I might consider paying for the group. I would like to know what other advantages in paying does?
For most groups I suspect the two biggest advantages are Direct Add and the increase in storage to 10 GB (free is 1 GB). See the pricing page for a comparison chart: /static/pricing
Will the photos of the email folder be better?
No, just bigger.
Which I suppose could be better if it allows you to put off doing anything about it until after Mark implements a bulk delete... ;-)
In the raw source for the message, the images are "inline": ...
I think what matters here is what you didn't show: the HTML img element in the message body that marks where the image should be placed in the display of the message.
I've had some trouble with this, getting different results from using Thunderbird, using Gmail's web interface, using the group's New Topic or Reply, or editing the message while pending. /g/GroupManagersForum/message/11066
Of course, groups.io does some processing, especially of embedded images. So the src protocol for the image file may not be the same in the group's messages section as it was in the message as sent to the group. It may also be different in the messages as outbound to the members. And then the member's email interface gets into the game.
For example, I've noticed that images I've embedded using the data: protocol tend to display just fine here on site, and in my Thunderbird, but not in Gmail's webmail UI. Go figure.
What I would tell your members is that they will likely have the most consistent success using their mail interface's Insert Photo menu command or button, rather than drag-and-drop or copy/paste. That usually means starting with a photo file that is stored in a file on their computer, and not one that is simply in memory from viewing a web site or having an app display it.
I don't mean to be dispiriting, but if you attempt to sort this out just be aware that you'll have to control for multiple variables in how the message was authored, where it is being viewed, and in the processing in between. Take careful notes, and when posting test images by email cc yourself at an email address where you can view source (so you can tell exactly what you sent, before any processing has been done by Groups.io).
The problem is - I have scheduled a smooth real cutover from Yahoo to groups.io for a date in the future
As I imagine is obvious in retrospect, the cutover should have been coincident with the transfer. Perhaps even calling a halt to messages in the Y!Group immediately before giving the final "go" for the transfer, if you're concerned about messages left behind. But I do understand that with the unpredictable queue delay that may be unacceptable too.
Is there a way to transfer only missing topics since the first transfer, ...
Not officially, but there is a means to do a second transfer. You can delete the record of the original transfer and schedule another, targeting only the areas you need. HOWEVER this mechanism was intended for situations where you left some areas out of the original transfer, and now want to transfer just those areas. That could have been the case if, for example, the Yahoo group was effectively non-functional in some areas at the time of the original transfer, but is "better" now.
I don't know what would happen if you scheduled another transfer, this time including only the Messages section. You are probably better off asking [email protected] about it before just trying it.
But they don¡¯t all seem to be deleted from the Pending messages list after being approved by email.
If you're just switching back to the Pending page, left open in a tab or window in your browser, make sure to refresh the page before believing what you see there.
If they're really still in the Pending page look for any kind of failure notice in your email. Maybe the approval wasn't accepted for some reason.
On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 08:52 PM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
The Table of Contents is another matter. I don't like the way that works, and others are pretty disenchanted with it, too. I suggest you provide that level of wiki structure via a bulleted list and anchor tags and let people populate the underlying material from there as appropriate.
If you intend this to be entirely free-form and flowing with lots of user input (like Wikipedia) then an external solution could indeed be a better option. Most of the folks here in GMF are fairly tech-savvy, but even then there's lot of repeat discussion on GIO features and foibles that never get populated in the wiki...and frankly, are unlikely to get read even if they were.
Ok, now you are?getting into the weeds as far as my knowledge level.? ?? Is that basically saying - one wiki page with anchors to simulate separating it into multiple pages and a ToC? It's? not going to be as free flowing as Wikipedia, but members will want to to1) two things
1) contribute to existing content about general aspects of the model of boat (equipment, fixes, leaks, etc.) that might be valuable to any member of the group.
2) create their own "my projects" page to present their own fixes, upgrades,? etc. that they did specificallyally to their own boat.
On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 06:21 PM, Ken Kloeber wrote:
Who cares where the content resides, so long as it's easy?peazy to get to, use, and eazy?peazy for non-techies to post content?.
As Shal said in his original response, the wiki editor bears a strong resemblance to the message editor. As such, those having some familiarity with the GIO web interface during normal interaction in a group shouldn't have too much trouble with the wiki.?
The Table of Contents is another matter. I don't like the way that works, and others are pretty disenchanted with it, too. I suggest you provide that level of wiki structure via a bulleted list and anchor tags and let people populate the underlying material from there as appropriate.
If you intend this to be entirely free-form and flowing with lots of user input (like Wikipedia) then an external solution could indeed be a better option. Most of the folks here in GMF are fairly tech-savvy, but even then there's lot of repeat discussion on GIO features and foibles that never get populated in the wiki...and frankly, are unlikely to get read even if they were.
Hope this helps, Bruce -- The system Help is your friend.??/static/help
Reassuring that it's not a bug, but the presentation is misleading. The chevron to the right of the number looks like an invitation to click to go to the next page. The word "results" next to the number would make it clearer.
Perhaps more significantly, when I tried to go to the second of the stated
16 pages of results, ...
Um, no. That was 16 results, not 16 pages of them. Shal
-- - My thoughts on freedom (needs updating) - political snippets, especially economic policy - misc. snippets, some political, some not Forget Google! I search with which doesn't spy on you
To re-iterate what I've said in the past: I have pretty strong opinions on this. I don't believe list management software should *ever* be changing the message IDs.
As I understand, this was originally done so that gmail users would see their own messages. Perhaps the response here is to instruct people on how to configure gmail for this behavior (since it affects much more than just a particular mailing list). (The easiest way is to write a catch-all filter rule that then does nothing. For some reason this causes the sent message to remain in the inbox instead of being moved to Sent).
With this change, however, something changed about the defaults. I have users now complaining that they are seeing their messages twice, and we had previously configured things to never send messages with changed message IDs. Did something change about the default or configurable behavior in this regard?
Having the same message content arriving with two Message-IDs is a bit worse than just the user seeing both copies. It causes email in-reply-to chains to be broken if the user happens to reply to the wrong one. They'll end up replying with a message-id that nobody else has seen. Many email clients will consider this a new conversation thread, and separate the messages from the rest. If this happens enough, it can really fragment a conversation.
On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Chris Jones wrote:
If I can manage it (ToC apart!) so can you. :)
Chris,
Ok, what's the trick to a GIO ToC??
In MW you simply paste into the ToC page, a (MW?formatted) link to the new?pagename?that? you created (or alternatively use a full URL). If you haven't?yet created your new page that you want to link?to, you simply type [[any unique new pagename]]. Save the ToC page, click on the new pagename? -- and?a?dialog opens to create it. Easy peazy to create your ToC page(s) and "linked-to" page(s.) Example below:
-ken
Re: Unable to view attached #images online
#images
Our group tends to send quite a few images in our messages. I do have some scaling settings established to keep it under control, but a user reported the following. When he views the group traffic online (he prefers not to get any emails), he notes that some users (me included) do not have any attached images visible in the message body. Other messages, including emailed responses to messages where the images are "missing", have the images.
Digging deeper, I can see that my messages have got the images in the "Emailed Images" album, and an image will be correctly cross-referenced to the source message. But why doesn't the image show up for message itself? In the raw source for the message, the images are "inline":
I think this is something to do with the way images are encoded by the sender's email programme. I have noticed the same thing; sometimes a picture will appear with the email, sometimes it's listed as an attachment that I have to select, and sometimes it doesn't appear at all (though it's present in the source).
I've yet to work out exactly what variations in the code cause which result, or what, if anything, can be changed at the sending end.
MediaWiki is the platform Wikipedia is on (not WYSIWYG).
I'm not necessarily trying to wholesale flip content from the?MediaWiki platform?-- that was on another (non-YahCHOO!) forum that works quite well.? Flipped from Y!, what we will be creating is primarily from scratch, although very limited copying and pasting from the other (MW) site is also likely.? ?Not that big a deal though --? there's limited formatting allowed (NICE!) over there and?anything can be edited in text mode and copy/pasted over.
Chris,
My point was not that it's difficult to make changes or wipe out something?that didn't "work."? Rather, that GIO is obviously here to attempt to make money by selling upgrades to its platform, and the?users have to figure out how to use the dang thing with no comprehensive guides or manuals or templates or?"how-tos." Only?in America.? Hey, if we buy the upgrade do we get a wiki manual? < SMILE? >?
At least?Google Sites provides sufficient?info on how to set up a site?and pages and?subpages, and, and, yadda,?yadda.? I'm thinking maybe set up our wiki on SITES, and a permalink on our forum to that wiki.? Who cares where the content resides, so long as it's easy?peazy to get to, use, and eazy?peazy for non-techies to post content?.
-ken
Re: Can I move my Big Tent group to groups.io?
#transfer
... we just have 10 years of messages stored on the Big Tent forum that I fear will all be lost.? Big Tent says there is no way to export the posts.
?
Milt's message indicated you should contact them. Have you tried that?
Failing that, if you can read the messages online then you can screen-scrape them. That's essentially what the transfer agent does with Yahoo Groups. You can copy/paste them by hand (as tedious as that would be) or find someone with the skill set to write a tool to do that for you.
?
There's an example of such an application, written as a plug-in for the Chrome browser, that works for Yahoo Groups. Something similar may be possible with Big Tent.
You might also ask Personal Groupware. They make downloaders for Y!Groups, LinkedIn, and Facebook. They might be willing to take on Big Tent.
How about sending a message to the group owner when this happens? Then they could send an email (maybe just a forward) to the unsub that will not be marked as spam?
Re: Can I move my Big Tent group to groups.io?
#transfer
I'm also looking to migrate a BigTent group to Groups.io.
Here's BigTent's FAQ on their upcoming shut-down.
Milt Baker
As of 12/31/18 BigTent Will Be Shutting Down
The BigTent Team
Thank you so much for being a part of the BigTent Community.? As of 12/31/18 we will be retiring the site and members will no longer have access to either the website or Apps.? ??
We've put together a list of FAQ's for both members and group leaders.
?
Why is BigTent Shutting Down??
At Care.com, we are constantly evolving and working to provide relevant products and services to families and caregivers.Unfortunately, we¡¯ve decided that the Big Tent is no longer the best place for us to focus, and we¡¯ve decided to shut it down. We apologize if this causes any inconvenience to you, and we appreciate your feedback on this matter!
?
Member FAQ's
How do I close my BigTent account??
You can deactivate your BigTent account at any time. This action will remove you from all your BigTent groups and will remove your profile from our system. You will no longer have access to BigTent or any groups' content.
To close your BigTent account, simply follow these steps:
Sign in to BigTent.
?Go to [your name] > Settings > Close account.
Click "Deactivate Account."
Once you confirm that you want to deactivate account, you will be removed from BigTent and your memberships in all of your groups will be terminated immediately.????
?
How do I leave a group /subgroup?
To permanently remove yourself from a group / subgroup and immediately cancel your membership:
Go to [your name] > Settings > Membership info.
Click "leave group" under the group or subgroup name.?
Once you confirm that you want to leave the group, you will be removed from it immediately.
?
?
Group? Leaders/Administrator FAQ's
How to delete a BigTent group
We do not allow admins to do this themselves because of the consequences of mistakenly deleting an active group. Please send an email to?support@...?to have our team delete your group.
?
Do you have any suggestions for alternatives to BigTent?
Here are a few of the alternatives that we know of that are similar to BigTent *
Facebook groups
Club Express
Google Groups
Wild Apricot
Meet-up
YahooGroups
?
*BigTent does not recommend or endorse any of these
Thanks Bruce and Shal for you answers. ?Downloading the member list is not a problem, we just have 10 years of messages stored on the Big Tent forum that I fear will all be lost. ?Big Tent says there is no way to export the posts. ?Just wanted to double confirm on this side. ?Ugh :( Thanks again Nell
I thought if another moderator clicks on a message to be moderated, it marks it claimed. You can¡¯t moderate it.
If the moderator clicks Edit is it "claimed", even if the moderator then cancels out. Sharon should have received the bounce back of her approval in that case, and should see those messages as "claimed" on the web site. Neither of those being mentioned, I'm not sure what could cause what she's seeing.
Note that on the web site the "claim" is only advisory, other moderators can still approve or reject the message. This is not a bug, it is that way so that the message doesn't get (semi-) permanently stuck if the claiming moderator doesn't finish with the message.
What about putting the member on No Mail (effectively unsubbing them from email) , tell them
they can see the mails on the web AND try to explain why this happened AND what they must do
to correct it. etc;?
That's essentially what I proposed in beta, except I decided that it would be best not to mess with the member's actual Email Delivery setting (and the distraction that some groups don't allow No Email). So I proposed a "status" akin to bouncing status - which stops group postings being sent to their email, and displays a banner on the web site when they visit.
The "tell them they can find the groups mails on the web" will probably have to come from a
source other than Groups.io, 'cos that is probably blocked by the subscribers email supplier
already.
That's a "maybe" in my book. The source of the notice is , but not an address associated with their group or its members, so I think it is already more likely to be delivered to the member's Inbox than whatever triggered the FBL in the first place.
I think the only two choices here are the automatic message from or a message sent by a group mod from a personal address. Anything else is likely to be (rightfully) mistrusted by the member. That said, there's no reason to choose -- do the automatic message, and if a group mod wants to follow it up later that's great.
I have shot myself in the foot a couple of times today, anyway here goes.
What about putting the member on No Mail (effectively unsubbing them from email) , tell them they can see the mails on the web AND try to explain why this happened AND what they must do to correct it. etc;
The "tell them they can find the groups mails on the web" will probably have to come from a source other than Groups.io, 'cos that is probably blocked by the subscribers email supplier already.
OK, Tony
On 22 Aug 2018 at 22:01, Shal Farley wrote about : Subject : Re: [GMF] Member removed for sendin
> But, my list members are not nearly savvy enough to figure out how to > create a spam filter.
Well, not a "spam filter" per se, but a filter for group messages. But I take your meaning.
Perhaps the section on "How can I stop this from happening again?", or parts of it, should be brought out into its own page for easy reference by group members. Then maybe it could get some elaboration, or pointers to instructions, for different email services.
> Still hoping I can drum up support for having Mark adjust this, so > list members aren't unsubbed, ...
I understand that unsubscription has a certain ruthlessness to it ("learn or die"). And I've made my alternative suggestion:
Every now and then I've thought perhaps I should flesh out that seed of an idea into a more fully considered proposal, but I keep stumbling on the fact that I think allowing the mods to resume a member would defeat the purpose. And without that ability you'd likely be faced with the same level of effort to get the member to un-status him/herself. Also, Mark seems firmly convinced that unsubscription is the best way to force the issue to be resolved, despite all the objections presented in beta.
Confounding the issue, I'm sure, is that some fraction (and I don't know if it is large or small) of the spam markings are probably by members who actually want to leave the group, but have been trained not to ever trust the "unsubscribe" link in a message, but to use their service's "Spam" button instead.
> Many wouldn't figure that out for days, maybe longer, if they're on No > Mail, ...
Eh? I don't see how this would happen to someone on No Email.
Except maybe as a "time-bomb" lurking in their Spam folder if they've switched to No Email within the last month (or whatever their service's expiration time is).
On the other hand most of my other groups have only intermittent activity, so the idea that a member might go several days or longer before realizing that they haven't heard anything in a while isn't too far-fetched.
On the gripping hand those groups also have smaller membership and very little for me to do as a mod. So far this has happened to exactly one of those members (an AOL address) and he promptly resumed himself.
I thought if another moderator clicks on a message to be moderated, it marks it claimed. You can¡¯t moderate it. ? If this isn¡¯t happening when there are more than one message waiting to be moderated, I would think it is a big and should be reported.?
If if I try to moderate by email - simply by replying to the moderation email, sometimes someone else got to it first. Then I get a return email saying so.?
Shal Farley
KWKloeber
Bruce
David Brown
Tom Link
Milt Baker
Frances