reply to sender/group
|
Once you've set that in Settings on your group, that becomes the default for the email client used by anyone. In the client, Reply or Reply to Sender are the same thing and it uses whatever is in the Reply To field, the group in this case. The Send to Sender button will still exist on the group though. If that doesn't answer your question, please provide additional details.
Duane |
开云体育Not quite.? since the Reply to Sender button still exists, I assume it is functional?? So I would like in Settings when I set it to reply to group, that becomes the ONLY way to reply and the Reply to Sender button either doesnt appear or doesnt work (which would of course be annoying to people, to have a button appearing but it doesnt work). sounds like this might be a programming change, since I have done all i can, and is better addressed in the beta group.??
Ro with Sally and Silk waiting at their feed dishes, and Handy, Feliz &? Police Kitty patrolling in the Great Beyond. > To: [email protected] > Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 09:52:37 -0800 > Subject: [GMF] Re: reply to sender/group > From: txpigeon@... > > Once you've set that in Settings on your group, that becomes the default for the email client used by anyone. In the client, Reply or Reply to Sender are the same thing and it uses whatever is in the Reply To field, the group in this case. The Send to Sender button will still exist on the group though. If that doesn't answer your question, please provide additional details. > > Duane > > > > > |
开云体育Not ?what I am taking about. ?I am talking about having clickable buttons for Reply to Group and Reply to Sender. ?Newbies are always using the wrong one. ?I want them I have to consciously send private emails if that ?is their choice, not have a button
option ?for it to confuse then.
Ro
-------- Original message --------
From: Xaun Loc <xaunloc@...> Date: 01/23/2016 19:02 (GMT-08:00) To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [GMF] reply to sender/group That would be true for people using an email client, but not for people
willing to wade through the web interface. People using a real email client ALWAYS have the ability to reply to the group or to any individual whose email address they have access to. I'm sure that there is some possible combination of circumstances where it might be rational for a group owner to try to prevent group members from ever emailing each other, but I really cannot conceive of what such a combination of circumstances might be -- especially since, as noted already, any such limitation would be a fantasy with no real effect beyond annoying group members. -----Original Message----- From: Duane Sent: Saturday, January 23, 2016 12:52 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [GMF] Re: reply to sender/group Once you've set that in Settings on your group, that becomes the default for the email client used by anyone.? In the client, Reply or Reply to Sender are the same thing and it uses whatever is in the Reply To field, the group in this case.? The Send to Sender button will still exist on the group though.? If that doesn't answer your question, please provide additional details. Duane |
|
I am only asking for the CHOICE to make the click buttons active or not, not to change the availability for others who want both active.?? As a member of several IO groups, I am CONSTANTLY getting private emails from people to hit Reply to Sender by mistake, not understanding this doesnt take it to the group.?? People can always private email each other, nothing I am suggesting takes that away, or suggests there should not still be a setting for both buttons active. Ro with Sally and Silk waiting at their feed dishes, and Handy, Feliz &? Police Kitty patrolling in the Great Beyond. Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 20:36:30 -0600 From: cackyb@... I wouldn't like to see this happen to all groups who have the group set to reply to group. The two groups that I have brought from yahoo to groups.io are set to reply to group, but members frequently choose to send individual posts back and forth. This is perfectly acceptable in my groups. We would definitely want both buttons to remain functional. Cacky [excess quote trimmed by moderator] |
|
Ro,
I have checked the "reply to group", yet reply to sender still appearsAs Duane and Xaun Loc have explained, you can't. The Reply To option in the group settings (as currently implemented) has no effect upon the web interface. Rather, it sets a field in outbound messages that most email clients/software use to control the behavior of the Reply button. So I would like in Settings when I set it to reply to group, thatFor replies by email the existing control is as close to that as you can get. For replies through the group's web interface, I think giving group moderators such an option might be very unpopular with members. Not what I am taking about. I am talking about having clickableWell, you did say you want a group setting that would eliminate the member's option to use the "Send to Sender" button on the group's reply function. I would be against that. sounds like this might be a programming change, since I have done all iYes this would be a programming change, something that you'd have to suggest in beta@ (I recommend including the hashtags #messages #reply #suggestions in your subject line). What I would support, rather than a new option, would be to make the existing Reply To option control which Send to button is shown to the members, but with a drop menu next to the button where the member may choose any one of the three Reply To selections (Group, Sender, Moderators). Visually the menu could be represented by a downward pointing arrow to click on, adjacent to the button. That is, it wouldn't need to take up much screen space (and would save the space taken up by one of the existing buttons). This would preserve the member's ability to deliberately select the destination, but would also provide a strong default that matches the typical "Reply" behavior in email. I think this would be of particular interest to groups who's Reply To setting is "Sender" (such as Freecycle/Freegle style groups). For them, having messages misdirected to the Group is probably an even bigger annoyance. -- Shal P.S., see also this thread in beta@ /g/beta/thread/online_replies/223643 |
|
Would moving the Send to Sender button away from the Send to Group button help any? Shal's idea of a default being the same as the email setting with a drop down menu certainly sounds doable and might be easier to understand and follow. Having a separate selection and Send would also make sense in case someone accidentally chose the wrong one. I don't much care for those boxes that do something as soon as you make a selection, especially if you make the wrong one. ;>)
Duane |
开云体育I dont quite understand anyone being against a group owner having the option to eliminate, for members, the Reply to Sender button.? Those owners that dont want to use such a option, neednt do so.? It needed affect any that dont want to use such a feature. ? Its really no different than the idea that you can set your group to Moderate or Not Moderate new messages.? Its about having the choice.? Freedom of choice, for the group owner, is the issue in this discussion.?? Yahoo doesnt have the Reply to Sender choice, yet one can certainly PM people. ? In this specific case, Yahoo has it over IO groups, IMO. ?? I can see tho, that most dont feel the same way that I do so it will be probably a fruitless battle to suggest it in Beta. ?? Perhaps not many people have been the recipient of as many misdirected "Reply to Sender" messages as I have, which I then have to forward to the group.??
Ro with Sally and Silk waiting at their feed dishes, and Handy, Feliz &? Police Kitty patrolling in the Great Beyond. > Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 00:11:58 -0800 > To: [email protected] > From: shals2nd@... > Subject: Re: [GMF] reply to sender/group > > Ro, > . > > > Not what I am taking about. I am talking about having clickable > > buttons for Reply to Group and Reply to Sender. Newbies are always > > using the wrong one. I want them I have to consciously send private > > emails if that is their choice, not have a button option for it to > > confuse then. > > Well, you did say you want a group setting that would eliminate the member's option to use the "Send to Sender" button on the group's reply function. I would be against that. > . |
|
Of course not, I never suggested that.?? there needs to be a NEW setting that allows that choice.? Ro with Sally and Silk waiting at their feed dishes, and Handy, Feliz &? Police Kitty patrolling in the Great Beyond. From: xaunloc@... Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 07:35:22 -0500 Ordinarily I don't like "ditto" or "+1" posts, but this is one case where I
think it is significant to let the powers the be understand that there are
definitely people on both sides of this issue.
?
Simply choosing "Reply to Group" as the default MUST NOT automatically
disable Reply To Sender. [excess quote trimmed by moderator] |
|
Ro,
I dont quite understand anyone being against a group owner having theTo me it seems like swatting a fly with a sledgehammer: a much too heavy-handed solution to the problem, when better alternatives exist. Did you read what I proposed? Any reasons that won't work for you? It seems to me a way to resolve the accidental use of Reply to Sender, while preserving functionality for the member. By avoiding the need for a new Settings option it also minimizes the coding change needed and the amount of training/education for other group owners ("why are there two Reply-To options"). Yahoo doesnt have the Reply to Sender choice, yet one can certainly PM people.Actually it does, though so well hidden that many people don't know about it. After you click reply, click on the two down-pointing chevrons to the left of the Subject line. That will open up the message header so that you can adjust the To: for your reply. There are five choices: Group, Sender, Moderators, and two combinations. If you're a moderator of the group, you can also change the From: address to be the group's -owner address, instead of your personal address. I can see tho, that most dont feel the same way that I do so it will beMaybe. If you find my suggestion acceptable, that might garner support among groups that normally operate with Reply To set to "Sender", as well as any moderators that have experienced the problem your way around. -- Shal |
开云体育Missing the point. ?Should be the group owners choice, no matter what group. ?Choice either way: ?have it available or don't have it available. ?A CHOICE, available in Settings, would not disrupt or change anyone's way of doing things.
Ro
-------- Original message --------
From: "vickie via Groups.io" <vickie_00@...> Date: 01/24/2016 12:24 (GMT-08:00) Ro,
Freecycle groups must have reply to sender and ?it must go to the members private email account on wanted or offered items.
Freecycle members also know to ?use ?group post email to create a new subject to the group to post taken or pending.. ?
We can't use ?.io freecycle groups otherwise
?
Chat groups should have reply to group only.
?
Vickie
[excess quote trimmed by moderator] |
|
Duane,
Shal's idea of a default being the same as the email setting with a dropI was imagining that one would click the down-arrow to open the menu and the message would be sent when you click on your choice. I also imagined that the menu would fully spell out those choices ("Send to Group", "Send to Sender", "Send to Moderators"). In my thinking they're no more prone to selecting the wrong one than the buttons are. Less so, in fact, because having to click on the arrow to see them gives you an extra moment to think about what you're doing. And, to Ro's case, I think a member who's prone to dither between the two buttons and perhaps choose the wrong one is much less likely to open a menu at all. That member, I think, would be far more prone to click the one available button. -- Shal |
Ro
Duane
Shal Farley