moderated non-member applying to subgroup should not get main group’s pending notice #suggestion


 

If a non-member of a restricted main group applies via web to a subgroup by clicking on ‘join this group,’ they correctly get a banner saying that only members of the main group can join the subgroup. However, afterwards they also *incorrectly* (IMO) receive the main group’s pending subscription notification, even if they had no intention (or desire) to join the main group.

You might say that they had an unknown desire to join the main group by applying to the subgroup, but I would not buy that. There are cases where people have heard of a subgroup (if Helen is reading, a case in point is the tanyackd Loss subgroup) and wanted to join, but who actively do not want to join, and whi have no real business being in, the main group.

If this groups.io behavior is intentional and thd idea is to give them the *opportunity* to apply to the main group, that seems admirable and desirable. But I think that to act as if they HAVE ALREADY applied to the main group is not only wrong but can be hella confusing.

So perhaps, instead of acting like they’ve already applied and sending what could be a confusing pending notice, an informative message could be sent telling them how to apply.


--
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 I also think it’s debatable whether ‘join this group’ should even be visible for subgroups when someone is logged in as a non-member of the main group.

On Dec 12, 2018, at 2:01 PM, J_Catlady via Groups.Io <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

If a non-member of a restricted main group applies via web to a subgroup by clicking on ‘join this group,’ they correctly get a banner saying that only members of the main group can join the subgroup. However, afterwards they also *incorrectly* (IMO) receive the main group’s pending subscription notification, even if they had no intention (or desire) to join the main group.

You might say that they had an unknown desire to join the main group by applying to the subgroup, but I would not buy that. There are cases where people have heard of a subgroup (if Helen is reading, a case in point is the tanyackd Loss subgroup) and wanted to join, but who actively do not want to join, and whi have no real business being in, the main group.

If this groups.io behavior is intentional and thd idea is to give them the *opportunity* to apply to the main group, that seems admirable and desirable. But I think that to act as if they HAVE ALREADY applied to the main group is not only wrong but can be hella confusing.

So perhaps, instead of acting like they’ve already applied and sending what could be a confusing pending notice, an informative message could be sent telling them how to apply.


--
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


 

I actually want this to happen, them joining the main group when applying to a sub-group. every time someone applies to a sub-group of mine. I don't want them subscribing only to the sub-group and not the main group. I actually want this to stay as is.


 

It is confusing with the current messaging. This is something that actually happened.

I have no issue with either (a) suggesting that the person apply to the main group when they apply to a subgroup, or (b) telling them explicitly that their application to the subgroup has resulted in an application to the main group and that they should ignore (or whatever) if they dont want to become a member.

The problem is that they are not told. They simply get a message saying ‘thank you for applying to bla-de-bla main group, please complete this questionnaire’ (or whatever the main group’s pending message happens to say), when in fact they have NOT intentionally applied and are given no explanation.

On Dec 12, 2018, at 2:52 PM, Robert Kingett <kingettr@...> wrote:

I actually want this to happen, them joining the main group when applying to a sub-group. every time someone applies to a sub-group of mine. I don't want them subscribing only to the sub-group and not the main group. I actually want this to stay as is.


--
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


 

Hi All,

In order to join a subgroup, you must be a member of the main group. It's not possible to just be a member of a subgroup. So, given a public subgroup, should the Join button be shown to non-members of the parent group? Or should it be a pointer to the parent group? Or something else?

Thanks
Mark


 

Mark,


So, given a public subgroup, should the Join button be shown to non-members of the parent group? Or should it be a pointer to the parent group? Or something else?

I thought this had been deliberately streamlined, so that the attempt to join the subgroup would cause a join of the primary group also. The idea being to simplify the flow rather than make the user stop and go do something else (join the primary group) and then come back to join the subgroup.

Maybe the issue is more one of making sure that the Notices sent are sensible, even merged as was done for Direct Add to the primary that includes one or more subgroup checkboxes.

To answer J's original issue, perhaps the Pending Notice of the primary group should be suppressed in this case, allowing the group managers to write the Pending Notice for the subgroup with wording that clarifies that the person is (implicitly) requesting membership in the primary group as well; or has joined the primary group, in the case of a primary group without membership restriction.
Shal


Michael Pavan
 


In order to join a subgroup, you must be a member of the main group. It's not possible to just be a member of a subgroup. So, given a public subgroup, should the Join button be shown to non-members of the parent group? Or should it be a pointer to the parent group? Or something else?
A pointer to the main group, with the explanation that only users who belong to the main group may ask to join a subgroup.


 

I think either

1. don't show it and give a pointer to the main group (and an explanation), or
2. show it but say that clicking on it will result in their applying to join the main group.

The problem with 2. is that the main group may or may not be restricted, so the word "applying" would be misleading if it's not, and the word "join" would be misleading if it is. So I think not showing it at all is slightly better in the sense of being more clear.
--
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,


2. show it but say that clicking on it will result in their applying to join the main group.

I'd support this, as text below the button.


The problem with 2. is that the main group may or may not be restricted, so the word "applying" would be misleading if it's not, and the word "join" would be misleading if it is.
 
I don't see a problem with having the text customized according to the setting of the primary group.

Shal


 

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 02:12 PM, Shal Farley wrote:
I don't see a problem with having the text customized according to the setting of the primary group.
Shal, I don't know much about subgroups, but I know that in some groups (if not all) with subgroups, the main group is restricted whereas the subgroup is not. So that could get complicated. In such cases, the non-main-group member would "apply" but a main-group member should see only "join," not "apply." 
 
--
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 Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 02:15 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
in some groups (if not all) with subgroups, the main group is restricted whereas the subgroup is not.
I meant "the main group can be restricted whereas the subgroups are not" 
 
--
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


Jim Higgins
 

Received from J_Catlady at 12/14/2018 10:15 PM UTC:

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 02:12 PM, Shal Farley wrote:
I don't see a problem with having the text customized according to the setting of the primary group.
Shal, I don't know much about subgroups, but I know that in some groups (if not all) with subgroups, the main group is restricted whereas the subgroup is not. So that could get complicated. In such cases, the non-main-group member would "apply" but a main-group member should see only "join," not "apply."

"Join" in your context seems to suggest that subscribership to a subgroup is ASSURED for a member of the main group, yet we've seen a number of messages here from Owners whose main groups are limited to "general members" with a subgroup for a limited number of people on a Board of Directors... or similar. So, since membership in a subgroup isn't assured in all cases, it should say "apply" and then if it turns out that membership in the subgroup doesn't require approval then the "application" will be "approved" automatically and immediately and the applicant/joiner doesn't need to know the difference. So "Apply" works for all cases; "Join" doesn't.

Jim H


 

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 04:40 PM, Jim Higgins wrote:
membership in a subgroup isn't assured in all cases,
But in some cases it is. And when it is, it should not say "apply."

Groups.io uses "join this group" to mean "join an unrestricted group," and only uses "apply for membership in this group" when the group (subgroup or otherwise) is restricted.

In the case my group member experienced (with respect to trying to join a subgroup of another group), the subgroup is unrestricted with respect to members of the main group. As I said, I don't know if that's universal. You're saying it's not. But neither is it never the case.
 
--
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


Jim Higgins
 

Received from J_Catlady at 12/15/2018 12:44 AM UTC:

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 04:40 PM, Jim Higgins wrote:
membership in a subgroup isn't assured in all cases,
But in some cases it is. And when it is, it should not say "apply."

Why not? It's a case of no harm done.


Groups.io uses "join this group" to mean "join an unrestricted group," and only uses "apply for membership in this group" when the group (subgroup or otherwise) is restricted.

That's not true!

After deleting my Gio cookies, visiting the home pages of my unrestricted group and my restricted group gives the very same view in both... "+Apply For Membership In This Group." If you have doubts, try it for yourself.


In the case my group member experienced (with respect to trying to join a subgroup of another group), the subgroup is unrestricted with respect to members of the main group. As I said, I don't know if that's universal. You're saying it's not. But neither is it never the case.

Very obviously it isn't universal... for the very clear reason I gave in a portion of my response you didn't quote.

Nor is the distinction you say Gio makes between "Join" and "Apply" true. That distinction is just a case of trying to split frog's hair three ways when there's no such thing as frog's hair in the first place.

So let's not rework a process that's already working just fine... let's just implement the suggested change (if Mark agrees to do so) using the word "Apply." It covers all cases... the only difference being the "behind the scenes" difference that "application" to an unrestricted group/subgroup is "approved" immediately.

Jim H


 

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 05:12 PM, Jim Higgins wrote:
That's not true!
Funny, because I also just checked, and the restricted groups I go to say "apply for membership in this group," whereas the unrestricted ones just say "join this group." I only checked a couple of groups.  ??????

Very weird.
 
--
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


 

In any case, if the language is different for restricted vs. unrestricted groups is different for main groups, I think it should also be correspondingly different for subgroups. Users will get used to one or the other and assume "join this group" means the group is unrestricted. But let's get first consensus on whether or not this is true - as I said, it's definitely true for the restricted and unrestricted groups I checked.
--
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


 

Here's an unrestricted group:
https://groups.io/g/js8call

Here's a restricted one:
https://tanyackd.groups.io/g/support

See the difference?
--
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


Jim Higgins
 

Received from J_Catlady at 12/15/2018 01:18 AM UTC:

On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 05:12 PM, Jim Higgins wrote:
That's not true!

Funny, because I also just checked, and the restricted groups I go to say "apply for membership in this group," whereas the unrestricted ones just say "join this group." I only checked a couple of groups. ??????

Very weird.

Indeed!

Jim H


Jim Higgins
 

Received from J_Catlady at 12/15/2018 01:20 AM UTC:

In any case, if the language is different for restricted vs. unrestricted groups is different for main groups, I think it should also be correspondingly different for subgroups. Users will get used to one or the other and assume "join this group" means the group is unrestricted. But let's get first consensus on whether or not this is true - as I said, it's definitely true for the restricted and unrestricted groups I checked.

And not true for the ones I checked.

Did you delete your Gio cookies before testing? Remember, the condition being discussed also included the case of a nonmember of the main group. If you tested on your own groups with cookies active you weren't a nonmember of the main group.

And in the end it makes no difference if "Apply" is used across the board because an "Apply" is approved immediately in the case of an unrestricted group, so the impression given to the new subscriber is, in effect, the same as the result from the "Join" that you prefer.

I see no good reason that Groups.io users should be lead to form the distinction you (incorrectly) said already exists.

Jim H


 

Jim,

After deleting my Gio cookies, visiting the home pages of my
unrestricted group and my restricted group gives the very same view in
both... "+Apply For Membership In This Group."
I believe you've made a mistake somewhere.

If you have doubts, try it for yourself.
Just did. I see the expected "Join This Group" for unrestricted groups, and "Apply For Membership In This Group" for restricted ones.

Shal