Date   

moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

 

I haven't had a chance to read all the arguments yet, but it's clear we're generating more heat than light at this point. I'm moderating this topic.

Mark


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

Duane
 

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:06 pm, J_Catlady wrote:


On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 04:24 am, Duane wrote:


So where would you be able to find a group site with as many features and
responsive support if you had to move because of public guidelines?
I guess you'd be out of luck.
I was referring to you. To me, a deal-breaker means that the situation/condition is unacceptable. Because of this, I had assumed that you'd leave groups.io if it didn't happen your way. Now that you've explained that it's not a deal-breaker, just an inconvenience, you won't need to look for another site.

Duane


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

J,

          You want to make this personal, I do not.

           If you wish to believe that your group is typical then that's your call.  I'll leave it at that.

           Most often people don't have all that much to say about an early feature proposal.  When that proposal enters active development and early beta stage it is entirely natural that others will take an increased interest.

            And how or why you believe that I'm using the beta group as a template of some sort is a complete mystery.  As I've said, my exposure to online groups has been extensive and goes well beyond groups.io.   I started out when Usenet was still king, which should give you some idea of just how long I've been interacting with online groups in various guises.  I'm not operating in a vacuum.

--
Brian  - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1703, Build 15063  (dot level on request - it changes too often to keep in signature)
I worry a lot. . . I worry that no matter how cynical you become it's never enough to keep up.
    ~ Trudy, in Jane Wagner's 
            Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

 

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:02 am, Shal Farley wrote:
You're conflating different things.Yahoo Groups don't have a Guidelines tab, and Groups.io has only had it a short while - and during that time it has always (until now) been public.

You're talking about the Pending and/or Welcome notices. Those are still sent in private emails.
Shal, I'm not conflating anything. My point is that in yahoo, and before the guidelines tab in groups.io, nobody complained that group guidelines were not available until they joined a group. Nobody demanded that the guidelines should be made public in case a potential member didn't like them and didn't want to join a group on the basis of the guidelines, nobody screamed that potential members should know what they're getting into (as people in this thread have been doing), nobody cited "prevailing norms" because there WERE no prevailing norms. The guidelines tab exists only because I pushed and pushed Mark for it over the past year. Nobody even cared that it was not there! Now it's suddenly of earth-shattering importance that they be made public. They didn't exist at all before and no one cared or complained. So how is this logical? 
 
--
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


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

 

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 04:00 pm, Brian Vogel wrote:
  It is long past time to realize that groups.io is not all about you and your groups
Brian, I never thought that it was. You, OTOH, seem to think you know everything about groups, and what the prevailing norms are. It is high time for YOU to stop spouting that someone's group is not the "prevailing norm" and that they therefore should be ignored whenever someone disagrees with your opinion. This beta group is very small. You have no idea how representative it is or is not of prevailing norms.

The last time we disagreed, you spouted the same gibberish, and you called me a megalomaniac, because I didn't think it was appropriate for group owners to have to ask permission from groups.io to delete their groups. Beta blowhards were all over this, spouting the same nonsense. Mark, very reasonably, did not implement that. I wonder whether you have any theories as to why he did not.
 
--
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


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

J,

          It is long past time to realize that groups.io is not all about you and your groups.

          You have had many great ideas, and you have had many idiosyncratic ideas.  It's not all about you, even if you originate the idea for something.  That's why a group like beta exists.  Not everything that you want will be something you get, and you seem to be mightily pissed when others have ideas that differ from your vision of what something should be.

           I also have been around groups online since the 1980s, so I am quite willing to say that I have quite a decent sense of how groups as a whole tend (note tend) to operate.  You can pretend otherwise if you feel like doing so, it won't change the fact that decades of familiarity give someone (and not just me) valuable perspective.

--
Brian  - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1703, Build 15063  (dot level on request - it changes too often to keep in signature)
I worry a lot. . . I worry that no matter how cynical you become it's never enough to keep up.
    ~ Trudy, in Jane Wagner's 
            Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

 

Plus, the idea that I am "responsible for finding my own workaround" for a feature that I suggested to begin with is laughable. You like to call my group "different" and haul out so-called "good design principles" of pleasing the majority. You actually have no idea how many groups are like mine in this regard or any other.
--
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


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

 

Call it the rule book, call it guidelines, call it whatever you want. I happened to coin the original term in my original suggestion for this tab and in MY group, the guidelines are the rule book. They need to be sent to new members, sent to the group once a month, and be always at hand and available to group members on the site.

Those were MY three conditions, and MY suggestions, and they applied to MY group, which was the reason I suggested and then pushed for this feature in the first place, starting many months ago.

So please don't preach about hiw guidelines 'should' be general in nature or 'should' not contain private information or 'should' be this, that, or the io they. The guidelines are the rules, the code of conduct, or whatever you want to call them. But they contain whatever the group owner wants them to include. They could include the Shakespearean sonnets for all I care. It's not the place of anyone here to dictate content. 

Whatever it's called, if I can't have it go out to group members automatically upon joining, be sent once a month to the group, be available on the site to members, and be maintainable in one place, then it's worthless to me and I'm back where I started, doing all of it by hand. 

Its interesting how people are so fixated now on having this be publicly available in all groups, whether the group  likes it or not, when they were indifferent (and in some cases, plainly against) the whole concept to begin with.
--
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


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

Good design cannot be all things to all people and has to take the most common cases (note, plural) into account.

Guidelines are not, in the vast majority of cases, considered "the rulebook" but are introductory in nature and give a high level overview.  Phrases such as, "there are very strict rules which must be followed to participate in this group," should be more than enough for guidelines.  If someone wants the forum/list rules there should be some way to request same, even if it is done by individual request. 

Those who have guidelines that are far more restrictive than "the average group" are indeed responsible for finding their own workarounds.  If those are actually the rule book then they're really not guidelines.  If the workarounds to split one from the other are "deal breakers" then they're "deal breakers."

--
Brian  - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1703, Build 15063  (dot level on request - it changes too often to keep in signature)
I worry a lot. . . I worry that no matter how cynical you become it's never enough to keep up.
    ~ Trudy, in Jane Wagner's 
            Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

 

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 04:24 am, Duane wrote:
So where would you be able to find a group site with as many features and responsive support if you had to move because of public guidelines?
I guess you'd be out of luck. 

The issue is that publishing heavy guidelines - as our group's are - without an opportunity to also publish, in an illustrative manner, what people get in exchange is bad advertising. And there is no way to simply state, even within the guideline document, the benefits that members reap from our group. They have to experience it.

Your group may be different. Others undoubtedly are. Please don't try to generalize or use sarcasm. Our group is serious and is saving cats' lives literally all over the world. Other groups are doing freecycle. Sometimes there's no comparison. The only way we can be successful at what we're doing is to have strict guidelines. If someone joins the group and realizes that we are saving their cat's life when their vet was not, they gladly put up with the necessary guidelines. If all they can see before joining the group are the two pages of rules, they are much less likely to join and we are likely to save one less cat's life.

If guidelines - which are turning out to be my Frankenstein monster - are made public in all groups, without the option to turn that off or without a compromise of making them public only in groups with public archives, I will simply toss them out and go back to the old way, as inconvenient as it was.
 
--
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


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

Sarah k Alawami
 

Actually this was a public list that anyone could join. The link was out there for the world.  But anyway, there you go. I think the guide lines should if the mod wants them be public so users know what they are getting into and they can join if they so choose.

Take care all.

On Sep 26, 2017, at 10:55 AM, Brian Vogel <britechguy@...> wrote:

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 10:03 am, Sarah k Alawami wrote:
One example was: "using the BCC field for this list is off limits." Um? So I agree that guidelines should be possible to the public, if the owner chooses so.
Well, if it was a private group it makes sense that BCC: would be forbidden (as it could be used as a way to circulate material to individuals who were not members of the private group) and CC: would be unnecessary if one is communicating inside the group, which is pretty much the expectation whether it's private or public.  If you were sending a private message you'd simply e-mail a group member off list or use a mechanism like Groups.io offers to do same.

I don't think it should have to do with owner choice.  If an owner does not want public guidelines then they can choose not to employ them or use a single line much like has been used with regard to references on resumes forever:   Guidelines furnished upon request.

That phrase should be the bare minimum if one publishes anything at all as Guidelines.  That still leaves a group as a black box, by and large, but if the owner and/or moderator(s) reliably follow through with furnishing the actual guidelines privately before actual membership is granted that gives the prospective member the information they need to make an informed decision.   If no information regarding a group's guidelines is forthcoming when requested then you really have to question why.

To put a slight twist on Groucho Marx:  "I wouldn't want to be a member of a club that won't tell me what it's about."
 
--
Brian  - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1703, Build 15063  (dot level on request - it changes too often to keep in signature)
I worry a lot. . . I worry that no matter how cynical you become it's never enough to keep up.
    ~ Trudy, in Jane Wagner's 
            Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 10:03 am, Sarah k Alawami wrote:
One example was: "using the BCC field for this list is off limits." Um? So I agree that guidelines should be possible to the public, if the owner chooses so.
Well, if it was a private group it makes sense that BCC: would be forbidden (as it could be used as a way to circulate material to individuals who were not members of the private group) and CC: would be unnecessary if one is communicating inside the group, which is pretty much the expectation whether it's private or public.  If you were sending a private message you'd simply e-mail a group member off list or use a mechanism like Groups.io offers to do same.

I don't think it should have to do with owner choice.  If an owner does not want public guidelines then they can choose not to employ them or use a single line much like has been used with regard to references on resumes forever:   Guidelines furnished upon request.

That phrase should be the bare minimum if one publishes anything at all as Guidelines.  That still leaves a group as a black box, by and large, but if the owner and/or moderator(s) reliably follow through with furnishing the actual guidelines privately before actual membership is granted that gives the prospective member the information they need to make an informed decision.   If no information regarding a group's guidelines is forthcoming when requested then you really have to question why.

To put a slight twist on Groucho Marx:  "I wouldn't want to be a member of a club that won't tell me what it's about."
 
--
Brian  - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1703, Build 15063  (dot level on request - it changes too often to keep in signature)
I worry a lot. . . I worry that no matter how cynical you become it's never enough to keep up.
    ~ Trudy, in Jane Wagner's 
            Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe


moderated Re: CORRECTION: Event: Database Upgrade, Wednesday, 27 September 2017 #downtime #cal-invite

Sarah k Alawami
 

So am I. I might let my list know though just in case someone desides to send an email and it brake. My list though is  so low traffic for now that it should not matter. lol! It's best to cover my but though, you know?

Take care all.

On Sep 25, 2017, at 9:53 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

 I'm still guessing that email will still be ok
"Emails sent during this time will be queued and sent when the site is back up."
--
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



moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

Sarah k Alawami
 

I agree. I was on a mailman list where guidelines were not visible to the public. Turns out there were so many rules I would end up leaving. One example was: "using the BCC field for this list is off limits." Um? So I agree that guidelines should be possible to the public, if the owner chooses so.

On Sep 25, 2017, at 11:08 PM, Tony Moody <aim@aptech.co.za> wrote:

I am with Shal on this one.

For prospective members to a restricted group it would be good to be able to read a set of the
guidelines on-line (or be sent them). Otherwise how do they know what they are letting
themselves in for?

OK,
Tony

On 25 Sep 2017 at 18:18, Shal Farley wrote about :
Subject : Re: [beta] "Guidelines" now publicl

Mark,

I have changed the group guidelines to only be visible to subscribers.
I disagree with this change.

It makes it difficult for a group with Restricted membership to let
prospective members know what the rules will be if they join the group.
I don't want to make the whole of the Wiki public for just that page,
nor all of Messages certainly.

Having the Guidelines be public seemed like the perfect solution. I
doesn't make sense to me that a group's guidelines would contain any
private information.

The Pending member notification is almost good enough for this, but even
for this the person must make the decision to apply for membership
before they are told the rules they'll be expected to follow. Seems a
little like bait-and-switch to me.

(And, of course, having to keep a second copy of the guidelines in the
Pending notice would violate J's abhorrence for maintaining multiple
copies - not that I'm actually very concerned by that issue).

Shal

--
https://groups.io/g/Group_Help
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum






moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:42 pm, Shal Farley wrote:
J,

Why not make them public for public (unrestricted) groups and private
for private (restricted) groups?
Precisely for the reason I stated: in a restricted group I believe the prospective member deserves to know what the rules will be before committing to join the group.

... or make them public iff the group has public archives.
Same answer. I think restricted groups are likely to have private archives.
With which I agree on both counts.

Groups, even private groups, should not ever be "black boxes" for those considering joining.   If you can't publish public guidelines regarding the group then something is terribly wrong.  Even if those guidelines state that additional details will be sent when a member attempts to join but before they'd be approved for membership, to allow them to consider whether they wanted to continue down that road would be enough.

There are a even private groups that have public archives where the idea is to control who can contribute, but not who can read what has been contributed.  There are, of course, others that have private archives, but even those are "members only," as I've never seen archives that are not accessible to private members of a private group.

The use of any online group, be it public or private, is a de facto form of publication, just in cyberspace rather than hard copy.   Once something is published it's published to an audience and the person publishing doesn't get to change their minds or have complete control over it.  It's out there and should remain out there for anyone who was initially granted access to it, in perpetuity.   Just because it isn't on paper does not change the well-understood social contract that goes with publication, even if that publication is for a members-only audience.
 
--
Brian  - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1703, Build 15063  (dot level on request - it changes too often to keep in signature)
I worry a lot. . . I worry that no matter how cynical you become it's never enough to keep up.
    ~ Trudy, in Jane Wagner's 
            Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

Duane
 

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 07:29 pm, J_Catlady wrote:


Making the guidelines public is a deal-breaker for me.
So where would you be able to find a group site with as many features and responsive support if you had to move because of public guidelines?

Duane


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

 

J,

You even fought (as I recall) having the guidelines tab and
now it is so important to you that it be public?
No, I liked and like the Guidelines tab.

What I didn't want was for it to be tied to an ad-hoc and limited set of email notifications. For scheduled transmissions I prefer the expressive power of repeating events - where you can have just about any interval you like.

I still find it odd that Pending isn't among the triggers for emailing the Guidelines. But that goes more toward the idea I suggested about having a multiple selector (instead of a single "type") for member notices.

... and now it is so important to you that it be public?
I run some very public groups, some moderately private groups, and some private groups. In all those cases the purpose of a Guidelines tab would be to let people know what is expected of them as members. I don't want to "spring" the rules on them after they've committed to membership in the group. I think there's more chance the members will respect the group Guidelines if they've been presented up front.

Shal

--
https://groups.io/g/Group_Help
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

 

J,

The same way they always didL join the group, be sent a copy of the
group guidelines (please remember: these used to be sent in private
emails, to members only) and find out, and leave if it doesn't suit
them.

This has NEVER been made public before and there was no problem. Not
in yahoo groups, and not here, ...
You're conflating different things. Yahoo Groups don't have a Guidelines tab, and Groups.io has only had it a short while - and during that time it has always (until now) been public.

You're talking about the Pending and/or Welcome notices. Those are still sent in private emails.

If I'd known it was going to be made public, I would not have wasted
my energy.
If I'd thought that it would be made members-only I would have argued against that up front.

The only place a Restricted group with private archives and wiki can publicly display group guidelines is on the group's home page, which I think is a very clumsy place for them, or (and I do thank you for the idea) on the Guidelines page, prior to today.

Shal

--
https://groups.io/g/Group_Help
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

 

I amended that to suggest that they be made public in groups with public archives.

And YOU have "other options" for the guidelines if you want them publicly available to people who have not joined yet: put them on your home page. Oh, the home page doesn't have enough space, but the guidelines tab is? You're welcome. :)
--
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


moderated Re: "Guidelines" now publicly visible! #suggestion #bug

 

J,

Why not make them public for public (unrestricted) groups and private
for private (restricted) groups?
Precisely for the reason I stated: in a restricted group I believe the prospective member deserves to know what the rules will be before committing to join the group.

... or make them public iff the group has public archives.
Same answer. I think restricted groups are likely to have private archives.

Shal

--
https://groups.io/g/Group_Help
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum

14781 - 14800 of 29453