On 29 Aug 2016 at 7:29, J_catlady wrote: Doesn't work for me in either safari or Firefox. Could you try one of
those? Sorry, I don't have either one installed on my computer. I do have Safari on my iPad. I'll check tonight if it helps. -- Jim Poston@... << I do not fear computers, I fear the lack of them. -Asimov >>
|
Doesn't work for me in either safari or Firefox. Could you try one of those? I had another search bug previously which Mark could g reproduce but was able, by a weird magical trial and error, to fix. At least one other person in beta confirmed it but Mark could never find it.
Thanks.
J
Sent from my iPhone
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Aug 28, 2016, at 10:37 PM, Jim Poston <poston@...> wrote:
On 28 Aug 2016 at 20:35, J_catlady wrote:
Ok. I'll report a bug. I'm using safari. Will also try Firefox. Yeah, it might be a browser problem.
For reference: it also worked for me in IE 11, Chrome 52, and Opera 12.
--
Jim
Poston@...
<< America: Home of the richest poor people in the world. >>
|
On 28 Aug 2016 at 20:35, J_catlady wrote: Ok. I'll report a bug. I'm using safari. Will also try Firefox. Yeah, it might be a browser problem. For reference: it also worked for me in IE 11, Chrome 52, and Opera 12. -- Jim Poston@... << America: Home of the richest poor people in the world. >>
|
Ok. I'll report a bug. I'm using safari. Will also try Firefox.
J
Sent from my iPhone
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Aug 28, 2016, at 7:10 PM, Jim Poston <poston@...> wrote:
On 28 Aug 2016 at 14:31, J_catlady wrote:
I typed "1" into the msg# box and hit "enter." Nothing happened. I did the same thing in 3 of my groups and was taken to message #1 in
each. I'm using Vivaldi 1.3 browser as a point of reference.
--
Jim
Poston@...
<< And now for something completely different. >>
|
On 28 Aug 2016 at 14:31, J_catlady wrote: I typed "1" into the msg# box and hit "enter." Nothing happened. I did the same thing in 3 of my groups and was taken to message #1 in each. I'm using Vivaldi 1.3 browser as a point of reference. -- Jim Poston@... << And now for something completely different. >>
|
I hate to bring up the "message # wars" again. However, today I was searching for message #1 in my group. I realize this could be had by simply clicking on Date to reverse the order, but instead I typed "1" into the msg# box and hit "enter." Nothing happened. Then I tried typing "1" into the box and instead clicking on the search icon. All that did was take me into the next search screen, with a place for entering a search term, which I did not want to do. Obviously, when you're searching for a particular message # you would not normally enter a search term as well. Going directly into "search" also did not work, because there's no msg# box - just a place for a search term. Before raising this as a bug, am I missing something? What is the current idea behind the message# box? It does not seem to do anything, as far as I can tell. J
|
Re: storage limits in basic plan
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 08:16 pm, Duane wrote: I believe it actually stores all attachments, photo or file, there. FWIW, this seems not to be the case. I was looking for some .docx and .doc files a member attached yesterday and they don't appear in the emailed photos section.? J
|
question about deleting a subgroup
Hi All, We continue to test groups.io as a replacement platform for Y!G. At this point we are pretty happy with most of it, but subgroups aren't ready for us just yet. The inability to cleanly move a thread to the "right place" is a problem, so we're probably going to avoid them for now. But that lead to an interesting discovery. ?I went to delete a subgroup I created and got a confirmation message telling me that the action cannot be undone (which is fine with me) but also that the subgroup name cannot be used for "some time". Does anyone know what "some time" is and why that is the case at all? If I delete this group now - to avoid confusion for our members when we transfer - and we decide to add a subgroup of the same name in 6 months, will we be able to, or is this name gone indefinitely? If the latter I'll just lock it up and leave it against future need, but if we'll be able to get it back, then I'll delete it against accidental discovery. Thanks for any and all advice on this. --jeffp
|
Re: storage limits in basic plan
Great idea, LeeAnne. Thanks! I guess if it's big enough for horses, it's big enough for cats!:-) J
|
Re: storage limits in basic plan
Hi J, This may or may not help you but I dropped our data usage by more than half by changing the settings in the photos to the smallest size possible (still usable for our hoof team to view and mark up suggested changes in hoof trimming) and then re-loading the photos.? This took a few days but was well worth the work for data savings
- ?LeeAnne,?Newmarket, Ontario ECIR Archivist?03/2004 ? ?? ??- Lightweight Cement Sculpture and Memorials?? -- -LeeAnne ?Archivist
|
Re: storage limits in basic plan
Thanks, Duane. Good news that messages don't count!
J
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Duane <txpigeon@...> wrote: If you go to the Upgrade page on a group that you own, it will give you a summary of the amount used of the storage limit.? Much easier than having to add them up.? A while back, the numbers were out of sync, but I think that problem has been corrected.
You should be able to just delete the attachments.? On the Photo page, the first folder should be named Emailed Photos.? I believe it actually stores all attachments, photo or file, there.? I'm not sure what the post would look like after deleting one though.? I would hope that it deletes the paper clip.
As best as I can remember, the content of messages doesn't count against any limits.? I don't see it reflected in any of my groups.
Duane
|
Re: storage limits in basic plan
If you go to the Upgrade page on a group that you own, it will give you a summary of the amount used of the storage limit. Much easier than having to add them up. A while back, the numbers were out of sync, but I think that problem has been corrected.
You should be able to just delete the attachments. On the Photo page, the first folder should be named Emailed Photos. I believe it actually stores all attachments, photo or file, there. I'm not sure what the post would look like after deleting one though. I would hope that it deletes the paper clip.
As best as I can remember, the content of messages doesn't count against any limits. I don't see it reflected in any of my groups.
Duane
|
storage limits in basic plan
(This should be merged with my previous message about storage, but it hasn't come through yet.) I totally forgot to add the amount of storage being used for messages. Where can I find that? J
|
storage limits in basic plan
Within less than a year, our group has exceeded 25% of its 1 GB of storage allowed in the basic plan. I got that by adding up the amount we're using for files, plus the amounts, listed in the photos section, that it's saying we're using for attachments and photos. Because our group doesn't allow members to add files, they usually include their cats' labwork as attachments, and then a moderator uploads it into the files section. The result is that a lot of our data is being stored, and counted, twice.? Is there a way, beyond deleting entire messages, of removing attachments from messages after they are sent, to reduce the amount of storage being used? I doubt that there is, so my next question is whether this would be a reasonable suggestion on beta.? Please don't suggest that we simply allow members to add their own files. There are specific reasons we don't want to do this. Thanks. J
|
Re: Information about spam FeedBack Loop (FBL) mechanisms
I would think that having a "List-Unsubscribe line in the header" would be an important item for services like YahooMail or AOL. It should also help Mark prevent problems with other services that may implement this tactic later. I'd "bother" him about it. ;>)
Duane
|
Re: Information about spam FeedBack Loop (FBL) mechanisms
On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 05:06 pm, Shal Farley wrote:
groups.io digests haven't List-Unsubscribe line in the header. Oh. Have you reported this to Mark?
I already bothered him too many times, I hesitate. :)
|
Re: Information about spam FeedBack Loop (FBL) mechanisms
Lena, I caught yahooMail doing exactly that.
Users typically don't care to use the Not Spam button. This would seem to be a problem for any list service, with users of such email providers. If the list service responds to the spam feedback by unsubscribing the member, but the feedback was generated by a seemingly harmless action (deleting a message from the junk folder rather than not-spam'ing it first), that will be a bad user experience. It's hard to say who the user will blame for it, which is why I suggested that Mark make the message to the member very explicit that the mail provider initiated the action. I can believe that some email providers do that even if the message in
Spam folder was not deleted by the user, but expired. :( Alas, I too can believe that a service would mindlessly treat both kinds of deletion the same. But yikes, that's a much worse user experience: they get unsubscribed "out of the blue" when a message they never saw ages out of the spam folder. Unsubscribe request is not the same as feedback report. An IP-address
owner can subscribe to feedback reports. The how-to is in Help pages for
postmasters, not for users. Unsubscribe button appears if the email
provider found a standard line in the message header
(List-Unsubscribe). Ok, so if the header field is there, and the unsubscribe button clicked, then the list manager gets back the mailto: they put in the header field as distinct from a feedback report. But whether the list gets an unsubscribe message or a feedback report isn't really the issue here. The concern that caused Mark to take down the FBL mechanism a while back was that many of the affected users wrote to him claiming not to have unsubscribed. I was wondering if those users simply forgot or misunderstood their action that caused the unsubscription. Unfortunately you've confirmed, at least in the case of Yahoo Mail, that the member's action could have been a simple deletion, which they had no reason to believe would result in unsubscription. Or worse, we both suspect that it could happen without any action on the member's part. And it is that latter case, where simply having a message delivered to the spam folder and later expire might cause a feedback report, forces me to reverse my answer to J - it just might be possible that merely having the provider determine that a message is spam could cause a feedback report and result in unsubscription. So the advice against using such email providers isn't wrong. It's is either that or be vigilant about checking one's spam folder and marking group messages as not-spam. Of course, that's a good idea with any email provider - if for no other reason than that you might have missed those messages and marking them not-spam may eventually help reduce the chances that future group messages will end up in the spam folder. BTW, groups.io digests haven't List-Unsubscribe line in the header. Oh. Have you reported this to Mark? That might be a contributing factor also; I don't have any way to know how many of the people who complained might have been on Digest but he might. Shal
|
Re: Information about spam FeedBack Loop (FBL) mechanisms
So, the bottom line is that AOL makes it a point to teach their users to be
even bigger idiots than they were when they signed up for AOL
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 22:35 PM
Subject: Re: [GMF] Information about spam FeedBack Loop (FBL)
mechanisms
?
I found this in AOL's help pages.??
?
How
do I unsubscribe from email newsletters that I receive?[excess quote and long quote trimmed by moderator]
|
Re: Information about spam FeedBack Loop (FBL) mechanisms
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 08:04 pm, Shal Farley wrote: One question I'd have is what happens if a message is delivered to the spam
folder, and the user deletes it from there rather than first designating it as
not-spam. Does that constitute an implicit confirmation (marking) of the
message as being spam? If so that could account for the users' belief that
they had not done such marking. I caught yahooMail doing exactly that. Users typically don't care to use the Not Spam button. I can believe that some email providers do that even if the message in Spam folder was not deleted by the user, but expired. :( On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 08:45 pm, Shal Farley wrote: AOL's help page strongly implies that the user's action, clicking Spam and
then Unsubscribe, is what causes the unsubscribe request (feedback
report) to be sent. Unsubscribe request is not the same as feedback report. An IP-address owner can subscribe to feedback reports. The how-to is in Help pages for postmasters, not for users. Unsubscribe button appears if the email provider found a standard line in the message header (List-Unsubscribe). BTW, groups.io digests haven't List-Unsubscribe line in the header.
|
Re: anyone know if Groups.io messages to aol members tend to go into spam a lot?
J, I was hoping too, but I never got the message, so how could I have that
evidence? THAT SAID: she later forwarded me the sent message and it WAS
sent to the +owner address. Short of having a CC from a sent message that will do, so long as the forward seems to quote the To: field entirely and intact. Yes, it's a thing. "Message from pending sub." ...
There's not a separate item for that in the Actions drop-down for search Perhaps because your group is unrestricted? Nope. I just missed it, looking for the wrong thing. "Non-subscriber message" versus "Message from pending sub" My hobgoblin rebels at that inconsistent phrasing. But in any case, since she was pending, the message should not only have
been received, but also logged in her +owner messages on her member
page, as they always are for pending members. It wasn't, so I believe
that it never got through, OR that it was not logged. Or something. More
likely the first, and my prime suspect is still AOL. I suppose it is possible that AOL claims to have delivered the message to Groups.io but didn't. An outright fabrication like that seems unlikely to me, but perhaps the delivery transaction had some sort of error leaving each side with a different status result (Groups.io thinking nope, AOL thinking yup). I've heard of the reverse, where the sender thought the transaction failed and later re-tried, resulting in doubled delivery (or even more than double). In any case, I think we've exhausted the evidence that users can dig up; digging deeper will likely require access to the mail server logs. Shal
|
Jim Poston
LeeAnne
Duane
Lena
Shal Farley