Topics

moderated Hashtag and Topic reply to overrides


 

That will be awesome. I am convinced that about half our pending members never receive the notice with the questionnaire, and I've frankly given up trying to contact people offlist when that occurs.


On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 2:47 PM Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:19 PM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 11:15 AM, Shal Farley wrote:
I haven't tested it, but if that is indeed the case I do wonder how that is achieved in the face of Reply All behavior.
It is not the case after all, you're right. I missed the little "+1" in the "To" field.
Anyway, this is very discouraging. In light of this, I can't use either the reply-to-sender or the reply-only-to-sender hashtag in my group.


As an aside, this is a big reason I want to complete the app and add unread message tracking (ie Groups.io Inbox). I cannot control a lot of the experience of reading messages with the various email clients. And I have no control whether an ESP decides to accept email from us (ie cox.net is delaying a lot of email from us right now), or mark our messages as spam. Having our own email client just for Groups.io messages will give users an option to have a better experience with our groups.

Mark


--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:19 PM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 11:15 AM, Shal Farley wrote:
I haven't tested it, but if that is indeed the case I do wonder how that is achieved in the face of Reply All behavior.
It is not the case after all, you're right. I missed the little "+1" in the "To" field.
Anyway, this is very discouraging. In light of this, I can't use either the reply-to-sender or the reply-only-to-sender hashtag in my group.


As an aside, this is a big reason I want to complete the app and add unread message tracking (ie Groups.io Inbox). I cannot control a lot of the experience of reading messages with the various email clients. And I have no control whether an ESP decides to accept email from us (ie cox.net is delaying a lot of email from us right now), or mark our messages as spam. Having our own email client just for Groups.io messages will give users an option to have a better experience with our groups.

Mark


 

On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 11:15 AM, Shal Farley wrote:
I haven't tested it, but if that is indeed the case I do wonder how that is achieved in the face of Reply All behavior.
It is not the case after all, you're right. I missed the little "+1" in the "To" field.
Anyway, this is very discouraging. In light of this, I can't use either the reply-to-sender or the reply-only-to-sender hashtag in my group.
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

J


Shal, yes, that appears to be the problem. However, I still don’t understand why ‘reply only to sender’ uses the gmail setting ...

Because you're composing the reply in Gmail. They populate the To and CC fields of the reply using their own rules and settings to choose content from the original message's fields (From, To, CC, Reply-To, etc.).

In the case of Reply Only To Sender messages Groups.io does not insert a Reply-To field in the original message, so Gmail (and other receiving email interfaces) would normally reply to the From address.  I don't think it would help in the Reply All case if Groups.io did supply a Reply-To field - I think Gmail (and others) would include that content in the reply but would likely still include the original message's To address (the group).

... whereas ‘reply to sender’ overrides it and creates a PM directly to the individual and not to the group.

I haven't tested it, but if that is indeed the case I do wonder how that is achieved in the face of Reply All behavior.

My guess is that it doesn't, that the Reply All does in fact return to the group as well, and it is the lack of a bounce that made you think otherwise.

Shal


 

Shal, yes, that appears to be the problem. However, I still don’t understand why ‘reply only to sender’ uses the gmail setting (whatever the person has it set to, even if they, like me, are clueless about the default) whereas ‘reply to sender’ overrides it and creates a PM directly to the individual and not to the group. This still seems problematic and misleading to me, but I haven’t had time yet to sort through the whole new scheme. If I’m honest, I may never have time and I’m hoping that at Mark will consider at least this particular issue at this point.


On Nov 1, 2018, at 10:03 AM, Shal Farley <shals2nd@...> wrote:

J,


But when someone hits "reply" by email from gmail (and probably other providers), groups.io should not be trying to send both the group and the individual if the hashtag is so marked, and that is what it does,

I see you found the Gmail option to have the default Reply behavior be Reply All.

If that option is chosen then the reply arrow at the top of the message does Reply All, and the buttons on the bottom are reversed (Reply All to the left of Reply). Reply All then sends the reply to both the From address (the sender) and the To address (the group) of the original message.

I don't think there's anything Groups.io can do about this Gmail behavior, except possibly to warn about it.

The only mitigation I can think of would be to silently swallow the message to the group rather than bounce it, but that would be a violation of email standards, and might well lead to more severe confusions. Modifying the original message's To address to be something other than the group posting address might help, but could also be problematic (e.g. the member might have their email filter for the group based on the To field).

That option (making Reply All the default behavior) is not unique to Gmail.
Shal


--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

J,


But when someone hits "reply" by email from gmail (and probably other providers), groups.io should not be trying to send both the group and the individual if the hashtag is so marked, and that is what it does,

I see you found the Gmail option to have the default Reply behavior be Reply All.

If that option is chosen then the reply arrow at the top of the message does Reply All, and the buttons on the bottom are reversed (Reply All to the left of Reply). Reply All then sends the reply to both the From address (the sender) and the To address (the group) of the original message.

I don't think there's anything Groups.io can do about this Gmail behavior, except possibly to warn about it.

The only mitigation I can think of would be to silently swallow the message to the group rather than bounce it, but that would be a violation of email standards, and might well lead to more severe confusions. Modifying the original message's To address to be something other than the group posting address might help, but could also be problematic (e.g. the member might have their email filter for the group based on the To field).

That option (making Reply All the default behavior) is not unique to Gmail.
Shal


 

..and for the record, I had neither box checked when I ran the test. Will try more tests later today. Seems like "reply all" might be the gmail default if neither box is checked.


On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 9:18 AM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
I just a gmail setting called "default reply behavior, reply or reply all" and will try to find time today to see how this interacts with the groups.io settings. This might be the key to the problem, but if so, it will not remove the problem in groups without trying to instruct everyone to set their gmail (or other) settings to conform with groups.io.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 09:18 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
I just a gmail setting
"just found"
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

I just a gmail setting called "default reply behavior, reply or reply all" and will try to find time today to see how this interacts with the groups.io settings. This might be the key to the problem, but if so, it will not remove the problem in groups without trying to instruct everyone to set their gmail (or other) settings to conform with groups.io.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

p.s. I did report this to support as a bug at least a year ago, but eventually gave up on it, thought it might be due to "disable other reply options," etc. So I'm glad it's coming up now.


On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 9:11 AM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 09:02 AM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
Are you using Reply All or something?
No, and that's the issue. The user just hits "reply" and gets the bounce message. This is using gmail. Not sure what happens with other email addresses but I seem to recall that it was a universal problem in my group, before I stopped using the feature. People replying via email were just hitting "reply," very innocently. Then they'd get the bounce message and would start to complain to me, wonder whether they'd been removed from the group, etc. As I said before, I have not yet had a chance to remove the "disable other reply options" in my test group and try this there and see if there's the same result.
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 09:02 AM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
Are you using Reply All or something?
No, and that's the issue. The user just hits "reply" and gets the bounce message. This is using gmail. Not sure what happens with other email addresses but I seem to recall that it was a universal problem in my group, before I stopped using the feature. People replying via email were just hitting "reply," very innocently. Then they'd get the bounce message and would start to complain to me, wonder whether they'd been removed from the group, etc. As I said before, I have not yet had a chance to remove the "disable other reply options" in my test group and try this there and see if there's the same result.
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Bruce Bowman
 

On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 11:38 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
In particular, ‘reply only to sender’ actually causes groups.io to attempt to send both to the sender and to the group, and then bounces the email it sends to the group; whereas ‘reply to sender’ actually sends only to the sender. So maybe these designations should be reversed.
J -- I created a hashtag with #replyonlytosender in ShalsTest and am not seeing the behavior you describe.

  • If I simply hit reply using my email client, it automatically populates my own address. The group address is NWTBF.
  • If I manually insert the group address anyway, the one going directly to me arrives fine but the one to the group bounces with a 500 error.
  • If I click the link to view/reply online, the message editor comes up Private with no way to change it to Public.
Are you using Reply All or something?

Bruce


 

In particular, ‘reply only to sender’ actually causes groups.io to attempt to send both to the sender and to the group, and then bounces the email it sends to the group; whereas ‘reply to sender’ actually sends only to the sender. So maybe these designations should be reversed.


On Nov 1, 2018, at 8:12 AM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Bruce, I take that back. I just tried your suggestion (using "reply to sender" instead of "reply only to sender") and it works fine via email. 
I will revert to questioning the wording of the new scheme once I test all the possibilities (and will post my comments about that in this thread), because I think the current wording is very misleading.
Thanks for your suggestion.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

Bruce, I take that back. I just tried your suggestion (using "reply to sender" instead of "reply only to sender") and it works fine via email. 
I will revert to questioning the wording of the new scheme once I test all the possibilities (and will post my comments about that in this thread), because I think the current wording is very misleading.
Thanks for your suggestion.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

"I wrote the Help section on hashtags."
and I will be updating that for Mark as soon as I thoroughly test the new scheme

On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 6:39 AM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 05:56 AM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
A hashtag with "reply only to sender" set is supposed to bounce stuff that is sent to the group.
I know what hashtags with "reply only to sender" are supposed to do. I wrote the Help section on hashtags. But when someone hits "reply" by email from gmail (and probably other providers), groups.io should not be trying to send both the group and the individual if the hashtag is so marked, and that is what it does, and then it bounces the one sent to the group. A person replying by email is not privy to the fact that the the topic is reply-to-sender. A person replying via web does know, because the reply is automatically marked "reply to sender." That is the problem here, and was the problem all along with this situation when a group is set to disable other reply options. People in my group were all alarmed, telling me their emails were bouncing, etc. I am guessing that the group's "disable other reply options" may be contributing to this problem (it may not, I don't remember - at one point our group had that setting, at another point it didn't) but I was planning to check that today
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 05:56 AM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
A hashtag with "reply only to sender" set is supposed to bounce stuff that is sent to the group.
I know what hashtags with "reply only to sender" are supposed to do. I wrote the Help section on hashtags. But when someone hits "reply" by email from gmail (and probably other providers), groups.io should not be trying to send both the group and the individual if the hashtag is so marked, and that is what it does, and then it bounces the one sent to the group. A person replying by email is not privy to the fact that the the topic is reply-to-sender. A person replying via web does know, because the reply is automatically marked "reply to sender." That is the problem here, and was the problem all along with this situation when a group is set to disable other reply options. People in my group were all alarmed, telling me their emails were bouncing, etc. I am guessing that the group's "disable other reply options" may be contributing to this problem (it may not, I don't remember - at one point our group had that setting, at another point it didn't) but I was planning to check that today
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Bruce Bowman
 

On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:23 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
Oops, no it’s not. Notification was delayed, but it’s the same problem as I had originally with this: an attempted reply via email bounced, with message that replies had to be only to sender. This was the original problem I had with this in my group, and which caused me to give up on using reply-to-sender hashtags. I can send you the details offlist after I run another test.
A hashtag with "reply only to sender" set is supposed to bounce stuff that is sent to the group. That is by design. Try a "reply to sender" hashtag instead. Ref: https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/18853  

Bruce


 

Oops, no it’s not. Notification was delayed, but it’s the same problem as I had originally with this: an attempted reply via email bounced, with message that replies had to be only to sender. This was the original problem I had with this in my group, and which caused me to give up on using reply-to-sender hashtags. I can send you the details offlist after I run another test.


On Oct 31, 2018, at 8:10 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

It's working! :-)
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

It's working! :-)
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

ps delayed reaction - Mark, is this override of group 
settlngs by hashtags new? Because this did not use to work. I distinctly remember because I had to give up on this situation after trying it before. Anyway, I will test it again today. Thanks.

On Oct 31, 2018, at 9:29 AM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Yay! Thanks Mark, I’ll check it out in my test group.


On Oct 31, 2018, at 8:57 AM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 8:09 AM J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

I'm finally getting to looking at this. I have not yet tested it, but my biggest and most immediate question is whether the hashtag would override the group setting that disables other reply options. My group is set to "reply to group" and has disabled other reply options, but I would like a hashtag to be able to set a topic to "reply to sender" and override that. My guess is this is not possible. Right?
 
Hashtags will override group settings, so you should be able to do this.

Thanks,
Mark 

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu