On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 03:22 AM, Ken Kloeber wrote:

You are receiving this email because you are subscribed to the GroupManagersForum@groups.io group.

I think this is fine. I'd give a thumbs down to "you received."
 
--
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 started this thread not for any nit-picky ideal of going "cleaner/crisper." I started it because I found the current term actually misleading.

I'd leave anything else alone that doesn't truly lack clarity.
--
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

Received from magicalkingdomgroups@gmail.com at 9/9/2018 03:06 PM UTC:

But the message wasn't rejected by the system.
How about "Message rejected by Management" or Owner or Moderator or just plain "Message was rejected" Ilene

Definitely NOT the latter. This comes to our attention because someone wants to know WHY... and "Message was rejected" doesn't even begin to hint at WHY.

Jim H

On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 08:39 AM, Jim Higgins wrote:

"Message was rejected" doesn't even begin to hint at WHY.

Well, we actually do know why. The full text of the search term includes "due to size" or "due to disallowed attachment" (not exact quotes - I'm paraphrasing) etc. "Message rejected" or "Message was rejected" or "Message was rejected by system" are all perfectly fine. Have a look at the search terms in the Message Activity log.
 
--
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, Sep 9, 2018 at 08:39 AM, Jim Higgins wrote:

This comes to our attention because someone wants to know WHY..

And actually, it "comes to your attention" because I was searching the Message Activity log and found the search term "Rejected Message" off the mark. The "why" is there and has always been there.
 
--
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

You get to write why it was rejected when you hit the rejected button

Oh okay, sorry, I missed something then. Ilene

On Sun, Sep 9, 2018 at 09:17 AM, magicalkingdomgroups@... wrote:

You get to write why it was rejected when you hit the rejected button 

We're not talking about moderator rejections. This is solely about messages that were automatically rejected by the system!
 
--
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, Sep 9, 2018 at 09:18 AM, magicalkingdomgroups@... wrote:

Oh okay, sorry, I missed something then.

Game of telephone. :-)
 
--
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, Sep 9, 2018 at 11:35 AM, J_Catlady wrote:

I started this thread not for any nit-picky ideal of going "cleaner/crisper." I started it because I found the current term actually misleading.

My point, not well communicated, is that it the construction is kept in mind and focused on up front when composing every message (of any type anywhere) the ambiguity and huhs? more often than not automatically disappear. 

Certsinly it’s fine as is.