words, how is the proposed method any better than sub/unsub in terms of ensuring that the spam issue will not happen again with respect to a particular user? In the unsub/sub situation, the user simply has to click on a link to resubscribe. They are warned about, but not forced to take any action with respect to, their spam filter. The proposed method seems similar in that regard - again, unless I am missing something.

You mention you direct-add unsubscribed members, but the free plan groups do not have direct-add 

I mentioned that only to show that unsub/sub has not accomplished anything, at least in the case of my group. It has been no more disastrous to simply add the member back in than to make them jump the hoop of clicking on a link to resub. The resub link (just like the proposed method) to me is like "wink, wink, see, you had to do something." Nobody has ever been unsubbed twice for marking a message as spam. That was my sole point here. I am fully aware that basic-level groups can't direct-add members

--
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 Thu, May 10, 2018 at 03:22 pm, Gerald Boutin wrote:

Alexis,

I did a quick test and if you generate a text only message using an email client  (eg Gmail) with a fixed width font, it renders properly when viewed on the groups.io web interface. Since there seems to be no way to chose a font online when composing, I don't see how you could directly generate a fixed width font post online.

Here's a sample I just pasted from a text message i sent to myself earlier for testing.

Fixed width font    < 4 Spaces     < 5 spaces

sdjhsdjklkjsadkj    < sdsadkjsdkl  < skldjasklj

 

The above rows should be aligned.

--
Gerald

Well, it was in fixed width font (monospace) while I was composing the message, but the formatting didn't come through.
 
--
Gerald

On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 12:22 pm, Alexis wrote:

Hi,

Might it be possible to have a 'fixed width formatting' option when viewing messages on the web front end. I am a member of a number of gorups that produce emails with large lists of which each column is padded out with spaces to keep the allignment of the columns. All these groups use plain text emails only, primarily to keep message sizes down as a 4,000 line email in plain text can be 56k, whereas in HTML could be 4Mb.
If it is possible, might you be able to make a setting in each member's profile so they view all messages in this format, or if not, how about within each group's setting's details.

Just transferred in from yahoogroups and I have to say a big congratulations on setting up an alternative to them and googlegroups, and just love your transfer routine..big BIG thumbs up

Cheers
Alexis

Alexis,

I did a quick test and if you generate a text only message using an email client  (eg Gmail) with a fixed width font, it renders properly when viewed on the groups.io web interface. Since there seems to be no way to chose a font online when composing, I don't see how you could directly generate a fixed width font post online.

Here's a sample I just pasted from a text message i sent to myself earlier for testing.

Fixed width font    < 4 Spaces     < 5 spaces

--
Gerald

Hi,

Might it be possible to have a 'fixed width formatting' option when viewing messages on the web front end. I am a member of a number of gorups that produce emails with large lists of which each column is padded out with spaces to keep the allignment of the columns. All these groups use plain text emails only, primarily to keep message sizes down as a 4,000 line email in plain text can be 56k, whereas in HTML could be 4Mb.
If it is possible, might you be able to make a setting in each member's profile so they view all messages in this format, or if not, how about within each group's setting's details.

Just transferred in from yahoogroups and I have to say a big congratulations on setting up an alternative to them and googlegroups, and just love your transfer routine..big BIG thumbs up

Cheers
Alexis

And to emphasize my point: unsub/resub seems like essentially a no-op anyway. In GMF (I’m no longer there) I heard arguments that it’s useful because it forces the member to do something affirmative to stay in the group. But I disagree that it creates a meaningful barrier. The whole process currently, and as proposed, strikes me as a ridiculous charade. I direct-add my unsubbed members back in to save them the confusion and the headache. And despite that, the same member has never been slammed twice in a row. It seems almost random.

--
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

I think that Catlady hit the nail on the thumb, none of our  schemes is any better than the simple unsubscribe.

I tried to stop looking at this thread because it's a really tough knot to open for so many reasons.

One of the biggest problems is that in many cases, the intended recipient is not informed of the groups.io message being intercepted and never delivered to them in any form.  Input from groups.io just stops because it's turned back at the email supplier.
In that case, there is no communication possible between groups.io and the intended recipient to instruct the recipient, period, so all schemes depending on communication are not possible.

Secondly, people do not like change and in many cases are fiercely loyal to their email provider often just because they don't want to have to leave a familiar environment or don't wish to lose the "freebees" provided by the email provider for the express purpose of keeping them as clients.

So showing them how to set up any new provider account doesn't seem an option.

Finally, I'm going to ignore this thread unless Mark introduces a change to the current process of handling spam notices.
--

Bob Bellizzi

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

Would it not be more simple to show the AOL user how to set up a gmail account to use with groups.io and avoid all of the AOL hassles?

Bruce Wilson
Barrie, Ontario, Canada

On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 09:15 am, Tom Vail wrote:

"Spam Report Hold" is better than “Suspended.”

maybe, but it's not good enough. People who have no idea what we are talking about here would start googleing "spam report hold" - and maybe in vain..

If we have something like this, it would have to tell people "check your spambox and mark your group's messages as not-spam. After doing so, reactivate your subscription *here* "

groetjes, Ronaldo

On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 09:02 pm, Randy Thomson wrote:

So the answer to the question

what's to then prevent the same thing from happening as before



is that, assuming the mail server takes expected action and the recipient
takes the proper action to designate messages from xyzzy@groups.io as safe
email, future messages will no longer be treated as spam and will be delivered
appropriately.

So "the subscriber unflagging messages", because using a filterrule would bypass the spamfilter instead of teaching it anything.

Seems to me things could go very wrong if a group were used for spam...

groetjes, Ronaldo

Since the behavior of neither the email server nor (especially) the recipient
is fully predictable, the process cannot be totally reliable, but (fingers
crossed) may work most of the time.



I think a lot of the discussion has gone into how to make the process
foolproof. IMO, there are too many permutations of fool for this to be
accomplished. Either unsubscribing or setting to no mail, and simultaneously
sending a notice with clear instructions is all we can do. My preference would
be the latter, but I’m OK with either approach.



Randy T



From: main@beta.groups.io <main@beta.groups.io> On Behalf Of J_Catlady
Sent: Wednesday, May 9, 2018 9:15 PM
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] AOL problem



On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 05:59 pm, ro-esp wrote:

What's keeping those later messages from getting stuck in the same spamfilter?

This is related to my question (two posts back) about the difference between
this method and the current method, wherein the user gets an email with a
resubscribe link. Currently, after someone resubscribes, what's to then
prevent the same thing from happening as before, i.e., future messages going
into their spam? Is the current proposition different in that their
configuration would somehow change to prevent future emails from going into
spam?

--
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, May 9, 2018 at 09:02 pm, Randy Thomson wrote:

how to make the process foolproof. IMO, there are too many permutations of fool for this to be accomplished

Haha :) 

But what I'm still not understanding is how the proposed method (set member to "spam block," send email with link to unblock) is any different or better than the current method (unsubscribe member, send email with unsubscribe link) IN TERMS OF the situation repeating itself ad infinitum with the particular member. I understand that it's better in terms of the user experience, since the member still has access to the group contents and is not toally unsubscribed. But there was a concern expressed here that just undoing the unsubscribe doesn't prevent the problem from happening again. How is the proposed method superior in that regard?


 
--
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