Topics

moderated banned members notified they're banned when try to log in - I thought this was stopped?


 

On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 05:22 PM, Sarah k Alawami wrote:
I would ban the member from coming back if they did not take the time to do this one thing before they left.
That is distinctly not what I am doing. Everyone is entitled to fill out the questionnaire or not. Sometimes people leave because their cat died. I am certainly not going to ban someone if I don't know why they left. I just *technically* ban them so that they appear on the banned list, so that I can get more info. This is a technical issue that has been made into a substantive one.
 
--
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 Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 04:21 PM, D R Stinson wrote:
I have to say I'm surprised at the judgmental nature of the responses to J's question.
Thanks, Dano. I was similarly stunned.
 
--
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


Sarah k Alawami
 

Actualy the question abou tGDPR does bring up a good point. The person keeping notes on the members, is that not baking the GDPR? I'm curious to know the answer to that s well.

Sarah Alawami, owner of TFFP. . For more info go to our website. This is also our libsyn page as well.
For stuff we sell, mac training materials and  tutorials go here.
and for hosting options go here
to subscribe to the feed click here

Our telegram channel is also a good place for an announce only in regard to podcasts, contests, etc.

Finally, to become a patron and help support the podcast go here

On 21 Jul 2019, at 17:57, J_Catlady wrote:

On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 04:21 PM, D R Stinson wrote:
I have to say I'm surprised at the judgmental nature of the responses to J's question.
Thanks, Dano. I was similarly stunned.
 
--
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 Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 06:04 PM, Sarah k Alawami wrote:
The person keeping notes on the members, is that not baking the GDPR? I'm curious to know the answer to that s well.
That's a much bigger issue and there is nothing special about the "Notes" page. It may just say "five cats in the household" and the person may not even be using their real name. In fact, our group uses only the person's first name and their cat's name. However, groups.io stores their personal info (in the GDPR sense - IP address, email address, etc.) regardless of whether or not "notes" are stored. So I think that's a topic for outside this hapless thread.
 
--
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 Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 08:55 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
I am certainly not going to ban someone if I don't know why they left. I just *technically* ban them so that they appear on the banned list, so that I can get more info. This is a technical issue that has been made into a substantive one.
Suggesting that the existing workaround be enhanced in some fashion strikes me as counterproductive. I believe you need to ask for what you really want -- comparable accessibility of Past Member information (including the Member Notes and whatever else you have discovered) that is currently available to you via the Banned list.

Regards,
Bruce


 

On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 06:20 PM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
I believe you need to ask for what you really want -- comparable accessibility of Past Member information
Yes, I've done that many times in the past and it continues to be flakey and funky. And I've already mentioned that in this thread.
I think I want to get some work done tonight, so I'm done 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


 

On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 06:20 PM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
Suggesting that the existing workaround be enhanced in some fashion strikes me as counterproductive.
Forgot to respond to this part: I am not making a suggestion to make my workaround work. It's a suggestion based on past desires of the majority, as expressed here, not to inform a member when they've been banned. The "you have been banned" banner seems to have been an oversight to that, in that it still exists. I am not asking groups.io to make a change so that my workaround can work lol.

And now I'm outta 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


 

I believe you need to ask for what you really want --
comparable accessibility of Past Member information
Yes, I've done that many times in the past and it
continues to be flakey and funky. And I've already
mentioned that in this thread.
I see a lot of piling-on here, and I don't understand why. What you're suggesting, Bruce, is what I interpreted as what J was asking for in the first place. Sometimes suggestions get lost behind more important problems that come up and they need a bump occasionally.

Regarding my comment about 'banning', I'm sorry that I gave someone the excuse to focus on pedantic details instead of seeing the broader situation. The logic of following up on why a person has left a group is the same as following up on why a person was banned. There can be a lot of things that affect a member leaving, and following up on the available details in those situations will sometimes bring to light problems that an owner can try to guide others through, or bring to management for attention. It may also point out situations where an owner may need to follow up with potential collateral problems such as changing ownership of posted photos to a member's new alternate identity.

Some here have suggested that people are keeping records about members who leave. Looking back. I can only assume that interpretation came out of someone's imagination, because I never read that into anything J wrote. I would say that anyone with that kind of imagination doesn't understand what kind of a onerous task such a thing would be. I would also remind those people that what is being discussed is not group owners keeping records, but the records that groups.io *already* keeps. There is obviously a reason groups.io records such things, and it would appear that if there is any way a group owner is given access that data, there is a reason for the owner to have that ability.

I'm saddened in a way to see how beta has changed in the last year or so. The more I read, the more I hear people trying to tell other people what they should and shouldn't be doing. I also read people's comments telling Mark what should and shouldn't be done and how to do it. I also read more and more discussions of technical things and the use of terms and acronyms that are undefined in the discussion, which push many non-technical people out of discussions. I have even been told that my concerns for such were "spurious", even though the person who made that statement never did explain what the acronyms I asked about meant. I am frustrated that I apparently don't know enough about the technical aspects of programming to be of value to the group discussion any more.

I spend less and less time here because there seem to be more and more people here who want to tell other people how they should or shouldn't run their groups, or show off their technical expertise. I know I will be vilified and cursed at for what I have already written. But it's what I've seen and I'm concerned that I may not be the only one who may have felt this.

And for those who may ask who the heck I am to make such statements, understand that I've been on groups.io for over four and a half years, and I support groups.io the old fashioned way, by maintaining two premium groups.

Dano


Bruce Bowman
 

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 03:21 AM, D R Stinson wrote:
I see a lot of piling-on here, and I don't understand why. What you're suggesting, Bruce, is what I interpreted as what J was asking for in the first place.
The original message is https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/21683. I quote it verbatim:

"Is it possible to fix this but [sic] changing it back to what it was (i.e., people are not informed they're banned from a group)?"

This request still strikes me as a bastardization of an existing work-around, and eliminating the need for the work-around strikes me as a more appropriate course of action. If that's piling on, consider me a piler...if you agree, then I don't see where the problem is.

Regards,
Bruce


 

Yes, Dano misunderstood. The original request was to change something that’s seemingly a bug, or minimally an oversight, to conform with what was the majority opinion here, and Mark’s subsequent agreement and decision, namely: not to notify members when they are banned from a group. 

The rest of it  - the consequences of the oversight with respect to my creative use of banning - is meaningless and could have been left out. The fact that I’m using banning as a workaround is meaningless and irrelevant.

The request is to make the system consistent with respect to not explicitly notifying members when they have banned.

The implicit request to make the info in Past Members conform to the info in Banned members is a reiteration of many requests I’ve made here and given up on, because it seems that because of the way the various lists work, that’s been too hard to implement.

I’m done referred to last night. It’s a whole new day in which to fight more misconceptions and misinterpretations! 😊


On Jul 22, 2019, at 9:30 AM, Bruce Bowman <bruce.bowman@...> wrote:

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 03:21 AM, D R Stinson wrote:
I see a lot of piling-on here, and I don't understand why. What you're suggesting, Bruce, is what I interpreted as what J was asking for in the first place.
The original message is https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/21683. I quote it verbatim:

"Is it possible to fix this but [sic] changing it back to what it was (i.e., people are not informed they're banned from a group)?"

This request still strikes me as a bastardization of an existing work-around, and eliminating the need for the work-around strikes me as a more appropriate course of action. If that's piling on, consider me a piler...if you agree, then I don't see where the problem is.

Regards,
Bruce

--
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


Judy F.
 

Dano, I totally agree with everything you have said.  I have also stopped reading so many of the messages for the same reason as you.  I've also when with the group for a long while.
Judy F.
SW Florida - USA


 

ps That should have read: Dano misunderstood, but so did you. 


On Jul 22, 2019, at 9:48 AM, J_Catlady via Groups.Io <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Yes, Dano misunderstood. The original request was to change something that’s seemingly a bug, or minimally an oversight, to conform with what was the majority opinion here, and Mark’s subsequent agreement and decision, namely: not to notify members when they are banned from a group. 

The rest of it  - the consequences of the oversight with respect to my creative use of banning - is meaningless and could have been left out. The fact that I’m using banning as a workaround is meaningless and irrelevant.

The request is to make the system consistent with respect to not explicitly notifying members when they have banned.

The implicit request to make the info in Past Members conform to the info in Banned members is a reiteration of many requests I’ve made here and given up on, because it seems that because of the way the various lists work, that’s been too hard to implement.

I’m done referred to last night. It’s a whole new day in which to fight more misconceptions and misinterpretations! 😊


On Jul 22, 2019, at 9:30 AM, Bruce Bowman <bruce.bowman@...> wrote:

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 03:21 AM, D R Stinson wrote:
I see a lot of piling-on here, and I don't understand why. What you're suggesting, Bruce, is what I interpreted as what J was asking for in the first place.
The original message is https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/21683. I quote it verbatim:

"Is it possible to fix this but [sic] changing it back to what it was (i.e., people are not informed they're banned from a group)?"

This request still strikes me as a bastardization of an existing work-around, and eliminating the need for the work-around strikes me as a more appropriate course of action. If that's piling on, consider me a piler...if you agree, then I don't see where the problem is.

Regards,
Bruce

--
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


 

Agree with Judy and Dano. 


On Jul 22, 2019, at 10:04 AM, J. Faulkner <jfaulkner44@...> wrote:

Dano, I totally agree with everything you have said.  I have also stopped reading so many of the messages for the same reason as you.  I've also when with the group for a long while.
Judy F.
SW Florida - USA

--
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


Barbara Byers
 

If you want to know why they leave the group, why don't you just ask them.  It does seem creepy to snoop around after not telling them they were banned.  Just MHO, so I would NOT be in favor of keeping it from the people you've banned.

Barb

 


On 2019-07-21 01:03 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

Wow. This has nothing to do with punishing them for not responding. In the interest of my group, I simply want to see a record of their interaction, and any notes I or another mod might have made in their Notes page, to better understand why they left. This is not "nosying around after them." This is an attempt to understand why people may be leaving the group, and which people might be leaving and why, The information is available, and this is simply a technical issue. The banned members list retains more information than the past members list.

Your criticism is inappropriate.
On Jul 21, 2019, at 9:56 AM, Helen <helen@...> wrote:

I'm gobsmacked that you use the ban function in this way. If people don't wish to respond to your goodbye message, that's their prerogative. IMO nosying around after them in other ways is inappropriate and abuse of the feature.

Helen




-- 
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 irrelevant. I may look at their history even if thy DO answer the question are. 


On Jul 22, 2019, at 10:21 AM, Barbara Byers <babmay11@...> wrote:

If you want to know why they leave the group, why don't you just ask them.  It does seem creepy to snoop around after not telling them they were banned.  Just MHO, so I would NOT be in favor of keeping it from the people you've banned.

Barb

 


On 2019-07-21 01:03 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

Wow. This has nothing to do with punishing them for not responding. In the interest of my group, I simply want to see a record of their interaction, and any notes I or another mod might have made in their Notes page, to better understand why they left. This is not "nosying around after them." This is an attempt to understand why people may be leaving the group, and which people might be leaving and why, The information is available, and this is simply a technical issue. The banned members list retains more information than the past members list.

Your criticism is inappropriate.
On Jul 21, 2019, at 9:56 AM, Helen <helen@...> wrote:

I'm gobsmacked that you use the ban function in this way. If people don't wish to respond to your goodbye message, that's their prerogative. IMO nosying around after them in other ways is inappropriate and abuse of the feature.

Helen




-- 
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


Barbara Byers
 

OK, I see your original request and agree with that:

"...request to make the info in Past Members conform to the info in Banned member list..."

But I do think in the interest of transparency, that people should be notified they are banned if they try to log in, it seems like a different issue. 

However, it's not a huge deal.  I guess if someone left my group and didn't respond to my repeated requests/questions about why, I would take it as a sign they no longer want to interact and I wouldn't bother trying to find out more.  But that's me.

Barb


On 2019-07-22 01:23 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

It's irrelevant. I may look at their history even if thy DO answer the question are. 

 

On Jul 22, 2019, at 10:21 AM, Barbara Byers <babmay11@...> wrote:

If you want to know why they leave the group, why don't you just ask them.  It does seem creepy to snoop around after not telling them they were banned.  Just MHO, so I would NOT be in favor of keeping it from the people you've banned.

Barb

 


On 2019-07-21 01:03 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

Wow. This has nothing to do with punishing them for not responding. In the interest of my group, I simply want to see a record of their interaction, and any notes I or another mod might have made in their Notes page, to better understand why they left. This is not "nosying around after them." This is an attempt to understand why people may be leaving the group, and which people might be leaving and why, The information is available, and this is simply a technical issue. The banned members list retains more information than the past members list.

Your criticism is inappropriate.
On Jul 21, 2019, at 9:56 AM, Helen <helen@...> wrote:

I'm gobsmacked that you use the ban function in this way. If people don't wish to respond to your goodbye message, that's their prerogative. IMO nosying around after them in other ways is inappropriate and abuse of the feature.

Helen



-- 
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


 

There are no “repeated requests” about why they left and that entire part of this thread is completely irrelevant.


On Jul 22, 2019, at 10:57 AM, Barbara Byers <babmay11@...> wrote:

OK, I see your original request and agree with that:

"...request to make the info in Past Members conform to the info in Banned member list..."

But I do think in the interest of transparency, that people should be notified they are banned if they try to log in, it seems like a different issue. 

However, it's not a huge deal.  I guess if someone left my group and didn't respond to my repeated requests/questions about why, I would take it as a sign they no longer want to interact and I wouldn't bother trying to find out more.  But that's me.

Barb


On 2019-07-22 01:23 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

It's irrelevant. I may look at their history even if thy DO answer the question are. 

 

On Jul 22, 2019, at 10:21 AM, Barbara Byers <babmay11@...> wrote:

If you want to know why they leave the group, why don't you just ask them.  It does seem creepy to snoop around after not telling them they were banned.  Just MHO, so I would NOT be in favor of keeping it from the people you've banned.

Barb

 


On 2019-07-21 01:03 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

Wow. This has nothing to do with punishing them for not responding. In the interest of my group, I simply want to see a record of their interaction, and any notes I or another mod might have made in their Notes page, to better understand why they left. This is not "nosying around after them." This is an attempt to understand why people may be leaving the group, and which people might be leaving and why, The information is available, and this is simply a technical issue. The banned members list retains more information than the past members list.

Your criticism is inappropriate.
On Jul 21, 2019, at 9:56 AM, Helen <helen@...> wrote:

I'm gobsmacked that you use the ban function in this way. If people don't wish to respond to your goodbye message, that's their prerogative. IMO nosying around after them in other ways is inappropriate and abuse of the feature.

Helen



-- 
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


--
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


David Grimm
 

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 03:21 AM, D R Stinson wrote:
I also read more and more discussions of technical things and the use of terms and acronyms that are undefined in the discussion, which push many non-technical people out of discussions.  I ave even been told that my concerns for such were "spurious", even though the person who made that statement never did explain what the acronyms I asked about meant. I am frustrated that I apparently don't know enough about the technical aspects of programming to be of value to the group discussion any more.  
And then in the very next thread Mark used the phrase 'PSP/Tube sharing groups' in a post I assume was related to a thread over on GMF. I agree with Dano on this. I follow this group to see the evolution of Groups.io as it happens, but there are times I have no idea what is being talked about. So I just end up lurking.

So what is 'PSP/Tube sharing'? I googled it and all I could find were thousands of links to join a group for it. Whatever it is. I did figure out that it has nothing to do with Groups.io per se.

Dave


 

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 10:21 AM, Barbara Byers wrote:
It does seem creepy to snoop around
LOL. We now have "nosying around," "abusing the system," "creepy," and "snooping around," all to describe a group owner's legitimate use of group content in an effort to understand how their group is 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


Glenn Glazer
 

On 7/22/2019 12:30, David Grimm wrote:

So what is 'PSP/Tube sharing'? I googled it and all I could find were thousands of links to join a group for it. Whatever it is. I did figure out that it has nothing to do with Groups.io per se.

Dave

I was confused, also. I believe refers to either:

* watching YouTube videos on a PlayStation Portable ( https://psp-cheats.wonderhowto.com/how-to/watch-youtube-videos-your-psp-with-ultimate-psptube-347792/ )
* using the tube tool in Paint Shop Pro ( http://campratty.com/1faq/faqpages/8.html ) which takes an image and makes a repeating pattern from it.

I think the latter one is what this group is about. One cannot just take images from somewhere and use them in a new art piece.

In any case, I do agree that this group content and aside from the IP aspects, nothing to do with groups.io per se.

Best,

Glenn

--
We must work to make the Democratic Party the Marketplace of Ideas not the Marketplace of Favors.

Virus-free. www.avast.com