开云体育

Vickie,

I decided to reply here in consideration of Mark's request in beta@ #6874 that we limit that thread to "how" without delving into what we will or won't use, or whether it's a good idea.
/g/beta/message/6874

That's kind of a tough request to follow, especially when I introduced the question wondering which of three options would be best. Maybe we can hash it out here and bring a refined description back to beta@

In beta@ #6915 Vickie wrote:

Looks like I won't be using the new feature A, B, or C settings.

I only would use anonymous user names only for freecycle if posting
through the group or by email anonymous receiving group messages via
your email anonymous

but once the member responds directly to the poster off list it is then
the email is revealed and it would be revealed only by the members
choice to respond back.
If the member does not respond back then the sender won't know the
members email
Only if they respond back to each other to do the item exchange off list
is when the email is revealed.

/g/beta/message/6915

With the possible exception of replies by email, I think what you've described is exactly what I intended by option B.

I wrote:

B) Non-anonymous off-list support. Send to Sender reveals one's email
address, thereafter the subscriber's can email off-list to each other.

Here's an example of what I meant:

John posts an item to the group. His message is posted in the group's messages section, and distributed to members by email according to their subscription settings (individual, digest, etc.). The only difference introduced by the Anonymous Posting option so far is that only John's name, not his email address, is revealed in his post; and that is true for other subscribers reading by email as well as for those reading by Groups.io's web site.

Mary wants to contact John about the item. She goes to the web site and uses the Reply feature, clicking "Send to sender". In Mary's reply her email address is included normally (as the From and Reply-To address) in the message to John, and hence is revealed to John.

John decides whether or not to reply to Mary. If he does, his email interface will include his address in his message to Mary in the normal way. After this point John and Mary are free to continue their off-list conversation as they please. Notably, if John chooses not to reply to Mary, neither she nor anyone else learns his email address.

I think the additional thing that you want, which I didn't accomplish, was allowing Mary to contact John by way of her email interface. Instead my description forces her to the Groups.io site to do that.

Call the above option B1, and what follows option B2.

There is possibly a way to accomplish an off-list reply to an anonymous posting, and that's by taking a baby-step toward option C. Instead of a noreply address or other placeholder in group postings, Groups.io could insert something like what Mark proposed in the third bullet of his message #6797:
John's posting could be from "[email protected]" (assuming John has set "John123" as his User Name in his profile).
/g/beta/message/6797

But where Mark specified that any email to that address would be dropped, it could instead be forwarded to John's actual email address. That would allow Mary to reply via her email interface rather than the Groups.io site if she wishes. As before, her reply reveals her address to John, and Johns actual address is not revealed to Mary until and unless he decides to reply to Mary.

Now B2 did require that John establish a User Name in his profile. That's probably a reasonable requirement, and it can be used as signifying his consent to have messages forwarded to him via this means (Just as in now signifies his consent to having people see his profile).

Do either B1 or B2 make sense to you?

Shal