开云体育

Shut down the bubble machine or at least pause it, please.??
We have enough information to build a reasonable decision tree and even an unreasonable one.<g>

I'm grateful but it seems that the more than 10 responses require off line review to see the entire picture.

--
Bob Bellizzi

The Corneal Dystrophy Foundation

We don't moderate all messages, just the first four from a new member because all of our new members go through a comprehensive join request form that gives us several key tokens to check them out.
Over many years we've found that few nutters, berserkers or H&D ers wait much longer that 2 or 3 messages to drop their bombs.
The issue we try to control is a result of our members' inexperience in internet search validity results and the value of providing urls when they quote questionable information.
Specifically, in the current case, a very newbie mentioned that she found serious complaints about specific surgeons.? She didn't quote any information from the complaints which is also a typical result in cases like this.
But these surgeons are actually two of the three who, about 15 years ago, perfected a technique that became the standard of care for correcting our common genetic eye condition and continue to contribute with incremental improvements, research and change.
I know they are not perfect but unthinking and non supported complaints are not acceptable.? We take complaints seriously and remove surgeons from our Member Recommended Specialists' List when complaints are verified.
Verifiable complaints are acted upon, removing the doctor with no fanfare.? Unverified complaints must be verified by the complainer providing adequate information within a very short time frame.
After which we will pull the entire thread.

Hope this isn't TMI.
--
Bob Bellizzi

The Corneal Dystrophy Foundation

Thank you a bunch. Shal.
I can use each and every one of your responses for the several conditions we encounter.
I was surprised to see that there are 12 messages on this topic and have to review the others before any further comment.
--
Bob Bellizzi

The Corneal Dystrophy Foundation

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:42 am, Duane wrote:

In this part of the US, a reminder may be the first time someone has seen something, so region does play a part.

I'd never heard of that and am interested. What part of the U.S. is that?

J

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 09:20 am, J_Catlady wrote:

clearly refer to something the person has already been told

That's your interpretation, but not necessarily the only one, since there are multiple definitions. In this part of the US, a reminder may be the first time someone has seen something, so region does play a part. I can only imagine what the definitions or understandings might be in other parts of the world.

Since we seem to be developing a way to get around the actual Subject of the email, we're free to use the one that works for us. If we can each have one that we can use for all situations, there should be no reason for Mark to change what is now done.

BTW, I would never presume to call something 'silly' just because I've never heard of it, have a different interpretation, or prefer to use other terminology.

Duane

I think I have a solution.

"Group Guidelines (sent to all new members and monthly to the group)"

That's my working title.

J

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 01:09 am, Shal Farley wrote:

He didn't. That was an alternative in my response to his third bullet item.

Ok. But the suggestion to rename or split threads will not work in an unmoderated group when the member has *already* posted a message off-topic to the thread. The problem Bob brings up here is one that comes up frequently in my own group, which is unmoderated so that I don't catch them in pending and there's nothing to be done. I don't know whether Bob's group is moderated or unmoderated.

J

Well, this is becoming silly. "Recalling" the past or "reminding" something clearly refer to something the person has already been told. I'm not putting the word "reminder" in the initial set of guidelines sent to a new member. I also do professional writing and editing, if it matters. And if a client tried to do that I would wipe it out in their draft. The thesaurus ideas are not definitions. They are just words that are close or have something in common.?

J

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 01:15 pm, J_Catlady wrote:

I don't the word 'reminder' changes meaning much.

Then using it as I will is correct (#2):

1. something that recalls the past
2. a note to remind a person of something not done

Also:

admonition
hint
suggestion

Duane

J,

I don't see where Bob said his concern is only for pending messages
requiring approval.

He didn't. That was an alternative in my response to his third bullet item.

Shal

I believe i Have the subject of "monthly rules" i my guide lines that every member?receives.?And if they do not follow them 3 times they are out, for good. We have 400 members and I don't have ?time to baby everybody so I use the same guide lines I've used for 13 years of running this list.
[excess quote trimmed by moderator]

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 05:38 pm, Shal Farley wrote:

No one yet has received it or its subject (being edited in Pending) and there are no older messages that should go into its thread. So none of those concerns apply.

I don't see where Bob said his concern is only for pending messages requiring approval. If so, I agree with you. Not seeing that, though...

J

J,

If you either (a) split a thread into one with a new name, or even
(b) rename the entire thread, people responding via email still have
the old message title in their email ...

Again, in this case the intent was to start a new thread (topic) with the message in question. No one yet has received it or its subject (being edited in Pending) and there are no older messages that should go into its thread. So none of those concerns apply.

Shal

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:22 pm, Shal Farley wrote:

The intent in this case is to create a new topic with its own options for locking or moderation. I don't understand what you mean about subverting future use of those features.

First, changing a thread title or splitting a thread doesn't work. If you either (a) split a thread into one with a new name, or even (b) rename the entire thread, people responding via email still have the old message title in their email and their response will, in case (a), appear in the ORIGINAL thread both on the web archive and in emails, and in case (b) appear as a NEW thread with the old title. As this goes on, with more and more people responding via email, you are constantly having to merge threads.

Second, there is some anomaly that screws up the locking and moderation if and when you rename or split a thread. There are several cases and I don't have time to enumerate them now. So it's just a warning that on TOP of the fact that renaming and splitting is really ineffective, it screws up future possible locking or moderation because of the email loophole. I can try to find some examples later but I'm running out the door now. They're not hard to concoct. The only reason I know about them is that it used to happen to me, until I made it a policy not to rename threads.

J

I don't the word 'reminder' changes meaning much. And I personally would never use it in the first guidelines message a member receives.

Using 'scheduled' is a slight improvement.

J

Sent from my iPhone

Duane,

A reply online or with the proper reply-to headers in an email should
go to the old thread.

"Should" being the operative word here.

As J notes, if it is a reply to a message that has since been deleted then that original won't be found in any topic and this reply will be treated as a new topic. Unless Mark has fixed this behavior since it was last discussed on beta@.

The other case J notes is when the original message has been split onto a new topic. then this reply now cites a topic which has a different subject text - again causing it to be treated as a new topic.

"... some subtlety ..."

Shal

Yes, it's not a reminder of something previously seen or mentioned, but I'm thinking of it as a reminder to read and follow the guidelines. How you would interpret it may depend on which country or even which part of a country you're in.

BTW, I decided to go with adding 'Scheduled' to the subject so folks may be less likely to think it's addressed only to them.

Duane

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 11:36 am, Shal Farley wrote:

However the mechanism for detecting when a message is a new topic versus a
continuation of an existing topic has some subtlety,

A reply online or with the proper reply-to headers in an email should go to the old thread. If the header is missing via email, it may go to the old one, but not sure of the time variable. I've run into this a couple of times.

Duane

J,

That's true but this will then subvert any future locking or
moderation.

Huh?

The intent in this case is to create a new topic with its own options for locking or moderation. I don't understand what you mean about subverting future use of those features.

Shal