Keyboard Shortcuts
Likes
Search
Replying to messages on Web page
|
Wanda Hall
I am being a bit thick I think but when using the web page to reply I can't see any way to make sure the thread is also copied below other than using block quote and then C&P'ing the previous message below my reply.
On yahoo, which we are moving over from, you could expand the reply to show previous messages in thread by clicking on the 3 dots and they would be included in the email notification.? Can't see them on groups.io We set up another test group a while back to see how it worked and am sure the message replied to on the web page included the previous message(s) below the new reply but can't remember what settings we used to do that, if any. Have a number of groups we are moving over and as a email user of groups, rather than web user which other members will be using, I'll get replies that won't show what they are replying to which can get pretty confusing as we are a support group.? Sometimes a thread may have a couple of tangents too which also adds to the confusion. So bottom line, after all that wafflelol,? is how do I make sure if anyone is replying on the web page the previous message they are replying to is also included on the page and also in mail notifications, without them having to copy it and use block quote so all users, be it mail notification only or web only can follow newer replies and know what bit of the thread the message refers to? Hope that made sense |
|
On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 07:01 AM, Wanda Hall wrote:
So bottom line, after all that waffle lol, is how do I make sure if anyone is replying on the web page the previous message they are replying to is also included on the page and also in mail notifications, without them having to copy it and use block quote so all users, be it mail notification only or web only can follow newer replies and know what bit of the thread the message refers to?Wanda -- There is no group setting that will allow you as an Owner to enforce your own quoting rules. As you noted, (unlike Yahoo) Groups.io does not automatically quote the previous message thread upon clicking the Reply button. This behavior in Yahoo was felt to promote over-quoting and message bloat, and it was better to leave it up to the person posting the reply to decide how much quoting is necessary to provide context. Note that if you highlight some text with your mouse before hitting the Reply button, that text will be carried over as a quote in the message composition window (that's how I did the quote above). See?/g/GroupManagersForum/wiki/Message-composition-tips-and-tricks?for some other ideas that might make quoting online easier for you.? Hope this helps, Bruce -- The system Help is your friend.??/static/help |
|
Brian Vogel
I have considered it a blessing that the web interface does not automatically quote material.? One of the things that drives me almost insane on Groups.io, and it's a result of the service being a hybrid, is the difficulty in searching the archives for original source material, which gets quoted again and again and again because many e-mail clients automatically quote.
In the vast majority of cases no quotation at all is needed if participants have been actively following a topic from its inception.? There are times when selective quoting is necessary when "point by point" responses are being made, and particularly if they're being made to several different messages at once.? But folks should be able to manage that easily whether they're participating via e-mail or the web interface. I wish that quotation required effort in all cases, so that people would think about whether or not they need it at all. -- Brian?-?Windows 10 Pro, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763?? ? ? ?Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?~ George Santayana |
|
Wanda Hall
Thanks Bruce, I¡¯ll just have to tell people who are replying via the site, instead of via email notifications, to highlight the text of the message they are replying to before starting their reply.
? Oh well lets hope people remember to quote what they are replying to lol ? Many thanks for replying ? ? Wanda ? From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bruce Bowman
Sent: 01 June 2019 14:28 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [GMF] Replying to messages on Web page ? On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 07:01 AM, Wanda Hall wrote: So bottom line, after all that waffle lol, is how do I make sure if anyone is replying on the web page the previous message they are replying to is also included on the page and also in mail notifications, without them having to copy it and use block quote so all users, be it mail notification only or web only can follow newer replies and know what bit of the thread the message refers to? Wanda -- There is no group setting that will allow you as an Owner to enforce your own quoting rules. ? ? [ad removed by moderator]? |
|
Wanda Hall
I do hear what you are saying but often there is a long discussion and someone may be replying to a specific part of that discussion and with a ?few groups we have going and lots of mail from them it¡¯s impossible to work out if they are replying to me or someone else or even to recall the whole case. Too many groups to have every tab open and defeats the object of using a mail client where all my mail comes to one place .. ? each to their own though.? ;) ? ? Wanda ? From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brian Vogel
Sent: 01 June 2019 15:00 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [GMF] Replying to messages on Web page ? I have considered it a blessing that the web interface does not automatically quote material.? One of the things that drives me almost insane on Groups.io, and it's a result of the service being a hybrid, is the difficulty in searching the archives for original source material, which gets quoted again and again and again because many e-mail clients automatically quote. Brian?-?Windows 10 Pro, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763?? ? ? ?Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?~ George Santayana ? ? [ad removed by moderator]? |
|
If I may I would disagree with you, Brian.? Whilst it is unnecessary for the whole of the thread to be copied on every message, it is frequently very helpful if at least the letter specifically being responded to is quoted.? I am a member of quite a few groups both on groups.io and yahoo and often I have seen a letter that might have been interesting if I had had the slightest idea what the guy was talking about. I accept that if I kept my mail sorted by thread, this wouldn't apply maybe, but I don't.? I like it sorted by date-received then all new messages appear at the top and are easy to scan. My opinion only. Peter On 01/06/2019 14:00, Brian Vogel wrote:
I have considered it a blessing that the web interface does not automatically quote material.? One of the things that drives me almost insane on Groups.io, and it's a result of the service being a hybrid, is the difficulty in searching the archives for original source material, which gets quoted again and again and again because many e-mail clients automatically quote. ? |
|
Brian Vogel
On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 01:13 PM, P H LLOYD wrote:
As to your first point, that's precisely the reason for my observation about the need to judiciously quote for "point by point" replies when there are just too many points that are not being responded to for any typical reader to retain the information about what is.? There are times when you can reply without any quotation and others where that's just rude for the reader.? I try to avoid making anyone struggle as far as having to know what I'm replying to. As to the second, well, choices have consequences.? I have never understood not using threaded/conversation view since its introduction.? And, of course, that's my opinion.? I always have my threads sorted by date with the most recent first and on the odd occasion where I actually need to go further back to check something that makes doing so a breeze. ? -- Brian?-?Windows 10 Pro, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763?? ? ? ?Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?~ George Santayana |
|
dave w
On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 02:02 AM, Brian Vogel wrote:
is the difficulty in searching the archives for original source material, which gets quoted again andBrian I find that difficult to swallow, and excessive in the extreme. Either you belong to very bad groups, or inarticulate wombats who cant trim- but and my compatriots find the search function VERY efficient. It is also very effective at 'summarising' search results- that is it gives one summary result of a thread where there may be 5,10, 20 responses. Your canned sig gets repeated too- think about what you also 'offer' that isn't valid information. cheers davew |
|
Brian Vogel
Dave,
? ? ? ? ? There are scads of "inarticulate wombats" as you term them.? The very idea of judiciously trimming has gone the way of the dinosaur in many venues. ? ? ? ? ? ?I am not complaining about the search function, but what gets returned when you have massive numbers of "inarticulate wombats" who hit reply, then top post, never bothering to trim a single thing. ? ? ? ? ? ?If you want to complain about signatures, which have been a common feature since Usenet days, then have fun.? They're not going away, and I have no intention of removing mine. -- Brian?-?Windows 10 Pro, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763?? ? ? ?Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?~ George Santayana[mod note: lets dial back on the personal comments. Note that the search function contains an option (in the Tools) to Exclude Signatures from the search.] |
Bruce