|
moderated
Terminology change
#update
From a semantic viewpoint, I have to disagree. When an outsider sends a message to a group and receives the answers, that person is a user but not a member or subscriber of that group groetjes/ĝis, Ro
|
From a semantic viewpoint, I have to disagree. When an outsider sends a message to a group and receives the answers, that person is a user but not a member or subscriber of that group groetjes/ĝis, Ro
|
By
ro-esp
· #24634
·
|
|
Solving the overload issue (Selecting specific messages into two batches - Individual email vs. Full featured digest delivery)
#suggestion
I'm not sure why you think there should be a technical solution, nor even whether one is possible. The way I do it is by insisting on netiquette ( unfortunately http://www.learn.to/quote doesn't work
|
I'm not sure why you think there should be a technical solution, nor even whether one is possible. The way I do it is by insisting on netiquette ( unfortunately http://www.learn.to/quote doesn't work
|
By
ro-esp
· #24596
·
|
|
Another instance of "thread" Instead of "topic" (unfollowing)
#bug
I don't think so. It's perfectly possible that in due time, there's more than one thread about the same topic, or at least with the same subject-line. "unfollow thread" is the technically correct term
|
I don't think so. It's perfectly possible that in due time, there's more than one thread about the same topic, or at least with the same subject-line. "unfollow thread" is the technically correct term
|
By
ro-esp
· #24537
·
|
|
moderated
Change DMARC behavior for p=none
#misc
It's hard to have objections.... as I don't know what is talked about. Does anyone care to explain/translate? "munge", "p=" ? groetjes, Ronaldo
|
It's hard to have objections.... as I don't know what is talked about. Does anyone care to explain/translate? "munge", "p=" ? groetjes, Ronaldo
|
By
ro-esp
· #24285
·
|
|
moderated
Restrict "Set Moderator Privileges" Permission
#suggestion
#done
yes Probably because it requires a shedload of programming, and/or Mark hasn't gotten around to it. No, it needs to be REFINED. We seem to all agree that a *moderator* needs to be able to appoint anot
|
yes Probably because it requires a shedload of programming, and/or Mark hasn't gotten around to it. No, it needs to be REFINED. We seem to all agree that a *moderator* needs to be able to appoint anot
|
By
ro-esp
· #24218
·
|
|
moderated
Restrict "Set Moderator Privileges" Permission
#suggestion
#done
No, that's not what I meant. If someone with the title of moderator is doing all the work, but has to go away for a while, (s)he needs to be able to promote someone to *moderator*. If the *owner* is m
|
No, that's not what I meant. If someone with the title of moderator is doing all the work, but has to go away for a while, (s)he needs to be able to promote someone to *moderator*. If the *owner* is m
|
By
ro-esp
· #24175
·
|
|
moderated
Restrict "Set Moderator Privileges" Permission
#suggestion
#done
I think there's a lot of consensus here, but not quite the right wording yet. Let me give it a shot: someone with the title of *moderator* should not be able to demote or remove someone with the title
|
I think there's a lot of consensus here, but not quite the right wording yet. Let me give it a shot: someone with the title of *moderator* should not be able to demote or remove someone with the title
|
By
ro-esp
· #24167
·
|
|
moderated
More mod-permission granularity
#suggestion
I'm not sure what "granularity" means here You want moderators to decide what they view and what not? What good is a moderator who can't approve or reject messages, and can't put abusers on moderated?
|
I'm not sure what "granularity" means here You want moderators to decide what they view and what not? What good is a moderator who can't approve or reject messages, and can't put abusers on moderated?
|
By
ro-esp
· #24107
·
|
|
moderated
forcing digests
Does "recent" have a definition? I always assumed that digests were sent out whenever the oldest message in waiting had been there for 24 hours...or as soon as there were 12 messages in the queue If w
|
Does "recent" have a definition? I always assumed that digests were sent out whenever the oldest message in waiting had been there for 24 hours...or as soon as there were 12 messages in the queue If w
|
By
ro-esp
· #23991
·
|
|
moderated
suggested change to use hashtag to control sending megs
#suggestion
then why send it? I don't think so. If I send a message to a group, I want it to be forwarded, not bounced back -- A very busy Nome inside reads Do you mean gnome? So any subscriber would have to visi
|
then why send it? I don't think so. If I send a message to a group, I want it to be forwarded, not bounced back -- A very busy Nome inside reads Do you mean gnome? So any subscriber would have to visi
|
By
ro-esp
· #23990
·
|
|
moderated
Process to propose new features
#meta
I don't have strong feelings as to whether or not we should do it this way, but if we do it this way we need to use terminology that's more clear than "suggestion vs proposal". In my mind those words
|
I don't have strong feelings as to whether or not we should do it this way, but if we do it this way we need to use terminology that's more clear than "suggestion vs proposal". In my mind those words
|
By
ro-esp
· #23909
·
|
|
moderated
Subgroup staging state and scheduled start date/time
#suggestion
"something like "this group will start functioning februari 30th, 18.45 UTC" Nice idea, but why limit it to SUBgroups? groetjes, Ronaldo
|
"something like "this group will start functioning februari 30th, 18.45 UTC" Nice idea, but why limit it to SUBgroups? groetjes, Ronaldo
|
By
ro-esp
· #23897
·
|
|
moderated
RFE: Some ideas for locking topics
#suggestion
Ideally, *in digests*, the indication "this thread is locked" should appear in the content-list of the digest, so people know the thread is locked before reading the messages or even replying to them
|
Ideally, *in digests*, the indication "this thread is locked" should appear in the content-list of the digest, so people know the thread is locked before reading the messages or even replying to them
|
By
ro-esp
· #23782
·
|
|
moderated
wording of the confirmation-request
I'm talking about joining over email. In GMF someone complained that people don't hit reply but send a message to GROUPNAME@groups.io My suggestion is to replace the "please reply to this email" with
|
I'm talking about joining over email. In GMF someone complained that people don't hit reply but send a message to GROUPNAME@groups.io My suggestion is to replace the "please reply to this email" with
|
By
ro-esp
· #23705
·
|
|
moderated
streamlining moderation-suggestion
Hi all So you get an email that there's a message to be reviewed, click the link and see there's list, with a box to tick and who the sender is and what the subject is....but not the actual content. S
|
Hi all So you get an email that there's a message to be reviewed, click the link and see there's list, with a box to tick and who the sender is and what the subject is....but not the actual content. S
|
By
ro-esp
· #23463
·
|
|
moderated
@ Susan B/renaming-thread
Sure, that's HIS prerogative as owner/moderator, and people can contact the mods OFFLIST about such things. My point is that nobody is interested in discussions about whether to have a discussion. Tho
|
Sure, that's HIS prerogative as owner/moderator, and people can contact the mods OFFLIST about such things. My point is that nobody is interested in discussions about whether to have a discussion. Tho
|
By
ro-esp
· #23391
·
|
|
moderated
@ Susan B/renaming-thread
Susan, a thread ends when nobody contributes to it anymore. Netiquette says that you don't have a discussion about whether to discuss a topic, and especially not on-list On groups.io, if you are fed u
|
Susan, a thread ends when nobody contributes to it anymore. Netiquette says that you don't have a discussion about whether to discuss a topic, and especially not on-list On groups.io, if you are fed u
|
By
ro-esp
· #23376
·
|
|
locked
renaming GMF
[starting new thread to unbury the subject] Yes, and a different abbreviation would reduce the chances of confusing it with the GMF on yahoogroups. groetjes/ĝis, Ronaldo
|
[starting new thread to unbury the subject] Yes, and a different abbreviation would reduce the chances of confusing it with the GMF on yahoogroups. groetjes/ĝis, Ronaldo
|
By
ro-esp
· #23362
·
|
|
locked
categorisation
I assume you are not referring to the meowing kind here. How is it a problem if some dudes have a massive following, and how exactly do you want to solve it? How would your system help you find groups
|
I assume you are not referring to the meowing kind here. How is it a problem if some dudes have a massive following, and how exactly do you want to solve it? How would your system help you find groups
|
By
ro-esp
· #22826
·
|
|
locked
categorisation
?? you would find it by doing a search for a tag that the owner/moderator put in the description. Being able to exclude searchterms would be nice, but 20 categories of a thousand groups each would sti
|
?? you would find it by doing a search for a tag that the owner/moderator put in the description. Being able to exclude searchterms would be nice, but 20 categories of a thousand groups each would sti
|
By
ro-esp
· #22773
·
|
