Cathy,

1) created the group (someone else created one of them) ...

That someone else would have had to promote you to Owner role, otherwise that Groups.io group would not appear for you on the transfer setup page.

... note they both refer to the same YahooGroup

I'm not certain what you mean, but that's unimportant. There's no technical requirement that the Groups.io group have any mention of the Yahoo Group in its Description or otherwise.

2) started the transfer process

I'm assuming you mean that you first clicked the green "Start New Transfer" button on the bottom of the instructions page.

Then on the Transfer page filled in the Yahoo Group name, selected the Groups.io group, reviewed the checkboxes, then clicked the green "Start Group Transfer Process" button on the bottom of that page.

As shown in the screenshots here:
/g/GroupManagersForum/wiki/Transfer-from-Yahoo-Groups#Group-Transfer-Process

3) added [email protected] to YahooGroups

Direct Add hasn't been a feature at Yahoo Groups for a number of years. I'm assuming you mean you entered that address on the Yahoo Group's Manage Invitations page.

Did the page say that it was sent, or did it give you an error?

(i never received a response so the actual user was not ccreated so i
couldn't make it the moderator)

In case the notification didn't reach your email inbox, you can look in your Yahoo Group's Manage Members list (or Activity log) to see if the invitation was accepted. If you haven't already.

4) when I check transfer status, neither appears

At the bottom of the Transfer instructions page, if you click on the "In Process" box and it doesn't drop down to show you the name of the Yahoo Group being transferred, then the system does not believe that you ever clicked the green "Start Group Transfer Process" button on the transfer setup page.

If you have not completed that step then the invitation to the transfer agent will be ignored. You must complete Step 1 before proceeding to Step 2.

If it does show you the Yahoo Group name, click on it to open the In Process page to see if there are any error messages or other notes at the top.

Shal


--
Help: /static/help
More Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wiki
Even More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list

On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 02:27 PM, Cathy Cakebread wrote:

4) when I check transfer status, neither appears

You have to actually click in the "In Process" box. It is a drop-down menu.

If you do that, and no groups appear in the drop-down, then either:

-- you didn't start the transfer at all, or
-- the email address that you're logged in under isn't an owner of those GIO group(s).

Hope this helps,
Bruce
--
The system Help is your friend.??/static/help

For each of the two groups, I have:
1) created the group (someone else created one of them) note they both refer to the same YahooGroup
2) started the transfer process
3) added [email protected] to YahooGroups (i never received a response so the actual user was not ccreated so i couldn't make it the moderator)
4) when I check transfer status, neither appears
thanks!?
Cathy

On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 01:46 AM, Cathy Cakebread wrote:

t has been a couple of weeks and I have still been unable to see?[email protected]?in YahooGroups. I think the issue is because I have two groups.io groups and I have tried to start the conversion with both (not a great idea). The question is how do I get unstuck?

Did you invite the transfer agent to join your Yahoo group? The transfer agent will not join without being invited.?Instructions on how to do that can be found at?

To check your transfer status, see?/g/GroupManagersForum/message/8352. If your group name does not appear in the "In Process" drop-down menu at all, you haven't started your transfer yet.

See?/g/GroupManagersForum/message/8697?for detailed, step-by-step instructions.

Hope this helps,
Bruce
--
The system Help is your friend.??/static/help

Hi Cathy,

New Group Not Being Created From Yahoo Groups

Just to be clear, you must create the Groups.io group. That's Step 0 of the instructions. From what you say later it sounds like you've done that. Twice.

it has been a couple of weeks and I have still been unable to see
[email protected] in YahooGroups. I think the issue is because I have
two groups.io groups and I have tried to start the conversion with
both (not a great idea).

As far as I know you can only initiate a transfer from a given Y!Group once at a time. But it could be that your second attempt replaced (superseded) the first, and in fact you only have one in progress. Or maybe you can actually have two at a time.

The question is how do I get unstuck?

Follow the instructions, one step at a time, and in the order given.

delete one of the groups.io accounts and start over with the other
one?

You don't need to delete any Accounts nor any Groups.

Note that "account" refers to your personal log-in account, the email address you use to log in to Groups.io. That's separate from any group(s) you may create; your account becomes the initial owner of any group(s) you create.

You may need to modify or cancel any transfers you find in the In Process list. Let us know what you find there if you'd like more advice about it.

Shal


--
Help: /static/help
More Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wiki
Even More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list

Michael,

Outlook.com did make <groupname>@groups.io into a clickable link for
/g/<groupname>

Nope, that would be impossible.

If that's what you see then I have to conclude that the content of an Invite has changed since the example I captured last June, and that now the invitation includes the email address as a link to the home page.

Again why be confusing by needlessly mislabeling an address (a URL as
an email address)?

No idea.

It is misguided laziness to forsake simple corrections ...

I think you may have mis-characterized the situation. The link is most likely the way it is by design, and not (in Mark's mind) in need of correction. Unless it has in fact been reported to him (I don't know), and even then he might disagree that it needs correction or have a reason it should be as it is.

Shal


--
Help: /static/help
More Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wiki
Even More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list

Buckskin Heights wrote:

Why does GroupsIO fail to communicate with either of these addresses
that work fine outside GroupsIO?

In your examples mailmymobile.net consistently rejected the invitation with the error "Sender IP reverse lookup rejected". I'm not sure what they mean by "rejected" but MXtoolbox correctly reports Groups.io's outbound IP address [66.175.222.12].


Likewise for the single example from tmomail.net.

The example from message.ting.com is different: "recipient rejected" - that indicates that they didn't recognize the phone number. Possibly they require the 1 or the +1 prefix.

How can I get this person's phone email address invited as a member?

You may have to report the error message to tech support at the gateway service to see what it means. Or report it to [email protected] for assistance. Or, if you pay for a Premium group, you could try using Direct Add for those addresses.

However, I have a concern that if the gateway is rejecting the invitations it may well reject the group's message posts as well.

Shal


--
Help: /static/help
More Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wiki
Even More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list

hi -?
it has been a couple of weeks and I have still been unable to see?[email protected]?in YahooGroups. I think the issue is because I have two groups.io groups and I have tried to start the conversion with both (not a great idea). The question is how do I get unstuck?
delete one of the groups.io accounts and start over with the other one? Something else?
thanks!
Cathy

开云体育

Hi John,

According to the Create Subgroup page, "After you create the subgroup, your parent group will now be?[email protected]...". What's not clearly stated (imho) is whether or not the [email protected] will still work or not.

It will, but in messages from your group the To address will reflect the new form. Likewise whenever the group's address is shown on site, or in a notification email.

The group's web address changes in an analogous fashion, but for that too the old form will continue to work for the primary group.

Shal



--
Help: /static/help
More Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wiki
Even More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list

It would seem logical to refer to the group by its URL rather than its
posting address,

Yes, and Mark was called on this recently in beta. I think it was the formatted Digest where the text of a link was the group's posting address but the URL under it was its home page. It did the "right" thing, but some felt it was confusing.

Agreed, needless ambiguity is definitely confusing.

unless a group permits non-subscribers to post, clicking on the
posting address shouldn’t take anyone to the group website…

In the invitation those were not links, so they wouldn't take one anywhere.

Unless your email interface linkified them (some interfaces will recognize an email address in a message body and make it clickable), but that would generate a message to that address, not take you to any site.

Thunderbird will linkify email addresses, but only in plain-text message bodies, Gmail doesn't. Possibly your email interface does in both plain text and formatted message bodies.

| You have been invited by <me> to join the Groups.io group <groupname>@groups.io.
Outlook.com did make <groupname>@groups.io into a clickable link for /g/<groupname>
Again why be confusing by needlessly mislabeling an address (a URL as an email address)?

... I would think it is more likely that a new subscribe would rather
go to the group upon joining rather than immediately sending a message
to the group.

True, which is why the only link in the invitation itself is the acceptance link. Which only takes you to the site (probably to your subscription page in the group, but I don't remember for certain);

It actually took me to the group webpage where I was already signed in with a different email address

it does not also open a new message either on site or in your email interface..

Yes, it didn’t, but it looked like it should.

Groups.io should strive to be clear and simple to understand and use.
It is misguided laziness to forsake simple corrections because 'those in the know’ understand that mislabeled items don’t mean what they look like. At best that generates confusion the rest of us have to deal with.

I've successfully added several cell phone email addresses to GroupsIO for those members who wish to receive their GroupsIO messages as texts not emails... all except for one person.?

The first two addresses?below (for the same android phone served by ting.com via t-mobile) successfully receive texts sent as emails from my regular email account, outside of GroupsIO:

?

Good address: <970310xxxx@...>

Good address: <+1970310xxxx@...>
Bad address: <970310xxxx@...> does not work from regular email

?

But when I enter the good @tmomail.net or the @mailmymobile.net addresses??-- or any permutation of them -- as an invitation in GroupsIO, I get the results below. Why does GroupsIO fail to communicate with either of these addresses that work fine outside GroupsIO? How can I get this person's phone email address invited as a member?

?

?

Hi!

Loving groups.io so far. I'm interested in the subgroups functionality, but I'd like some confirmation before taking the plunge and creating my first.

According to the Create Subgroup page, "After you create the subgroup, your parent group will now be?main@<group>.groups.io...". What's not clearly stated (imho) is whether or not the <group>@groups.io will still work or not. Our group has been in use for a few months now and I'd hate to have to re-educate everyone to use a new address just after migrating from Yahoo to groups.io.

So, does <group>@groups.io work after creating a subgroup, or does that address no longer function?

(I actually have a domain-based alias created that points to <group>@groups.io, so I have the option of re-pointing that alias, but some users know about and use the <group>@groups.io address, so there's likely to be a few issues if that address will no longer work.)

Thanks!

- John

Michael,

If Groups.io rewrote all From addresses as if for DMARC, wouldn’t that
ensure the same and a more reliable experience for all users?

Yes, but IMO the same miserable experience.

I'm more keen on convincing mailbox providers to eschew the "reject" policy, but I know that's a lost cause. Some receiving services (such as Gmail) treat it as "advice" but will generally ignore it if the message (or the sender) otherwise seems non-spammy enough -- by whatever magic criteria Gmail uses.

Perhaps someday the ARC protocol may reach broad enough acceptance that email lists could stand-down their DMARC defense mechanisms and go back to unmodified From addresses. But I'm not holding my breath on that either.

It is more possible that ARC acceptance may become broad enough that Groups.io could narrow the defense and make it triggered by the policies of the receiving service as well as that of the sending service. Then From re-writing would penalize only the users of receiving services that won't use ARC (or other means) to overrule the sender's DMARC policy.

Shal


--
Help: /static/help
More Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wiki
Even More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list

Michael,

It would seem logical to refer to the group by its URL rather than its
posting address,

Yes, and Mark was called on this recently in beta. I think it was the formatted Digest where the text of a link was the group's posting address but the URL under it was its home page. It did the "right" thing, but some felt it was confusing.

unless a group permits non-subscribers to post, clicking on the
posting address shouldn’t take anyone to the group website…

In the invitation those were not links, so they wouldn't take one anywhere.

Unless your email interface linkified them (some interfaces will recognize an email address in a message body and make it clickable), but that would generate a message to that address, not take you to any site.

Thunderbird will linkify email addresses, but only in plain-text message bodies, Gmail doesn't. Possibly your email interface does in both plain text and formatted message bodies.

... I would think it is more likely that a new subscribe would rather
go to the group upon joining rather than immediately sending a message
to the group.

True, which is why the only link in the invitation itself is the acceptance link. Which only takes you to the site (probably to your subscription page in the group, but I don't remember for certain); it does not also open a new message either on site or in your email interface..

Shal


--
Help: /static/help
More Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wiki
Even More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list

| Subject: Invitation to join the <groupname>@groups.io email group
Shouldn't this be "<groupname>.groups.io"? (and again in the message body)?

Mark typically uses the group's posting address as the name of the group, so it should appear as [email protected] or <[email protected]>. That is, the angle brackets should either encompass both the name and domain, or not be present.

It would seem logical to refer to the group by its URL rather than its posting address, unless a group permits non-subscribers to post, clicking on the posting address shouldn’t take anyone to the group website… And until an Invitation were accepted one would not be a subscriber yet, unless clicking on that <posting address named group> both accepts and generates a message to the group - I would think it is more likely that a new subscribe would rather go to the group upon joining rather than immediately sending a message to the group.

however at the bottom of the Invitation there were 3 confusing and unexplained 'buttons':
"Thank you for the invite." , "Thank you for the invitation." , and "Can you please add me?"
What are these 3 unexplained 'buttons', what is the difference between them, and where do they go?

That sounds like a feature of your email interface. I know Gmail sometimes makes suggestions like that, what they do is compose a reply with the suggested text in the body, then leave it for you to complete the reply or just click Send. Possibly other services have that feature too.

Yes it was to an outlook.com email address (as I quoted in my inquiry)
| Hello <emailaddress>@outlook.com,

Thanks for the explanations.

Dale,

Turns out I had gone to the 'Access Control' panel in Yahoo Groups and
set all controls to 'off' - meaning even the moderators could not see
old messages.

Good catch.

I've updated GMF's wiki page to make note of that.
/g/GroupManagersForum/wiki/Transfer-from-Yahoo-Groups

Shal


--
Help: /static/help
More Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wiki
Even More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list

Mark,

Shal, has it been discussed before why Mark chose this interface?

Yes. There was extensive discussion in beta at the time.

Initially the green "Reply to Group" and blue "Reply to Sender" buttons were both available, with the button reflecting the group's setting on the left. Some moderators complained that this made it far to easy for members to inadvertently click the non-preferred button, resulting in misdirected replies.

having a Private button that changes the green "Reply to Group" button
to a blue "Reply to Sender" button is less than optimal and could be
confusing to users.

Amusingly, the argument that it "could be confusing to users" was exactly what carried the day for the moderators who did not like having both buttons available at once. They felt it did not sufficiently guide the user as to which was the group's preferred reply destination.

It was probably many of those same moderators who later pushed for the option to "Remove Other Reply Options".

I tend to agree with you that the current mechanism seems like a bit overkill. I'd have preferred not introducing this "Private" modality and instead finding another way to guide the user towards the group's preference.

Shal


--
Help: /static/help
More Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wiki
Even More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list

On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 03:53 PM, Mark Emmer wrote:

Shal, has it been discussed before why Mark chose this interface? From the perspective of UI stability, having a Private button that changes the green "Reply to Group" button to a blue "Reply to Sender" button is less than optimal and could be confusing to users.? Why not have "Reply to Group" and "Reply to Sender" buttons in a stable interface?

I believe the intent here is to have the web interface mimic what is [supposed to] happen via email; to wit:? the group Owner sets the default reply behavior of the group and the individual subscriber has to manually override that if they want to do something else.

In email, the group default setting (see Message Policies>Reply To) sets the reply-to field in the message header of *every* outgoing group message. Compliant email clients are?supposed?to parse this and populate the message To: field accordingly whenever the user hits the "reply" button. As we have seen, actual behavior varies, depending on both the client itself and its own settings; nonetheless, the field as populated serves as a "strong suggestion" from the group Owner as to what he wants to happen.

Similarly, the web interface reflects the group setting, with the assumption that the Owner set things up this way for a reason. To override it a subscriber has to use the "greyed-out" reply button[s]; with the fervent hope that most people will use the default.

One can eliminate the "greyed-out" buttons in the online message editor entirely by clicking the "Remove Other Reply Options" in settings. This removes those same reply options from [html] email footers but still does not actually prohibit non-compliant replies via email, only those composed online.?

Going back to the original question that started this thread....

Currently, the only way to?completely enforce?"Reply to Sender" group-wide -- using both the web interface and by email -- is to create a hashtag with the "Reply Only to Sender" override set and apply that hashtag to the initial message. For any such message, attempts to send a reply back to the group by email will be rejected by groups.io.?Again: there is no group setting that will accomplish the same objective.
?
I hope this helps...and made sense.

Regards,
Bruce

Shal, has it been discussed before why Mark chose this interface? From the perspective of UI stability, having a Private button that changes the green "Reply to Group" button to a blue "Reply to Sender" button is less than optimal and could be confusing to users.? Why not have "Reply to Group" and "Reply to Sender" buttons in a stable interface?? If it hasn't been discussed, then I will make the suggestion in beta.

Mark E.