Date   

locked Re: two different sets of trailing links on messages?

 

jeffp,

One person posted a test message to the group, and the following is a
screen capture of the various links appearing after her post. She tells
me she posted this from inside the groups.io UI, not via email:

[plain-text footer]
As you've already discovered, that's a footer to a message in plain text. She could have sent it from an email interface (most have a means to send plain text, even if it isn't the default). Or she could have sent it from the Groups site if she's set her profile to use plain-text posting.

That looked all wrong, so I tried several things, and others have
replied to her post as well. Those posts all have trailing links that
look like this:
And that's a formatted (HTML) footer.

The formatting differences are necessitated by the fact that plain text cannot hide the URL for a link: so the URLs are shown in full.

Whether you see those URLs as plain text (which you must copy/paste) or as links you can click on depends on your email user interface. Most will detect and "linkify" URLs that are present in plain text messages. Some won't.


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


locked Re: two different sets of trailing links on messages?

 

jeffp,

Given those links differ, I think the plain text versions need to be
updated to reflect the other options. At least they need to include the
reply to sender and reply to group links in them.
Formatting aside, those are the only two missing from the plain text.

Those two were deliberately omitted because they are mailto: links.
https://groups.io/g/beta/message/7843

Testing revealed that not all email interfaces would correctly linkify mailto: links. Some wouldn't linkify them at all. Some, including Gmail and Yahoo mail would linkify the mailto: but wouldn't pick up the Subject parameter.
https://groups.io/g/beta/message/7733

Shal


locked Re: two different sets of trailing links on messages?

Jeff Powell <jrpstonecarver@...>
 

I think this has been narrowed down more deeply, and the issue is really a bug.

It turns out that the original message that caused my confusion wasn't posted from the UI. It was sent from a plain text email client. Given that information and a bit of additional testing we have confirmed that:

  • Emails to a group that come from plain text email clients get trailing links that look like those in pic1.png (attached to the OP above).
  • Emails to a group that come in HTML format get trailing links that look like this in pic2.png (also attached above).

Given those links differ, I think the plain text versions need to be updated to reflect the other options. At least they need to include the reply to sender and reply to group links in them.

I have updated the zendesk ticket I opened with this information. With luck it will be fixed quickly. It's probably pretty simple if I had to guess, and just an oversight.

--jeffp


locked Re: Reply to both Group and Sender?

 

On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 02:02 pm, Jeff Powell wrote:
I do want it as a group setting

Big sigh of relief. ;) 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


locked Re: two different sets of trailing links on messages?

Jeff Powell <jrpstonecarver@...>
 

FYI, I've just opened a bug about this on the groups.io zendesk site. This really looks like a bug of some kind. I can't make it happen, and so far I have no idea how it did so in the first place.

 


locked Re: Reply to both Group and Sender?

Jeff Powell <jrpstonecarver@...>
 

On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 01:42 pm, J_catlady wrote:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 01:38 pm, J_catlady wrote:
I'm not sure that's what he was asking for, though. 

I think (or thought) he was asking for this on an individual-message basis, not as a group setting. 
--
J

Actually, I do want it as a group setting, a la Yahoo's current options.

And given it would be a group setting - if it happens at all - your groups can avoid that setting, so no change to how your groups behave.

--jeffp



locked Re: Reply to both Group and Sender?

 

On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 01:38 pm, J_catlady wrote:
I'm not sure that's what he was asking for, though. 

I think (or thought) he was asking for this on an individual-message basis, not as a group setting. 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


locked Re: Reply to both Group and Sender?

 

On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 12:15 pm, Jeff Powell wrote:
do note that (at least as I see messages in gmail) the sender's email address can be seen when you're reading what they've sent you.

Yes, we've discussed this literally ad nauseum here (note: linguists now say you can use "literally" to mean "not literally" LOL). It's been the subject of a possible "anonymous groups" feature as well as the (impotent) "fig-leafing" of email addresses posted within a message.

Still, making a specific option to reply to both is more encouragement to reply offlist than I'd personally like to see. 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


locked Re: Reply to both Group and Sender?

 

On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 12:51 pm, Shal Farley wrote:
what jeffp is asking for is a new Reply To setting for the group

I realize that was your interpretation, Shal, and I'd have no problem with that. I'm not sure that's what he was asking for, though. 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


locked Re: Reply to both Group and Sender?

Jeff Powell <jrpstonecarver@...>
 

That's the gist of what I'd like to see. There may well be technical issues with it that Mark would understand far better than I do, but yes, that would be very useful to our group.

Thanks!


locked two different sets of trailing links on messages?

Jeff Powell <jrpstonecarver@...>
 

Hello again all. This time I have a mystery. We continue to test, hoping to transfer our group as early as sometime in the coming week if all goes well. But I just found this.


One person posted a test message to the group, and the following is a screen capture of the various links appearing after her post. She tells me she posted this from inside the groups.io UI, not via email:

That looked all wrong, so I tried several things, and others have replied to her post as well. Those posts all have trailing links that look like this:

You'll note the large number of differences, including the complete absence of reply to sender and reply to group links.

Both screenshots are taken on my computer, from my gmail account, showing what I got as these messages were posted.

Does anyone know why the first is so different? I am going to have a hard time explaining to our users that they can click on the Reply To Sender link sometimes, but not all of the time. That seems really wrong.

Help?

--jeffp



locked Re: Reply to both Group and Sender?

 

jeffp,

Yahoo has some option to do that - a group where no one can see anyone
else's email address - but there are, I think, a lot of complications
that arise from that setup, and no group I have ever worked with has
decided to try it.
I run a Yahoo Group like that. But hiding one's email and IP addresses is optional to the member, not group-wide. And yes, that being Yahoo, there are a couple of needless complications. Fortunately none of that has relevance here in Groups.io (except as a cautionary tale).

In any case, however, you as the moderator are able to select from
"reply to group only", "reply to send only", "reply to group and
sender", "reply to moderators only" and "no replies allowed" if my
suggest is adopted. (I hope I have that list of choices right... I think
I do.)
The group's Reply To option currently allows you to select from "Group", "Sender", and "Moderator". So as I understand it you propose adding "Group and Sender" to that drop-list.

Shal
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/GroupManagersForum/info


locked Re: Reply to both Group and Sender?

 

J,

If this is implemented I would *strongly* prefer a disable button ...
That's easy. Unless I've misunderstood, what jeffp is asking for is a new Reply To setting for the group. All you need do is not choose that setting.

and/or that it only be possible only via email replies (no 'group and
individual' button on the site).
I haven't thought through how this would reflect in the Reply on site.

I think the simplest implementation would be to change the "Reply to Group" button to "Reply to Group and Sender" only if the group's Reply To option is set that way - leaving all else the same. (Leaving aside button size considerations in the mobile interface.) Nothing would change for groups that don't chose the proposed setting.

In a group using the proposed setting a member would still have the Private button to choose a reply to sender only, but would lack a way to send a reply to the group only. That's probably ok.


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


locked Re: Reply to both Group and Sender?

Jeff Powell <jrpstonecarver@...>
 

Also, if I can, I'd just like to thank you all. One thing about groups.io... if you ask a question, you will get an answer. Unlike Y!G.


Thank you!


locked Re: Reply to both Group and Sender?

Jeff Powell <jrpstonecarver@...>
 

I would have no problems at all if it was disabled, but do note that (at least as I see messages in gmail) the sender's email address can be seen when you're reading what they've sent you. Thus, a determined poster can reply to just the sender with a copy & paste operation.  Now, to be honest, most people don't do that, and some UI's - notably on cell phones (I'm looking at you, Apple) - can make the address displayed up there very confusing. But getting around this is possible in any case unless all email senders addresses are completely masked.

Yahoo has some option to do that - a group where no one can see anyone else's email address - but there are, I think, a lot of complications that arise from that setup, and no group I have ever worked with has decided to try it.

In any case, however, you as the moderator are able to select from "reply to group only", "reply to send only", "reply to group and sender", "reply to moderators only" and "no replies allowed" if my suggest is adopted. (I hope I have that list of choices right... I think I do.) If that was the case, you simply wouldn't choose "reply to group and sender" for your group and you'd be fine, as things are. Or am I missing something?

--jeffp



locked Re: Reply to both Group and Sender?

 

I get what Jeff is saying. The 'reply all' from email (at least, gmail) still goes only to the group. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 5, 2016, at 12:11 PM, Jeff Powell <jrpstonecarver@...> wrote:

Actually, Ro, that won't do what I want, and I just looked at it in my test group.

I want the person getting a post from the group to be able to hit "reply" or "reply-all" in their email software to get a message addressed back to both the group and the poster of the message they are replying to.

If I do what you suggest, they can only reply to the group and the links at the bottom of the message won't include the "Reply to Sender" option, which - right now - is the only easy way to accomplish that when the default for the group is to reply back to the entire group.

I hope that makes sense. It's disturbingly difficult to discuss this sort of stuff in writing.  ;)

--jeffp


--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


locked Re: Reply to both Group and Sender?

Jeff Powell <jrpstonecarver@...>
 

Actually, Ro, that won't do what I want, and I just looked at it in my test group.

I want the person getting a post from the group to be able to hit "reply" or "reply-all" in their email software to get a message addressed back to both the group and the poster of the message they are replying to.

If I do what you suggest, they can only reply to the group and the links at the bottom of the message won't include the "Reply to Sender" option, which - right now - is the only easy way to accomplish that when the default for the group is to reply back to the entire group.

I hope that makes sense. It's disturbingly difficult to discuss this sort of stuff in writing.  ;)

--jeffp


locked Re: Reply to both Group and Sender?

 

Scratch that, the 'private' button already allows them to surmount moderation in that respect. So no additional problems there. I would just prefer to discourage, rather than explicitly encourage further, offlist replies.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 5, 2016, at 12:00 PM, J_catlady <j.olivia.catlady@gmail.com> wrote:

It should also not be available to members on moderation, since it provides a way to surmount the moderation. I would vote against this feature, bottom line.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 5, 2016, at 11:58 AM, J_catlady <j.olivia.catlady@gmail.com> wrote:

Is it true that in yahoo, this can only be done via email? Either way, I would want a way to disable it. We have enough problems in my group due to offlist communication (including the propagation of bad medical advice not subject to scrutiny by the group) without providing an easy way to do more of it (I.e., encourage it). If this is implemented I would *strongly* prefer a disable button and/or that it only be possible only via email replies (no 'group and individual' button on the site).

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 5, 2016, at 11:43 AM, Shal Farley <shals2nd@gmail.com> wrote:

jeffp,

But it would make our lives easier if replying to both the sender and
the group was possible.
I'd support "Group and Sender" in a group's Reply To option.

I can also see it being useful in groups where most members are on digest or read by web (special notices / no email).

Shal

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author.

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.

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. 

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


locked Re: Reply to both Group and Sender?

 

It should also not be available to members on moderation, since it provides a way to surmount the moderation. I would vote against this feature, bottom line.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 5, 2016, at 11:58 AM, J_catlady <j.olivia.catlady@gmail.com> wrote:

Is it true that in yahoo, this can only be done via email? Either way, I would want a way to disable it. We have enough problems in my group due to offlist communication (including the propagation of bad medical advice not subject to scrutiny by the group) without providing an easy way to do more of it (I.e., encourage it). If this is implemented I would *strongly* prefer a disable button and/or that it only be possible only via email replies (no 'group and individual' button on the site).

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 5, 2016, at 11:43 AM, Shal Farley <shals2nd@gmail.com> wrote:

jeffp,

But it would make our lives easier if replying to both the sender and
the group was possible.
I'd support "Group and Sender" in a group's Reply To option.

I can also see it being useful in groups where most members are on digest or read by web (special notices / no email).

Shal

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author.

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. 

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


locked Re: Reply to both Group and Sender?

 

Is it true that in yahoo, this can only be done via email? Either way, I would want a way to disable it. We have enough problems in my group due to offlist communication (including the propagation of bad medical advice not subject to scrutiny by the group) without providing an easy way to do more of it (I.e., encourage it). If this is implemented I would *strongly* prefer a disable button and/or that it only be possible only via email replies (no 'group and individual' button on the site).

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 5, 2016, at 11:43 AM, Shal Farley <shals2nd@gmail.com> wrote:

jeffp,

But it would make our lives easier if replying to both the sender and
the group was possible.
I'd support "Group and Sender" in a group's Reply To option.

I can also see it being useful in groups where most members are on digest or read by web (special notices / no email).

Shal



--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu

18661 - 18680 of 29416