Topics

locked Changes to beta@ to reduce traffic


 

Hi All,

This came up on another thread, but it deserves to be pulled out into its own thread. It's hard not to notice the increase in traffic to beta@; July is poised to be the busiest month ever, by far. Ans, as you may have noticed, I'm having trouble keeping up. Here are a mix of policy and technical changes I'm making effective immediately:

  • All bug reports should be submitted to support @ groups.io only. If a bug affects multiple people, I'll post it here. All bug fixes are already posted in the #changelogs, so people will continue to see what's being fixed.
  • General questions should be redirected to the good folks at Group Managers Forum.
  • I've turned off message editing.
  • I'm adding a feature to the site to automatically lock threads after a specified time, and will turn it on for beta@. I'm thinking that 1 week is a good time limit.

Other suggestions are appreciated, especially for ways to ensure people know where to post bugs and general support questions.

Thanks, Mark


Ro
 

Wonderful ideas and decisions



Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy® Note 4.


-------- Original message --------
From: Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io>
Date: 7/25/16 08:58 (GMT-08:00)
To: beta@groups.io
Subject: [beta] Changes to beta@ to reduce traffic

Hi All,

This came up on another thread, but it deserves to be pulled out into its own thread. It's hard not to notice the increase in traffic to beta@; July is poised to be the busiest month ever, by far. Ans, as you may have noticed, I'm having trouble keeping up. Here are a mix of policy and technical changes I'm making effective immediately:

  • All bug reports should be submitted to support @ groups.io only. If a bug affects multiple people, I'll post it here. All bug fixes are already posted in the #changelogs, so people will continue to see what's being fixed.
  • General questions should be redirected to the good folks at Group Managers Forum.
  • I've turned off message editing.
  • I'm adding a feature to the site to automatically lock threads after a specified time, and will turn it on for beta@. I'm thinking that 1 week is a good time limit.

Other suggestions are appreciated, especially for ways to ensure people know where to post bugs and general support questions.

Thanks, Mark


Frances
 

Hi Mark,

I love the feature in Groups.io that allows a post to be a sticky. Why not make this one a sticky, so it will come first if anyone goes to the online group home?

Frances


On Jul 25 16, at 11:58 AM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

Hi All,

This came up on another thread, but it deserves to be pulled out into its own thread. It's hard not to notice the increase in traffic to beta@; July is poised to be the busiest month ever, by far. Ans, as you may have noticed, I'm having trouble keeping up. Here are a mix of policy and technical changes I'm making effective immediately:

  • All bug reports should be submitted to support @ groups.io only. If a bug affects multiple people, I'll post it here. All bug fixes are already posted in the #changelogs, so people will continue to see what's being fixed.
  • General questions should be redirected to the good folks at Group Managers Forum.
  • I've turned off message editing.
  • I'm adding a feature to the site to automatically lock threads after a specified time, and will turn it on for beta@. I'm thinking that 1 week is a good time limit.

Other suggestions are appreciated, especially for ways to ensure people know where to post bugs and general support questions.

Thanks, Mark



Joseph Hudson <jhud7789@...>
 

Hi, great decisions but I have something to add. For those folks that use the groups only via email, such as myself primarily in most of the time. Would there be a notification that is sent to us when a thread gets locked? And since this is Shell group can anybody join the group managers forum? As I will like to help out is much as I can and whenever I do it's not very often but would like to be a part of the group if possible.
Joseph Hudson
Email
I device support
Telephone
2543007667
Skype
joseph.hudson89 facebook
Twitter

FaceTime/iMessage

On Jul 25, 2016, at 10:58 AM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

Hi All,

This came up on another thread, but it deserves to be pulled out into its own thread. It's hard not to notice the increase in traffic to beta@; July is poised to be the busiest month ever, by far. Ans, as you may have noticed, I'm having trouble keeping up. Here are a mix of policy and technical changes I'm making effective immediately:

  • All bug reports should be submitted to support @ groups.io only. If a bug affects multiple people, I'll post it here. All bug fixes are already posted in the #changelogs, so people will continue to see what's being fixed.
  • General questions should be redirected to the good folks at Group Managers Forum.
  • I've turned off message editing.
  • I'm adding a feature to the site to automatically lock threads after a specified time, and will turn it on for beta@. I'm thinking that 1 week is a good time limit.

Other suggestions are appreciated, especially for ways to ensure people know where to post bugs and general support questions.

Thanks, Mark



 

I think the lock-threads feature will be especially useful. 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

It's dumb to buy smart water.


 

I forgot to mention one other thing (I'm still on my first Cherry Coke Zero of the day). I don't wish to ever see any personal attacks on beta@ (or anywhere on Groups.io for that matter, which is one reason I was pushing for the Code of Conduct). Over the weekend I saw a post that went over the line, and I was not happy.

Do not criticize individuals here. Criticize ideas, criticize the group in general, criticize Groups.io, criticize me. But not other group participants. And by criticize, I of course mean civilly.

Thank you. Mark


Nightowl >8#
 

Mark Fletcher wrote:>>I'm adding a feature to the site to automatically lock threads after a specified time, and will turn it on for beta@. I'm thinking that 1 week is a good time limit.<<

I'm curious about if we have a thread such as the one about the Code Of Conduct, where you wanted to collect feedback for a certain length of time. If you started a thread like that and wanted it to continue, can you disable or change the locking timing?

My other concern is when someone gets as far behind as I did, and needs to address something from months back, such as when I discovered that my e-mail address went public on Google, would it be acceptable to copy the info in question from the locked thread, and make a new topic addressing that issue?

One other suggestion. On some sites, there is a button you can click that says report a bug, or issue, that makes it easier to directly e-mail the support team from the site. Maybe that would encourage people to report bugs more readily that way. Just a thought.

And last, if you still want to work on the Code Of Conduct, let me know what you thought of my last draft, and I'll rework it for you. Or I'll re-send it, if you can't find it.

Thanks for all you do,

Brenda


 

On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 10:21 PM, Nightowl >8# <featheredleader@...> wrote:
Mark Fletcher wrote:>>I'm adding a feature to the site to automatically lock threads after a specified time, and will turn it on for beta@. I'm thinking that 1 week is a good time limit.<<

I'm curious about if we have a thread such as the one about the Code Of Conduct, where you wanted to collect feedback for a certain length of time. If you started a thread like that and wanted it to continue, can you disable or change the locking timing?

Right now, you cannot change the auto-locking timing on a per-thread basis. There is a way around that if you wish. The auto-locking program runs nightly, and looks for the most recent threads within a 30 hour period that should be locked. So, for beta@, every night it looks for threads that were created between 7 days and 8 days + 6 hours ago (the +6 is a fudge factor to make sure that if the lock program was delayed in running one night that it wouldn't miss anything). It then locks those threads. It doesn't look at earlier threads. So, if a thread gets auto locked, you could go back a day or two later and unlock it again and it would stay unlocked. The one caveat to this is if you change the auto lock time period in Settings, the lock program will go in that night and examine all threads and lock the appropriate ones.

By me setting it for one week, my hope would be that it adds a sense of urgency to drive to a solution and not linger for weeks and weeks. At least that's the hope.

 
My other concern is when someone gets as far behind as I did, and needs to address something from months back, such as when I discovered that my e-mail address went public on Google, would it be acceptable to copy the info in question from the locked thread, and make a new topic addressing that issue?

If you have something substantial to add or if something's changed, then yes, please start a new thread. But the longer it's been closed, the more consideration I would ask before revisiting the topic. The goal is not to squelch discussion.

 
One other suggestion. On some sites, there is a button you can click that says report a bug, or issue, that makes it easier to directly e-mail the support team from the site. Maybe that would encourage people to report bugs more readily that way. Just a thought.

On my TODO list is to have a proper Contact Us page, where you can select the group involved and other things.
 
And last, if you still want to work on the Code Of Conduct, let me know what you thought of my last draft, and I'll rework it for you. Or I'll re-send it, if you can't find it.

Thanks. I do want to revisit the Code of Conduct at some point. I tabled it because of the poor reception the subject got here, but I do still think about it.


Thanks,
Mark 


Nightowl >8#
 

Mark Fletcher wrote:>>Thanks. I do want to revisit the Code of Conduct at some point. I tabled it because of the poor reception the subject got here, but I do still think about it.<<

Just let me know if you need me to resend the last version.

I should be able to work on it for you now, because things have settled down some in real life.

Brenda


 

On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 08:58 am, Mark Fletcher wrote:
General questions should be redirected to the good folks at Group Managers Forum.

I have one other thought here. I think that if GMF is to be a Groups.io-sanctioned help forum, it should not be moderated. I also think that the moderators should be chosen or approved. by Groups.io. 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


 

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 09:31 am, J_catlady wrote:
moderators should be chosen or approved. by Groups.io.

...besides, of course, Shal, who started the whole thing. :-) 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


 

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:31 AM, J_catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 08:58 am, Mark Fletcher wrote:
General questions should be redirected to the good folks at Group Managers Forum.

I have one other thought here. I think that if GMF is to be a Groups.io-sanctioned help forum, it should not be moderated. I also think that the moderators should be chosen or approved. by Groups.io. 

I am not on GMF and haven't read the archives, but I trust Shal's judgement in running that group and have no issues with him running a group that is sanctioned by us.

You do bring up a good point, tho. I'm happy to point to other groups as well, and in fact just changed the group description and welcome message to also point to Group_Help (https://groups.io/g/group_help). If there are other groups, please let me know and I'll add pointers to them as well. Or if you have suggestions for how to word things, that would also be appreciated.

Thanks,
Mark


 

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 10:18 am, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Or if you have suggestions for how to word things, that would also be appreciated.

Mark,

I think the current language makes it sound like GMF and Group_Help are *the official* Groups.io help forums. Whereas in fact, both technically/officially/commercially has nothing to do with Groups.io. 

"For general Groups.io questions, please see the Group Managers Forum and the Group_Help group"

They are placed in the same paragraph, and on a same plane, with pointers to support and Trello, which *are* official Groups.io entities. As a new user, I would assume they are just as official as support and your Trello page. So I find this misleading.

As a current and up-to-date user, I still find it distressing that they're put on the same plane here. I've always objected to the fact that GMF is completely moderated (Shal knows this, because we've discussed it - I think he's said he's considered switching to using NuM?). I avoid the group because of that. It's fortunate that I usually keep up-to-date enough not to have to ask questions there, and generally only answer questions by others. But I am distressed by now being told by Groups.io officially that general questions should be addressed to these outside groups, with you (i.e., Groups.io itself) not having control over them - or even keeping up to date on the archives, as you just mentioned. Would you yourself, for example, keep that group completely moderated if it were owned by Groups.io?

For suggested language, I would add anything making it absolutely clear that those help groups are not run by Groups.io. I'd have to think about it. Perhaps something like, "..please see the volunteer-run groups GMF and Group_Help. (Note: these groups are volunteer-led and not officially run by Groups.io").

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author. 

I wish I could shut up, but I can't, and I won't. - Desmond Tutu


Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

I have to second J's concerns here.   From the perspective of a vendor-customer relationship, which Groups.io maintains with users, it is critical that they understand the difference between "turning to the community of users" for help versus employing the vendor's official communication mechanisms.

Believe it or not, I think that Microsoft has done a good job in how they've clearly identified the difference between their official support channels and the extensive assistance available through their user community forums.


--
Brian

A lot of what appears to be progress is just so much technological rococo.  ~ Bill Gray


 

J, Brian,

Excellent point. I've changed the wording of the group description and welcome message to include:

For general Groups.io questions, please see the groups Group Managers Forum and the Group_Help group. Note: these groups are volunteer-led and are not officially run by Groups.io.

Thanks,
Mark

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Brian Vogel <britechguy@...> wrote:

I have to second J's concerns here.   From the perspective of a vendor-customer relationship, which Groups.io maintains with users, it is critical that they understand the difference between "turning to the community of users" for help versus employing the vendor's official communication mechanisms.

Believe it or not, I think that Microsoft has done a good job in how they've clearly identified the difference between their official support channels and the extensive assistance available through their user community forums.


--
Brian

A lot of what appears to be progress is just so much technological rococo.  ~ Bill Gray



ro-esp
 

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 01:08 pm, Mark Fletcher wrote:


On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 10:21 PM, Nightowl >8# <featheredleader@att.net>
wrote:

Mark Fletcher wrote:>>I'm adding a feature to the site to automatically
lock threads after a specified time, and will turn it on for beta@. I'm
thinking that 1 week is a good time limit.<<
The other three make sense, but this one doesn't. If someone goes away for a week, you want him/her to start a new thread to discuss the same topic? That doesn't reduce traffic, it just spreads discussions over several threads.


Right now, you cannot change the auto-locking timing on a per-thread
basis. There is a way around that if you wish. The auto-locking program
runs nightly, and looks for the most recent threads within a 30 hour period
that should be locked. So, for beta@, every night it looks for threads that
were created between 7 days and 8 days + 6 hours ago (the +6 is a fudge
factor to make sure that if the lock program was delayed in running one
night that it wouldn't miss anything). It then locks those threads.
"created" ?? If the issue hasn't been resolved, this too will just create additional threads about the same topic. Maybe it will even make people reply quickly instead of thoroughly.


It doesn't look at earlier threads. So, if a thread gets auto locked, you
could go back a day or two later and unlock it again and it would stay
unlocked.
If "you" is the owner/moderator, wouldn't it be more logical to not autolock at all?

The one caveat to this is if you change the auto lock time period
in Settings, the lock program will go in that night and examine all threads
and lock the appropriate ones.
small detail: there's no such thing as "night" on a worldwide group


By me setting it for one week, my hope would be that it adds a sense of
urgency to drive to a solution and not linger for weeks and weeks. At least
that's the hope.
Like I said, I don't like to rush things that way. Let me give another idea: how about an option to put the entire group on hold. Make an option that allows you to not send out/publicise group messages. New posts would simply be held until the specified release-time. I can imagine some religious people not wanting to get any messages during sabbath or sunday. Posts could be collected during that day, and be released at say 4 O'clock monday-morning (or some other specified moderator's timezone time).

You could use the same feature to close a group for the summer holidays.

groetjes, Ronaldo