I wrote: I may not have been clear, but my intent was that only one of those two phrases appear, the one matching the color of the button. J wrote: You probably understood my intent, but seeing your c

#suggestion

J wrote: I'm not fond of "Send to Sender" either, for much the same reason. How about just "Send", with a fuller explanation in text below the button: "Send your reply to the group" (button background

#suggestion

Marina, Correct. That is by design: the member Posting Privilege Overrides override only the group's Moderation setting, not any of the other things which may cause a message to be moderated. This is

#bug

Duane, Isn't that a feature? That is, if there are replies you haven't seen in that topic wouldn't you want to know that? Maybe the Messages list would be more to your liking. Caveat: I don't read onl

#bug

K, This has headed off of Mark's original topic, if you'd like to see such a feature it would likely be best to start a new #suggestion topic about it. Shal

#update

Chris, Says the guy whose From address is already being rewritten. ;-) But your example does serve to show that Ken's concern about identifying the author has been suitably mitigated by the way Groups

#update

K, Understood. But that is a very big "all". It would largely defeat the "group" concept, turning Groups.io into a mere mail reflector. Which messages are you referring to? A DMARC record for groups.i

#update

Mark, This will work for those posters/recipients subject to DMARC rewriting, Digests, Summaries, and notices. But are those major contributors to the problem? GMF had a spate of reports a while ago o

#update

Chris, The mechanism that sets the Bouncing status can have lots of leeway in it, depending on the response code from the receiving service and frequency of occurrence. https://groups.io/helpcenter/ow

#bug

Christos, I'd go with something more rectangular, landscape orientation, to visually suggest a bar. Perhaps just a bit less tall (matching font baseline to character height?) and just enough wider to

#suggestion

Bruce, Correct, that is the scenario I tested. I believe that the utility of having this information vastly outweighs any possible confusion over why it is unavailable for private replies by email. Ea

#suggestion

J, Oh, I see. No, to reproduce (what I think was) Sean's case I used the Messages page of my test group on the web to click "Reply", "Private" and "Reply to Sender" on a message posted by a different

#suggestion

J, Now I'm confused. This suggestion was not (intended as) a reply. I did not PM anybody for this. I did CC Sean directly in my message to him prior to my reply to him in Beta, if you are actually tal

#suggestion

Mark, In attempting to reproduce Sean's problem I noticed that my Email Delivery History contained no record of the successful delivery of the Private reply. https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/3010

#suggestion

Sean, Not me. I just tested this in my test group, using two members (one the OP, the other replying privately), and the individual reply went through immediately. Please see my detailed reply in GMF

#bug

Andy, It is extremely unhelpful, but you can thank Gmail for that banner of misinformation. That's the actual response given by Groups.io when Gmail attempted that message delivery. I'm sure Mark wish

#suggestion

Hank, No. That is exactly the difference between the "No Email" and "Special Notices Only" choices in the Email Delivery panel of each member's Subscription page. You can check the "Disable No Email"

#suggestion

Ken, Beta really isn't the venue for lessons in how internet mail works (nothing here Mark doesn't know), but that's not quite how it works. What the spam-puter "gets back" is either a "success" code

#suggestion

Andy, You missed my point about addressee responses and server responses. During the transaction when the sender (legit or spammer) connects to Groups.io to deliver the message Groups.io has only two

#suggestion

Andy, That's true of a reply by the addressee. But I don't think it is true of either a rejection or a deferred bounce by the receiving service. Confirming that the service exists doesn't tell the spa

#suggestion