Date   

moderated Re: funkiness with messages view vs. topics view

Duane
 

I normally use Topic View and haven't noticed anything unusual. I tried switching to other views and it looks like I'm always returned to the one I last used. Once in awhile I'll have several tabs open, even different groups. If I change the view in one, the others don't change until I refresh (as I think it should be) and that sometimes throws me off.

Duane


moderated funkiness with messages view vs. topics view

 

Has anyone else noticed that topics view seems to keep coming up more often, despite whatever view you were in before? I've reported this to support but I now wonder whether this is something new and intentional. Or possibly there's something awry with my browser? I am constantly seeing topics view come up and having to toggle back to messages view, like, many many times a day. Is it just me?
--
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: Suggestion integration Facebook group

 

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 3:54 AM, Göran <goran@...> wrote:

It would be really great to be able to integrate a closed facebook group.
We have a closed member group that would be great to integrate because there is group.io members that don´t have and will never get a facebook account.
These members could also receive facebook post items.

While I haven't looked at the Facebook API in awhile to see if it's possible, this is on the todo list.

Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Re: little idea about offlist messages

 

I would be strongly against this. I currently add either "private" or "offlist" to the text of any private email, to make sure the reader knows that it's offlist. I'd previously lobbied for the system to add that text automatically, in addition to just in the title, but it wasn't forthcoming - so I do it myself.
--
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: when topic is closed, remove "moderated" status #suggestion

 

Mark,

Thanks for the clarification.

I can definitely see the usefulness, for a topic that was previously moderated *by hand*, and later closed, of keeping the moderated status if and when it's reopened, because (for example) the topic may be a touchy one.

But do we really want, for a topic that was *automatically* moderated after x number of days and automatically closed after y number of days, to have to remove both statusus by hand in order to reopen 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


moderated Re: little idea about offlist messages

Jujube <ellaxyu@...>
 

Great idea.

----- Original Message -----
From: "ro-esp" <ro-esp@dds.nl
To: beta@groups.io
Date sent: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 16:10:57 -0800
Subject: [beta] little idea about offlist messages

maybe nobody sees the need, but sometimes messages not meant for the entire list do reach the entire list (sometimes even on moderated groups..)

So maybe we can have some "code" that automatically rejects messages that start with
OFFLIST or [off-list] , and blocks the "reply to group" button when someone changes the subjectline so it starts with that in the web-interface.

[if you don't see the need, just let this thread stop]


groetjes, Ronaldo


moderated Re: when topic is closed, remove "moderated" status #suggestion

 

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 3:29 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Great. I want to be clear what you mean by "never shown." Is the moderated status still there (assuming it was there before the thread was locked)? Asking another way: if the "locked" status is removed, is the result is the "moderated" status? Or is the moderated status actually removed when a thread is locked?

The moderated status is still there.

Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Re: Clearly Identifying Different Groups #suggestion

 

Hi Brenda,

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Nightowl >8# <featheredleader@...> wrote:
One of the reasons that I have a lot of trouble staying caught up in groups.io, particularly Beta and GMF, is that they both look completely alike when you are online on the website.

When you are composing a message, as I am doing now, you cant even see the title bar.

The group name is displayed at the top of every page, in what's called the breadcrumb bar. It's the grey bar. Do you see that? Perhaps there's something I can change to make that more apparent?

Thanks,
Mark


moderated Re: How on earth does Groups.io thread a topic?

 

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 06:33 am, Brian Vogel wrote:
I only wish that I'd had to deal with the horrors of this specific "scourge" characteristic on a routine basis.

Agreed. 
--
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: How on earth does Groups.io thread a topic?

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 01:48 am, Shal Farley wrote:
Sad that Yahoo Mail is also infected by the same cargo-cult disease. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_programming

 They say that one example of this practice, and listed first, is:  adding unnecessary comments to self-explanatory code.

I must say, I'd give my eye teeth to have seen this done, as my experience as a programmer was the dearth (complete absence, often) of comments in thousands of lines of code, whatever the reason.

I never presumed that code was "self-explanatory" to anyone other than its writer, and even not to him or her after they'd not been actively working with it for an extended period of time.

I only wish that I'd had to deal with the horrors of this specific "scourge" characteristic on a routine basis.
--
Brian

I have made mistakes, but have never made the mistake of claiming I never made one.   

          ~  James G. Bennet


moderated Suggestion integration Facebook group

Göran <goran@...>
 

Hi

I have a suggestion to add to integration.
It would be really great to be able to integrate a closed facebook group.
We have a closed member group that would be great to integrate because there is group.io members that don´t have and will never get a facebook account.
These members could also receive facebook post items.

Regards

Göran


moderated Re: How on earth does Groups.io thread a topic?

 

Mark,

They were replies. But the only References header had the Message-ID
of that message.
All the hipsters know that self-referential things are so meta they're cool.

And it doesn't include the Message-ID of the message it's a reply to.
WTF.
That's a good one.
"Hey don't look at me - the spec just says to stick in a Message-ID."

<Insert disparaging things about Yahoo engineering here>
Gladly. I've often had the feeling that all of Neo was implemented by people who'd never used Classic (or possibly never used email at all) to a spec written by people equally clueless.

Things like this, something having the right form but dysfunctional, were all too common during the roll-out, and many persist.

Sad that Yahoo Mail is also infected by the same cargo-cult disease. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_programming

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


moderated Re: How on earth does Groups.io thread a topic?

 

Mark,

I still have to wonder why the threads were splitting (and evidently the yahoo headers were effed up) only with that one particular yahoo-email member (and, on and off, with one other one). We have lots of members with yahoo email addresses who don't cause the behavior. Not that it matters at this point, but it's perplexing...
J

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 12, 2017, at 9:55 PM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 6:12 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
Unfortunately, this is not working yet in my group. One of the members whose posts always splits threads has created at least two threads with the identical title today. I will send the relevant info to support, but things may change by then because I am merging these threads moment by moment and the conversation is very active...

Watch now as Mark goes on a rant against Yahoo....

I found the problem with J's group. Those messages that weren't threading were coming from Yahoo. They were replies. But the only References header had the Message-ID of that message. But not quite. They added a '.ref' to the middle of that id. Why? WHO THE HELL KNOWS! And it doesn't include the Message-ID of the message it's a reply to. WTF.

We handle the case where the only References ID is the message's own Message-ID. But the extra '.ref' screwed that up, and prevented the rest of the algorithm from working correctly.

We're now handling this correctly. For those keeping track of these things at home, we had a similar problem a year or two ago with Yahoo, except instead of '.ref', they were adding '.JavaMail.yahoo.ref'. I had blissfully forgotten about that, much in the same way I try to forget about the pain of having cavities filled.

<Insert disparaging things about Yahoo engineering here>

Ahem. I feel better.

Thanks for listening,
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


moderated Re: How on earth does Groups.io thread a topic?

 

LOL. Can I "Like" this twice? Requesting a new feature. ;)
--
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: How on earth does Groups.io thread a topic?

 

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 6:12 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
Unfortunately, this is not working yet in my group. One of the members whose posts always splits threads has created at least two threads with the identical title today. I will send the relevant info to support, but things may change by then because I am merging these threads moment by moment and the conversation is very active...

Watch now as Mark goes on a rant against Yahoo....

I found the problem with J's group. Those messages that weren't threading were coming from Yahoo. They were replies. But the only References header had the Message-ID of that message. But not quite. They added a '.ref' to the middle of that id. Why? WHO THE HELL KNOWS! And it doesn't include the Message-ID of the message it's a reply to. WTF.

We handle the case where the only References ID is the message's own Message-ID. But the extra '.ref' screwed that up, and prevented the rest of the algorithm from working correctly.

We're now handling this correctly. For those keeping track of these things at home, we had a similar problem a year or two ago with Yahoo, except instead of '.ref', they were adding '.JavaMail.yahoo.ref'. I had blissfully forgotten about that, much in the same way I try to forget about the pain of having cavities filled.

<Insert disparaging things about Yahoo engineering here>

Ahem. I feel better.

Thanks for listening,
Mark


moderated Re: How on earth does Groups.io thread a topic? BV

 

Ronaldo,

I'm looking through email-eyes
Me too, almost always. And seldom with threaded view turned on.

But I do sometimes use the handy View/Reply link in a message footer to go on site to see the whole message thread if I think there may be later messages that would moot or modify my reply. Sometimes that's actually easier than viewing the thread in my email interface.

As I've said (and we may be venturing in academic discussion and
wishful thinking here), ideally it would not start a new thread if a
"specifier" is tacked on at the end of a subjectline, but it
definitely should when the subject is changed.
That I think would be an AI problem: how much and what type of content can be appended to a Subject before it is considered a new topic. A way out might be to establish a syntax, for example: if what's added is all in parentheses, which software could more readily detect. But then you're getting back into the realm of having to train the users how to use it.

If a programmer feels like doing it (I'm guiessing it's a ton of
work), I'm sure there even could be some way for the machine to check
for *quote* to see if a message belongs in a thread
That I've actually suggested (going back and looking for matching body text in prior messages), but in the context of auto-trimming (or auto hiding) quotes - thus distinguishing between quote from prior message, which may be trimmed or hidden, versus quotes from an outside source, which oughtn't be.

Of course, that starts with the ability to reliably discern which parts of the message body are quoted material - and that of itself has proved a challenge given all the different conventions and personal styles. Another "AI" problem unless you decide on a limited number of rigid formats for quotes. And we're back to user training again.

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


moderated Re: How on earth does Groups.io thread a topic?

 

Unfortunately, this is not working yet in my group. One of the members whose posts always splits threads has created at least two threads with the identical title today. I will send the relevant info to support, but things may change by then because I am merging these threads moment by moment and the conversation is very active...
--
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: little idea about offlist messages

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

I'd add "Private:" to both any variant of "Offlist" or "Off-list" [capitalized, mixed case] that is manually entered by the end-user rather than generated by the web interface when you explicitly hit the "Private" button.  I might even extend this to a user-entered "PM:" on the front of a subject since I frequent a number of places that use the parlance "Private Message" and where people will often use the shorthand form.

Essentially, if someone uses the Private button then any subject line at all should be permitted and never bounced, because it requires very explicit intent and action to activate it, whereas hitting the "Reply to Group" button is almost a reflex that can sometimes occur much like a gag, with the same feeling after you've done so and wish you hadn't.
--
Brian

I have made mistakes, but have never made the mistake of claiming I never made one.   

          ~  James G. Bennet


moderated Re: How on earth does Groups.io thread a topic? BV

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 04:02 pm, ro-esp wrote:
Or rather, whose lives you want to make easier.

Should we have a poll about it?

 Actually, I think that making someone create a new e-mail message, with a new subject, to create a new topic is not making their lives any more difficult than it is for a web user who has to hit a "New Topic" button and enter all the same information, and do any cut and paste from an old thread if they want to create a true new one "the logical way."

It is my sincere belief that one should not be able to create an unintentional new thread, which is usually a split of an existing one rather than an actual spin off, by simply changing the subject - in any way.   It's just too darned easy to make a change to the subject, by even a single character, and I see thread splits of this nature being created with relative frequency, or people treating the subject like it's an extension of the message body and not knowing that changing it has any impact on threading both on the Groups.io web interface and in a number of e-mail clients that support threaded views where subject takes primacy over header information in threading.

As I said at the outset, there is no "right answer" to this and no matter which way Mark might choose to go there will be howls from one quarter or another.

There are times where "the top" needs to set a direction and stick with it.  Right now I fully understand how things actually work and am also seeing, time and time again, the shortcomings of that threading algorithm in the form of thread splits from subject changes that really are not intending this, and are robbing their own contributions of their conversational context both in the web interface and in e-mail clients that give subject primacy in threading.

My position is based strictly on two things:

  1. I see clearly unintended thread splitting through subject changes occurring with greater frequency here than I have ever seen on other forums in which I participate.
  2. It drives me freakin' crazy.

As the old saying goes, "Your mileage may vary."  Those for whom this is true have every opportunity to make their cases on this topic just like they do on a multitude of others.  I've actually been surprised that there hasn't been more chiming in from the beta regulars.
--
Brian

I have made mistakes, but have never made the mistake of claiming I never made one.   

          ~  James G. Bennet


moderated little idea about offlist messages

ro-esp
 

maybe nobody sees the need, but sometimes messages not meant for the entire list do reach the entire list (sometimes even on moderated groups..)

So maybe we can have some "code" that automatically rejects messages that start with
OFFLIST or [off-list] , and blocks the "reply to group" button when someone changes the subjectline so it starts with that in the web-interface.

[if you don't see the need, just let this thread stop]


groetjes, Ronaldo

17261 - 17280 of 29708