Date   

moderated Re: Can we change the topic at the message level?

 

Bob,

And this is helpful to me because ......?
Because this is not a help group; see the Beta home page. Your complaint does have some merit though, most of the replies (including my own) were off-topic.

The straight-up answer to the question in your subject line is "No, you can only edit the Subject text of a topic - not individual messages."

Frances had the first and best answer for what you're trying to achieve: You can split topics.
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum/wiki/How-to-Split-Threads

When you split the new message(s) off of the original topic you are given a field to set a new subject for the messages removed from the original topic. You can also merge topics together.

Or, if you don't need to split or merge, you can edit the subject of the whole topic. In the Topics list choose "Edit Subject" from the drop menu right of the name and time. In the Messages list choose "Edit Topic" from that menu.

If you're looking at messages, look in the "More" menu.

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


moderated Re: Can we change the topic at the message level?

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 05:08 pm, J_Catlady wrote:
Each topic shows an excerpt from the first message in that topic. That doesn't change unless Mark decides to change the implementation (and I would vote for that).

 I don't keep track of the Trello pages, but I seem to remember that this may be somewhere on the to-do list.

I've said my piece (and so have you) on this particular issue.  This is the one and only web forum, and I participate on many, that does not show a snippet from the latest message and who the author is of that latest message in topics view (threaded view, whatever) rather than first message and first poster (but with latest message addition time, if I'm not mistaken.  I'll see in a moment or two.)

I've simply trained myself to keep track of the rough or exact message count and/or time of the most recent message I've seen on my last visit to determine which topics I need to be revisit because there have been additions.  It's a suboptimal solution, but the amount of traffic on most of the groups I frequent makes this a workable method.
--
Brian

 

       Personally, I'm always ready to learn, although I do not always like being taught.

             ~ Winston Churchill


moderated Re: Can we change the topic at the message level?

Bob Bellizzi
 

Frances,

Thank you for your constructive answer. It's a rose among thorns

It's a refreshing change from the "perfect engineering solution" mindset that tells you to eliminate anyone who doesn't use the embedded Reply button on the  email.  Oh, sorry, eliminate all who use email.  Email is a legacy that will go on for at least another generation because it was somewhat pervasive well before Internet and Browsers which are roughly half as old as my youngest child.  One simply can't eliminate the stakeholders and expect to have other that a perfect system with no messages and very few users.

Bob Bellizzi.

and I coopt catlady's signature for this email because I just couldn't not get snarky


moderated Re: Can we change the topic at the message level?

Bob Bellizzi
 

And this is helpful to me because ......?

Bob Bellizzi


moderated Re: Can we change the topic at the message level?

 

It has nothing to do with the browser and we're talking about apples and oranges. ;)

You're still looking at the order in which individual messages are displayed.

I'm talking about the immediate display, within a single topic, when you go into Topics view. Each topic shows an excerpt from the first message in that topic. That doesn't change unless Mark decides to change the implementation (and I would vote for that).
--
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: Can we change the topic at the message level?

Frances
 

J, I am talking about the view that is labelled Topic. 

Oh, okay, in trying to replicate this, I realize that I start with Topics (the default - for me) and then click on the topic I want.



Then, I get here - all the messages in that topic / thread.



If necessary, I click on Date to change the order. But yours actually showed up first in the list from my previous view of this topic earlier.

Perhaps it is the browser? I am using Safari 10.1

Frances

On May 19 17, at 7:19 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 04:09 pm, Frances wrote:
True - that the oldest (or first) in a topic appears first. But on the website, it is easy to click on Date and then they appear with the newest in the topic appearing first. Just did that!

You're talking about message view. I'm talking about Topics view, and the fact that the previewed snippet in that view is always taken from the oldest message in the topic. That doesn't change.
--
J_._,_



moderated Re: Can we change the topic at the message level?

 

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 04:09 pm, Frances wrote:
True - that the oldest (or first) in a topic appears first. But on the website, it is easy to click on Date and then they appear with the newest in the topic appearing first. Just did that!

You're talking about message view. I'm talking about Topics view, and the fact that the previewed snippet in that view is always taken from the oldest message in the topic. That doesn't change.
--
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: Can we change the topic at the message level?

 

Brian,

(and I know this is a personal opinion, so please don't grab
those torches and pitchforks) that e-mail lists are an anachronism.
Aww, just one small candle and a toothpick?

Notice what we're about. We're discussing the features of a platform explicitly designed as the next generation of email lists. That's the singular motivation for Groups.io's existence.
https://wingedpig.com/2014/09/23/introducing-groups-io/

Now you're almost certainly not alone in preferring a web-centric interaction. Myself I prefer the flexibility of having both - which is why I've been so strongly attracted to Groups.io, and before that Yahoo Groups.

Here, in beta@, I think the question is not whether email or web is the better user experience - everyone has their opinion on that - rather the focus should be on how to make both experiences better.

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


moderated Re: Can we change the topic at the message level?

Frances
 

True - that the oldest (or first) in a topic appears first. But on the website, it is easy to click on Date and then they appear with the newest in the topic appearing first. Just did that!

Frances


moderated Re: Can we change the topic at the message level?

 

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 03:52 pm, Brian Vogel wrote:
I remain astounded how much resistance there is in certain quarters (and J, I think you're one of them, but this isn't personal) to the use of threaded view.

LOL. I'm not at all against the Topics view.. My problem is that as currently implemented (and this relates to a prior suggestion of yours, Brian, which I heartily supported, but which never happened), the previewed message in Topics view is the oldest, rather than the most recent, message in the topic. That is totally useless to me. When I go into my group, what I want to immediately see is the most recent action, and Topics view does not show it to me. I am still knocking my head against having to switch back to Messages view every time I go into my group because the system doesn't remember that that's the last view I was in. (Just thought I'd throw that in there. ;)
--
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: Can we change the topic at the message level?

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

Every time I read about this sort of thing, and how much of it is engendered by e-mail as the communication medium, the more convinced I become (and I know this is a personal opinion, so please don't grab those torches and pitchforks) that e-mail lists are an anachronism.

You simply don't have well over 75% of the problems described on a web forum interface.  Specifically all splits and merges are immediately obvious to anyone looking over a group page as a whole and, if the topics are well named, they tend to drive responses to the correct topic (provided a split is done such that each resulting topic is "pure").

Of course, the use of threaded view in e-mail clients can help this a great deal as well.  I remain astounded how much resistance there is in certain quarters (and J, I think you're one of them, but this isn't personal) to the use of threaded view.   I'd lose my mind in e-mail were I not using threaded view, as it keeps topics together, literally, or apart when that's appropriate.
--
Brian

 

       Personally, I'm always ready to learn, although I do not always like being taught.

             ~ Winston Churchill


moderated Re: Can we change the topic at the message level?

 

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:39 pm, Brian Vogel wrote:

If the readership doesn't see a split unless a message is added to the "new topic" that's been split from the existing one that would explain why virtually no one ever replies to anything but the original topic.  That would also make me, as moderator, be certain to send out an additional message on a new topic created by split announcing its existence and specifically asking that traffic for the new topic be responded to on the new topic.

 They don't see it, there's no notification, and even notification by the moderator doesn't work because it's chronologically later in their inboxes than messages with the original title, so they respond to that first. It is WORSE than trying to herd cats. I never split, rename, or merge any more and have it in the group guidelines for members not to rename threads because it just creates twin streams.

Not that this would necessarily move the membership, but it's worth a try.

Right. It's worth one try, maybe two. After that, forget about it. I don't even try any more. ;)

And that's *besides* the issues with locking and moderation loopholes caused by splitting/renaming.

--
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: Can we change the topic at the message level?

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

I believe that J_Catlady has done the best job of documenting the issues with split and merge.

One of the things I'm tasked with is doing merges where new topics (that aren't really new topics) are accidentally spun-off if someone adds or subtracts a character or characters in a message subject during a reply.  This generally works pretty well, particularly if I catch it early, but if the "spin-off" message triggers a whole bunch of replies all of those replies come in on that spin-off topic and need to be merged, too.  At least most times when that happens if it's a particularly prompt set of replies I find, say, 10 of them in that spin-off thread which is already dying down or has completely died down and I can merge the lot back into the original topic at one time.

I just realized that I've never done a split, or may have only done one, but I've also never followed up with someone who participates by e-mail to see if this triggers a new message to go out with the split title so that the e-mail participants know that a thread has, indeed, been split.  Since moderators can edit a message without sending the repaired version out to the readership, and I've done so on my own messages, I imagine that splits and merges both do not trigger something that the readership can see.  Perhaps someone can confirm/refute who's done a lot of splitting.

If the readership doesn't see a split unless a message is added to the "new topic" that's been split from the existing one that would explain why virtually no one ever replies to anything but the original topic.  That would also make me, as moderator, be certain to send out an additional message on a new topic created by split announcing its existence and specifically asking that traffic for the new topic be responded to on the new topic.

Not that this would necessarily move the membership, but it's worth a try.
--
Brian

 

       Personally, I'm always ready to learn, although I do not always like being taught.

             ~ Winston Churchill


moderated Re: Can we change the topic at the message level?

Frances
 

Bob, check out how to split and merge threads in the GroupManagersForum wiki.

https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum

Some group managers / moderators have said there can still be a problem because some members may still reply to the old thread. You can also close threads. 

Frances


moderated Can we change the topic at the message level?

Bob Bellizzi
 

Our members seem to defy all requests to initiate a new subject/topic when they have a new item to ask about or discuss.

They simply use the reply function and as a result, most others, looking for questions/answers and simply scanning subject/topic, totaly miss important messages.

No amount of effort seems to make a difference in this methodology.

Can I move messages from one topic to another to ensure question and answer and topic are relevant?

If  so, how?

Bob Bellizzi


moderated Group by topic and hide archive

Benoît Dumeaux
 


moderated Re: Bug, peculiarity, I don't know exactly how to categorize this . . .

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 01:39 pm, Joseph Lee wrote:
Ah, that's because I (the owner of that list) approved that message.

 Don't be doin' me no favors, Joe!   ;-)

--
Brian

 

       Personally, I'm always ready to learn, although I do not always like being taught.

             ~ Winston Churchill


moderated Re: Bug, peculiarity, I don't know exactly how to categorize this . . .

 

Hi,
Ah, that's because I (the owner of that list) approved that message. Sorry about that.
Cheers,
Joseph

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Vogel" <britechguy@gmail.com
To: beta@groups.io
Date sent: Thu, 18 May 2017 13:10:52 -0700
Subject: [beta] Bug, peculiarity, I don't know exactly how to categorize this . . .

One of the groups I routinely participate on is the Windows 10 for Screen Reader Users ( https://win10.groups.io/g/win10 ) group. 혻I have moderator privileges on that group for the specific purpose of archive maintenance, which means in this case merging topics that get accidentally split due to accidental changes to subject lines. 혻I add that only because it might make a difference.

That group has two subgroups, "List Matters" and "Insiders" for talk about matters related to list moderation and similar and for those who are on the Windows 10 Insider program.

When I go to the Subgroups page, the "List Matters" group is shown under the heading,혻*Subgroups You Belong To* , while "Insiders" is under,혻*Subgroups You Can Join* . 혻This is correct because I long ago subscribed to/joined the "List Matters" subgroup but have never done so for "Insiders."

A short while ago I sent a message via email to the main address for the "Insiders" group, which I full well expected would bounce back to me because I have never joined it and the web interface clearly indicates that. 혻 Well, lo and behold!, that message posted.

Why on earth would it do this? 혻Even as a moderator for the parent group I would think that anything that the Groups.io interface shows as being a subgroup I could join would result in a bounce back to me. 혻When I am looking at said message at this very moment through the web interface, with myself logged in, there is no reply option on it, which I would expect as well since I have never joined.

Something seems to be slightly off here.
--
*Brian*



혻 혻 혻 혻*Personally, I'm always ready to learn, although I do not혻* *always like being taught.*

혻 혻 혻 혻 혻 혻 혻~ *Winston Churchill*


moderated Bug, peculiarity, I don't know exactly how to categorize this . . .

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

One of the groups I routinely participate on is the Windows 10 for Screen Reader Users group.  I have moderator privileges on that group for the specific purpose of archive maintenance, which means in this case merging topics that get accidentally split due to accidental changes to subject lines.  I add that only because it might make a difference.

That group has two subgroups, "List Matters" and "Insiders" for talk about matters related to list moderation and similar and for those who are on the Windows 10 Insider program.

When I go to the Subgroups page, the "List Matters" group is shown under the heading, Subgroups You Belong To, while "Insiders" is under, Subgroups You Can Join.  This is correct because I long ago subscribed to/joined the "List Matters" subgroup but have never done so for "Insiders."

A short while ago I sent a message via email to the main address for the "Insiders" group, which I full well expected would bounce back to me because I have never joined it and the web interface clearly indicates that.   Well, lo and behold!, that message posted.

Why on earth would it do this?  Even as a moderator for the parent group I would think that anything that the Groups.io interface shows as being a subgroup I could join would result in a bounce back to me.  When I am looking at said message at this very moment through the web interface, with myself logged in, there is no reply option on it, which I would expect as well since I have never joined.

Something seems to be slightly off here.
--
Brian

 

       Personally, I'm always ready to learn, although I do not always like being taught.

             ~ Winston Churchill


moderated Re: strip out another automatic advertisement? #suggestion

Bob Bellizzi
 

Our latest TOU  is available at all times.  If we update it we special notice all members informing them that the new ones are in force and if they disagree they must resign.

We were fortunate that a contract lawyer member defined to overall TOU gratis. And was after he was banned from a Yahoo group for asking a  valid question that was not against the terms of that group but was counter to the unspoken direction of the qroup.  Never get a lawyer angry at the way you operate  your group.  He demanded in a postal letter, delivered to thegroup owner, that all of his original messages and copies contained in replies be removed from the group.  This was legal under Yahoo's TOU but impossible to do practically without destroying the group.

The original group  owner quit after defining another person as owner.

Quite messy.

Bob  Bellizzi

14841 - 14860 of 28419