Re: Member list vs. member directory
Richard, ... one of my groups had 33,000 members when it was at Yahoo, but only
7,000 were transferred to groups.io, and I could only assume that the
others were all anonymous members with no declared email address. Or members on bouncing status. Those too do not transfer over. Shal
|
Re: Member list vs. member directory
Richard, ... on the other hand, this is completely blown out of the water by
the fact that everyone who receives posts by email can see every
poster's email address ... That's basically in the nature of email lists (as opposed to online fora). There are ways around it, but most email lists operate with the sender's From: address forwarded in the clear. The theory behind the truncation on the web site is that a spammer can't just join a group and scrape everyone's email addresses out of the archive. They would have to lurk and receive messages for some time - and historically spammers haven't shown that kind of patience. Having members' email addresses in each other's mail folders, and possibly address books, does represent some vulnerability to compromised email accounts, but generally this has been seen as a much lower probability of exposure than just scraping them out of the group's site. But the thing is, there is really no reason for your email address to
have been included in the message headers in the first place, since
it's not required for the message to be delivered to me. That's true. And as I mentioned in my prior reply a variety of proposals for how Groups.io might handle this have been discussed in beta@ in the past. But for now Groups.io operates within the tradition of email lists, which makes sense given Groups.io's origins. Of course there may be other considerations that would make such a
proposal unfeasible (for example the SMTP RFCs may specify that the
original headers must be preserved exactly when a message is
distributed to a mailing list, ... I don't think there's anything to prohibit a service like Groups.io generating the outbound messages with completely replaced headers, as if the message originated at Groups.io - basically making messages posted by email equivalent to those posted on site. Yahoo Groups' feature to allow members to hide their email address does this in a rather direct (and unnecessarily draconian) way: members who choose to hide cannot post by email, they must post on site. That's one of the reasons I don't use that feature myself. I think I might put an explicit statement in my groups' descriptions
and welcome messages that brings attention to this situation. That's probably a good idea, especially if your group members largely haven't participated in conventional email lists, or Yahoo Groups which do not allow members the ability to hide (my impression is that the overwhelming majority do not allow it - it isn't the default). Shal
|
Re: Member list vs. member directory
I don't think what you say is entirely true.
Before I moved my groups from Yahoo, there were many instances of members who had no declared email address at all, but were perfectly able to post.
This was occasionally a problem, especially in the case of a couple of rather abusive members whom I wanted to send private warnings to (I don't like publicly shaming people), but there was no way to contact them. In fact one of my groups had 33,000 members when it was at Yahoo, but only 7,000 were transferred to groups.io, and I could only assume that the others were all anonymous members with no declared email address.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto: [email protected]] On Behalf Of Cecil Bayona Sent: 20 November 2017 17:59 To: [email protected]Subject: Re: [GMF] Member list vs. member directory This has been an issue on Yahoo groups, with some individuals getting all upset when someone ask them for their email address, they were not aware that if one used an email client everyone's email address was totally exposed. Privacy is only there in the mind of some on the Internet, the reality is if you use the Internet someone knows who you are and where you have been unless you take actions to maintain privacy beyond the average users knowledge.
|
Re: Member list vs. member directory
Shal (and others who responded, for which thanks) I think what concerns me here is that on the one hand, there is this distinction between the member directory and member list (which of course was the starting point for this thread), and you made the point, Shal, that 'I suspect most groups would restrict this list to moderators for privacy reasons'; on the other hand, this is completely blown out of the water by the fact that everyone who receives posts by email can see every poster's email address (admittedly they can't browse through the list but that's rather beside the point). Now personally I have no problem with people knowing my email address (and indeed I use the same email address for all my online memberships, and I always use my real name everywhere - except Github which was a historical accident). And I think a group should be able to allow its members to see email address information if that's what the group wants, as in Sarah's case. But where members want their email address privacy respected, it seems disingenuous to merely make the member list inaccessible when anyone who is an email-based user can see the originator's address in every post received. What's more, non-email based users probably assume that their address is indeed properly private because they never see full email addresses as a result of the fig-leafing. I realise that when an email-based user replies, it's their email client that generates the preface to a quoted message, but what it generates is based entirely on what's in the headers of the message being replied to. Thus for this reply, Outlook generated ' From: [email protected] [mailto: [email protected]] On Behalf Of Shal Farley', but had you not had a display name it would have inserted your email address. But the thing is, there is really no reason for your email address to have been included in the message headers in the first place, since it's not required for the message to be delivered to me. For example, the 'From:' header could say From: "Shal Farley" < [email protected] > rather than including your email address; and for john.doe@... who doesn't have a display name it could say From: "john.doe@" < [email protected] > This wouldn't affect delivery of the message but would obviate the need for the sender's email address to ever be visible to recipients. It could then be a group policy decision or perhaps individual option whether to use this scheme or stick with the current approach. Of course there may be other considerations that would make such a proposal unfeasible (for example the SMTP RFCs may specify that the original headers must be preserved exactly when a message is distributed to a mailing list, which is why I mentioned standards in my earlier post), and if that's the way it is then there's really nothing further that can be done. But I'm hoping that something along these lines might be possible. By the way, I only dragged this whole issue up again because a member of one of my groups was complaining when another member who responded to one of his posts addressed him using the 'fig leaf' rather than his display name, after which he cottoned on to the fact that his email address was visible to all email-based members - he had thought no-one could see it at all. I think I might put an explicit statement in my groups' descriptions and welcome messages that brings attention to this situation. Richard
|
Re: Member list vs. member directory
This has been an issue on Yahoo groups, with some individuals getting all upset when someone ask them for their email address, they were not aware that if one used an email client everyone's email address was totally exposed.
Privacy is only there in the mind of some on the Internet, the reality is if you use the Internet someone knows who you are and where you have been unless you take actions to maintain privacy beyond the average users knowledge.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 11/20/2017 11:37 AM, Shal Farley wrote: Richard,
> It seems to me that groups.io has a rather inconsistent story
> regarding privacy of email addresses.
That's true, the inconsistencies and the feature itself are largely borrowed from Yahoo Groups tradition.
> It appears to be the case that if you receive posts via email, you can
> often?/always? see the poster's email address, regardless of whether
> you have access to the member list.
Always.
A fundamental decision in the design of the email support is how much modification to do inside message bodies. For email message delivery the answer has always been "as little as possible". I think at present it is limited to appending the group footer and (at the receiving member's option) replacing attachments with links to stored copies of the attachments.
I think this is a good answer, on both efficiency and integrity grounds.
Display of messages on site, and the inclusion of messages in Digests, have further processing. Material quoted from prior messages, if detected, is hidden on site under an ellipsis button and is not included in Digests. Email addresses in the message body, excluding those in the groups.io domain (and maybe some few others) are truncated ("fig-leafed") when shown to members, but not when shown to moderators/owners.
> If you then reply to a post and quote the original message, that
> quotation will contain whatever your email client put in the 'on such
> and such a date so and so wrote' bit,
As it turns out, email services vary considerably in how they preface such quotes in replies. Recognizing them is an on-going update item for Groups.io.
> and this seems to depend on whether the sender has defined a display
> name in their profile.
Email services are idiosyncratic about this. But generally yes, many will include only the "Display Name" portion of the From address, if there is one; some will include both Display Name and email address, a few will include only the email address.
> If there is no display name, groups.io shows the whole email address,
> not truncated in the same way as it does for replies via the website.
In email, and when viewed by moderators/owners on site, whatever the sender's service put into the message is shown. For members viewing on site Groups.io truncates the address (again with the exception of groups.io addresses).
> It seems to me that a possible improvement would be for groups.io to
> assume a display name of the first part of the email address for
> posters who haven't explicitly defined a display name.
Again, if you're talking about the preface to a quote, that comes from the sending member's email service.
Otherwise that's pretty much what Groups.io already does: the truncated address ("user@...") is shown in place of the Display Name.
> Not sure what can be done about the full email address not being
> visible in the email client, whilst staying compliant with the
> standards.
Yes, it would be possible. As you noted, Yahoo Groups' "hide" feature is one example implementation; a feature which is available to members of GMF's sister Yahoo! group.
Several approaches to this have been discussed in beta@, but nothing has come of it so far. If you're curious, I think "anonymous" would be a good search word, as in groups with anonymous members.
Shal
--
Cecil - k5nwa
|
Re: Member list vs. member directory
Richard, It seems to me that groups.io has a rather inconsistent story
regarding privacy of email addresses. That's true, the inconsistencies and the feature itself are largely borrowed from Yahoo Groups tradition. It appears to be the case that if you receive posts via email, you can
often?/always? see the poster's email address, regardless of whether
you have access to the member list. Always. A fundamental decision in the design of the email support is how much modification to do inside message bodies. For email message delivery the answer has always been "as little as possible". I think at present it is limited to appending the group footer and (at the receiving member's option) replacing attachments with links to stored copies of the attachments. I think this is a good answer, on both efficiency and integrity grounds. Display of messages on site, and the inclusion of messages in Digests, have further processing. Material quoted from prior messages, if detected, is hidden on site under an ellipsis button and is not included in Digests. Email addresses in the message body, excluding those in the groups.io domain (and maybe some few others) are truncated ("fig-leafed") when shown to members, but not when shown to moderators/owners. If you then reply to a post and quote the original message, that
quotation will contain whatever your email client put in the 'on such
and such a date so and so wrote' bit, As it turns out, email services vary considerably in how they preface such quotes in replies. Recognizing them is an on-going update item for Groups.io. and this seems to depend on whether the sender has defined a display
name in their profile. Email services are idiosyncratic about this. But generally yes, many will include only the "Display Name" portion of the From address, if there is one; some will include both Display Name and email address, a few will include only the email address. If there is no display name, groups.io shows the whole email address,
not truncated in the same way as it does for replies via the website. In email, and when viewed by moderators/owners on site, whatever the sender's service put into the message is shown. For members viewing on site Groups.io truncates the address (again with the exception of groups.io addresses). It seems to me that a possible improvement would be for groups.io to
assume a display name of the first part of the email address for
posters who haven't explicitly defined a display name. Again, if you're talking about the preface to a quote, that comes from the sending member's email service. Otherwise that's pretty much what Groups.io already does: the truncated address ("user@...") is shown in place of the Display Name. Not sure what can be done about the full email address not being
visible in the email client, whilst staying compliant with the
standards. Yes, it would be possible. As you noted, Yahoo Groups' "hide" feature is one example implementation; a feature which is available to members of GMF's sister Yahoo! group. Several approaches to this have been discussed in beta@, but nothing has come of it so far. If you're curious, I think "anonymous" would be a good search word, as in groups with anonymous members. Shal
|
Re: Member list vs. member directory
I don't mind the email address b eing in the client. This is why I moved my list to groups.io. Many of us reply off list, or need to so we need to see the whole email address. All 300 of us have ben on all 4 iterations of this list I took over in 2005.
Take care
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Nov 20, 2017, at 4:37 AM, Richard L King <rlking@...> wrote:
Shal
If the Members list is not shown to Members then email
addresses in the body of messages show just the user name (left of the "@"
sign) when viewed on the group's Messages pages. It seems to me that groups.io has a rather inconsistent story regarding
privacy of email addresses.
It appears to be the case that if you receive posts via email, you can
often?/always? see the poster's email address, regardless of whether you
have access to the member list.
If you then reply to a post and quote the original message, that quotation
will contain whatever your email client put in the 'on such and such a date
so and so wrote' bit, and this seems to depend on whether the sender has
defined a display name in their profile. If there is no display name,
groups.io shows the whole email address, not truncated in the same way as
it does for replies via the website.
It seems to me that a possible improvement would be for groups.io to
assume a display name of the first part of the email address for posters
who haven't explicitly defined a display name.
Not sure what can be done about the full email address not being visible in
the email client, whilst staying compliant with the standards. But it must
be possible to only show the defined or inferred display name: after all
Yahoo Groups (whose name I hoped I would never have to utter again!...)
managed to send out emails for members who had no email address defined
within the group.
Richard
|
Re: Member list vs. member directory
Speaking of the truncation (aka fig-leafing), Mark has promised repeatedly that this will be made optional per group (I don't want it in my group). We still don't know when this is going to happen, but every time I've asked, Mark has said he just hasn't gotten around to it yet. It's on the Todo list.
--
J
|
Re: Member list vs. member directory
Shal If the Members list is not shown to Members then email
addresses in the body of messages show just the user name (left of the "@"
sign) when viewed on the group's Messages pages. It seems to me that groups.io has a rather inconsistent story regarding privacy of email addresses. It appears to be the case that if you receive posts via email, you can often?/always? see the poster's email address, regardless of whether you have access to the member list. If you then reply to a post and quote the original message, that quotation will contain whatever your email client put in the 'on such and such a date so and so wrote' bit, and this seems to depend on whether the sender has defined a display name in their profile. If there is no display name, groups.io shows the whole email address, not truncated in the same way as it does for replies via the website. It seems to me that a possible improvement would be for groups.io to assume a display name of the first part of the email address for posters who haven't explicitly defined a display name. Not sure what can be done about the full email address not being visible in the email client, whilst staying compliant with the standards. But it must be possible to only show the defined or inferred display name: after all Yahoo Groups (whose name I hoped I would never have to utter again!...) managed to send out emails for members who had no email address defined within the group. Richard
|
Re: Transferring Links from Yahoo Group
Dotty, When a Yahoo Groups is transferred to Groups.io, where will the Links
be placed on the .io group? They go into a table in the Database section. Shal
|
Re: Member list vs. member directory
Andre, What is the difference, As Duane mentioned, the Member list includes member's subscription information, and in particular shows their email addresses. I suspect most groups would restrict this list to moderators for privacy reasons. But some groups with restricted membership might allow members to know each other's email addresses. My classmate groups operate this way: we grew up together and in many cases know each other's physical addresses and phone numbers - so showing each other's email addresses is no big deal. Note that as a side-effect, if the Members List is shown to members, then email addresses in the group's Messages archive are not truncated ("fig-leafed"). If the Members list is not shown to Members then email addresses in the body of messages show just the user name (left of the "@" sign) when viewed on the group's Messages pages. what is the directory for? The directory contains links to member's group profile. For a member to appear in the directory that member must choose to reveal some profile information. Again, the group admins must decide as a policy for the group whether to allow members to access this directory. In this case, even if the Directory is hidden, a link to a member's group profile may be present anywhere the member has posted to the group - if the member has made profile information available. Each member's Subscription page has a "Group Profile" tab where the member can edit what information is shown to other members. By default each member's profile starts as a copy of their Account profile, but the member can customize the information shown in each group of which they are a member. Shal On 11/19/2017 9:53 AM, Andre Polykanine wrote: Hi everyone,
When setting up group permissions, there are two items: member list
and member directory.
What is the difference, what is the directory for?
Thanks!
|
Re: Member list vs. member directory
The Member List has email addresses and some other info. I reserve that one for moderators. The Directory only has their user name and their avatar.
Duane
|
The clarification was about the fact that there needs to be a space before a hashtag if it is not at the beginning of the subject line (there were some people in another group who didn't realize that and were having trouble with using hashtags in general). What you're reporting seems to be a separate bug or change.?
--
J
|
Transferring Links from Yahoo Group
When a Yahoo Groups is transferred to Groups.io, where will the Links be placed on the .io group?? I see that Links are mentioned in the list of data that will be copied, but no Links page option in .io.? I found this question has been asked before, but not a conclusive answer.
Thanks,
Dotty
|
Member list vs. member directory
Hi everyone,
When setting up group permissions, there are two items: member list
and member directory.
What is the difference, what is the directory for?
Thanks!
--
With best regards from Ukraine,
Andre
Skype: menelion_elensule
Twitter: @m_elensule; Facebook: menelion
|
On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:40 pm, Shal Farley wrote:
CHANGE: Clarification in the help on hashtag behavior.
This still doesn't work quite right. According to the help page, any hashtags in the middle should be duplicated at the end of the subject line. Instead they are moved to the end. In the example shown, "Seeking #advice for a #rosebush with blackened leaves", it becomes "Seeking for a with blackened leaves #advice #rosebush", instead of "Seeking #advice for a #rosebush with blackened leaves #advice #rosebush" as shown. I've notified Support and Mark said the moving action is what is intended. Unless the behavior is changed, you'll need to be careful of hashtag placement. Duane
|
Hi all, The last two week's change logs: Feel free to reply to this topic if you'd like to comment on the changes. Or better yet, if you expect a lot of discussion start a new topic (or rejoin an existing one) about a specific change. * Changes to /leave link behavior:
If you click on a leave link and are logged in as someone else,
you are logged out. This behavior was subsequently changed: * When visiting a /leave link for someone else, display an error
message and an option to log out. I believe the latter behavior is superior, as most people in this circumstance will be logged in to their own (and only) account - logging them out unexpectedly would be a rude surprise. If you are logged out, you are not then logged in as the person
the /leave link belongs to. One thing I haven't tested yet is what you can do at this point. I'm presuming (hoping) that you can unsubscribe even though not logged in. The details on this one are important for email-only subscribers. There's a rather long thread on this in beta@, if you want the details. * Gathering SPF responses on inbound messages for testing/possible
future use. Yay! Hopefully this is a prelude to eliminating the need to confirm email commands, in many (most) cases. * Search results have the topics actions dropdown when viewing
collapsed topics. Yay! Another step toward consistency in messages list presentation & controls. Comments about these others are also welcome: CHANGE: Clarification in the help on hashtag behavior. CHANGE: Changes to /leave link behavior: If you are logged in as the person the /leave link belongs to, you are still logged in. I re-ordered the buttons for leaving, putting the 'Leave Group' button last. The email address of the account is now displayed on the page. BUGFIX: The Vote link in poll messages didn't work for some people without permission to add a new poll. CHANGE: Much more accurate count of total search results when using the 'collapse topics' option. BUGFIX: When trying to view a deleted event, now show a banner explaining it's been deleted. BUGFIX: Couldn't approve a pending message from someone who has already unsubscribed and when the group is set to moderate new users. CHANGE: Column hiding when viewing a table is remembered as you page through the table. Also the buttons look nicer. BUGFIX: The /updategroup and /deletegroup API end points returned invalid_permissions when they should not. BUGFIX: We were not processing some bounce emails that were marked as being autoresponder messages. CHANGE: Changed format of ICS files to try to fix erroneous timezone problem with a couple of calendar programs. CHANGE: When creating the #guidelines hashtag when sending the group guidelines, set Mods Only Post and Mods Only Reply to true, and if the guidelines should be sent special, set the tag to Special as well. CHANGE: Wording changes to help and group notices. INTERNAL: Using the search cluster for viewing messages by month/year to take load off main db. BUGFIX: Search results were displayed incorrectly when summaries had HTML unsafe characters. BUGFIX: Fixed email subscription process for some Enterprise sub groups. SYSADMIN: Changed the messages and activities tables autovaccuum scale factor to 0.00. NEW: Added 'Member Page' option to 'More' menu and dropdown when viewing messages. BUGFIX: Fixed subjects for new member notices to match new terminology. BUGFIX: For member notices with HTML links that have text that is the same as the link itself, don't display it double when converting it to plain text. NEW: Generate name tags for people who have RSVPed Yes to an event. Please call out any you find significant. Shal
|
Re: Special hashtag useage
Thanks, I didn't get around to removing the message or nullifying it after finding the answer. The answer was on Beta buried in a 38 message topic. -- Bob Bellizzi
The Corneal Dystrophy Foundation
|
Re: Special hashtag useage
Yes, that¡¯s what the ¡®special¡¯ feature does on a hashtag. All replies go out as special notices. Sent from my iPhone
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Nov 18, 2017, at 2:18 PM, Bob Bellizzi < cdfexec@...> wrote: Can a moderator/owner, reply to one of their own Special Notices and utilize the "special" hashtag so that this particular reply goes out as a special notice? We're running a Giving Tuesday fundraiser and I would like to be able to initially send a special notice about a challenge grant and then periodically update the results with a reply that also gets Special Notice action -- Bob Bellizzi
The Corneal Dystrophy Foundation
|
Can a moderator/owner, reply to one of their own Special Notices and utilize the "special" hashtag so that this particular reply goes out as a special notice? We're running a Giving Tuesday fundraiser and I would like to be able to initially send a special notice about a challenge grant and then periodically update the results with a reply that also gets Special Notice action -- Bob Bellizzi
The Corneal Dystrophy Foundation
|
Shal Farley
Sarah k Alawami
Duane