This needs to be reported to [email protected] . Mark is the one to straighten this out.

I'm going to take a guess that this transfer may have been started before the "Start New Transfer" button on the Yahoo Transfer page was instituted. Part of the reason for using the new form was to try to keep those things straight where Y! groups were transferring to groups.io but the group name had already been taken by someone else. But the form provides a double check on source and destination for other transfers as well.

Seeing some of the twists and oddities he's dealing with, I completely agree that Mark needs a little vacation. And somehow he manages all this with outward patience and calm. He's a far greater man than I am...

Dano

Hi Loopy,

Can I add a 2nd email address?

Yes and no.

You can of course hold two subscriptions in your group, each under its own email address, and both as owner.

But those then are separate accounts in Groups.io; you can't do what I think you're asking: manage more than one subscription address within a single Groups.io account - as you could with Y!Groups.

I am the owner of a small group but I need to be able to keep in touch
with them so being able to use a backup address would be great.

I think it is always a good idea to have more than one owner in a group; even if they're both you at different addresses. When I do that I make sure the two addresses are from different companies - so I'm less likely to have both addresses out of service at the same time.

Shal


--
Help: /static/help
More Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wiki
Even More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list

Pam,

Now I'm trying to transfer that group and another with the .au after
the address and it keeps telling me it's not a valid address. Any clue
how I can move these two groups? I can't seem to edit that
"@yahoogroups.com part of the email address.

It seems you don't have to edit it. Go ahead and enter your group's name and ignore the wrong locale.
/g/GroupManagersForum/message/6114

Shal


--
Help: /static/help
More Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wiki
Even More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list

Thankx very much, Shal. That may be what happened. I was trying to be careful, but could have made the mistake you suggest.

I've sent a note to [email protected] and will report back on their response.

Mike

N6JGA

jonathon,

Looking at it from a citation/legal POV, is the original Message-ID
placed in a field "X-Message-ID"?

It is placed in a field named "X-Orig-Message-Id".

I am aware that Message-IDs are, in theory, non-unique.

Actually email senders are admonished to ensure that they are unique across all of space and time. Ok, that's a bit overstated, but it is the idea.

Shal


--
Help: /static/help
More Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wiki
Even More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list

Mike,

During a transfer yesterday of members and files to new group from
Yahoo, they somehow were merged into an already existing group instead
of the intended one.

Oops.

How did this happen, how do I prevent it in the future

When you set up the transfer you select the target group from a drop-list of groups in which you have owner role. Maybe you somehow slipped with that control before hitting the "Start group Transfer Process" button?

and how do I correct this error?

Deleting all the improperly copied content by hand won't be easy. I'd write to [email protected] to see if they can undo it for you.

Shal


--
Help: /static/help
More Help: /g/GroupManagersForum/wiki
Even More Help: Search button at the top of Messages list

During a transfer yesterday of members and files to new group from Yahoo, they somehow were merged into an already existing group instead of the intended one. How did this happen, how do I prevent it in the future and how do I correct this error?

?

The new group to which the members and files should have gone is Pacificon.groups.io.
The group they all went to by mistake is MDARCTech.groups.io.

The members and files came from Pacificon.yahoo.com.

Thankx for the help,

?

Mike

N6JGA

Those of us who make use of Google Adwords or Analytics need to comply with much of GDPR because Google is enforcing it in the way we use their platforms.
--
Bob Bellizzi

The Corneal Dystrophy Foundation

I come from a Mailman (another popular mailing list) where modification of any template is allowed. ?It's a good model to follow :-).

On 04/15/2018 07:25 AM, Shal Farley wrote:

CHANGE: Instead of changing the Message-ID for all recipients, we now
?? only change the Message-ID for the original sender.

I'm not able to put my finger on why, but this one has my spidey-sense
tingling. It just seems wrong to distribute the "same" message with
different Messsage-ID content.

Looking at it from a citation/legal POV, is the original Message-ID
placed in a field "X-Message-ID"? If so, then it is quasi-acceptable.
However, if the original Message-ID is no longer in the message, then
you just destroyed the ability to differentiate between messages. I am
aware that Message-IDs are, in theory, non-unique.

jonathon

On 04/14/2018 09:00 PM, Jim Fisher wrote:

(i) of Article 9(2) as well as Article 9(3); (d) for archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific or historical research purposes or statistical purposes in accordance with Article 89(1) in so far as the right referred to in paragraph 1 is likely to render impossible or seriously impair the achievement of the objectives of that processing; or (e) for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims."

My guess is that this is talking about either private archives, or
archives held by a library, museum, or similar cultural institution,
that impose specific criteria, in order to access the archive. (This is
just one of the plethora of things with the GDPR that is somewhat
ambiguous.)

As a general rule of thumb, European Law ignores precedent, as set by
case law. However, precedent qua "this is what the law makers meant,
based upon this section of this text", is usually accepted.

I can see a company in the US claiming that archives were deleted to
comply with GDPR, when US law specifically requires the archives to
retained, especially when such archives contain the smoking gun. that
the court wants/needs to prove malfeasance.

this Regulation includes a derogation for organisations with fewer than 250 employees with regard to record-keeping.

This is one of those things that appears to be country specific:
* Estonian law appears to ignore organization size, dividing
organizations into solo-practitioner v non-solo practitioner, and
looking into why the data was collected, and retained;
* Irish law appears to differentiate between more than 250 employees and
less than 250 employees;
* I can't decipher the Hungarian website. :(

I'm sure Mark's lawyers will sort it out for him, in so far as that is possible in advance of any court rulings.

I hope so.

I've seen a couple of companies set up geoblocks, so that people from
Europe can neither access their website, nor purchase goods nor purchase
services from them, stating that they are doing so, because their
lawyers were unable to provide the required assurance that they were in
compliance with GDPR, and their accountants said that the costs involved
in compliance were higher than the revenue obtained from current
European customers.

In reading through the literature this past fortnight, it looks like
people in the data privacy field expect the GDPR to be the blueprint for
similar legislation world wide. Personally, I see it as being a
non-starter in the US, PRC, Russian and the Organization of Islamic
Cooperation/United Muslim Nations (OIC/UMN). The most it can spread is
into former European colonies that are neither Russian, nor PRC, nor
OIC/UMN client states.

Nor am I convinced that GDPR compliance is going to be seen as a good
thing, by the majority of individuals outside the EU.

I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.

jonathon

great -- tx randy.

On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 02:25 pm, mariealline@... wrote:

I created a poll and the poll send an email to the group...

Marie; this may sound like a very silly question but did you set up a #Poll hashtag before starting? If you didn't then something strange may well have happened. Have a look at the relevant message on your Group message page; is there a #Poll hashtag present in the Subject?

Chris

That standing footer information is required legally, if I'm not mistaken. Group/list emails (from any place) must include the owner and unsubscribe information. It's required to allow contact with a group owner and to unsubscribe to prevent unwanted direct adds and that sort of thing - regardless of the platform or provider.
Ginny T.

Choose how many posts you require from new subscribers before they are unmoderated. That's the "unmoderate after".

Frances

开云体育

tx / yeah..... so i guessed that this-here would do it; comments / corrections welcome.? does "Not Enabled", below, mean that once approved new members can post without approval / moderation?? this is the protocol i'd like to achieve: once a member is approved, he/she can post away without further intervention from admins.