locked Proposal: All groups must be moderated or new user moderated


Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

Sue,

           You take "new member introductions" literally.  The users on the forum I refer to don't.  There's often an "introduction" post that says nothing but "new here."  They need not be revelatory in any way and that group is largely ignored.  It exists in the most part as a spam prevention mechanism.

           I presume all groups have lurkers.  That being said, if someone's so reserved as to not be able to make a one word post to a new member forum this is not a large population.

--
Brian

A lot of what appears to be progress is just so much technological rococo.  ~ Bill Gray


Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

Also, lurkers (and I've been one) who are true lurkers aren't going to be too concerned about posting, at least not immediately.  If they know what they need to do prior to posting capability being "turned on" that's generally enough to filter humans from spambots.
--
Brian

A lot of what appears to be progress is just so much technological rococo.  ~ Bill Gray


Robert Schechter
 

My group is closed. We do not need/want moderating.


 

Sorry to be coming in late on this and I haven't had time to read the beta groups digest much lately (recently moved and started new job) so I might be speaking up unnecessarily, in which case, never mind. 

I would not want to have to moderate my group, even for new users. It takes way too much time, and for my group isn't normally needed except rarely for someone being inappropriate. I wonder why this came up at all. Surely it should be up to the owner whether their group or individuals in the group should be moderated?

As much as I adore groups.io, requiring moderation would be a deal breaker for me. 


Rae
--------------------------------------
Rachel Rice, MA 
Professional Indexer and Editor






ncatt
 

I think Mark is asking for a io groups solution . . . not a single group solution.

He needs something that works for all with as little inconvenience as possible.

If someone will not even post to join, what will they ever contribute to the group, ever!
(except a member count)

The better group:
10 that often post are better then a thousand that will never
===========================================

Maybe capchas for group creation then membership approval for groups
until membership reaches a certain size
  


On 10/6/2016 11:09 AM, Robert Schechter wrote:
My group is closed. We do not need/want moderating.

-- 
✞
God Bless America
"While the storm clouds gather far across the sea,
Let us swear allegiance to a land that's free,
Let us all be grateful for a land so fair,
As we raise our voices in a solemn prayer."


Nightowl >8#
 

Mark Fletcher wrote:>>So I propose to make it so that all groups must be either moderated or have new users be moderated.  I have not yet thought through whether this should apply to sub-groups as well. But I wanted to get everyone's take on this proposal first. Is there a good reason to allow open groups at all?<<

It depends what you mean by open groups. Sanctuary is a group where anyone can join, and it can be read publicly. But no one can post without being unmoderated and approved. As long as a group's archives can still be open to the public,I'd be fine with what you are proposing to do.

Brenda


Ro
 

As long as new users can be UNMODERATED instantly at owners  descretion i am ok with it.  Otherwise,  i would not be.  Currently  i use the auto owner response to new applicants  which is a small questionaire.  If they don't answer it,  they don't get approved,  so moderation  in my groups is totally unnecessary

Ro



Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy® Note 4.


-------- Original message --------
From: "Nightowl >8#" <featheredleader@...>
Date: 10/13/16 20:20 (GMT-08:00)
To: beta@groups.io
Subject: Re: [beta] Proposal: All groups must be moderated or new user moderated

Mark Fletcher wrote:>>So I propose to make it so that all groups must be either moderated or have new users be moderated.  I have not yet thought through whether this should apply to sub-groups as well. But I wanted to get everyone's take on this proposal first. Is there a good reason to allow open groups at all?<<

It depends what you mean by open groups. Sanctuary is a group where anyone can join, and it can be read publicly. But no one can post without being unmoderated and approved. As long as a group's archives can still be open to the public,I'd be fine with what you are proposing to do.

Brenda