Thanks Barb.? I totally agree that is head and shoulders above yahoogroups which is more than dysfunctional these days -- in fact, I am amazed that anyone still uses yahoogroups.??
?
We are a Scout unit, and moved all of our many lists over to 4 months ago.? But that one list -- the "I need help fast" or "I don't know where to go, so I'm asking the leaders for help" list -- that one is ONLY there for maximizing responsiveness.? Rather than having scouts emailing to the Scoutmaster or any one person, the messages go to a small group of leaders and the first one to see it and who can answer, responds. All of us have 1-2 other jobs at least, and we cannot guarantee a fast response individually, but the scouts deserve our best so we came up with this collective solution.? So 5 years ago we moved over to this small-group approach and the person who gets to it first AND has the right info can answer.? Since moving to the moderated system, response lag has increased significantly.? The moderation process is additive to our time-until-response (the approver seldom is the one with the info for the response).? So the system we put in place for improving responsiveness doesn't work with .? We've been trying it for a few months now, and I know it doesn't sound like much to many, but it makes a difference to the scouts.? So this was a "hail mary" to figure out how to config to suit our needs.? I appreciate folks offering their perspectives ; we were just hoping for a solution that would work for us without moving to a different system.
?
Thanks,
Bill
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 12:51 PM Barbara Byers < babmay11@...> wrote:
We had a list on Yahoogroups that allowed unrestricted posting (posts by non-members and unmoderated), for that same reason, to allow folks to ask questions.? Now, we simply allow non-members to post to our IO list, but then each of those posts have to be approved.? It's not that big a deal, of course we don't get a ton of non-member postings either.? Any of the moderators or owners can simply go to Groups.io and approve it.? One click.? It's worked fine for us, and I still would move from the dysfunctional Yahoo lists to IO in a heartbeat, if I had to decide again.
Barb
[excess quote trimmed by moderator]
?
?
|
I have a member in one of my groups who finds she has to sign in with her password every time she accesses the groups she belongs to, even when she accesses a second one from the drop down "Your groups" menu at the top of a group page. She tells me she makes sure to sign into her groups every few days, and yet this is a constant issue for her. My guess is that she has some kind of privacy setting on her computer and smart phone (it happens with both devices) that she is not aware of that is preventing cookies. Anyone have any advice I can give her? Annick
|
We had a list on Yahoogroups that allowed unrestricted posting (posts by non-members and unmoderated), for that same reason, to allow folks to ask questions.? Now, we simply allow non-members to post to our IO list, but then each of those posts have to be approved.? It's not that big a deal, of course we don't get a ton of non-member postings either.? Any of the moderators or owners can simply go to Groups.io and approve it.? One click.? It's worked fine for us, and I still would move from the dysfunctional Yahoo lists to IO in a heartbeat, if I had to decide again.
Barb
?
?
On 2019-01-11 11:54 AM, Bill Sherman wrote:
Shal,
?
Thank you for taking the time to lay it out for us, though I am not really sure how "if the service?gains a reputation for delivering spam messages" could happen -- WE would be the ones allowing unmoderated emails to this list, and WE would be the ones to take action (such as adding in moderation or changing the address or whatever we needed to do) if we were ever to be hit with spam.? And, as I indicated, we haven't been spammed more than a couple of times in our 12 years of operation on prior systems.
?
"We" would never contribute to a gaining reputation for allowing spam delivery that we had deliberately?risked allowing...? I understand caution, but it seems like it is caution for fear of something that could not happen.? I sure wish we had discovered way, way in advance of moving all of our hundreds of families over to that there was no way to support this "experts list" kind of address.? It is an absolute showstopper for us, and one which will now cause us to uproot the organization (a Boy Scout unit with hundreds of addresses) and move off of to a different system.? Sigh.
?
If I could put in my $0.02 as a suggestion that might save other organizations this hassle in the future -- please consider allowing this option.? There really is no downside risk, if it is appropriately caveated. You could shroud it in all kinds of warnings about ill-advised configurations and such -- but a hard and fast rule that protects my expert list from what they need is enough to drive them away.? And it is too bad because in every, and I mean every other way this system was perfect for us.
?
Thanks,
Bill;
?
[excess quote trimmed by moderator]
|
re: "You really wouldn't have control of this.? All it would take would be a few members receiving one of the posts, then marking it as spam."
Of course we would have control over this -- the "members" you refer to are the few of us that want to risk this in order to accept the emails.? And we know to just delete a spam message if it should happen rather than to mark it as spam.
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 12:04 PM Duane < txpigeon@...> wrote: On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 11:00 AM, Bill Sherman wrote:
"We" would never contribute to a gaining reputation for allowing spam delivery that we had deliberately?risked allowing...
You really wouldn't have control of this.? All it would take would be a few members receiving one of the posts, then marking it as spam.? FYI, way back when this was possible, but the requirement for at least one anti-spam choice was needed to protect the site.
Duane
--
Help: /static/help
GMF's Wiki: /g/GroupManagersForum/wiki
Search button at the top of Messages list
A few site FAQs: /static/pricing#frequently-asked-questions
|
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 11:00 AM, Bill Sherman wrote:
"We" would never contribute to a gaining reputation for allowing spam delivery that we had deliberately?risked allowing...
You really wouldn't have control of this.? All it would take would be a few members receiving one of the posts, then marking it as spam.? FYI, way back when this was possible, but the requirement for at least one anti-spam choice was needed to protect the site. Duane -- Help: /static/helpGMF's Wiki: /g/GroupManagersForum/wikiSearch button at the top of Messages list A few site FAQs: /static/pricing#frequently-asked-questions
|
Shal,
Thank you for taking the time to lay it out for us, though I am not really sure how "if the service?gains a reputation for delivering spam messages" could happen -- WE would be the ones allowing unmoderated emails to this list, and WE would be the ones to take action (such as adding in moderation or changing the address or whatever we needed to do) if we were ever to be hit with spam.? And, as I indicated, we haven't been spammed more than a couple of times in our 12 years of operation on prior systems.
"We" would never contribute to a gaining reputation for allowing spam delivery that we had deliberately?risked allowing...? I understand caution, but it seems like it is caution for fear of something that could not happen.? I sure wish we had discovered way, way in advance of moving all of our hundreds of families over to that there was no way to support this "experts list" kind of address.? It is an absolute showstopper for us, and one which will now cause us to uproot the organization (a Boy Scout unit with hundreds of addresses) and move off of to a different system.? Sigh.
If I could put in my $0.02 as a suggestion that might save other organizations this hassle in the future -- please consider allowing this option.? There really is no downside risk, if it is appropriately caveated. You could shroud it in all kinds of warnings about ill-advised configurations and such -- but a hard and fast rule that protects my expert list from what they need is enough to drive them away.? And it is too bad because in every, and I mean every other way this system was perfect for us.
Thanks, Bill; ?
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 11:31 AM Shal Farley < shals2nd@...> wrote: Bill,
?> One, /just one/, of our lists has always been a "reach out for
?> help" list.? It needs to be unmoderated /and/ open to the public.
By "open to the public" I assume you mean unrestricted membership.
?> Is there a way to configure this that we are missing in the interface?
No.
The closest you can get is New Member Moderation, which will require
that at least one post from the new member be approved before the member
is automatically unmoderated.
Alternatively, you can set the group to allow posts by non-members, but
such messages are always moderated.
?> If not, why is this prohibited?? I understand that it opens that list
?> up to spam ...
That's the reason.
It would be an unusual setup, but you could promote an arbitrary number
of the more active group members to be moderators with minimal
privileges, and they can receive immediate notification of the
new-member posts requiring approval. The "message approval needed"
notices include a full copy of the pending message.
?> Why can't we choose to take that risk for one of our lists?
Because it potentially affects other Groups.io groups if the service
gains a reputation for delivering spam messages.
Shal
--
Help: /static/help
More Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wiki
Even More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list
|
Bill, One, /just one/, of our lists has always been a "reach out for
help" list. It needs to be unmoderated /and/ open to the public. By "open to the public" I assume you mean unrestricted membership. Is there a way to configure this that we are missing in the interface? No. The closest you can get is New Member Moderation, which will require that at least one post from the new member be approved before the member is automatically unmoderated. Alternatively, you can set the group to allow posts by non-members, but such messages are always moderated. If not, why is this prohibited? I understand that it opens that list
up to spam ... That's the reason. It would be an unusual setup, but you could promote an arbitrary number of the more active group members to be moderators with minimal privileges, and they can receive immediate notification of the new-member posts requiring approval. The "message approval needed" notices include a full copy of the pending message. Why can't we choose to take that risk for one of our lists? Because it potentially affects other Groups.io groups if the service gains a reputation for delivering spam messages. Shal -- Help: /static/helpMore Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wikiEven More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list
|
Here's my understanding of your question:
- You have a group or subgroup, let's call it "expertlist", of which the members are your helpful experts - You want members of the public to be able to send a message to "expertlist" without having to join it - You want the experts to receive that message, and be able to reply directly to the person in need
I believe you can do that like this: 2. Make all your helpful experts OWNERS of that subgroup. Making your experts owners of the "expertlist" subgroup will not make them owners of the main group or grant them any additional rights over the main group. However, it will allow them to do absolutely anything with the expertlist subgroup. Presumably, though, these are trusted experts. 3. Have each expert log in to their account and? a. select "expertlist" from the "Your Groups" dropdown b. select the "Subscription" option in the left navbar.? c. set the very last setting in the list, "Owner Email" to "All Emails" (Receive every message that is sent to expertlist+owner@...) if it isn't already 4. Publish the address "expertlist+owner@..." (or whatever is the appropriate address for the group you create...) and have members of the public write to it with their questions.?
The experts can than use expertlist to discuss amongst themselves who will reply to the petitioner, and then respond to the petitioner from their personal email address. (My understanding from recent correspondence on this list is that it's not possible to send outgoing mail from the expertlist+owner address.)
That's how our main group and subgroups are set up -- and so far, we have received zero spams in a little over a year of using Groups.io. However, we have never published the?+owner address beyond its default appearance on the page for our group.?
Hope that helps.?
Regards, -- Peter
On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 15:47, Bill Sherman < bgsherman@...> wrote: We migrated our non-profit organization?from another group mail management system to and have been very happy with the reliability and feature set.
There does seem to be one thing that we have not been able to set up, though.? One, just one, of our lists has always been a "reach out for help" list.? It needs to be unmoderated and open to the public.? I know, I've read that this is not the "sweet spot" for , but this is a real need for this one list (out of the many lists our org uses).? We do not want to have a different email paradigm/address for just this one list.
Is there a way to configure this that we are missing in the interface?? If not, why is this prohibited?? I understand that it opens that list up to spam but a) the people on the list are savvy enough to handle spam if it happens -- they are problem solvers by definition, and b) in the 12 years we ran our nonprofit on a prior system we averaged less than 2 spam messages per year.? Why can't we choose to take that risk for one of our lists?? I'd hate to move our whole organization off to another system just because we can't figure out hot to set up our help line.
Am I the only one with such a need?
Thanks for reading.
Bill
|
B, It appears the yahoo groups transfer page has been update dand
transfers are now possible? I haven't tried it, but yes transfers are back on as of yesterday evening: Shal -- Help: /static/helpMore Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wikiEven More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list
|
One moderator creates a poll, another tries to close it
#poll
I often have the case of one moderator creating a poll, and then another moderator needs to close it (and get the results).? At the moment only the moderator who created the poll can close it. I have checked the settings in the subgroup, and all it has specified is that "only moderators can create".? Is this a limitation of GIO or am I missing something?
Thanks
Beth
|
Re: Move a message into a different topic
I recall that it was w/in 1 day.?
Our msgs come thru as
Re: [groupname] Topic
1st, I retained all cept Topic, pasted New Topic?
2nd, I replaced all with New Topic
did not retain only Re;
|
We migrated our non-profit organization?from another group mail management system to groups.io and have been very happy with the reliability and feature set.
There does seem to be one thing that we have not been able to set up, though.? One, just one, of our lists has always been a "reach out for help" list.? It needs to be unmoderated and open to the public.? I know, I've read that this is not the "sweet spot" for groups.io, but this is a real need for this one list (out of the many lists our org uses).? We do not want to have a different email paradigm/address for just this one list.
Is there a way to configure this that we are missing in the interface?? If not, why is this prohibited?? I understand that it opens that list up to spam but a) the people on the list are savvy enough to handle spam if it happens -- they are problem solvers by definition, and b) in the 12 years we ran our nonprofit on a prior system we averaged less than 2 spam messages per year.? Why can't we choose to take that risk for one of our lists?? I'd hate to move our whole organization off to another system just because we can't figure out hot to set up our help line.
Am I the only one with such a need?
Thanks for reading.
Bill
|
Am I reading this correctly? It appears the yahoo groups transfer page (/yahootransfer) has been update dand transfers are now possible?
Anyone tried this ?
Thanks,
-B
|
Re: Group email messages blocked by BT
Hello
I had been evaluating Groups.io, and finding it streets ahead of anything else I started tweaking the settings to improve it before paying the money.
The next two messages, send from BT Yahoo emails, just disappeared. I wondered if the site went down frequently, or if it did not accept messages with the wrong headers? Then I sent a message from a non-BT email, and immediately got back an autoresponder message saying I had set it to an Announcement group only, and that no-one could post.
BT Yahoo simply deletes all autoresponders, you never know about them. Administrators might like to be aware of that. They are not in the spam box - I have just checked that and found subscription notifications for that account in there. BT Yahoo clearly does not learn, even slowly.
Thank you all for your help
John Clube
[excessive quote trimmed by Moderator]
|
Re: Deleting old attachments query
Andy, How are ¡®old attachments¡¯ determined? Is this purely on date so that
the oldest get deleted first ... I believe so. ... or is there some other logic applied so that, for example,
attachments on messages in a sticky or locked topic are prevented from
being deleted? Hmm... There was some discussion in beta about putting some kind of "keep" marker on attachments to exempt them from auto-delete, or being able to put a link to them in the Files section as a way to mark them. But I don't think anything came of that. Still a good idea, and exempting the attachments of a pinned topic makes perfect sense to me. I'm not so sure about locked topics. Shal -- Help: /static/helpMore Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wikiEven More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list
|
Re: Negative search criteria
|
Has there been any discussion around using a negative operator (usually a dash, like in google) in searches? I just now wanted to do a search of "all messages in this time frame without the word "upload" in the subject and when I tried "-upload" got the same results as "upload". Best, Glenn
--
[redacted]
[ad and political sig trimmed by moderator]
|
Re: Adding Via Groups IO to my sender name
Loopy, So it appears this is going to happen with any email I use? Yes and no. It depends not only on the service you use, but on the email interface of the person looking at your message. ... I changed to Gmail and now it's there also. When you look at your own, yes, but not as others see it. For example, when I look at your message in my Gmail Inbox I see a.loopy.letter and nothing else. But in the previow of the message, or the message when I open it, I see your email address in bold, with "via groups.io" in small print. However, when I look at my own message (also sent from Gmail) or a message from someone with one of the DMARC-affected services, in the Inbox I see the person's name followed by "via Gro." (apparently the column width is too narrow to spell it out). But in the preview (and opened message) I see "Shal Farley via Groups.io" all in the same bold face. Using my email application, Thunderbird, I do not see any "via Groups.io" at all for your address (but do for mine and for the DMARC-affected ones). I have an outlook account I can use but no point changing it if that
is going to be added to it. There's basically no point in trying to deal with this issue, it is largely out of users' hands. More and more I suspect users will need to get used to seeing markings like that on messages that went through email lists of any sort. They're trying to stomp out the kind of confusion that some users have about whether a given message came directly or via a list. Shal -- Help: /static/helpMore Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wikiEven More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list
|
Re: Yahoo Transfers are On Again!
Richard, Please CANCEL my prior request. Nobody at GMF can do that for you - this is a user-to-user forum. If your transfer request still appears in the Existing Transfers list you can probably cancel it yourself. If you had already given the final "go ahead" then Groups.io support would be your better bet: [email protected]I had requested a transfer of my yahoo group just prior to time they
were suspended. During the suspension I transferred my yahoo group ... You might go ahead with it anyway, to fill in whatever gaps may have been left in your manual process. For members in particular, the transfer agent will skip any addresses that already appear in your Groups.io group. For other content the copy would likely create duplicates, unless there are whole sections that you left out and would like to now pick up. Shal -- Help: /static/helpMore Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wikiEven More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list
|
Re: Yahoo Transfers are On Again!
I had requested a transfer of my yahoo group just prior to time they were suspended.? During the suspension I transferred my yahoo group (GPDAks) manually.? Please CANCEL my prior request. Yahoo Group - GPDAks Groups.io - GPDA thanks Richard GPDA Owner
|
Annick Phillips
Duane
Shal Farley
Peter Sayer
KWKloeber