> That always made sense to me. I thought GDPR info referred to info *about* the person, not info posted *by them*. I remember a former discussion about this here. I had a problem that when I proposed

#misc

I feel it would be better if the default for new groups was to disallow editing. Most group owners when they understand the issues seem to prefer to disable it. Noel

#suggestion

>> Neither am I. It has saved me a few times. As i started my original post, it's more for peace of mind. >> It would be better to emphasize the auto draft save. > You have a point. The only way I lea

#suggestion

I remember a long time ago reading this 'Ode to Virtual Memory': The other day I had a scare I wrote a byte that wasn't there It wasn't there again today Oh how I wish that it would stay! Noel

> Thoughts? Is there another path I haven't thought of? Since the comprehensive solution involves providing much of an email system, is there a way of front-ending it with a dedicated and private emai

#suggestion

> US could work. I don't think we need a badge for settled, as that will be the "normal" case for members. My first thought on seeing US is Unservicable or that they are in the USA. >We have NuM as a

> Perhaps so. I look at it this way: Although we group owners are accustomed to using the web interface, I'd say that 80-90% of my subscribers use email only. The "reply-to" fields of all outgoing ema

Part of the problem I think is for people using a browser on a PC the screen is very wide compared to a phone. On my screen the bright Reply and Discard buttons occupy 5.5 cm on the right of the scree

> The button was set up this way to gently discourage subscribers from using something that was not intended to be the primary reply mode of the group. I would say what it achieves is rather more than

> Actually, according to my screen readerthe button does say "reply to sender." Does it not say that for you guys? The button says "Reply to Group" for my groups. When I click on the Private button it

> If you did it more often you'd quickly get used to it. This is one of those things that people learn the first time around. But it could benefit from some user documentation for sure. On our group i

> Now that I played around with it, I'm OK with how it works, it's just the "Private" isn't very intuitive. Could it be labeled "Private Reply" or something like that? Just thinking out loud. My issue

> So I agree that the button name could (but not necessarily should) be changed to "Reply to Sender". Even Offlist would be clearer in my view. Noel

> There was some reason this wasn't done at the beginning. I wanted the same kind of thing, but it couldn't be implemented and I don't remember why. If not possible, changing the button colour to not

> I disagree re: obscurity. I think the reply interface was updated (2016?) to the current layout for replies. We have had very few accidental group replies as a result of the layout. I think it helps

I've twice had users of the web interface complaining that there is no way to 'Reply to Sender'. I have to explain that it is there, but you need first to reply (which is not obvious, as it feels like

We have a number of traders and small manufacturers as part of our group, and information about an item that might satisfy a users needs or a new item now available are very welcome. We just ask that

> Members may have only one account on this forum. There is no need to have more than one. I have 2 accounts on one group of which I am a moderator. One to get messages as emails, one to get a digest

> Here is potentially a fix for this. It would not work for a group who have people uploading hundreds of images, but for those who generally load only a few at a time, have the option to require the

#suggestion

I don't understand why the member is unsubscribed rather than sending of emails being suspended like it would be for bouncing emails. That way they would still have online access. Noel