Topics

moderated non-mod usable beta tag set for private replies only #meta


 

I disagree. Let us have a little personality here! You could limit the number of lines in a signature as an optional group setting (something I suggested here long ago, actually.) That could cut down on the sheer volume. 
--
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


Chris Jones
 

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 05:16 PM, Ken Kloeber wrote:
** Mark, could I also suggest that signatures on Beta (other than a name, etc.) be "discouraged"?  They add nothing to Beta and are better reserved for individual groups and just add to the volume we have to view.  If you don't have one, I don't see a compelling reason why we need them.
A very definite "Like" for that!

Chris


KWKloeber
 

>>>On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 08:21 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
At this point I have no particularly compelling example.<<<
A (non-specific) example could be if there was a way using Private to formulate (read: fine-tune) a soon-to-be-formalized #suggestion and minimize the chaff (my new fav word, the visual fits so well) that leads up to (at least some) finally agreeing on a "way to" - or what "should" - be suggested to be implemented.  I'm envisioning something akin to

"Topic X #suggestion
I'm thinking of suggesting that Mark implement X, in a way to effectuate Y but also allow Z and Q for our group."   
"Anyone have anything to add to that that would make it better?
"

I believe that it would lend itself to more thoughtful replies than the easy-to-instantly-hit "Reply" (in other words, ready-aim-suggest (not fire-ready-aim).+
A drawback is the messaging would all be individual, with no group collaboration as if it were on here or, say, Basecamp or other.
If there's some way to provide that type discussion it might streamline the discussion here, if only because a lot of the misunderstandings/clarifications could be fixed up front.


** Mark, could I also suggest that signatures on Beta (other than a name, etc.) be "discouraged"?  They add nothing to Beta and are better reserved for individual groups and just add to the volume we have to view.  If you don't have one, I don't see a compelling reason why we need them.


Samuel Murrayy
 

On 21/01/2020 01:35, Mark Fletcher wrote:

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 04:28 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

...and/or they want to communicate with others offlist about the
subject for some other (non-nefarious) reason, thinking that beta
members may be the best-equipped to discuss it with.
My first inclination is to not do this. I thought there was too much
off-topic stuff on Beta recently, and I'd like to avoid that going forward.
I understand, but you must realise that your changes are going to change
the nature of the "beta community". Although chit-chat has always been
officially discouraged here, chit-chat nevertheless occurred.

So here's a suggestion: create a subgroup for beta'ers who want to talk
in a somewhat less formalised setting, talk@beta.groups.io. It need not
be a free-for-all chat group -- it'll be a place where beta'ers can have
discussions unmoderated that they may personally feel veer just a little
too far away from the main group's neat and tidy setup.

Samuel


 

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 09:37 PM, Bill Burns wrote:
Surely this is why the Group Managers Forum list exists.
Yes but the problem persists here. 
 
--
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


Bill Burns
 

On 1/20/2020 8:21 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
The main kinds of off-topic posts I see in beta involve “help” questions. Even with the new hashtag restrictions, topics here frequently start with a valid suggestion but then quickly devolve into long, drawn-out “how to” threads that don’t belong in beta. I think that adding a “private” hashtag even to those kinds of threads, once they take off in that kind of direction, could actually cut down on clutter and messsges that don’t belong in beta.
Surely this is why the Group Managers Forum list exists.

--
Bill


 

And this topic has now so severely strayed off topic that I expect it to be locked soon...
--
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 Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 07:42 PM, txercoupemuseum.org wrote:
Main@beta seems to be where to submit requests or ideas for consideration.  It’s a “different set eyes, ears, and mindset" from GMF.  Any response from you is, by definition,”official.  Nothing from GMF is "official words”.  That difference is what brings some of us newbies here seeking authoritative words from “on high”.
WRB,

While I completely sympathize and understand your predicament, I think it's important to recognize that virtually nowhere else would you expect the founder, owner, and sole developer of a major software product to make himself available for routine "help" questions about how to use the product. So I think it's unrealistic to come to beta as a newbie because he is here, and because he is the official word, and to expect forebearance for and answers from him for basic questions about how to use the product.

That's why he has designated other groups for that, such as GMF and Group_Help. The people in those groups are more than capable of answering 99.9% of questions from people new to the product. You don't need the "official" word from Mark on how to use hashtags, or how to use advanced subscription preferences, or nearly anything else that already exists as a feature. But, you might say, how do you know if something already exists as a feature or not? Simple. Until you are really familiar with the product, you ask in one of the help forums whether it already exists before making your suggestion on beta.

I hope this makes sense, and I hope I'm not being presumptuous in answering a question that you clearly meant for Mark. Mark is the creator of the whole thing and shouldn't need to answer questions like this. Although he will probably answer anyway. :)
 
--
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


txercoupemuseum.org
 

Hi Mark,

For every person confident enough to try to voice request for help there will always be many more “lurkers"who breathe a sigh of relief that someone else was having the same problem.  So, after you have read through this post please share with us what hashtag it should have had and perhaps share a screen shot as to how that would look.

Main@beta seems to be where to submit requests or ideas for consideration.  It’s a “different set eyes, ears, and mindset" from GMF.  Any response from you is, by definition,”official.  Nothing from GMF is "official words”.  That difference is what brings some of us newbies here seeking authoritative words from “on high”.

That need doesn’t make us “draftees” to be put or kept in “our place" by a drill sergeant.  Many of us find Groups.io confusing in many ways because we simply do not have the time (or the will) to educate ourselves to “expert” level here.  These are neither complaint nor public confession, merely simple impersonal facts.

No one can change the fact that half the solution to any problem is someone perceiving said “problem” as such in the first place.  By their very nature, “problems” are often situations concerning that which we “don’t know that we don’t know”.  With my limited IT background, I don’t claim to be able to definitively identify a “Bug” from a “feature” that is less than “intuitive”.

So when, inevitably, a newbie like me makes a suggestion out of inexperience with Groups.io, I find those “...long, drawn-out “how to” threads that don’t belong in beta…” to often be of considerable help; whether in clarification of that which is already here, or in FINDING information I didn’t ’t know enough to successfully search for.  

While individual responses may very well NOT “belong in beta”, I have found some of these most useful on occasion and believe they DO “belong” SOMEWHERE.  I still don’t understand how to use a hashtag as J_Catlady suggests, but I do think there should be a “OT” discussion place, thread, whatever works to which such “follow-up” could transfer without the stigma of having somehow erred from the established path.  

Anything that improves comprehension and understand here serves an important purpose until such time as overall documentation and/or help risers to the level of a Groups.io “manual”.   So inasmuch as such would seem desirable and positive in the overall, I see merit in allowing such PUBLIC conversations on/off Main@beta.  

Groups.io can have “structure” without forcing one and all into conforming to a complex and inflexible series of procedure and “topics”.  

Best!

WRB

— 

On Jan 20, 2020, at 7:21 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Mark,

Thanks for your response. It is very helpful, after making a suggestion, to have an idea of which way you are leaning on it. 

<snip>

The main kinds of off-topic posts I see in beta involve “help” questions. Even with the new hashtag restrictions, topics here frequently start with a valid suggestion but then quickly devolve into long, drawn-out “how to” threads that don’t belong in beta. I think that adding a “private” hashtag even to those kinds of threads, once they take off in that kind of direction, could actually cut down on clutter and messsges that don’t belong in beta.

I think a hashtag like #OT would be used very infrequently by group members themselves, and when used, would result in only a single message onlist. Whereas if the hashtag could be used by you to stop topics from going in the wrong direction.

That’s the only case I can make right now. 


On Jan 20, 2020, at 4:35 PM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 04:28 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

It might be helpful to allow beta members to start topics that they only want private replies to, either because they are somewhat off-topic and they don’t want to clutter up the message list with the replies, and/or they want to communicate with others offlist about the subject for some other (non-nefarious) reason, thinking that beta members may be the best-equipped to discuss it with. To that end, I suggest a beta hashtag set to private replies only and usable by non-mods.

My first inclination is to not do this. I thought there was too much off-topic stuff on Beta recently, and I'd like to avoid that going forward. I'd like it to be more focused than it has been recently. If you have a specific example, I could be open to changing my mind. But I think it'd have to be compelling.

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



 

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 5:51 PM lloyd lehrer <lloydlehrer@...> wrote:
Is there a mods only messaging tool or a way to create unique email grouping addresses within groups.io?  I use a subgroup to message our mod team but is there another way to keep other eyes off a set of messages with a single address to the team?

This is off-topic to the original post, and is more a question for GMF or List_Help.

Thanks,
Mark


lloyd lehrer
 

Is there a mods only messaging tool or a way to create unique email grouping addresses within groups.io?  I use a subgroup to message our mod team but is there another way to keep other eyes off a set of messages with a single address to the team?

lloyd lehrer, MANHATTAN BEACH, CA


On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 4:35 PM Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 04:28 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

It might be helpful to allow beta members to start topics that they only want private replies to, either because they are somewhat off-topic and they don’t want to clutter up the message list with the replies, and/or they want to communicate with others offlist about the subject for some other (non-nefarious) reason, thinking that beta members may be the best-equipped to discuss it with. To that end, I suggest a beta hashtag set to private replies only and usable by non-mods.

My first inclination is to not do this. I thought there was too much off-topic stuff on Beta recently, and I'd like to avoid that going forward. I'd like it to be more focused than it has been recently. If you have a specific example, I could be open to changing my mind. But I think it'd have to be compelling.

Thanks, Mark


 

Mark,

Thanks for your response. It is very helpful, after making a suggestion, to have an idea of which way you are leaning on it. 

At this point I have no particularly compelling example. The request was motivated by my futile attempt to keep my yahoo query from generating onlist replies. At the time, not knowing that the limited hashtags were on the way, I had a brief thought of asking you to set the topic to private replies only. Some other groups I’m aware of have a specific hashtag #OT that is set to private, and I thought that could cut down on the clutter that occurred last night. I was actually glad that you finally locked the thread.

The main kinds of off-topic posts I see in beta involve “help” questions. Even with the new hashtag restrictions, topics here frequently start with a valid suggestion but then quickly devolve into long, drawn-out “how to” threads that don’t belong in beta. I think that adding a “private” hashtag even to those kinds of threads, once they take off in that kind of direction, could actually cut down on clutter and messsges that don’t belong in beta.

I think a hashtag like #OT would be used very infrequently by group members themselves, and when used, would result in only a single message onlist. Whereas if the hashtag could be used by you to stop topics from going in the wrong direction.

That’s the only case I can make right now. 


On Jan 20, 2020, at 4:35 PM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 04:28 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

It might be helpful to allow beta members to start topics that they only want private replies to, either because they are somewhat off-topic and they don’t want to clutter up the message list with the replies, and/or they want to communicate with others offlist about the subject for some other (non-nefarious) reason, thinking that beta members may be the best-equipped to discuss it with. To that end, I suggest a beta hashtag set to private replies only and usable by non-mods.

My first inclination is to not do this. I thought there was too much off-topic stuff on Beta recently, and I'd like to avoid that going forward. I'd like it to be more focused than it has been recently. If you have a specific example, I could be open to changing my mind. But I think it'd have to be compelling.

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


 

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 04:28 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

It might be helpful to allow beta members to start topics that they only want private replies to, either because they are somewhat off-topic and they don’t want to clutter up the message list with the replies, and/or they want to communicate with others offlist about the subject for some other (non-nefarious) reason, thinking that beta members may be the best-equipped to discuss it with. To that end, I suggest a beta hashtag set to private replies only and usable by non-mods.

My first inclination is to not do this. I thought there was too much off-topic stuff on Beta recently, and I'd like to avoid that going forward. I'd like it to be more focused than it has been recently. If you have a specific example, I could be open to changing my mind. But I think it'd have to be compelling.

Thanks, Mark


 

It might be helpful to allow beta members to start topics that they only want private replies to, either because they are somewhat off-topic and they don’t want to clutter up the message list with the replies, and/or they want to communicate with others offlist about the subject for some other (non-nefarious) reason, thinking that beta members may be the best-equipped to discuss it with. To that end, I suggest a beta hashtag set to private replies only and usable by non-mods.


--
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