开云体育

We had a situation occur like this, a few years ago, where an owner had passed away. And the moderator of the group got promoted to owner. I believe, that you can request this to be done via groups. iOS support email address.

On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 09:34 AM, outlawmws wrote:

The current "Solutions" are inadequate and extremely limiting.

My questions are:
What is the problem of adding a co-owner?
If you don't want a co-owner, what's wrong with having a moderator with all permissions?? Or less than all, but enough to run the group?
What are you trying to do that can't be done with the current features?? This needs to be stated clearly or there will never be an option available.

I consider myself the current caretaker of the information in any groups that I "own", as well as on my web site.? Many people have contributed to the data, not just me.? I've given co-ownership on all my groups, just in case, but have discussed the situation with those people that they don't have to do anything as long as I'm around.? If they completely change the group, or even delete it, after I'm gone, I won't care!

Duane
--

However it depends on the nature of the group. If it is simply a personal project, it may not matter. Each owner is the best judge of that.

I have read some interesting points and suggestions. Please post something on Beta where the owner Mark Fletcher can read it, and perhaps put it on his to-do list.


Having a second owner is not a rule. I personally think it is best practice for many groups, at least for now.

Frances


--
Help available from Groups.io help and GMF wiki.

?

On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 08:33 AM, Mike Hanauer wrote:

But, perhaps the bottom line for me is that I like being able to see past members, which would include RI and Bounced, although perhaps the ability to see them explicitly as past members would be helpful to understanding.

On paid groups, you can see a list of Past Members.? I don't think Bounced and RI are considered past members unless/until they're removed from the group.

Duane
--

Happy Sunday everyone
In my groups I have 2 moderators if needed but one moderator has total access as I do as owner, in case today is my last day.
I trust the folks I place as members, isn't that what it should be about though?
Anyways, just my two cents and of course taking care of our groups to help them continue to move forward is helpful to all members.
Have a beautiful day
Sugar


“How lucky I am to have something that makes saying goodb

We might be crossing paths messaging some of our subscribers, but that hopefully will mean the message will get through, if not from one owner then from another owner (although I suspect the target will neither get, read or react to them)

I do not see it in any way as fighting each other, just the opposite

If you have a second email address set up as owner (or moderator?) to receive owner messages, you will have a record by email of any changes to your subscriber lists without cluttering up your member list with people who have never confirmed or reverified
(I say a second email address as my owner address stopped getting all subscribe/unsubscribe messages a while back but the second one does)

Any NC have not confirmed their email address so won't get any group messages anyway, so if more than a few weeks since their application why keep them?

Those who have not reverified will be removed in due course anyway so will not appear in your member list soon

Blue B for bouncing can be sent a bounce probe

Red B are bounced and not receiving, again depending on how long it is or the reason for the bouncing is it worth keeping them

Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK)

Duane I respectfully disagree.?

The current "Solutions" are inadequate and extremely limiting.? Separation of powers and segregation of duties are established practices, and for entities like public companies, required business practices.? This current so called solution of multiple owners defeats those practices and regulations/? ?

Grouys.io needs to stop treating this problem from a "hobby" standpoint and enplace policies and procedures and supporting technical solutions to accommodate the reality that not everyone wants to treat the organization of their groups as the current "existing solutions" support.

I have seen other forums have internal political battles and takeovers, some justified, some not..? The decider of whether to assign co-ownership of a group is entirely the group owners, and no one else.??

I personally am owner of at least a half dozen groups.? In only one? case have I set a co-owner.? The rest are at risk if something happens to me.? Heck, currently some don't even have a second moderator..? I set them up to try to save them during? the Yahell debacle, and while they are a shadow of what they used to be,? they live on for now.??

I face this ownership at my workplace as well,? as we manage SaaS services and even though our customers are businesses,? we get cases where they "lose" the sole owner of the account.? These are paying customers and the businesses, despite their poor practices of managing those accounts, and despite use giving them "best practices" still come back needing help to fix the self inflicted problem.

Example causes:

• Company hired a contractor and the contractor leaves (sometimes not amicably)? and owns the account with a personal Email - no self recovery possible.
• Business is sold and the new owners want control? - we must verify the sale was legit.
• business changes email server (URL change related to company name change)? and cannot recover the email of the owner

While some of these may not apply to Group.io owners, parallel? causes (like the demise of an Email service) can.

This is a real problem and Groups.io does a disservice to every group it has attracted by not addressing it.

Some of the solutions we use to address different issues/causes :

• Encourage the company/customer to re-establish the email, give it to a trusted staff member; log in and say "I forgot my password" and then add a new Email/owner.? and? deal with it
  • Only works if you have access to the email
  • cannot be legally? used in the EU/UK/Switzerland (GDPR privacy rules.)
• Establish the true ownership of the account/Company and hack??the account in the back end Database
  • Costly in time and only one person in our company is allowed to do so. - Not desirable, but necessary at times

I think several solutions already suggested are not unreasonable for Groups.io::

• add a feature for an assigned "Inheritor"
• Add a Super admin/owner over current owner level
• have a function to reassign the group ownership on reasonable proof of the demise of the owner

Note that thee is no one "solution" ;? Groups.io needs options to deal with these things, as situations that drive the need change.

The bottom line is that the status quo is not a reasonable solution, as these threads and common occurrences clearly indicate.? Saying "just do the recommended second owner" is closing eyes and ears to a real problem.

开云体育

And what then when the "super owner" keels over and is no more?

You would then have a conventional "owner" or "owners" with the same resulting problem

Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK)

On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 01:51 PM, Steve Stallings wrote:

One partial step could be to create a new class of "super owner" who cannot be deleted by conventional owners. This could give original "super owners" the confidence to appoint more conventional owners.

This seems to be another suggestion to have a technical solution to a problem that is caused by group owners not following the guidance in the manual.? If a super owner role was created you'd still end up in the same position when owners didn't use it. As Chris pointed out, the guidance in the manual is clear.

Regards?
Andy

On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 04:55 AM, txercoupemuseum.org wrote:

The first step is to acknowledge that it IS a PROBLEM

As I see it, the PROBLEM is that owners won't use the existing solutions or aren't aware that they can privately pass on ownership when they die.? Of all people, I learned about digital estates from my non-techy ex-wife! ;>)

Duane
--

One partial step could be to create a new class of "super owner" who cannot be deleted by conventional owners. This could give original "super owners" the confidence to appoint more conventional owners.

Isn't the main problem here that the groups automatically are part of the owner's digital estates? It has been my understanding for many years that was the issue that Groups IO, or any other group venue, cannot work around. That's why we've set up second (and sometimes third) owners of groups I am part of.?
--
Pat P

On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 10:55 AM, txercoupemuseum.org wrote:

The current manner in which GMF “moderation” acts to stifle free and active discussion of such legitimate issues has the predictable result of perpetuating the indefinite continuation of practices clearly inadequate by any reasonable definition, unreasonable and presumptively oppressive to men and women presumably possessing all right(s) of free association in these United States. ?I, for one, would like to see this reality change.

I think I would argue that the existence of this topic (and those on the same subject that have arisen in the past), and the inclusion of the post from which I have quoted rather proves the opposite of what has been asserted.?

Perhaps it is necessary to restate that GMF has no formal standing and cannot implement any particular "policy" even if it wanted to. The GMF has no control over what individual group owners do, and the control that Groups.io has is only exercised in limited circumstances, and succession planning is not one of them.?

That said I think it is fair to say that the clear consensus on GMF is for a group to have more than one owner. It is very much worth noting the following from the Owners Manual (my bold...):

It can be found in this section of the manual.?

If any group owner fails to follow this advice then the GMF and its members can hardly be held responsible.

Chris

On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 08:52 AM, Michael Pavan wrote:

They insist that the workaround of having more than one Owner (who could delete your Group, or demote or depose you and take over your Group) is adequate and acceptable.

As a workaround, I granted my moderators all permissions, including that of appointing other moderators. So they will be able to run the group in any circumstance.
I'd rather keep the Owner status, and responsability, for myself.
I like the idea of a "will" feature, though.

Marina

On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 07:52 AM, Michael Pavan wrote:

the workaround of having more than one Owner (who could delete your Group, or demote or depose you and take over your Group) is adequate and acceptable

I suggest this "workaround" actually works well for most Groups. I can't imagine many instances of malicious intent within the "mutual interest" universe of Groups.IO; I wouldn't want to be a member of a Group that was toxic or autocratic!

However, for those who do fear a take over, the solution seems (to me) quite simple: the Owner documents (in hardcopy) the access details and places in a sealed envelope with a Trusted Person. This information is documented in the (Files section) of the Group so everyone knows who to approach in the event that the Owner is no longer active. IMHO the onus should be on the (sole) Owner - not Groups.IO - to make an appropriate provision.

(I look forward to reading the counter-arguments ...)

On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 09:15 PM, Frances wrote:

Yet again a group is threatened with dissolution because the sole group owner has died.

Time to do something about that now, while you can.

I've discovered recently that you can make your ownership of a group (or any other online account) part of your estate in your traditional will or as a separate digital will in some states.? That will allow you to do things as you see fit without naming another owner.? Anyone that feels they can't share ownership could use this without involving Groups.io at all.? It would be up to you to make sure the necessary information is available at the time it's needed.? You can research Digital Estate Planning for more information.

Duane
--

开云体育

Frances,