Date   

moderated Re: Members list without members' email addresses #suggestion

Gerald Boutin <groupsio@...>
 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 05:14 PM, Don McKee wrote:

I would like the ability to display the "Members" list (not the "Directory") to all subscribers, but omit or obscure the email addresses to those who wouldn't otherwise be able to see them. This would be helpful when I want everyone in a group to be able to see who is (or maybe more importantly, who isn't) subscribed, but still want to maintain some level of privacy.



 Don,

If you didn't mind a bit of effort and you are handy around a computer, you can already export the groups's member list. It comes as a .json format file. However, that is just a text file and with a little bit of editing and formatting, you could generate a file with whatever info you wanted and include that in a post or upload as a file.

--
Gerald


moderated Whacky wiki ToC

KWKloeber
 

The issues applying a ToC to each wiki page (that warrants one is well documented.  
Whats the probability of those issues getting “fixed”?  Or should we just move on to another wiki platform?

Page ToCs **should** look respectable as they do with the mediawiki platform, like in this example:
http://c34.org/wiki/index.php?title=Diesel_Engine

Is that outside the rehlm of the possible? (I.e., ain’t gonna happen”?)

 Ken


moderated Re: Members list without members' email addresses #suggestion

Don McKee
 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 01:28 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
I can see an advantage to providing that option, but I think it should be sure to clarify that the email addresses of any members who post cannot be hidden from group members who are subscribed via email.
I'm not sure what you mean. I'm looking for an option that lists the "Display Name", but  hides a usable email address.

 
Also, the display in the list of members without a display name seems problematic. Would you just leave them out?
If users haven't set their display name, then just leave them blank or maybe replaced with "<Not Provided>" (I'm fine with the former). In those cases, all you've got to go on is the part of the email address that's displayed (e.g. "don.mckee@..." in my case). If the email address is omitted completely, then this option may not provide much value for those groups whose members don't set their display name.

It's also a little unclear what's meant by "those without the correct permissions." I would leave that out entirely and have it say "Subscribers, but mask email addresses." Otherwise, you're basically implying that some subscribers could see more than some moderators, and that sounds like a mistake.
What you suggested is what I originally had. I changed it to imply that owners (and moderators with appropriate permissions) would still see the entire email address.

-Don


moderated Re: Members list without members' email addresses #suggestion

 

"the display in the list of members without a display name"

should read

"the list's display of members without a display name"



On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 1:28 PM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
I can see an advantage to providing that option, but I think it should be sure to clarify that the email addresses of any members who post cannot be hidden from group members who are subscribed via email. 

Also, the display in the list of members without a display name seems problematic. Would you just leave them out?

It's also a little unclear what's meant by "those without the correct permissions." I would leave that out entirely and have it say "Subscribers, but mask email addresses." Otherwise, you're basically implying that some subscribers could see more than some moderators, and that sounds like a mistake.

--
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


--
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: Members list without members' email addresses #suggestion

 

I can see an advantage to providing that option, but I think it should be sure to clarify that the email addresses of any members who post cannot be hidden from group members who are subscribed via email. 

Also, the display in the list of members without a display name seems problematic. Would you just leave them out?

It's also a little unclear what's meant by "those without the correct permissions." I would leave that out entirely and have it say "Subscribers, but mask email addresses." Otherwise, you're basically implying that some subscribers could see more than some moderators, and that sounds like a mistake.

--
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 Members list without members' email addresses #suggestion

Don McKee
 

[A locked post by the same title, although slightly different request, can be found here.]

I would like the ability to display the "Members" list (not the "Directory") to all subscribers, but omit or obscure the email addresses to those who wouldn't otherwise be able to see them. This would be helpful when I want everyone in a group to be able to see who is (or maybe more importantly, who isn't) subscribed, but still want to maintain some level of privacy.

From a UI perspective, this might be implemented by adding an option to the "Members Visible" setting:
  • Subscribers, but mask email addresses for those without the correct permissions
  • Subscribers
  • All owners, and moderators with the correct permissions
  • Owners Only
Thanks for your consideration!

-Don


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Tony Moody wrote:
What about some sort of filter?  ; like a whitelist /blacklist and/or a trainable baysian filter.
What about just considering my original feature request. :) Why are people suggesting things as far afield as AI and Bayesian filters? This has gone really far afield. ;p
 
--
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


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

Tony Moody
 

Peace.

What about some sort of filter?  ; like a whitelist /blacklist and/or a trainable baysian filter.
Not sure how to handle the results but maybe the filter could add appropriate hashtags or push the post to moderation if in doubt. 

Each group could have their own filter to play with and that could be a handy feature.

OK,
Tony



On 4 Sep 2018 at 10:03, J_Catlady wrote about :
Subject : Re: [beta] setting to moderate ever

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 09:57 AM, Dave Wade wrote:

I see examples of this type of behaviour in groups most every day.

Of course. But that's not a reason to throw in the towel. You may as well recommend doing away with moderated threads completely because people will always find a way around them. Is that what you are advocating? Because that's the logical conclusion to your objection.

--
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

  


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 10:29 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
I am not sure it has general and wide spread utility…
I have no idea how many groups veer one way or the other in terms of individuals vs. topics needing moderation. But moderating a topic is ALREADY a feature i in groups.io. By saying that "in most its usually people who need moderating, not topics" you are again essentially arguing that the feature is useless. And it is not.

The only question is whether moderating threads by certain individuals would have value. My group is in existence proof that it would. It can't be known a prior how many other groups would take advantage of or benefit from it, but these arguments against it are really perplexing. It would be a minute change to the UI and trivial to implement, and nobody would have to use it who didn't want to. 
 
--
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


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

Dave Wade
 

 

As others have said, in most its usually people who need moderating, not topics. In most groups there are one or two vocal individuals who need careful management.

They divert threads off-topic and hijack sensible discussion. Even then they are, if membership is not moderated, prone to opening new accounts….

.. so what I am saying is that whilst I can see some benefit in it, I am not sure it has general and wide spread utility…

 

Dave

 

From: main@beta.groups.io <main@beta.groups.io> On Behalf Of J_Catlady
Sent: 04 September 2018 18:04
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] setting to moderate every thread a member starts

 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 09:57 AM, Dave Wade wrote:

I see examples of this type of behaviour in groups most every day.

Of course. But that's not a reason to throw in the towel. You may as well recommend doing away with moderated threads completely because people will always find a way around them. Is that what you are advocating? Because that's the logical conclusion to your objection.
 
--
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


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 09:57 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
I see examples of this type of behaviour in groups most every day.
Of course. But that's not a reason to throw in the towel. You may as well recommend doing away with moderated threads completely because people will always find a way around them. Is that what you are advocating? Because that's the logical conclusion to your objection.
 
--
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


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

Dave Wade
 

J,

 

It might work for JUST your group, but I see examples of this type of behaviour in groups most every day. Saw one at the weekend in a Ham Radio group where some ones post was blocked, and in a Vintage Computer group just today where a reply was removed..

 

Dave

 

 

From: main@beta.groups.io <main@beta.groups.io> On Behalf Of J_Catlady
Sent: 04 September 2018 17:48
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] setting to moderate every thread a member starts

 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 09:41 AM, Dave Wade wrote:

When folks figure out their replies are moderated they will simply create new threads or change the subject in a different thread to get their urgent replies through.

I disagree. That will not happen in our group. How do I know this? Because I ALREADY moderate such threads and it doesn't happen. The only difference is that I now have to do it by hand.

The "having worked in IT for years" argument also holds no sway with me - although, as I posted before re the Freakonomics Radio story, human nature does make people find a way around rules. This is not about 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


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

 

I do think Walter's keyword idea has merit, but would be better implemented through a hashtag bearing the keyword. That way, only specific threads would be moderated, rather than every thread containing the keyword.
--
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


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 09:41 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
When folks figure out their replies are moderated they will simply create new threads or change the subject in a different thread to get their urgent replies through.
I disagree. That will not happen in our group. How do I know this? Because I ALREADY moderate such threads and it doesn't happen. The only difference is that I now have to do it by hand.

The "having worked in IT for years" argument also holds no sway with me - although, as I posted before re the Freakonomics Radio story, human nature does make people find a way around rules. This is not about 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


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

 

I thought the keyword idea was a little pie-in-the-sky and impractical. People might be asking about "large cell lymphoma" in general (to use an example more in line with my group) and not have a cat with it. We have threads all the time with people asking the difference between large and small cell. I want to moderate a lot of the threads with people who have cats with large cell and are circling the drain. I don't want to moderate every thread that mentions the disease. This would totally not work for us, even if it were practical and easy to implement (which I think is questionable).

The rest of this is semantics. I don't want to manage the "specific person" who starts the thread. I want to manage the responses to the thread, and the responders are unknown until they respond.

I think this might have usefulness in other groups, as well. It's like having a partially moderated group: conversations about certain issues are automatically moderated through knowledge of which individuals, by virtue of their specific situations, will be posting about them. The topics might be especially sensitive for some reason, or particularly inflammatory, or they might be dangerous if inappropriate replies are posted (as in our group). I'm sure there are lots of applications.
--
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


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

Dave Wade
 

J,

 

Whilst I think there is mileage in being able to moderate specific threads or hashtags, I think that once folks catch on you will find you end up moderating people.

When folks figure out their replies are moderated they will simply create new threads or change the subject in a different thread to get their urgent replies through.

Well they will see them as urgent, they will believe they are right, they will say so when they find you are censoring them.

Having worked in IT for years I will say that folks will put a lot of work into by-passing any rules, even if they effort in by-passing the rules is much more than simply obeying.

Dave

 

From: main@beta.groups.io <main@beta.groups.io> On Behalf Of J_Catlady
Sent: 04 September 2018 17:27
To: main@beta.groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] setting to moderate every thread a member starts

 

On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 03:19 PM, Walter Underwood wrote:

Obviously, it is about managing specific people at specific times

Am just catching this now. No, it's not about managing specific people. It's about managing specific sensitive threads and the RESPONSES to those threads, which can come from anyone in the group. Certain people, because of their cats' conditions, will start such threads and I want to prevent inappropriate or dangerous advice being given to them by OTHER group members, whose identities are unknown until they respond.

Currently I have to jump in and catch such threads and moderate them before they catch fire. I know a priori which people have cats in such conditions, and being able to set them to have their threads moderated would be tremendously helpful.

The alternatives I have now are either to put those people actually on moderation, which I prefer not to do, because that does not allow them to participate freely in other threads; or, as I said, to try to jump in as quickly as I can after the thread starts to take off.

I've explained this in as much detail as I can at this point. Obviously it's up to Mark. The hashtag idea would also work, which I've started another thread about. 
 
--
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


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

Walter Underwood
 

Offline, I suggested some keywords which would trigger moderation on a new topic. To pick a random
possibly fatal condition, if “renal failure” was mentioned when starting a new topic, it could be automatically
moderated.

This seems like it could be useful in a support group where the same questions are asked frequently
and are answered in an FAQ.

J thought that would not work for her group.

By “specific people at specific times” I meant what you describe as “I know a priori which people have
cats in such conditions”. That you know ahead of time is new information in this thread and seems
useful for designing a solution.

wunder
Walter Underwood
wunder@...
http://observer.wunderwood.org/  (my blog)

On Sep 4, 2018, at 9:26 AM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 03:19 PM, Walter Underwood wrote:
Obviously, it is about managing specific people at specific times
Am just catching this now. No, it's not about managing specific people. It's about managing specific sensitive threads and the RESPONSES to those threads, which can come from anyone in the group. Certain people, because of their cats' conditions, will start such threads and I want to prevent inappropriate or dangerous advice being given to them by OTHER group members, whose identities are unknown until they respond.

Currently I have to jump in and catch such threads and moderate them before they catch fire. I know a priori which people have cats in such conditions, and being able to set them to have their threads moderated would be tremendously helpful.

The alternatives I have now are either to put those people actually on moderation, which I prefer not to do, because that does not allow them to participate freely in other threads; or, as I said, to try to jump in as quickly as I can after the thread starts to take off.

I've explained this in as much detail as I can at this point. Obviously it's up to Mark. The hashtag idea would also work, which I've started another thread about. 
 
--
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



Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

 

On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 03:19 PM, Walter Underwood wrote:
Obviously, it is about managing specific people at specific times
Am just catching this now. No, it's not about managing specific people. It's about managing specific sensitive threads and the RESPONSES to those threads, which can come from anyone in the group. Certain people, because of their cats' conditions, will start such threads and I want to prevent inappropriate or dangerous advice being given to them by OTHER group members, whose identities are unknown until they respond.

Currently I have to jump in and catch such threads and moderate them before they catch fire. I know a priori which people have cats in such conditions, and being able to set them to have their threads moderated would be tremendously helpful.

The alternatives I have now are either to put those people actually on moderation, which I prefer not to do, because that does not allow them to participate freely in other threads; or, as I said, to try to jump in as quickly as I can after the thread starts to take off.

I've explained this in as much detail as I can at this point. Obviously it's up to Mark. The hashtag idea would also work, which I've started another thread about. 
 
--
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


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

 

I'll rephrase. The format of hashtags obviously has nothing to do with the feature request. People would be free to use whatever kinds of hashtags they want.
--
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


Re: setting to moderate every thread a member starts #suggestion

 

Apologies. I’m a bit fed up with the path this thread has taken and have little patience left with it. You were the unfortunate victim.


On Sep 4, 2018, at 7:20 AM, Tony Moody <aim@...> wrote:

Ouch !!!

That was damned rude, out of line and uncalled for.

not ok,
Tony



On 4 Sep 2018 at 1:37, J_Catlady wrote about :
Subject : Re: [beta] setting to moderate ever

This is irrelevant to the feature request. Do your hashtags however you want.


On Sep 4, 2018, at 1:24 AM, Tony Moody <
aim@...> wrote:

Hallo J,

If #hashtags are written out in full then the hashtag collection could take up a lot of space in the Subject: But they are clearly read and understood.

Were you thinking of a coded a hashtag?

I'm going back to being a maintenance engineer in food factories.
a code like #PCY01 could mean a Pump, of type Centrifugal, in the Yard, number1
and #VFS01 would be the oldest Forklift in the Store and is a Vehicle for maintenance and accounting purpose.
We used codes for physical Location and for Priorities, etc

For what purposes?
An overall asset register of interest to engineer, maintenance workshop manager, accountant, buyer, top management, and production staff.
To identify a specific piece of equipment, what it is, in broad-ish terms and where it is. Production can easily identify the asset to Engineering and Maintenance, so that it can be jobcarded and allocated to the correct team.
Accounting will easily allocate any expenses to the correct beanbag.
etc etc

Maybe a mix of both concepts (#clear and #coded) would be useful

OK,
Tony






On 3 Sep 2018 at 15:41, J_Catlady wrote about :
Subject : Re: [beta] setting to moderate ever

p.s. BTW I also have decades of software design and implementation under my belt. So you can stop with the man 'splaining.


On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 3:39 PM J_Catlady < j.olivia.catlady@... > wrote:
I've already proposed an alternative solution using hashtags. See the other thread. I think Mark will understand the use case and if he doesn't, he's free to ask me. I've explained it to you in greater detail offlist.
<big snip -tm>

--
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

 

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

11641 - 11660 of 29666