Topics

locked "Like" for the email-centric (was First Impressions of Groups.io)


 

Ian Gillis wrote:

("like")
Heh.

I wonder if there's a way to bring the facile nature of "Like" to email-centric dinosaurs like myself.

Perhaps as an email command. Reply to the message but add +like to group's address to 'tick' the Like counter of the original message. I had considered a hashtag for the purpose instead, but I wouldn't want the act of clicking "Like" to generate a message to the group. Using an alternate address makes it clear that this is a special function and not a group posting.

Naturally, there could also be a "Like" link in the message footer. But if that's other than a mailto: then there's the issue of how it works for email-only subscribers.

On the receiving side members could opt-in to receive email notification when someone "Like"s their message. The like count could be included in daily digests of messages.

And if you're considering having a global "activity in your groups" type of daily digest likes could be listed there, I'd certainly sign on for that.
https://help.yahoo.com/kb/groups/SLN2530.html

-- Shal


Cherrill <cdjamieson@...>
 

 
 
 
 
 
 here we all go ... save it in your animations
Cherrill
 

-------Original Message-------
 
Date: 08/11/2014 2:49:43 PM
Subject: "Like" for the email-centric (was Re: [beta] First Impressions of Groups.io)
 
Ian Gillis wrote:
 
> ("like")
 
Heh.
 
I wonder if there's a way to bring the facile nature of "Like" to email-centric dinosaurs like myself.
 
Perhaps as an email command. Reply to the message but add +like to group's address to 'tick' the Like counter of the original message. I had considered a hashtag for the purpose instead, but I wouldn't want the act of clicking "Like" to generate a message to the group. Using an alternate address makes it clear that this is a special function and not a group posting.
 
Naturally, there could also be a "Like" link in the message footer. But if that's other than a mailto: then there's the issue of how it works for email-only subscribers.
 
On the receiving side members could opt-in to receive email notification when someone "Like"s their message. The like count could be included in daily digests of messages.
 
And if you're considering having a global "activity in your groups" type of daily digest likes could be listed there, I'd certainly sign on for that.
 
-- Shal
 
 
 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links:
 
You receive all messages sent to this group.
 
Contact Group Owner: beta+owner@groups.io
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
 
 


Frances
 

As an older user of Facebook, it drives me crazy when I "like" something that is tragic. I "like" the report of the hurricane damage, etc. Wish there were some other term! However it is so well established that I guess it is the one that has to be used. 

Basically when I "like" something in Facebook, I am saying I agree with the sentiment or your opinion, or I read the linked article and it was spot on, or hey, I loved this picture of your dog.


Bruce Pappas <bruce@...>
 

I tend to use the FB "Like" button as I read this, want you to know I read it, and thanks for posting. Doesn't necessary mean I "like" its content. But I'm sure we all use it differently. I frankly would prefer "Read".
-BruceP

_______________________________________________
Bruce Colglazier Pappas
Email: bruce@...
Phone: (H) 763-377-9874 - (C) 763-229-7075 - (F) 763-377-8189
Address:  20 Ardmore Dr, Minneapolis, MN 55422-5208  USA
Website:  www.brucepappas.com
Skype: bruce.c.pappas

On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Frances <travel@...> wrote:

As an older user of Facebook, it drives me crazy when I "like" something that is tragic. I "like" the report of the hurricane damage, etc. Wish there were some other term! However it is so well established that I guess it is the one that has to be used. 

Basically when I "like" something in Facebook, I am saying I agree with the sentiment or your opinion, or I read the linked article and it was spot on, or hey, I loved this picture of your dog.



Frances
 

Love the term "read" instead of "like". Or would it be too twee to have "thanks for sharing"?


 

Frances,

As an older user of Facebook, it drives me crazy when I "like" something
that is tragic.
Hence the occasional calls for a "dislike" button. Or agree/disagree, which are not the same dimension (one may agree with something one dislikes).

In a far distant place I was heard to make a suggestion to radically expand on that idea:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/GroupManagersForum/conversations/messages/54979

Mostly tongue-in-cheek.

-- Shal


 

On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Shal Farley <shal@...> wrote:

I wonder if there's a way to bring the facile nature of "Like" to email-centric dinosaurs like myself.

Perhaps as an email command. Reply to the message but add +like to group's address to 'tick' the Like counter of the original message.

What about instead of having to edit an email address when you reply, just reply with the one word:

like

and that automatically gets converted into a like? I'd also add '+1' as another way of indicating liking.


Mark


 


On 9 November 2014 18:36, Frances <travel@...> wrote:
Love the term "read" instead of "like". Or would it be too twee to have "thanks for sharing"?


Frances -
I like "Thanks for sharing" - it covers everything from "Appalling" to "Fantastic". It also implies a degree of appreciation of the post, whether that post is disturbing or heartwarming. But I think that there is a good case for an automatic "Read by XX members" count - in addition to the "Thanks".
Just don't add "Have a nice day".

The person who will be most interested in these counts and plaudits is the originator. So, IMHO, the originator (only) should be presented by a subscript or notification which says "Read by 325" and "Thanked by 2". On the website the latter should have FB-style pull-down with names.

Which brings me to wonder - is the main thrust of Groups IO towards satisfying the email reader, or the webview reader? To me Yahoo is the former, FB is the latter. Or will Groups IO have feet in both camps?

Shal -

I understand and sympathise totally with your instinctive "yuck" reaction to the "likes" - and the like. But I've observed people on my expat group spilling over to FB because a) they feel obliged to write correct English and b) because when they do post and there is no reply, they assume it's because no-one has read the words they have laboured over, or no-one "likes" them.

Three individuals come to mind:
1) Well-built "earth mother" housewife - lovely, generous person with a warm heart, intelligent but of limited education - is totally mortified if any unfeeling grammar Nazi criticises her prose.. She likes FB because she can restrict herself to monosyllabic comments and the posting of photographs of her lovely family.
2) Graduate of the London School of Economics - excellent photographer - but he's dyslexic and stumbles into some horrendous solecisms - he too can restrict himself to short comments and the posting of photos.
3) 85-year old factory manager and engineer - downloads group emails and spends his evenings writing beautifully-crafted, lengthy and helpful prose off-line. He thinks FB is the work of the devil and refuses to have any truck with it.

Needless to say, the first two hardly posted on Yahoo and I missed them, but when I added FB as an alternative they became quite prolific.

You're only a Cretaceous dinosaur - us Triassics really know how to be prejudiced!

regards,
Ian

PS Grammar Nazis please note that I've used English, rather than American-English spellings and usage. Much to the dismay of the Gmail smell chucker!




--


 

On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 2:10 AM, Ian Gillis <tessel.bas@...> wrote:

Which brings me to wonder - is the main thrust of Groups IO towards satisfying the email reader, or the webview reader? To me Yahoo is the former, FB is the latter. Or will Groups IO have feet in both camps?

Feet in both camps, with the modification that these days, you have to include the mobile viewer (which we don't really do yet). I don't want Groups.io to ever lose its email groups base and strong emphasis on discussion. But I also want it to be a product of the 21st century.

Mark 
(under the influence of cold medication today)


 

Mark,

What about instead of having to edit an email address when you reply,
just reply with the one word:

like
That'd work too.

As long as the matching is permissive enough to allow for extraneous whitespace, perhaps punctuation, quoted original message, HTML decoration and other typical debris. But not so permissive as to accidentally suck up a message that has the word in it.

-- Shal


 

like

On 18 November 2014 08:44, Shal Farley <shal@...> wrote:
Mark,

> What about instead of having to edit an email address when you reply,
> just reply with the one word:
>
> like

That'd work too.

As long as the matching is permissive enough to allow for extraneous whitespace, perhaps punctuation, quoted original message, HTML decoration and other typical debris. But not so permissive as to accidentally suck up a message that has the word in it.

-- Shal



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.





 

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Shal Farley <shal@...> wrote:
Mark,

> What about instead of having to edit an email address when you reply,
> just reply with the one word:
>
> like

That'd work too.


Of course, this could be expanded to support any one word reply. But that could be crazy.


Mark 


 

indubitably

On 11/18/2014 9:13 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:

Of course, this could be expanded to support any one word reply. But
that could be crazy.


 

Mark,

Of course, this could be expanded to support any one word reply. But
that could be crazy.
Not unlike the palette of emoticons idea. Maybe the one goes with the other, for web and mail users respectively.

But there's a germ of an idea there. Often enough people try to unsubscribe from my Yahoo Groups by replying with the one word "unsubscribe"; this suggests that perhaps the one-word reply could be useful as an alternate form for some of the email commands.

This would also serve to teach our members to reply in complete sentences. Definitely bucking the Texting/Twitter/Facebook trend. ;-)

-- Shal


 


On 18 November 2014 19:12, Shal Farley <shal@...> wrote:
Definitely bucking the Texting/Twitter/Facebook trend.

​Shal,

Excuse me, young sir, but do I detect a hint of prejudice?

Surely not - all your comments are always carefully researched before being written, and take no account of emotion.

But while texting and Twitter have clear (and very small), intrinsic size limits, Facebook does not. Both posts and comments can be quite lengthy - but when displayed they are normally truncated, so the appearance is of a page filled with short, snappy stuff - but with a "see more" link. And the "Note" facility enables the creation of lengthy papers with​ rich text including photographs, and, if appropriate, files of up to 25MB can be posted.

IMHO the truncation is a good attribute for a web page; you can get an idea of whether a post may be interesting, or whether it's just Ian Gillis banging on about Facebook in his normal way, and thus not worth reading.

There is absolutely no reason why this particular thread should not be formatted in the Facebook style. Yes, it's different - you don't have all the headers and footers for a start, but that doesn't mean that it might not be preferable - particularly for mobile users.

Do you have a Facebook account? You might like to have a look at a "Note" - it's public access - as long as the "public" has a Facebook log-in. I suppose pushing 1.5 billion users is pretty public…

https://www.facebook.com/notes/ian-gillis/iter-the-way-to-new-energy/10151096942803920

regards,

​Ian​

--


 

Ian,

Excuse me, young sir, but do I detect a hint of prejudice?
Hmm... I guess Tyrannosaurs were never known for their sense of humor. Or whichever form of thunder lizard that is agape in your profile photo. When you quoted me you left out a relevant adjunct to the sentence:

Definitely bucking the Texting/Twitter/Facebook trend. ;-)
As it happens I have been using Facebook for a few years now, even run a group there and have notes there. I and some of my friends are no strangers to lengthy and well researched posts and replies.

There is absolutely no reason why this particular thread should not
be formatted in the Facebook style.
Infinite scroll suits some people. Notably Yahoo Groups and Groups.io have both adopted that style for for presenting message lists and messages in topic.

For rapidly catching up on what's new in my email I tend to prefer either a page per message style, or a list with preview style, where I can move from message to message with a single keyboard click and the next message always starts at the same position on the screen. That lets me take in the gist of each message at a glance and move on to the next with minimum fuss.

What I would suggest would be to have some list/message viewing options, with facile ways to switch among them, so that one can choose the style that works best for what you're doing at the moment.

-- Shal


Laurence Taylor
 

On 21/11/2014 21:50, Shal Farley wrote:

Infinite scroll suits some people. Notably Yahoo Groups and Groups.io
have both adopted that style for for presenting message lists and
messages in topic.
Infinite scroll doesn't suit me at all. I want to get to the bottom of
the screen - especially if I want to save it!

What I would suggest would be to have some list/message viewing options,
with facile ways to switch among them, so that one can choose the style
that works best for what you're doing at the moment.
If it could be turned on or off by the user, that would be nice for both
camps.

--
rgds
LAurence
<><


Nightowl >8#
 

Once again, replying to an older message:

Shal wrote on 11/21/14:>>Infinite scroll suits some people. Notably Yahoo Groups and Groups.io have both adopted that style for for presenting message lists and messages in topic.<<

And that implementation alone was one of the worst things they did to us. Many people, including me, cannot handle infinite scroll. My hands go numb and fingers tingle. Handicapped people couldn't handle it, it was an absolute nightmare. We always depended on the page view, which thankfully, Mark has included here, and we always counted on being able to use message numbers.

I am on Twitter, I admit it, as @featheredleader. But I got on Twitter for only one reason: to crusade against Yahoo. Mind you, it came in handy also when Ferguson, Missouri found itself in the midst of rioting and arson, (Yes, I live very near there, and grew up there), but even then I can't handle endless scroll. Only reason I can handle it some on Twitter is I use a Mouse with a button command and because it does end, it's not endless.

So in response to the "Please don't make this like Facebook" comments, my comment is if there is such a thing as an endless scroll, please please, make it optional.

My biggest problem with Facebook however, has little to do with how it's formatted in general. It has to do with how it works...where everyone and their brother can link and connect to you and see your posts and three parties down's posts and etc. NO privacy, NO protection.

If I wanted to be that connected, I wouldn't have stayed with Yahoo Groups as long as I have.

Brenda
Nightowl >8#




David P. Dillard
 

It is not just accessibility with continuous scroll. The database Summon when they went from the 1.0 version to the 2.0 version went from individual pages of search results to continuous scroll which I detest in any such application of archived content. In Google, Google Scholar, Google Books searches one can take the link to a specific page of search results so that one can go back to where they left off in looking at the results or just remember the page number one was on. This is simply not possible in the world of scroll, one link for the entire result takes on to the very beginning of the search result. The same is true for the archives in general and for search results of archives in Yahoo Groups, not to mention the search tool on Yahoo has major issues and behaves very erratically.

Two things about search that need attention on Groups IO


The search icon on Groups IO does not work, one must hit enter for a search to work.


One should be able to search for a group on the main Groups IO page and not have to find a link to a page where this can be done.

For any interested, Summon at Temple can be found here and is available for all to use.

http://library.temple.edu

Here are examples of Summon in use compared to other search tools.


http://tinyurl.com/ps6uz7k


Between continuous scroll and walking a straight line to ones right to facilitate the abstract pop up for individual records to show up, this database has become an accessibility and usability nightmare. This in a database whose content is invaluable. It may cover more ground than Google Scholar and Google Books combined, it certainly is a critical place to look when one needs content on a subject of interest.

Here, for example, is what this database indexes regarding email groups:

http://tinyurl.com/kkwug97

..

..


Sincerely,
David Dillard
Temple University
(215) 204 - 4584
jwne@...

Research Guides
https://sites.google.com/site/researchguidesonsites/


RESEARCH PAPER WRITING
http://guides.temple.edu/research-papers
EMPLOYMENT
http://guides.temple.edu/employment-guide
INTERNSHIPS
http://guides.temple.edu/employment-internships
HOSPITALITY
http://guides.temple.edu/hospitality-guide
DISABILITIES AND EMPLOYMENT
http://guides.temple.edu/c.php?g=134557

On Sun, 11 Jan 2015, Feathered Leader wrote:

Once again, replying to an older message:
Shal wrote on 11/21/14:>>Infinite scroll suits some people. Notably Yahoo Groups and Groups.io have both adopted that style
for for presenting message lists and messages in topic.<<
And that implementation alone was one of the worst things they did to us. Many people, including me, cannot handle infinite
scroll. My hands go numb and fingers tingle. Handicapped people couldn't handle it, it was an absolute nightmare. We always
depended on the page view, which thankfully, Mark has included here, and we always counted on being about to use message
numbers.
I am on Twitter, I admit it, as @featheredleader. But I got on Twitter to crusade against Yahoo. Mind you, it came in handy
also when Ferguson Missouri found itself in the midst of rioting and arson, (Yes, I live very near there, and grew up there),
but even then I can't handle endless scroll. Only reason I can handle it some on Twitter is I use a Mouse with a button
command.
So in response to the "Please don't make this like Facebook" comments, my comment is if there is such a thing as an endless
scroll, please please, make it optional.
My biggest problem with Facebook however, has little to do with how it's formatted in general. It has to do with how it
works...where everyone and their brother can link and connect to you and see your posts and three parties down's posts and
etc. NO privacy, NO protection.
If I wanted to be that connected, I wouldn't have stayed with Yahoo Groups as long as I have.
Brenda
Nightowl >8#


 

I haven't tried this yet (plan to set up a group later!) - but can voice recognition software interface with the groups? They took that away in Yahoo and as a disabled used I sometimes (regularly!) need to use it

On 12 January 2015 at 11:36, David P. Dillard <jwne@...> wrote:


It is not just accessibility with continuous scroll.  The database Summon when they went from the 1.0 version to the 2.0 version went from individual pages of search results to continuous scroll which I detest in any such application of archived content.  In Google, Google Scholar, Google Books searches one can take the link to a specific page of search results so that one can go back to where they left off in looking at the results or just remember the page number one was on.  This is simply not possible in the world of scroll, one link for the entire result takes on to the very beginning of the search result.  The same is true for the archives in general and for search results of archives in Yahoo Groups, not to mention the search tool on Yahoo has major issues and behaves very erratically.

Two things about search that need attention on Groups IO


The search icon on Groups IO does not work, one must hit enter for a search to work.


One should be able to search for a group on the main Groups IO page and not have to find a link to a page where this can be done.

For any interested, Summon at Temple can be found here and is available for all to use.

http://library.temple.edu

Here are examples of Summon in use compared to other search tools.


http://tinyurl.com/ps6uz7k


Between continuous scroll and walking a straight line to ones right to facilitate the abstract pop up for individual records to show up, this database has become an accessibility and usability nightmare.  This in a database whose content is invaluable. It may cover more ground than Google Scholar and Google Books combined, it certainly is a critical place to look when one needs content on a subject of interest.

Here, for example, is what this database indexes regarding email groups:

http://tinyurl.com/kkwug97

...

...


Sincerely,
David Dillard
Temple University
(215) 204 - 4584
jwne@...

Research Guides
https://sites.google.com/site/researchguidesonsites/


RESEARCH PAPER WRITING
http://guides.temple.edu/research-papers
EMPLOYMENT
http://guides.temple.edu/employment-guide
INTERNSHIPS
http://guides.temple.edu/employment-internships
HOSPITALITY
http://guides.temple.edu/hospitality-guide
DISABILITIES AND EMPLOYMENT
http://guides.temple.edu/c.php?g=134557





On Sun, 11 Jan 2015, Feathered Leader wrote:


Once again, replying to an older message:

Shal wrote on 11/21/14:>>Infinite scroll suits some people. Notably Yahoo Groups and Groups.io have both adopted that style
for for presenting message lists and messages in topic.<<

And that implementation alone was one of the worst things they did to us. Many people, including me, cannot handle infinite
scroll. My hands go numb and fingers tingle. Handicapped people couldn't handle it, it was an absolute nightmare. We always
depended on the page view, which thankfully, Mark has included here, and we always counted on being about to use message
numbers.

I am on Twitter, I admit it, as @featheredleader. But I got on Twitter to crusade against Yahoo. Mind you, it came in handy
also when Ferguson Missouri found itself in the midst of rioting and arson, (Yes, I live very near there, and grew up there),
but even then I can't handle endless scroll. Only reason I can handle it some on Twitter is I use a Mouse with a button
command.

So in response to the "Please don't make this like Facebook" comments, my comment is if there is such a thing as an endless
scroll, please please, make it optional.

My biggest problem with Facebook however, has little to do with how it's formatted in general. It has to do with how it
works...where everyone and their brother can link and connect to you and see your posts and three parties down's posts and
etc. NO privacy, NO protection.

If I wanted to be that connected, I wouldn't have stayed with Yahoo Groups as long as I have.

Brenda
Nightowl >8#