Date   

moderated Re: custom colors don't work in direct add custom message #bug

Glenn Glazer
 

On 01/16/2021 14:56, Duane wrote:
On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 04:12 PM, Glenn Glazer wrote:
P.S. a feature request would be to be able to store this custom message or at least have it default to the last custom message used.
You can already create/store as many custom messages as you want on the Member Notices page, then select the one you want when doing the Direct Add.  You can have one Active as the default, but still select another at that time if you want.  You do have to create them before using though.

Duane

Good to know, thanks, Duane!

Best,

Glenn

--
PG&E Delenda Est


moderated Re: custom colors don't work in direct add custom message #bug

Duane
 

On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 04:12 PM, Glenn Glazer wrote:
P.S. a feature request would be to be able to store this custom message or at least have it default to the last custom message used.
You can already create/store as many custom messages as you want on the Member Notices page, then select the one you want when doing the Direct Add.  You can have one Active as the default, but still select another at that time if you want.  You do have to create them before using though.

Duane


moderated custom colors don't work in direct add custom message #bug

Glenn Glazer
 

When constructing a custom message as part of a direct add, one can change the color of the font or font background using this widget:



Selecting a pre-selected color from the upper part of the widget works fine.

However, clicking on any of the white boxes just causes the widget to close. Normally, when I have seen this kind of widget before, it brings up an RGB/CMYK/HTML Hex/HSL color picker (something like https://htmlcolorcodes.com/color-picker/) which enables the creation and selection of a custom color which is then stored in one of the boxes in the original widget.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/87.0.4280.141 Safari/537.36

Best,

Glenn
P.S. a feature request would be to be able to store this custom message or at least have it default to the last custom message used.

--
PG&E Delenda Est


moderated Re: #suggestion Moderators should be able to Reply to or Forward a message of 'importance' and tag it "Special Interest" in the process #suggestion

 

This is my take on this; if there is some pending message and Dan thinks Special Notice users might/should/will find this message of interest, or some previously-posted message (or topic?) which (those Special Notice users did not receive originally) and has now become of importance/whatnot to those users for the same reasons as before, Dan would like to send (forward) that message to them (if posted already) or ensure they also get it if a moderated message, even if it's not a special notice.

The quick and dirty solution to that would be to add the ability to "mark" (masquerade) an incoming message in the pending queue as "Special Notice" in the message approval screen.  Yes I know from a procedural POV only admins are supposed to send (i.e. originate) Special Notices, but from a code POV, the marking of a message as a Special Notice is really nothing but a flag to the mailer code to also include the Special Notice user subset in the emailing (and add the [special] taggery); after the Special Notice message has posted in the archives, it's treated as any other message in terms or replies, etc. anyway, so if there was a checkbox in the message approval screen that means "Treat this message as a Special Notice, for email delivery purposes only", it would take care of his request:  When that option is checked and the pending message approved and posts, even if it posts just like a regular message, it would also be sent to the Special Notice users as well.  The caveat is that the mailer code would need to somehow know that this is a regular message that should be treated as a "Special Notice" only as far as recipients are concerned and therefore not add the [special] taggery, unlike when a mod creates a real Special Notice, so a message author admin status check would determine that.

Something like this however would require the group (or user(s)) to be moderated so the messages can be intercepted before they post, therefore doesn't provide the same capability for posted messages, still leaving only the current way, copy+paste.

So taking Shal's proposed solution (for already-posted messages) and twisting it a bit, it now becomes a Message/Topic Forward capability, which allows it to be used for more than as a fix for this particular case.  If Mark was go through the work required to implement Shal's proposed solution, I suspect for just a little extra effort more he can implement it as a Forward instead, with the possibility of generating income, i.e. for Admins it can be a provided tool but for users it could be a (group-account or GIO-account) paid feature.

Possibly something like this, assuming we would want to also be able to forward a whole topic:

1. Topic button -> Forward Topic
2. Hamburger -> Forward Message

3a. If user FWD, action results in a note, "Message/Topic emailed to your group account address" or something, and that's it; not sure if it should be logged or not.
3b. If admin FWD, a popup Forward-To screen comes up:

4a. Reply-To dropbox:
- Group
(default, allows the recipient to (re-)engage the Topic online or through email if a Special Notice or No Email user)
- Sender possibly (admin wants to forward a message to another member and discuss it further between them)
- Group Owner possibly (again admin wants to forward a message to the mods only and discuss it further between them only)

4b. Recipients/Forward-To dropbox:
- Some special-flag entries, such as maybe [Everyone regardless*], [Mods Only], [Special Notice members only], or [No Email users only*]; possibly add the other delivery subsets as well, [digest users only] etc.
- And the full member list for forwarding to individuals.

(* This would also give a way for the admins to easily reach out to the No Email users with something important - this can be done now but it can be a PITA doing it through the Member List, you have to play around with the URL per-page count parameter value to get the sorted list paginated as such so the majority of No Email users are taking up the whole page and one can use the SelectAll checkbox)

4c. - Some kind of a "forwarding note" textbox, maybe with the default "Note: Forwarded Message" or something, inserted by the mailer code as bolded/delimited text at the top of the message body (and I guess for all messages within that topic, if forwarding a topic).  That would allow the admin to use this forward functionality for several possible scenarios; for example, in Dan's case, an existing topic has become of interest to Special Notice folk, note could be "Hey guys, this topic might be of interest to you".  Or, you just posted a Special Notice about your group now accepting sponsorship or about upgrading the group to premium, and you want to let the No Email users aware of it**, so possibly "There is a matter of importance to the group's future and I thought you would want to become aware and participate if you want."

** You may argue, why not just sent them the link to the topic instead of forwarding the actual message/topic?  Yes you can, but that precludes email-only users; if you send them the actual message, I assume it would also contain the footers***, so they can go online that way and engage if they want, OR they can reply to the message and their reply will post as a regular topic reply, and can engage through email only.  Or you could include the link in your FWD note as well.

(*** I guess care should be taken when the footer code generates those forwards, it uses the original posted topic/message IDs for some of the specific footer links such as View Topic Online, Follow Topic, etc.  Something similar would also probably need to be done to the message headers as well so an email-client reply (to Group) references that actual posted message and not the forwarded message itself)

4d - Maybe also a checkbox like "subject-tag notice's subject as [Special]" (as in a real Special Notice) because the full/real Special Notice moniker & functionality is not really applicable to this functionality. 

Clicking OK will initiate the emailing-out.

In Dan's case, the workflow for moderated messages of possible importance kinda stays the same, after approving it he still has to get involved, but instead of copy+paste+side-effects he would then instead just forward the already-posted message to the Special Notice users only.

Cheers,
Christos

PS: There's also an alternative interpretation of Dan's request, make certain users (who just happen in this case to be Special Notice users) aware of that message/topic, kind of a "tag" functionality if you will, be able to tag/alert folk of a topic or message who otherwise wouldn't be.  This would be equivalent to emailing out a link to the online topic/message in the above proposal though, so it still has the preclusion problem of email-only users.



moderated Re: Owner box in photos being changed by members #bug

JenniferEverSews
 

yes.
Jennifer
=================

On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 12:42 AM, Judy F. wrote:
members SHOULD NOT be able to even click on the Owner box.  Only the Moderator(s) and owner(s) should be allowed to do that.   
 


moderated Re: Owner box in photos being changed by members #bug

Judy F.
 

Duane, I think, as for as our group is concerned and it sounds like at least one other, members SHOULD NOT be able to even click on the Owner box.  Only the Moderator(s) and owner(s) should be allowed to do that.   
Thank you/
Judy F.


On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 08:23 PM, Duane wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 06:21 PM, JenniferEverSews wrote:
Then they cannot restore the correct owner's id/name because they cannot recall or find it.
Actually, if a member changes it (and saves the edit), they can't change it back.  Either a group owner/mod or the 'new' owner must do it.  If they change it, but don't save, no harm done.

Duane


moderated Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal #suggestion

billsf9c
 

forget about grandfathering. That would work. 

It would be ok, voluntarily... otherwise it would destroy the trust he has managed to create.

BillSF9c


moderated Site updates #changelog

 

Changes to the site this week:

  • INTERNAL: Work on stopping spam accounts and spam groups as well as deletion of many existing spam accounts and groups.
  • DOCS: Updates from Nina.
  • CHANGE: Ensure that if a message is sent from a banned member, it's logged as such. Also don't display badges in the banned member page.
  • CHANGE: Changed special message to special notice in the activity logs for consistency.
  • BUGFIX: Fix timezone offset issue with event times on the /feed page?
  • NEW: Groups can now allow people to sponsor their hosting fees.
  • CHANGE: Mobile reformatting: iPad widths now use the bottom navbar like phone widths. The More menu in the bottom navbars is now a drawer that slides in from the left. Several little mobile formatting tweaks.
  • BUGFIX: It's no longer possible to input a negative reminder time before an event.
  • CHANGE: Formatting changes to the add event page for adding reminders.

Take care everyone.

Mark


moderated Re: Owner box in photos being changed by members #bug

 

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:07 PM, Judy F. wrote:
the Sew It's For Sale group
Great group name!
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
I'm not arguing. I'm just explaining why I am right.

My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


moderated Re: Moderator control for sponsorship notifications #suggestion

Bruce Bowman
 

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 05:51 PM, Andy Wedge wrote:
Can we get an extra option in the Moderator Notifications panel to control the sponsorship notifications in the same manner as others please?
Agreed. It will need a corresponding hashtag, too.

Bruce


moderated Re: Owner box in photos being changed by members #bug

Duane
 

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 06:21 PM, JenniferEverSews wrote:
Then they cannot restore the correct owner's id/name because they cannot recall or find it.
Actually, if a member changes it (and saves the edit), they can't change it back.  Either a group owner/mod or the 'new' owner must do it.  If they change it, but don't save, no harm done.

Duane


moderated Re: Owner box in photos being changed by members #bug

JenniferEverSews
 

Yes, please do make this change.  
    While some may change the owner box intentionally, sometimes a member changes photo ownership by mistake.  Then they cannot restore the correct owner's id/name because they cannot recall or find it. 
    Mods/owners do at times need to be able to change the photo ownership.  For example, when a member dies - their membership is removed as a security precaution.   However, the photos they shared are kept as a treasured reminder of their artistry and friendship.   
Thanks,
Jennifer
 
===============


On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 04:07 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
change the Owner box ... causing issues where they are then locked out of editing their photo since the name has been changed when they clicked the down arrow on that line. 

Does anyone need this functionality for members? Can I restrict the ability to change photo ownership to just mods/owners?
 
Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal #suggestion

ro-esp
 

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 03:14 PM, Andy Wedge wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:25 PM, Chris Jones wrote:
Some have argued that "people will leave if charged"; well... let them.
Why should Mark or anyone else have to subsidise a group of people who
expect a service such as Groups.io to be free in perpetuity? What right
have freeloaders (for want of a better term) to more or less demand that
Premium or Enterprise Groups pay for them for ever?
Because apps, Facebook and Googlegroups are free?

We all understand that there is no free lunch, but some people (maybe in the third world - several of my Esperanto-related groups are worldwide) can't afford a subscription, and some will think some groups don't provide enough value (too few members, too little info) yet. Heck, some people have no experience with nor appreciation for list-serves. Put in what one person calls a "paywall" and they may never learn to appreciate what we have here..

Ultimately, it doesn't matter WHO pays, as long as Mark can pay the bills and hire assistants. I would gladly pay a modest fee for the groups I own (or maybe even for an extra feature of choice) and I assume some group-members are willing and able to pay/donate a modest fee for the service.

at 88000 groups, would 10 or 20 euro/dollar a year per group suffice?

groetjes, Ronaldo


moderated Re: Owner box in photos being changed by members #bug

Duane
 

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 03:07 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Can I restrict the ability to change photo ownership to just mods/owners?
That would be my preference.  In most cases, it confuses members and causes a mess to be cleaned up.

Duane


moderated Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal #suggestion

Andy Wedge
 

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 09:28 PM, Chris Jones wrote:
For the reasons stated above, I disagree. Even an account charge of $1 would see a 10-fold increase in our current costs.
This might be an instance of the "nuance" I mentioned playing a part. As you should be able to prove your charitable status (albeit IIRC to UK rather than US standards) this might be a way of organising a waiver. At the same time if any of your members are also members of other Groups.io groups I would not expect any waiver to apply across the board so I would hope that they would have to pay as individuals for ongoing access to those.
The majority of our members had never heard of Groups.io before we joined and are also email only so don't connect with the fact that they have a Groups.io account. There are a handful of our members that I know have connections with other groups but the overwhelming majority do not so any potential 'savings' for us because of that approach will be negligible. 


Um... well IMHO the ongoing "free" provision of Basic groups (esp the legacy ones) is completely unsustainable, and the proposed charging scheme is a barrier to future growth of new free groups.

I tend to agree and it's why I suggested a small charge for Basic groups and some kind of paid intermediate group between Basic and Premium to provide a smaller step up to the next level.

Andy


moderated Moderator control for sponsorship notifications #suggestion

Andy Wedge
 

Hi Mark,

 

Can we get an extra option in the Moderator Notifications panel to control the sponsorship notifications in the same manner as others please?

[Note: I did mention this previously but it may have been missed in all the other traffic on this subject]

  

Thanks

Andy


moderated Include group subject tag on sponsorship notification emails #suggestion

Andy Wedge
 

Hi Mark,

Can we get the group subject tag included as a prefix to the sponsorship notification emails so that it matches other notifications please?

[Note: I did mention this previously but it may have been lost in amongst all the other traffic on this subject]

Thanks
Andy


moderated Re: #bug event times in /feed are all 8 hours out #bug

Malcolm Austen
 

On 15/01/2021 21:08:33, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

Malcolm,

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 3:11 AM Malcolm Austen <malcolm.austen@...> wrote:
I'm afraid it isn't fixed for the instance I'm looking at Mark. I tried all the reloads, with <ctrl>, to no avail so when I shut down last night I allowed ccleaner to do a full clear-out of cache and cookies. The issue is still there this morning - one event in the [sogvols] groups scheduled for 15:00 UTC but showing in the feed for UTC logins as being at 07:00.

I checked your account, and you had your timezone set to Pacific time (see https://groups.io/account?page=prefs). I reset that to UTC, and the time listed for that event in the /feed page now matches expectations. Please check and let me know what you see.
Malcolm Austen: 
Hi Mark, yes, I set it to PST to check what effect it had on the /feed display. That moved the event to showing as 23:00, now my account is back to UTC, the event shows as 07:00 but the event itself is scheduled for 15:00 UTC.

I just set my own account forward to AWST (Pert, UTC+8) and, sas I expected, the event now shows in /feed at 15:00 bit the calendar view (correctly) shows the event as 23:00.

Sorry Mark, the display doesn't match my expectations :-) whereas the calendar display does.

Malcolm.


Thanks,
Mark 


moderated Re: Samuel's Paid User Proposal #suggestion

Chris Jones
 

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 02:14 PM, Andy Wedge wrote:
For the reasons stated above, I disagree. Even an account charge of $1 would see a 10-fold increase in our current costs.
This might be an instance of the "nuance" I mentioned playing a part. As you should be able to prove your charitable status (albeit IIRC to UK rather than US standards) this might be a way of organising a waiver. At the same time if any of your members are also members of other Groups.io groups I would not expect any waiver to apply across the board so I would hope that they would have to pay as individuals for ongoing access to those.

Unsustainable for us and I suspect many others. 

Um... well IMHO the ongoing "free" provision of Basic groups (esp the legacy ones) is completely unsustainable, and the proposed charging scheme is a barrier to future growth of new free groups.

A further potential snag is that if I have read things correctly future group owners would be able to game the system to avoid incremental charges, resulting in Groups.io's projected increased income not materialising at all.

Not really the intended outcome.

Chris


moderated Re: #bug event times in /feed are all 8 hours out #bug

 

Malcolm,

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 3:11 AM Malcolm Austen <malcolm.austen@...> wrote:
I'm afraid it isn't fixed for the instance I'm looking at Mark. I tried all the reloads, with <ctrl>, to no avail so when I shut down last night I allowed ccleaner to do a full clear-out of cache and cookies. The issue is still there this morning - one event in the [sogvols] groups scheduled for 15:00 UTC but showing in the feed for UTC logins as being at 07:00.

I checked your account, and you had your timezone set to Pacific time (see https://groups.io/account?page=prefs). I reset that to UTC, and the time listed for that event in the /feed page now matches expectations. Please check and let me know what you see.

Thanks,
Mark 

1921 - 1940 of 29661