No, it is not "true." It is your opinion. And that's precisely why I did not quote you originally: to avoid this kind of substantive political discussion.

Once again: could you please lay off the politics? It is becoming too hard not to counter these kinds of blatantly political statements.

Mark, Mention has been made here by at least one person (possibly more) of a "necessity for more free speech rather than less". This seemed to be a not-so-subtle allusion to recently imposed - and ent

"... There's NO reason..."

Mark, <What changes would you propose?>>> You beat me to this as I was composing the below. Please consider a policy along the lines of "IO supports organizations whose missions are the betterment of.

What about group owners having "groups.io living wills"? I don't see any other way around the situation where an owner *legitimately* goes missing or gets hit by the proverbial truck. Group owners cou

That depends entirely on what they're trying to stop. No hope is necessary. He has shown that he can.

I suggest that there is nothing that can be done to the platform (groups.io) that will prevent hijacking when trust deteriorates between co-owners. Who is the "true" owner of a group? That is a pact b

Many people support causes they believe in, and many company owners do so through their company. In Mark's case the easiest and probably most effective way for him to do that is by offering a Groups.i

Not appropriate or relevant for this discussion. I'm putting this topic on moderation. Let's keep things focused please. Mark

As another European (UK, where we know a thing or two about divisive politics 😉), I agree with Victoria’s comment above. However, were my political views more different, I might feel that I did not wi

No, they do not. It is a feature yahoo has, and since my group was moved from there, I said I miss it. Sorry for not understandable abbreviations. I was sure everyone understands s.o. as someone and s

Hi Shal, Is the issue more that a group that perhaps not all of your members like is mentioned on the pricing page, or is it that I would support that group at all (myself and Groups.io being basicall

Same here. AND (sorry, caps) I don't think it will compromise profits in any way, shape, or form in any case.

Hi All, Thanks for the respectful discussion. Give me a couple days to figure out what I'm going to do. In the meantime, as promised, here's a picture of Feynman, preventing me from getting any work d

Yes, I believe I said so in my post. This is consistent with how many online forums work -- for example, on forums where my picture is displayed next to my post, on most forums it always shows my most

#suggestion

Mark, Yes. The issue is both the nature of the organization (partisan political agenda) and it being subsidized by Groups.io as a service. No, your money is your money. I've tried to be extremely clea

Mark . . . wrote: Shal has a point, but I think you could support that organization behind the scenes. Instead of advertising on GIO that you will give free premium group status to their members, just

Mark Following up on Shal's. Let's be honest that "advertising" or "not advertising" supporting any cause, left right or center, isn't going to make or break you or IO. However, you stated the precise

Yes. 1- Fix the link to Indivisible so that it redirects properly to Indivisible :) In all of this - no one noticed that actually that link is broken. ( the www. needs to be removed) 2- Move : "Is you