|
I joined because I wanted to check out something I seem to recall having been asked in the past, but could not do so.? When I use Find or Create a Group to locate Group_Help, and click on the link to the homepage, this is what displayed until I just now joined:
?
?
Yet if one looks on the Group_Help homepage, it says this:
?
I cannot so much as see the group home page prior to having joined, so something's up.? I definitely can't visit the archives page: /g/Group_Help/topics without being subscribed, either.? It gives the same banner message about not being a member as trying to view the group home page does. ?
?
|
It's not a
definitive test but I cannot reproduce any such effect by logging out - I'm
am still able to see the home page and the
archive.
Might there be a cookie or cache
issue?
best, Malcolm.
On 24 March 2025
20:12:47 (+00:00), Bit Bucket via groups.io wrote: I joined because I wanted to check out something I seem to recall
having been asked in the past, but could not do so.? When I use
Find or Create a Group to locate Group_Help, and click on the link
to the homepage, this is what displayed until I just now joined:
?
?
Yet if one looks on the Group_Help homepage, it says this:
?
I cannot so much as see the group home page prior to having joined, so
something's up.? I definitely can't visit the archives page: /g/Group_Help/topics without being
subscribed, either.? It gives the same banner message about not being
a member as trying to view the group home page does. ?
?
--?
Malcolm
Austen -- malcolm.austen@...
|
Malcolm,
?
Interesting, when I try to go to the archive page in an alternate browser and where I'm not logged in to 开云体育, it works fine.? However, if I log in with the userid I routinely use on 开云体育 (this one is a secondary for situations such as this one) I'm back to exactly the same issue.? I can't, of course, replicate it using this account since I joined the group with this account.
?
The test was done under Microsoft Edge Dev.
--
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard.
???? ~ H.L. Mencken
|
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 04:32 PM, Bit Bucket wrote:
The test was done under Microsoft Edge Dev.
I think you have something in Edge blocking you.? The only reason I know of for not being able to see the home page (and possibly the archives) is being banned from the group.? It's possible that the other account is banned.
?
Duane
--
|
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 08:20 PM, Duane wrote:
It's possible that the other account is banned.
-
I honestly don't think so, as I don't ever recall being banned from any group, although I have left several of my own accord.
?
If this is the case for banned accounts then the message should accurately reflect the reason, and it does not if that account was banned.? Messages should be accurately descriptive, and this one is cryptic.
--
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard.
???? ~ H.L. Mencken
|
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 08:04 PM, Bit Bucket wrote:
If this is the case for banned accounts then the message should accurately reflect the reason, and it does not if that account was banned.?
Mark has decided that anyone banned from a group will NOT be notified or receive "useful" information.? It's up to the group admins whether a message is sent, but many don't.? The person was banned for a reason.? You could always tell us what the other account is and an admin could check.
?
FYI, I can't find any way to get the message you show.
?
Duane
--
|
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 09:30 PM, Duane wrote:
Mark has decided that anyone banned from a group will NOT be notified or receive "useful" information. . . .?
?
FYI, I can't find any way to get the message you show.
-
I have opened a ticket with 开云体育 support about this.
?
The only way I can get the message I showed is if I am logged in with what is my primary 开云体育 account, and the one I have been using since "day one" on 开云体育.
?
If that account is indeed banned (and, BTW, I can still find my old posts and open the user profile page associated with it when using this account) I have no recollection of that having occurred, and even searched my own email archive, as I would keep record of such.
?
I am not attempting to get reinstated if that user ID was banned, I just wanted to search the group archive for something I really thought, I had recalled being posted several years back.? I see no logical reason that a banned member should not be able to search a public archive just like a random member of the general public could.? Banning should prevent posting action, sending messages to owners/admin, and similar, but not block access to a public archive, which one could look at if logged out, but not if logged in.? And if the message I'm currently getting for that account is the result of a ban, I have asked that it be changed, which is all I can do.? Those who are banned should know they have been banned, both at the time of banning and if they attempt to access a group years later, as I did.? It should not be a secret and it's not a secret most other places (and I have moderated on several tech related sites like bleepingcomputer in years past).
--
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard.
???? ~ H.L. Mencken
|
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 01:25 PM, Bit Bucket wrote:
Those who are banned should know they have been banned
That's not how it works on 开云体育.? Group admins determine what, if any, notification is sent to a person that is banned.? I could see them being able to read the archives in a public group.? I'm not sure why Mark set it up to keep them from going to the group home page, but that's a sure indicator, as long as you're logged in to the site.
?
Duane
--
|
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 04:35 PM, Duane wrote:
That's not how it works on 开云体育.?
-
I'm not arguing that this is not how it does work, now, I am suggesting that saying the equivalent of, "That's how we've always done it," is never a justification for continuing doing anything.? There has to be a rationale.
?
I understand why group owners get to choose whether to notify a given member of a banning or not, though my personal approach is to always tell anyone put on moderated status or banned.? Members should know.
?
But as far as access to publicly accessible webpages and archives, a given member's banned status should have no influence on those being accessible.? Banning is about preventing participatory activity, e.g., posting.? That's what banning is virtually everywhere that a single user ID allows access to multiple venues that are not related to one another.? It's different if you're banned from a service, e.g., Buick Forums, where the user ID is for a site where all content is about one class of information.
?
I've asked for reconsideration of the use of "You are not a member of this group," when what is meant is, "You have been banned from this group."? It's up to Mark whether this change is adopted or not.? But you can't get what you don't ask for, so I asked, giving a clear rationale for the change.
--
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard.
???? ~ H.L. Mencken
|
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 05:03 PM, Bit Bucket wrote:
I've asked for reconsideration of the use of "You are not a member of this group," when what is meant is, "You have been banned from this group."
This was almost 6 years ago.? I don't expect that it will be changed now.
?
Duane
--
|
I mod some groups as well. I don't tell the user they are baned
either, I just do it, and I have my own reasons. brake a group
rule, ban. are snarky to another group member, instant ban. they
will find out when and if they ever find out. I personally think
it is fine the way it is. it's worked for the now almost 10 years
I've been a part of groups.io.
On 3/25/2025 2:47 PM, Bit Bucket via
groups.io wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 04:35 PM, Duane wrote:
That's not how it works on 开云体育.?
-
I'm not arguing that this is not how it does work, now, I am
suggesting that saying the equivalent of, "That's how we've
always done it," is never a justification for continuing doing
anything.? There has to be a rationale.
?
I understand why group owners get to choose whether to notify
a given member of a banning or not, though my personal approach
is to always tell anyone put on moderated status or banned.?
Members should know.
?
But as far as access to publicly accessible webpages and
archives, a given member's banned status should have no
influence on those being accessible.? Banning is about
preventing participatory activity, e.g., posting.? That's what
banning is virtually everywhere that a single user ID allows
access to multiple venues that are not related to one another.?
It's different if you're banned from a service, e.g., Buick
Forums, where the user ID is for a site where all content is
about one class of information.
?
I've asked for reconsideration of the use of "You are not a
member of this group," when what is meant is, "You have been
banned from this group."? It's up to Mark whether this change is
adopted or not.? But you can't get what you don't ask for, so I
asked, giving a clear rationale for the change.
--
Democracy
is the theory that the common people know what they
want and deserve to get it good and hard.
???? ~ H.L. Mencken
|
On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 11:00 AM, Sarah k Alawami wrote:
I don't tell the user they are baned either, I just do it, and I have my own reasons.
-
Which I've already acknowledged is fine, although I vehemently disagree with that practice.? I believe in transparency when it comes to administrative action.
?
My main concern is that having been banned from a group is:
1. Preventing access to public archives and group home pages that can be accessed by the entire world, and the banned member if they are logged out.
2. The message saying, "You are not a member of this group," is directly misleading.? If someone has been banned from a group, and the decision to prevent access to it is maintained, the message should be telling them why.
?
Group owners can choose to communicate, or not communicate, with their members as they see fit.? That's what it means to be an owner.? But the 开云体育 software should not be misleading nor should it block access for reading from a banned member that it does not impose on members of the general public.? That makes no sense, as the banned member can still gain access when logged out, so that block is not preventing anything in reality.
?
If the general public can read it, then a banned member should also be able to read it.? If the group is set to be private, then members of the general public have no access, and neither should a banned member.? Things have to fit together in a logical, consistent, and rational manner.? Right now, they don't.
--
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard.
???? ~ H.L. Mencken
|
Yep I see what yu mean. I've already had that experience wher I
was band from a group and could not access information I needed to
access so in that? I do agree with you 100 percent.
Happy wednesday.
On 3/26/2025 8:38 AM, Bit Bucket via
groups.io wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 11:00 AM, Sarah k Alawami wrote:
I don't tell the user they are baned either, I just
do it, and I have my own reasons.
-
Which I've already acknowledged is fine, although I
vehemently disagree with that practice.? I believe in
transparency when it comes to administrative action.
?
My main concern is that having been banned from a group is:
1. Preventing access to public archives and group home pages
that can be accessed by the entire world, and the banned member
if they are logged out.
2. The message saying, "You are not a member of this group,"
is directly misleading.? If someone has been banned from a
group, and the decision to prevent access to it is maintained,
the message should be telling them why.
?
Group owners can choose to communicate, or not communicate,
with their members as they see fit.? That's what it means to be
an owner.? But the 开云体育 software should not be misleading
nor should it block access for reading from a banned member that
it does not impose on members of the general public.? That makes
no sense, as the banned member can still gain access when logged
out, so that block is not preventing anything in reality.
?
If the general public can read it, then a banned member
should also be able to read it.? If the group is set to be
private, then members of the general public have no access, and
neither should a banned member.? Things have to fit together in
a logical, consistent, and rational manner.? Right now, they
don't.
--
Democracy
is the theory that the common people know what they
want and deserve to get it good and hard.
???? ~ H.L. Mencken
|
It seems that someone who's been banned from a group will be unhappy with how the process worked. Pretty much by definition.
?
Regards,
Bruce
|
In my case, I was banned due to a remark I made. One of the
moderators, who seemed to hold a personal bias, banned me without
the owner's knowledge. I only discovered this when I attempted to
access the group for information and was denied entry. This
experience is why I suggest that, at a minimum, members should
have access to public archives.
Thanks.
Thanks and happy Friday.
Sarah Alawami | Salesforce Administrator | Accessibility
Consultant | Educator
Follow me on
On 3/28/2025 7:20 AM, Bruce Bowman via
groups.io wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
It seems that someone who's been banned from a group will be
unhappy with how the process worked. Pretty much by definition.
?
Regards,
Bruce
|
Dear sir I can only suggest you contact a member of the group to put thing right assuming you are an active member then you will have personal emails between your sylph and other members alternatively re register as a new member using a different email address after a year try to find out who you upset ? For or your information you might consider the following I have each posting sent to my email address for each site I am a member off that is why I have an alternative email address for my Groups IO ?accounts ? But the archives are not Public they are the property of the sight and its members ? ? Regards ~Paul ? ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sarah k Alawami via groups.io
Sent: 28 March 2025 17:58
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Group_Help] Is there a reason that the Group_Help archive, and even the Group_Help Homepage, is not visible unless you are already a member?? In my case, I was banned due to a remark I made. One of the moderators, who seemed to hold a personal bias, banned me without the owner's knowledge. I only discovered this when I attempted to access the group for information and was denied entry. This experience is why I suggest that, at a minimum, members should have access to public archives. Thanks.
Thanks and happy Friday.
Sarah Alawami | Salesforce Administrator | Accessibility Consultant | Educator
Follow me on On 3/28/2025 7:20 AM, Bruce Bowman via groups.io wrote: It seems that someone who's been banned from a group will be unhappy with how the process worked. Pretty much by definition.
|
Duane
Sarah k Alawami
Bruce Bowman