Suggestion for our group Administrator


Jim Adney
 

Groups.io offers an option that I think would be useful: Allow users to edit their own posts. I know I've made typos that I wish I could fix and had second thoughts that would have been best added to my original message. I usually realize this right after I post my message, so being able to edit would be useful.

I'm the admin on some other groups.io lists; that's how I know about this. It's easy to implement. just go to Admin/Settings/Message Policies and uncheck "Disable Editing Messages".

thanks for considering this,


Michael W. Lynch
 

On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 08:45 AM, Jim Adney wrote:


Groups.io offers an option that I think would be useful: Allow users to edit
their own posts. I know I've made typos that I wish I could fix and had second
thoughts that would have been best added to my original message. I usually
realize this right after I post my message, so being able to edit would be
useful.

I'm the admin on some other groups.io lists; that's how I know about this.
It's easy to implement. just go to Admin/Settings/Message Policies and uncheck
"Disable Editing Messages".

thanks for considering this,
I agree with Jim. I have made some really silly errors that I wish I could correct. This could be helpful

--
Michael Lynch
Dardanelle, AR


Tom Gardner
 

I disagree, despite having made silly errors.

This is (principally) an email reflector service, and it is good discipline to check before hitting "send".

The major problem is those that receive emails and never look at the groups.io website will get a continual stream of infinitesimally different emails, one for each change. That's a real pain!

On 11/09/21 15:02, Michael W. Lynch via groups.io wrote:
On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 08:45 AM, Jim Adney wrote:

Groups.io offers an option that I think would be useful: Allow users to edit
their own posts. I know I've made typos that I wish I could fix and had second
thoughts that would have been best added to my original message. I usually
realize this right after I post my message, so being able to edit would be
useful.

I'm the admin on some other groups.io lists; that's how I know about this.
It's easy to implement. just go to Admin/Settings/Message Policies and uncheck
"Disable Editing Messages".

thanks for considering this,
I agree with Jim. I have made some really silly errors that I wish I could correct. This could be helpful


Thomas S. Knutsen
 

This! It is most annoying to get 10^6 e-mails because someone is editing
small things in their posts.

BR. Thomas.

lør. 11. sep. 2021 kl. 16:09 skrev Tom Gardner <tggzzz@gmail.com>:

I disagree, despite having made silly errors.

This is (principally) an email reflector service, and it is good
discipline to
check before hitting "send".

The major problem is those that receive emails and never look at the
groups.io
website will get a continual stream of infinitesimally different emails,
one for
each change. That's a real pain!



On 11/09/21 15:02, Michael W. Lynch via groups.io wrote:
On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 08:45 AM, Jim Adney wrote:

Groups.io offers an option that I think would be useful: Allow users to
edit
their own posts. I know I've made typos that I wish I could fix and had
second
thoughts that would have been best added to my original message. I
usually
realize this right after I post my message, so being able to edit would
be
useful.

I'm the admin on some other groups.io lists; that's how I know about
this.
It's easy to implement. just go to Admin/Settings/Message Policies and
uncheck
"Disable Editing Messages".

thanks for considering this,
I agree with Jim. I have made some really silly errors that I wish I
could correct. This could be helpful





--
With Best regards, Thomas S. Knutsen.

Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.


pdxareaid
 

i do find not being able to edit a post, usually right after it was posted, regardless of my proofreading, very annoying.
if i care, i delete the entire post and repost with the changes. This will sometimes leave a post not as i would wishit.

the email interface (and the reason groups.io was chosen for the migration) hobbles features other forums take for granted like editing.

if i accept the email interface is important, then there probably should be no editing of posts and people will have to put up with the occasional delete and repost or incorrect posts.
if i think living in the current century is important, then we should have editing.

fortunately, not for me to decide nor is dealing with the rath of the losing side. :-)
...and kinda glad there are no emojis


Michael W. Lynch
 

On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 09:40 AM, pdxareaid wrote:


...and kinda glad there are no emojis
Made me laugh! I don't believe that even the most ardent "pro edit" folks would advocate for adding emojis and GIF's to a "list of features"!

--
Michael Lynch
Dardanelle, AR


pdxareaid
 

going a little OT:
in other forums i occasionally use emojis to save off misunderstandings as the spectrum of mindsets is much wider than this forum.
this forum is civil enough that emojis are generally not needed. though dancing bananas would be nice...jk.


Carsten Bormann
 

On 2021-09-11, at 16:47, Michael W. Lynch via groups.io <mlynch003=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

Made me laugh! I don't believe that even the most ardent "pro edit" folks would advocate for adding emojis and GIF's to a "list of features”!
Emojis are not a feature, they are a fact of life 😁

I don’t know what you mean by GIFs (animated ones maybe?) — but since TekScopes does not allow any images, we also don’t get GIFs.
But that is a bug, not a feature.

Grüße, Carsten


Tom Gardner
 

On 11/09/21 15:40, pdxareaid via groups.io wrote:
fortunately, not for me to decide nor is dealing with the rath of the losing side. :-)
It shouldn't be a case of winning exclusive-or losing.

All tools have characteristics, advantages and disadvantages.

If you want a web-interface and editing, I suggest you look at EEVBlog forum.


 

god no, please, no edit feature. The edit re-emails are intensely
annoying. If you made an error, just write a second email correcting
it, and this time, also make sure you're paying attention...

On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 5:07 PM Tom Gardner <tggzzz@gmail.com> wrote:

On 11/09/21 15:40, pdxareaid via groups.io wrote:
fortunately, not for me to decide nor is dealing with the rath of the losing side. :-)
It shouldn't be a case of winning exclusive-or losing.

All tools have characteristics, advantages and disadvantages.

If you want a web-interface and editing, I suggest you look at EEVBlog forum.






pdxareaid
 

"Emojis are not a feature, they are a fact of life 😁"
why would you do that...you will be the one known to have started it, not me.

not leaning one way or the other

there once was a tek forum named groups.
domain io and sometimes an oops.
emailers kept happy.
no editing crappy.
though emojis it can reproduce. 👌


Dave Voorhis
 

On 11 Sep 2021, at 16:03, Carsten Bormann <cabocabo@gmail.com> wrote:

On 2021-09-11, at 16:47, Michael W. Lynch via groups.io <mlynch003=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

Made me laugh! I don't believe that even the most ardent "pro edit" folks would advocate for adding emojis and GIF's to a "list of features”!
Emojis are not a feature, they are a fact of life 😁

I don’t know what you mean by GIFs (animated ones maybe?) — but since TekScopes does not allow any images, we also don’t get GIFs.
But that is a bug, not a feature.
I’d consider that a feature, not a bug. :-)


Keith
 

re: editable posts

I'm with Jim on this one. Here's why

The data and ideas we post here are quite long-lived. I routinely search out old threads, hoping for correct and trustworthy answers. I then quite often trust, and apply the claims and advice present therein. But, in doing those searches, I do sometimes find howlers in there, my own and others! In the current model, the person who is quite wrong (like me, sometimes) but also quite convinced when they hit "post", simply has no way to make good on his or her mistaken idea. That is, except to post another tiresome explanation of the thing, admitting, warning others "not to read post #xyz123" etc. It is not efficient.

And, when those old posts cannot be corrected, except by re-posting and/or deleting, it just doesn't seem to be building a clear and trustworthy library for future readers. So, just my opinion here, but the long life of mistaken or less-than-best-thinking postings tends to spread mistaken ideas... and it is hard figure out which ones are right and which are wrong. That is, unless one wishes to follow the entire (sometimes extensive) thread and "find" that the misstatement was corrected twenty five messages later. This can be very frustrating and time-consuming.

So that's why I think Jim makes a good point.

But, whatever the admins decide, I want to stress that I'm very VERY grateful for this forum and especially its administrators! Such a depth of wisdom, knowledge and a willingness to share amongst so many is fabulous. I know I've grown and learned so much simply by reading and following the ideas and threads of some very bright and gifted men and women here on the forum.

Deep and sincere thanks to every person who has sacrificed and contributed as an administrator. Your excellent stewardship has kept this forum viable. You are very much appreciated.

Keith
coolblueglow


Renée
 

I consider it a blessing that it is not available.
personally nothing is broke lets not fix it till it is broken or so bloated it runs slow.
btw the list works great when using an external editor ( ie thunderbird or claws)...I know too much trouble for some.
Renée

On 9/11/21 9:36 AM, Dave Voorhis wrote:
On 11 Sep 2021, at 16:03, Carsten Bormann <cabocabo@gmail.com> wrote:

On 2021-09-11, at 16:47, Michael W. Lynch via groups.io <mlynch003=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Made me laugh! I don't believe that even the most ardent "pro edit" folks would advocate for adding emojis and GIF's to a "list of features”!
Emojis are not a feature, they are a fact of life 😁

I don’t know what you mean by GIFs (animated ones maybe?) — but since TekScopes does not allow any images, we also don’t get GIFs.
But that is a bug, not a feature.
I’d consider that a feature, not a bug. :-)




saipan59 (Pete)
 

My 'vote' is also to turn on editing, and to suggest (for those that care) to use digest e-mails so that you don't get many individuals per day.
I don't expect that post-editing will happen 'frequently' anyway. And it feels better than creating *another* post to correct a mistake.

Pete


Dave Voorhis
 

On 11 Sep 2021, at 18:09, saipan59 (Pete) <saipan1959@gmail.com> wrote:

My 'vote' is also to turn on editing, and to suggest (for those that care) to use digest e-mails so that you don't get many individuals per day.
I don't expect that post-editing will happen 'frequently' anyway. And it feels better than creating *another* post to correct a mistake.
Unless it’s a different Groups.io <http://groups.io/> forum I’m thinking of, wasn’t editing turned on in the early days of using Groups.io <http://groups.io/>, and didn’t that result in a barrage of emails from a few folks who quite reasonably made frequent edits to their forum posts, but weren't aware it was pumping out emails?

Though maybe that facility has been improved since to only send one email per post per day, or some such.


 

My bad experience of groups that enable editing is that 30% or more of posts get 3-5 edits each which more than doubles the message flow.

So my vote is no.

D.

-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@groups.io <TekScopes@groups.io> On Behalf Of saipan59 (Pete)
Sent: 11 September 2021 18:10
To: TekScopes@groups.io
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Suggestion for our group Administrator

My 'vote' is also to turn on editing, and to suggest (for those that care) to use digest e-mails so that you don't get many individuals per day.
I don't expect that post-editing will happen 'frequently' anyway. And it feels better than creating *another* post to correct a mistake.

Pete


pdxareaid
 

this is my last post on this. i was not leaning at first but am now.
i think we all know we are using yesterday's technology. sure there is much better and i would prefer we use it.
however, this is a legacy forum and the folks with the most knowledge likely would prefer
not to have editing since they are using the email interface.

if that is true, out of respect and to insure this is a place welcoming to those who know the most, i'm for
keeping the email interface to their liking.
if there is a workaround to allow both manageable email and editing, then great.
short of that keep what was decided on for the transition from yahoo.


 

On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 7:16 PM Dave Voorhis <voorhis@gmail.com> wrote:

On 11 Sep 2021, at 18:09, saipan59 (Pete) <saipan1959@gmail.com> wrote:

My 'vote' is also to turn on editing, and to suggest (for those that care) to use digest e-mails so that you don't get many individuals per day.
I don't expect that post-editing will happen 'frequently' anyway. And it feels better than creating *another* post to correct a mistake.
Unless it’s a different Groups.io <http://groups.io/> forum I’m thinking of, wasn’t editing turned on in the early days of using Groups.io <http://groups.io/>, and didn’t that result in a barrage of emails from a few folks who quite reasonably made frequent edits to their forum posts, but weren't aware it was pumping out emails?
Yes, that's precisely why it's off.

Though maybe that facility has been improved since to only send one email per post per day, or some such.
It's the same as it's been. No changes.

On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 6:59 PM Keith <coolblueglow@gmail.com> wrote:

The data and ideas we post here are quite long-lived. I routinely search out old threads, hoping for correct and trustworthy answers. I then quite often trust, and apply the claims and advice present therein. But, in doing those searches, I do sometimes find howlers in there, my own and others! In the current model, the person who is quite wrong (like me, sometimes) but also quite convinced when they hit "post", simply has no way to make good on his or her mistaken idea. That is, except to post another tiresome explanation of the thing, admitting, warning others "not to read post #xyz123" etc. It is not efficient.
Editing is enabled on HPAK. No one *ever* does anything like what you
describe. The *only* edit notification emails happen when someone
clueless about the notification emails corrects single-letter typos
one at a time with 5 subsequent notification emails. Infinitely honing
forum posts in here to perfection is a nice pipe dream, but in
practice, no one does this. I can't say it's due to one thing
specifically. I think it's because our memory and recall are finite,
so once you figure out something new, you don't think about the fact
that you made a post about this two years ago, one of 10 000 posts you
made. I think you're looking for a wiki, not for a mailing list.

NB the Tek/HPAK Discord allows editing messages. It can be joined
here: https://discord.gg/g5C2jaAX

I'm not against editing messages, I'm just against editing messages
here, because it's absolutely terrible on what essentially is a mail
reflector with file hosting.

And, when those old posts cannot be corrected, except by re-posting and/or deleting, it just doesn't seem to be building a clear and trustworthy library for future readers. So, just my opinion here, but the long life of mistaken or less-than-best-thinking postings tends to spread mistaken ideas... and it is hard figure out which ones are right and which are wrong. That is, unless one wishes to follow the entire (sometimes extensive) thread and "find" that the misstatement was corrected twenty five messages later. This can be very frustrating and time-consuming.
That's what most people will do anyways. So you're not spared the
search. When reading a post, you won't know if the poster is of the
editing type, or of the follow-up type, and I bet that most will be of
the follow-up type. In fact, most will be of the no edit, no follow-up
type. So you're saving nothing, and you're really killing the email
interface with absolute garbage.


Tommy
 

My vote: Do not enable editing, do not fix what is working reasonably well...