Update: Related Groups Feature Test
Hi all,
My name is Leonard and I am the Director of the Yahoo! Groups team. There has been a lot of discussion about the test we are running with the Related Groups content in emails. We are listening to your thoughts and wanted to update you on some of our current thinking. But first, some clarification about the feature.
The Related Groups feature is a test. In a test, our goal is to learn whether the feature is useful for Yahoo! Groups users. If the feature is useful, we would want to invest more into it. If we find it is not useful, we would want to remove it or improve it. So what are the results of the test so far? Well, it is still too early to get definitive results, however the current direction of the data shows that members are joining many more groups than ever before. With that said, let’s discuss some of the feedback we have heard:
- Is anyone listening to my feedback? Yes, we are reading your messages and comments. However, if you want a direct line to us about this feature, we have provided a choice in the Groups Help area to submit issues you are seeing with the Related Groups feature It is particularly important to let us know if you are seeing a specific recommendation that is a problem for you, and why it is a problem, so that we can look into addressing the issue. Please only submit Related Groups commentary, as this goes to the product team and not customer service and so we are not staffed to respond to inquires not related to this feature via this link.
- The name of the feature “Related Groups”. We received a number of proposals for different names for this feature. We definitely want users to understand what this list is. For this reason, we showed users how many common members existed between groups. We are trying to be as transparent as possible about how this works, so people can make an informed decision. If we find a name that makes everyone happy we would love to update the feature with it.
- Concerns about privacy. We require a minimum number of common members between groups before we would show a related group. However, use the feedback form we mentioned above if you are seeing an issue.
- Logic of the results. Prior to this feature, members within groups would sometimes ask others for recommendations, but the process was awkward. In this test, we tried to come up with a simpler way for members to identify groups they might also be interested in. Developing the best suggestions for groups is a never-ending process, and we are continuing to explore ways to improve this process. We’ll continue to track the results of this test (as well as your feedback), as our goal is to provide the Groups community with the best possible experience. This includes looking for ways to suggest groups with small memberships and making sure that the recommendations made are to healthy communities.
- Ability to opt-out. While we don’t have a tool on the website that allows you to opt out of this test, we definitely intend to provide such a feature in the future. Based on the results of the test, we’ll develop a roadmap for these changes.
Leonard
RS said,
March 19, 2008 @ 11:48 am
Leonard,
Glad to hear from you in person. Also good to know who’s running the show over there now. Wasn’t able to find out, and poor Lee Clancey took a slap for you on this issue. I wish I’d known who to properly blame, because he owes you a slap.
This post does nothing to help us out.
To address your statements above:
1. I think the link to this help reporting section is CRUCIAL to apply to the feature that goes out in the e-mails, so users have an immediate way to respond to an inappropriate listing. Your help sections are not laid out very well in general, and you would get much more feedback and sooner if it was as easy to report as it was to see. Thanks for at least providing a way to report inappropriate listings. Meanwhile, all our members still see the listing. No fix, just a possibly reduced liklihood of a repeat offense later. Maybe. I find this kind of heavy handed development very inconsiderate to the end-user. I’ve seen it kill good services before. Responses like this one only add fuel to the fire.
2. “Groups with Common Members” would make more sense, no? Ya know, since that’s what it IS. As it stands, I’ve seen many statements by mods that users think this is related to the group that the message came through, and there is almost zero real relationship. As we have said, minimal value here! The bafflement continues.
3. *Boggle*. This statement does not address privacy concerns at all. It also leaves small groups out in the cold, due to the minimum. Without providing this feature as an Opt In service, you have violated the privacy of EVERY group that gets listed involuntarily. You also made sure dead and spam groups get equal listing, since everyone was candidate. The data surfaced is going to be useless in those cases. Hello!
4. There is no ‘process’ for users asking each other about groups. That happens on an individual basis. There is no formal process. You imply that YG has some sort of process for this, and you don’t. So, what, a crappy solution beats none at all? Hows about offering a rating system for groups? Howsabout fixing your search product. If people can’t find groups, isn’t that your fault, not ours? For some reason we pay the price though…sad.
5. So we’re stuck with all suffering through your test?! 500 posts and counting in less than a week about how this is angering our members and you are going to let it ride?? I’d be outraged if I wasn’t so incredulous.
And this jewel:
“Well, it is still too early to get definitive results, however the current direction of the data shows that members are joining many more groups than ever before.”
Sure they are! The wrong groups under false impressions, and mods are having to kick some of them right back out. You tracking that too? Is your data telling you how many are spammers n scammers? Are you tracking which groups are shutting down, or abandoning YG as a result of this? You may need to start…
Leonard, its imperative you understand this: Its not the feature itself, its HOW you did it that has me (and others) very angry. No warning, no opt out, no discussion, no input prior to it. You’re providing the worst solution to a problem suffered by people who either (a) can’t work a search engine, or (b) are sick of coming up with dead & spammer groups when they use the one for YG. You bypassed the real problem and made another one! This “problem” you are tackling has minimal representation on the suggestion boards, if any at all. The suggestion boards are basically a priority-based to-do list for you folks, no? Why skip past the first few pages of top-rated suggestions and come up with this? What were you thinking?
Leonard, since Lee must only have left recently, I am left wondering how long you have been with YG. These are serious mistakes to make with the community of moderators, judging by the feedback already, and my own reaction. For someone to misjudge us so badly for the sake of getting one set of numbers up, I am left wondering if you got a junk directive from on high to do that, or if you yourself just are that out of touch. I’d rather believe the former than the latter.
I am very sad to see this turn for the Yahoo Groups’ development process. I hope you catch a clue before the goose dies. This was bad. Real bad. Letting it ride was an even worse call. Not much I can do at this point besides rant. I’m very disappointed. This was exactly the kind of response I’d hope Yahoo would be smart enough to avoid. Oh well. Can’t help you plug the holes if you insist on ignoring us and making more. Thanks for at least showing your face. Oh and on behalf of Lee, here’s your .
Nubia said,
March 19, 2008 @ 12:08 pm
Dear group owners
if you are against this new recommandation module of yahoo
who add advertising for other groups in the mails
add your vote here on the yahoo groups suggestion board
http://suggestions.yahoo.com/detail/?prop=groups&fid=79637
and don’t forget to rate the survey
Nubia, owner of Nubia_group
RS said,
March 19, 2008 @ 12:43 pm
I have a rating system for groups in mind that would not only allow us to rate good groups, but also flag inactive ones (which includes spam groups), and eventually bury them a few degrees (you could still find such groups, just on purpose not on accident). I am still typing it up, but if groups were surfaced by common category, common keywords between groups and high user approval ratings, you’d have something REAL to offer. Make the results being surfaced an opt-in feature to keep out dead/spam groups, and not disturb the private groups, and you have a viable product enhancement.
More later via a link when I get it in better shape, and posted someplace.
Nubia said,
March 19, 2008 @ 12:52 pm
i like to read your comments dear RS
)))
Amit Kumar said,
March 19, 2008 @ 1:05 pm
I still stand by my comment that at least there should be a filter for people/users using non adult group to not get advertised about adult groups. It is like an open invitation to every kid who wants to see some skin.
Dewitt Gimblet said,
March 19, 2008 @ 1:23 pm
Well, Leonard, I have to say I’m pretty disappointing in you. If you couldn’t see the complains coming, you’re pretty out of touch with your users. And if you did foresee the objection many of us would have, you should have at least had the opt out option available when the feature was “put into test”. And you let the feature be rolled out just before the weekend when you couldn’t react quickly to the complaints. And, it took you until Wed to finally respond and when you did, you didn’t respond with the appropriate, “I’m sorry”, which indicates that you still don’t understand you screwed up. I used to manage OS development for a major corporation. If I had committed the sort of blunder that you did, my manager would have played field hockey down the hall with my head.
deg
Normajean Brevik said,
March 19, 2008 @ 1:24 pm
Hi Leonard,
I was shocked to see this feature added to my digest and horrified that my group members might actually be able to see and hot link to these other sites. Frankly, some of these groups are poorly run that’s why I started my own group. I hate to see my group associated with some of these other list owners and sites. Honestly some of these people have been ban from my group for poor behavior so why would I want them associated in my posts?! Egads man, I gives me the willies! PLEASE reconsider this feature in Yahoo groups! Honestly, in my opinion, this is NOT a good thing.
Thanks for listening. I really do appreciate all that you folks do in the background to keep us up and running and except for this I have NO complaints.
Sincerely, Normajean Brevik
List Owner of Fiber Art Traders
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FiberArtTraders
Billie said,
March 19, 2008 @ 1:32 pm
I for one am not happy with the idea of advertising other groups in my groups without being asked first.
I have not heard any owner thinking it was a good idea, in fact, we feel like Yahoo likes to tell our members to go to another group aka the grass is greener on the other side. This is simular to “Fully Featured”, no one likes it or uses it
I have 2 groups, would love to opt out as soon as possible
oklatom said,
March 19, 2008 @ 1:33 pm
Okay, I read it. Then I waited a bit, and went back and read it again.
Let me see if I understood it correctly here: The goal of making the big groups bigger is working, so we can keep on making money on the ads we put in the big groups. The little groups don’t have the base we need to convince advertisers that their message (I’ll be nice and say message rather than spam) will be read, so despite what you think, we will keep it going because it makes our wallet fatter. That about cover it? I thought so.
RS said,
March 19, 2008 @ 1:45 pm
Oklatom, you may have hit the nail on the head there. I have been thinking that the reason YG does nothing about dead groups is that every page hit is also an Adserve, so when a search engine crawls up the page and serves it, the advertiser gets an adserve too, so they put that in the win column, despite the user pulling his/her hair. Yahoo: are we wrong? If so, you need tos tart shjowing us with actions that we are, and that satisfaction counts for something with you, because many were on the fence with you, and this was a puch the wrong way.
Nubia: I like yours too! Thanks!
Tricia J. said,
March 19, 2008 @ 1:51 pm
Once again, slowly. No opt out. YahooGroups isn’t really that determined to emulate spammers, is it?
Instead, opt in. Notify list owners of the capability, and IF they want their list included, they can take action to opt in – turn the feature on, perhaps. If they don’t take action, you keep your fingers OFF their list for this feature.
Is it really time to inform the advertisers (not hard to tell who they are) that we will be boycotting their products advertised on our lists because of this kind of thing? Really?
Nubia said,
March 19, 2008 @ 1:54 pm
dear oklatom i applaudise this is exactly what i think myself about the reasons of this recommandation feature
i think myself to add a comment at the end of each mails of my group saying
this list is NOT RECOMMANDED by nubia_group
dear RS thanks
ReduceReuseRecycle said,
March 19, 2008 @ 1:58 pm
RS rocks! I agree totally with your points!
Leonard,
The only conclusion that I can come to is that English is not your first language. If it were, surely you would have quickly come to the conclusion that very close to 100% of the commenters do not want this idiotically implemented non-enhancement!! Since it appears that you didn’t understand what we have said, would you please tell us your first language so we can find someone who also speaks and writes that language and ask them to translate so there will be no reason for you to misunderstand?
I am a co-owner of a group that has some spin-off groups started by people who didn’t like our rules about no advertising of their businesses, even in sig lines. Why do you think we would want to see their spammy groups listed as “recommendations” on our group’s messages? According to the Y!G TOS, we have the right to run our groups the way we want. By imposing these “recommendations” on us without a way to turn them off, YOU ARE VIOLATING YOUR OWN TOS!!!
RS said,
March 19, 2008 @ 2:18 pm
It struck me during lunch that a collection of volunteer groups getting 100% usage of the feature would get more feedback sooner on the usefulness of this feature, rather than all of YG getting unsolicited, unannounced, and unavoidable random strikes at a10% frequency. Total chaos process, vs orderly and helpful process. Just sayin’ that this would have been nice, from my perspective. I’d have been opting in to try it out and give you feedback rather than foaming at the mouth about wanting out. I want new tools for my groups. Ones that work. Ones I can turn on and off. Anything else is a disruption. See how one process engenders respect and the other destroys it? All I can ask is that you learn from this.
RS said,
March 19, 2008 @ 2:20 pm
Oh and Thanks Triple R. I feel like I’m hogging the feedback at this point. I’m done for now.
Terri said,
March 19, 2008 @ 2:23 pm
So this is just a test? Hmmm in the meantime my group suffers and members are now up in arms about the additional JUNK within their posts. As a group owner what am I to do? Sit back, wait till Yahoo does what it needs to, watch my group get peeved to the point of leaving or worse yet gain members that find we are not what they have?
I look after my group, I do the maintaince to keep it running. With all this EXTRA junk I am dealing with now its insane. With more than 1100 members on my one group and having 2 other groups, soon to be coming and going this will add to my work load. YES WORK, groups that are active take work from the Owners/Moderators. They just don’t sit there running on their own.
Now Leonard you ask us to sit back… wait, its a test… seriously? If your search engine worked properly then you wouldn’t need to go to these extremes to get people to FIND the groups they are in need of.
I have recommended other groups of similar interest within my group, I have never sent anyone to a BAD Group or to an Inactive group. BUT your “related groups” are not really doing that are they? Just sending people to groups that have members that are “common”, possibly DEAD Groups or not even really like minded… whats the point of this?
I would love the choice to have or not have this option for my group. I don’t care if you keep it so long as I have a choice as to whether or not participate.
Don’t leave the group owners the only choice of “UNLISTING” our groups to get clear of this. If this happens then you will be relying solely on the “word of mouth” of the groups to get people to the “unlisted” groups, therefore reducing traffic.
Please, give us a choice!
Vamp said,
March 19, 2008 @ 2:32 pm
It is forbidden to advertise other groups in my group and I remove or ban members for this so why would I allow you to do it ? It makes me think of moving over to Google groups instead. Please reconsider your actions before other group owners move their groups elsewhere too.
Why are you advertising other groups in my group anyway ? There is a search for groups at Yahoo Groups home ? If you can’t figure out how to use this feature you shouldn’t belong to groups.
Terri said,
March 19, 2008 @ 2:59 pm
Good point Vamp,
There is a search engine also on each group there is a SEARCH Feature (Search for other groups…). So please explain to us why this “extra” advertising of “related” groups is needed?
Can you touch base on this for us?
Patty said,
March 19, 2008 @ 3:16 pm
What happened to Jami? Who are you? Please give us your full name. Jami really exists, do you?
Anyhow, it sure seems you’ve made up your minds without really hearing us. Please understand many of us are considering leaving Yahoo groups because of this. The test is causing nothing but aggravation for many of us. Quit testing and address our concerns, please!
Beth Cornell aka said,
March 19, 2008 @ 3:47 pm
I for one wouldn’t mind advertizing other groups that are in the same realm as the group they are being advertised on. Like if your group is Tagging then why not put other taggers group links on those pages. I know of alot of other sites doing this and it seems to work well and people are happy. But like those above, I do agree not to put llnks that do not have anything to do with that group.
Beth Cornell
Barbara said,
March 19, 2008 @ 3:50 pm
Nice try. Keep trying.
I have some real-time issues for you. I make soap. Many suppliers have their email groups for more than advertising their business but for discussion as well. Now, they are advertising their competitors ON THEIR LIST WITHOUT THEIR APPROVAL. Yes, this is happening. I can show you at least two groups that are advertising each other. Lovely.
I am also part of the homeschooling community. The homeschooling community is very divided among political, religious lines. There are some issues that we all agree on and may be on a list for that issue but may be on other lists as well, that are very opposite of what others would want to be on. I can see that some of the fundy Christian homeschoolers might get pretty upset to see that there are Pagan homeschoolers on their list as well,m even if their common list has a strict “no religion discussion” rule.
HOW is this helpful??
IT is not. Make OPT IN! WHY should I have to opt out when I didn’t ASK for it in the first place.
Barbara
Terri said,
March 19, 2008 @ 3:53 pm
I am quoting RS here as I to agree with his comments
“RS said,
March 19, 2008 @ 2:18 pm
It struck me during lunch that a collection of volunteer groups getting 100% usage of the feature would get more feedback sooner on the usefulness of this feature, rather than all of YG getting unsolicited, unannounced, and unavoidable random strikes at a10% frequency. Total chaos process, vs orderly and helpful process. Just sayin’ that this would have been nice, from my perspective. I’d have been opting in to try it out and give you feedback rather than foaming at the mouth about wanting out. I want new tools for my groups. Ones that work. Ones I can turn on and off. Anything else is a disruption. See how one process engenders respect and the other destroys it? All I can ask is that you learn from this.”
Can you not make your “new additions/features” beta features and have Beta testers from real groups sign up to give you the proper feedback rather than bombarding those who are so opposed.
If you get a number of testers from each “topic” area they can tell you how it would work for them.
RIGHT ON RS… have to say I love your comments. I just wish more people would chime in, we need to enlarge our choir in order to be heard I think.
Kathy said,
March 19, 2008 @ 4:07 pm
Leonard,
First off I hope you’ll address our concerns instead of just a general post that did nothing to allay the concerns posted on the blog Jami started.
First off, why push other groups that might be in opposition of the group it’s posted on? This is one of the biggest complaints I’m seeing from everyone.
Why not just put this feature on the search engine page instead of bothering groups with it?
Why in the world add it to emails that are already too cluttered as it is now?
If you insist on going through with this no matter what you’ve seen the majority of feedback against, then you should have figured out a way to do opt in before implementing this. It should NOT be pushed on people that don’t want it. I can go no mail on all my groups. I don’t want to but I can. So can everyone else. How is that going to be useful to your advertisers? Not opt out either but opt in. Actually the best way to do that is to have each individual opt in if they want to. That way those that for some reason don’t know how and obviously don’t want to learn how to search for themselves are free to get spammed and the rest of us won’t be.
Shal said,
March 19, 2008 @ 5:11 pm
I disagree with the demand that the feature be made opt-in. I would think it is precisely the members of ownerless or otherwise poorly run groups that most need to see the recommendations.
The ability to opt-out I think should be given to the member, similar to opting out of invites or direct adds. That way those with limited or expensive connectivity can keep their message bandwidth minimized.
I agree that the description “Groups related to …” is unfortunate. I think a lot of the umbrage over this feature comes from inferences that these other groups are related by more than just common membership. Common management, common topic, common quality, …
I would suggest something simple like “Yahoo also recommends …” instead. That takes away any implication that the owners/mods of _this_ group had anything to do with these recommendations.
If adult groups are really being recommended to members of non-adult groups that’s also a problem, but one that should be trivial for Yahoo to fix. OTOH, if the problem is with groups that have “questionable” content, but aren’t placed in the adult category that’s tougher to solve — you can usually find a few of those with search too. A fast and easy way to report them may be part of the answer.
Other than that, though, I find the feature to be innocuous and potentially beneficial to my groups — this tempest in a teapot from other group mods notwithstanding.
Chrissy said,
March 19, 2008 @ 10:05 pm
I still don’t like the idea ,its bad enough competing for members and keeping them in without having groups try to steal members.I care about my groups and want quality over quantity.I hate spam and so do my members I gotten so many complaints over this.Like said before improve the search engine.And once this “test” is over and *if* you do keep this PLEASE,PLEASE let us shut this off we we chose to.
Rajesh Kainth said,
March 19, 2008 @ 10:08 pm
Hi All
I have just submitted this on the yahoo blogspot dealing with this subject. Its at the link
http://www.ygroupsblog.com/blog/2008/03/19/update-related-groups-feature-test/
Dear Mr. Leonard,
Thanks a lot for speaking to us. I appreciate your concerns about taking feedback from us, but I am sorry to note that inspite of overwhelming opposition to this idea from all quaters, you still feel its too early to get definative results!!! I really find this to be strange.
In contrast you have already got late in disbanding this feature. Are you going to disband it when many group owners have shifted their groups somewhere else or some have stopped releasing mails in their groups till this feature is disbanded? My dear friend you dont have to put your hand in fire, just to know it will burn the hand. Kindly go through below which is my feedback on this issue:-
1. Out of the 5 groups which you have publicised on my group’s platform, the owners and moderators of 4 are banned members in my group for spamming, scamming, creating disturbances in my group.
2. Two of them are semi-porno groups, who have used porno stuff for fattening their nos.Out of the two, one is still releasing vulgar porn stuff in his group and the other, after gaining good no. of members through pornography, has now become a saint. In Hindi it is said ” 900 chuhaye khakar billi haj ko chali.( after eating 900 mice, the cat is going for Haj(prilgrimage).
3. The owner of one of them is a well known spammer, and a cyber criminal and by using all hook and crook means including intimidation of smaller groups, he has been able to fatten his group. He was thrown out by me from my group for these very activities way back in August 2005 and now you are unknowingly and unintentinally working as a middle man to promote him in my group. What a shame!.
4. The biggest group appearing in my list is a dead group. See the mail count of that group its not even 1.5 mail average per day.
Mr. Leonard your very defination of “common intrests” is wrong. Common members don’t mean common intrests. Oh no, no way at all. You say more people joining Yahoo Groups, but have you also monitored, the spammers, hackers, dead groups? My dear friend one of the group’s owner you are publicising in my group mails has, not hundreds, but thousands of complaints with truckloads of proofs pending with your Yahoo office. Instead of taking action against such a group you are making him dance on our head.
For your kind info, mutual recommendations for joining other groups, are already going on between various groups. Its the owner of the group who knows and should decide which other group is friendly and has common intrests and NOT YOU PLEASE. KINDLY DO NOT THROW BACK IN OUR HOUSE, THE VERY FILTH THAT WE HAVE THROWN OUT FROM OUR HOUSE.
Luv & Regards
Rajesh Kainth
Owner Dil Se Desi Group
Rajesh Kainth said,
March 19, 2008 @ 10:37 pm
Dear Mr. Leonard
I would like to add to the above, that unknowingly you have licensed intimidation and bullying of smaller groups by bigger groups.
Luv & Regards
Rajesh Kainth
RS said,
March 19, 2008 @ 11:07 pm
Rajesh:
Great post! Please make sure to report these issues to that new help feature Leonard links to in his post. Hopefully it will help. I’d like to know if it does.
RS said,
March 19, 2008 @ 11:11 pm
For those that do want to report a problem group being advertised, the form linked to is the correct one, question 8 is the crucial one to make sure it gets to the product team. Be sure to select the one titled ‘Related Groups’.
Bee said,
March 20, 2008 @ 5:42 am
Put very simply, for you to understand, Leonard…
Based on the amount of and content in msgs posted, THE TEST FAILED.
NOT enough feedback? How much more do you need? Oh wait, you won’t read it anyway.
I suppose you’re just playing this game of “need more info” to continue violating Yahoo’s TOS and collecting those big advertising bucks.
Most disgustedly,
B
Wayney said,
March 20, 2008 @ 6:00 am
I’m so very against this for multiple reasons. I do not allow people to advertise their groups on my group without prior permission. I want to know what is being “recommended”. I especially don’t allow advertising and I see this as advertising because some group owners do profit in some way from their groups. I don’t care so much about groups with the same focus as mine, I don’t see it as competing but many owners do. I just feel that unsolicited promoting of a group is spam. I have no problem with members of my groups belonging to a “competing” group, I belong to some that could be considered competitive with my own groups.
I also have a problem with this because members have a hard enough time deleting trailers as it is. Adding these recommendations just makes the “junk” (as most members refer to the ads, info etc after the email) harder to delete. And for the members who either don’t understand how to delete it when replying or for those too lazy to do so, when they leave it and reply, it makes digests much longer and more cluttered. As an owner, I have enough complaints about the length of digests and people not trimming posts as it is without adding all of this info.
I also feel that if I want a new group, I’m an adult and fully capable of knowing what I like and want to consider joining. I don’t need a computer picking groups for me, just because we have the same members. Having the same members doesn’t mean the groups are similar. It just means members overlap. The potential for recommending a group I am not interested in is high from what I’ve seen.
I hope that this stops. I’d seriously consider moving my group elsewhere if this continues.
Denise said,
March 20, 2008 @ 6:18 am
WHY? am i list others but yet my group is NOT showing up on any of the related groups. I am on 5 pages of groups in the same area. and all those in the test are basicly spamming the same 5 groups. that is crappy. If i am going to be force to spam my competitors, then I should at least be being spammed as well.
so Mr Leonard, what’s up with that?
Laine Butterworth said,
March 20, 2008 @ 8:20 am
I believe that there is a definite consensus here.
End this test!
Laine
RS said,
March 20, 2008 @ 8:54 am
Holy Macaroni n Cheese! I just put one and one together last night!
“Minions of the Evil Leonard” was the test group mentioned in the announcement of this feature!
YOU ARE EVIL LEONARD!
Evil Leonard, I say to you: Stop your evil ways!
If you wanted a fast track to making a name for yourself in Evil, well mister, you picked a doozey! So now you must feast upon my Suggestions of Justice!
I will now pit it against your evil, mano a mano!)
So, you want to surface content for groups users they might find relevant, and you want to do it via their e-mail (because you are Evil).
Fine.
But WE want the option to say yes or no to any aspect of this process, and to get *quality* groups when we get promotional notices about other groups. There’s no fun in checking out a listing if it turns out to be evil too. I now present a way to thwart your evil plans to send us all unrelated content and promote bad groups.
Here’s how we both win. Justice 101, chum!
Lesson 1: The user is in charge!
When a user joins a group, they should see a pre-checked box (much like you leave the download Yahoo Toolbar box checked for me every time I join a group, you madman), with the legend “I would like Yahoo to recommend groups to me that are similar to this one”. Then the user can opt in/out of whatever your latest evil scheme is to promote people’s groups.
You want it in the e-mail (you evil fiend) so here’s how. Every (week/month/whatever) the user gets an seperate e-mail with similar groups listed in it, using whatever evil criteria you want. There’s all the evil you get. Leave the e-mail format you have now alone. Its evil enough as it is. Well, alright, you can add one link at the bottom that says “Find Similar Groups” which takes them to the user settings page for the group, where they can recheck the box. If they won’t use a search engine, none of us can force them.
See how we just bypassed a few types of complaints you’ve seen already? Let’s bypass the rest. To the Groups end, chum! Where we continue the fight against evil.
Lesson 2: The Moderator is ALSO in charge! (And what to do if they aren’t)
Not all groups are equal. Many are rudderless, with no activity or no mod to clean up the spamfest. Some groups don’t want promotion, others can’t get enough. Some are adult groups and as such should be only promoted to people who leave the box checked when joining an *adult group*. (Sending Adult listings to all YG users? For shame Evil Leonard! For Shame! Put it in the Happy Box!)
Create a moderator control on each group (an UNchecked box) with the legend “I want Yahoo to promote my Group”. This gives you and your minions a list of willing victims to try out your evil schemes on. This is an opt-in feature so that Quality results are ALL that surfaces. Rudderless and dead groups are left out of the equation by default (no active mods there to check the box), so that however you pitch these groups to us, the only ones promoted are those that asked you to do it.
Do this before you hatch any more evil schemes, and you’ll have no more complaints about getting bad groups surfacing (until the newer ones die off anyway–and I have a fix to keep them out too, but more later on that), or who got something they didn’t want. You’ll simply get feedback on whether the new promotional feature was useful for its intended purpose or not.
Justice 101, Leonard. Its called the old “win-win”. Be a better Overlord. Lest we continue to smite ye.
Signed: Your Nemesis,
RS
(moniker pending)
Francine Hill said,
March 20, 2008 @ 9:48 am
I do not like this at all. The group I own is for beginners. The last thing they
need to do is go to a new group and get chastised for asking questions about
their art or about yahoo. My group is to help them learn the ropes of yahoo
groups and to give them a safe place to ask about their art.
I also run a teen art group with my granddaughter and I do not want those
kids subjected to adults they don’t know. I’ve had too many try to get into
this teen group and advertising that it’s a teen group is not good for the kids.
One other thing, I don’t allow my group members to advertise other groups
on my group, why would I want Yahoo to do it?
Thanks for listening.
Gil. said,
March 20, 2008 @ 9:52 am
Leonard,
You are not listening. You’ve already been given specific instances of problems arising from this brilliant new idea Yahoo is forcing on us yet you want those who’ve already answered you to jump through Yahoo’s “Help” hoops. In the past, Yahoo’s responses to me have been so totally unrelated to my concerns…canned responses every one of them…that I doubt very much that anything has changed. Good luck to anyone who believes they will get any kind of personal, thoughtful response from you.
Who cares what you call this feature of yours? It’s not the name that irritates me, it’s the fact that you’re doing it at all, without consulting anyone, without allowing anyone the ability to opt in “or” out.
Do you really believe that Yahoo can give our group members better advice on other groups to join than the concerned and caring people who read pleas for help? We know our limits on my dog groups and when we see that people need more help than we can give on specialized subjects that go beyond our parameters we are perfectly willing to send them to related groups devoted to specific topics which are better able to give them the help and advice they badly need.
At the same time, we have strong differences with some dog groups which are appearing in Yahoo’s list of groups with common members, yet we are being forced to display their URLs so that the curious and the clueless will try those groups out. This, IMO, is indefensible. If people do not like our groups, they can leave and find others to join. Of course, that would be easier if your Search engine was worth a flip. I can find Yahoo groups more easily using Google.
Besides, you know yourself, or should, that many members join a group and after a while lost interest and forget they even belong to them. How much does a number of members in common really mean?
And where, by the way, is Jami? She may be reluctant to deal with the storm of protest here, and that’s understandable, but we’d certainly rather deal with someone who has a connection with us, who has been as helpful as possible while being caught between users and management, than someone who just appears out of the blue.
Faye said,
March 20, 2008 @ 9:56 am
Leonard, I think this related group feature is a bad idea. If you have so much time and energy to dream up something like this, you must surely have some way of fixing 360 so that it isn’t so slow and iffy. Wordpress and Blogspot come up almost immediately and I can post without all the hassle 360 takes. I know you are phasing out 360, but I do hope you make what comes next a vast improvement over what we have now. And let the groups decide if we are related or not. Please don’t try to force a relationship that may not be compatible.
Bruce Wilson said,
March 20, 2008 @ 11:23 am
I would like to know what planet Leonard is on. Has he even bothered to look at the overwhelming negative feedback that has been posted in response to Jami’s initial posting about the “feature”?
Wake up Leonard. This is a very bad idea that no one wants (except maybe a few people at yahoops who are totally out of touch). I am seeing many complaints from group users who detest the crap now being added on.
If you want to do something useful forget this “feature” and improve the Search function so it is easier for someone to find groups
Nora Jean Gatine said,
March 20, 2008 @ 12:04 pm
This is the skuttlebutt that’s going around regarding the purpose of the “recommended” Yahoo Groups…. and I quote:
“They are indeed selling something, it is called “Unique page views”
and that is the basis Internet advertisers use to measure how desirable a
place is to advertise on and how much to pay. the more unique views,
the more you can charge.
Yahoo is courting a “partnership” (read sell their company to) with a
number of other companies including Microsoft and Fox. More views
makes them worth more so the owners will get a bigger price when they sell.
All those links are designed to get you to try another group,
resulting in a unique page view, so they are using you to make them
worth more when they sell out.
Oh, they also sell your info and what groups you belong to as well as
track your online activity and sell that info to advertisers. Ever
notice how over the past few years more and more of the ads fit your
interests? That’s why.”
I would like Leonard to address this rumor. If Yahoo is beefing up it’s unique page views, because the links that show up on the posts aren’t just to the YG recommended, but it’s a long url that signifies it’s being tallied, then everything we’ve written about how YG can improve the user experience has been a BIG WASTE OF TIME.
If we’ve been mislead as to the purpose of these “recommended YG” then it is bad news. The ill will that will result will not beef up the unique page views but drive YG Owners to find another portal to host their list members. If there’s a “run on the bank” ,as it were, of exiting YGs then the numbers will go down, yes?
Because when a YG of a thousand or more members leaves it’s not just one disgruntled list owner leaving out. It’s the whole group that leaves out. Every time a YG member opens the Yahoo Home Page to sign in, to check email, to look at the news, to ask questions on “Answer”, these are unique page views that will leave Yahoo when the YG exits for a portal that’s isn’t going to jerk us around and blow smoke up our behinds.
Instead of falsely beefing up hits and eyeballs with a bit of crappy code that diminishes the end user’s experience, making a product worse than it was, wouldn’t it be a better use of time and resources to FIX the YG search engine so Yahoo will be selling a good product to who ever buys Yahoo?
Does Yahoo really think that this gambit of falsely upping the unique page views wouldn’t get out, be discussed, blogged, and boo’d?
If this rumor that’s floating about isn’t true then you best put your best PR spin on it and stomp out the flames. It’ll get back to the buyers and who wants to buy a portal with ill will attached to it, a portal that’s bleeding loyal users who account for the majority of unique page views?
Is it a sign of desperate times for Yahoo? Maybe YG Owners should be searching out other portals and abandon ship since the decision makers of Yahoo seem to be doing just that themselves?
Cyndi - Dreams Unltd said,
March 20, 2008 @ 12:52 pm
I absolutely HATE this new “feature.” In some of the groups to which I belong, other groups I would absolutely NOT recommend to anyone are listed. If I was a group owner and had a group “advocated” on my group that I didn’t believe in, I’d be LIVID! While I agree with nearly all of the “against” comments posted here, I’ll just pick the very first comment by RS as being totally representative of my feelings. At the very least a group owner should have the choice of having their group listed or to NOT have a listing included at the bottom of posts going through their group!
Cyndi - Dreams Unltd said,
March 20, 2008 @ 12:56 pm
Hmmm, have to add, as I forgot in my previous post, that one of the owners of a group I belong to thought I’d just added these “advertisements” to my posts on my own and asked that I not do so! Of course, she apologized when she found out the real story, but it just goes again to show that no real thought or preparation went into how groups owners OR members would feel about this new NON-feature!
Jan said,
March 20, 2008 @ 1:48 pm
Norma jean –
unfortuantely for users and moderators – I believe you have hit the proverbial nail on the head – like both RS and I pointed out there is no rational reason for groups that are messageless, & ownerless existing for years unless the ‘tally’ is all that matters -
F said,
March 20, 2008 @ 3:15 pm
NJ, I have a different theory that your unique page views in a way although certainly that could also be true. But how about Yahoo, in an attempt to overcome Microsoft or at least get more money, wants to convince their stockholders to vote against Microsoft, and stick with them, because Yahoo will say “we’ve added a million new members to groups in such a short time.” Of course, they are not new users at all, but the stockholders won’t know that. Well, just a thought.
ReduceReuseRecycle said,
March 20, 2008 @ 3:46 pm
Leonard,
Have you read this Yahoo page? http://docs.yahoo.com/info/values/page2.html The title is “What we [meaning Yahoo] do not value.” There are so many in that list that fit this situation that I can’t even begin to choose some to match it and print here. I hope, however, that you do indeed read it and take it to heart.
I also hope that Nora Jean Gatine’s great comment at March 20, 2008 @ 12:04 pm really is just a rumor.
Bruce Wilson said,
March 20, 2008 @ 4:44 pm
OK, now I have it figured out. This gem was on the What We Value Page
“Fun:
We believe humor is essential to success. We applaud irreverence and don’t take ourselves too seriously. We celebrate achievement. We yodel.” This group recommendation is so funny Lenord must be yodelling to beat the band. Unfotunately though I think he is taking himself too seriously.
And then there is this:
“Customer Fixation:
We respect our customers above all else and never forget that they come to us by choice. We share a personal responsibility to maintain our customers’ loyalty and trust. We listen and respond to our customers and seek to exceed their expectations.”
I guess the those who abhor this recommendation fiasco do not count as customers because they sure are not listening and responding.
Marie_in_Florida said,
March 20, 2008 @ 6:39 pm
First of all I am totally, unequivocally, physically, mentally and emotionally against this lamebrain idea of links on our posts, as are 95% to 100% of the other monitors and owners, go read the Blog if you don’t believe me.
Second – HEY OWNERS AND MONITORS THIS IS FOR YOU.
This is posted on the Blog as well – I have discovered after watching the posts on the four sites I am involved in for the last couple days, (only one is a sttionery site the others are not) that IF you use HTML or Stationery the possibility of having the Links put on decreases about 95%. I saw none on any post that was sent in on Stationery or in HTML. They seem to go only on plain e-mail or that which is written in Plain Text.
The stopper to most of these links is simple, have your people switch to HTML and/or Stationery if they can. maybe both together. Some of them won’t be able too because of the “free” e-mail programs they seem to insist on using like Hotmail, Juno, AOL and possibly Yahoo itself. But those that use Outlook Express, Incredimail or possibly G-Mail and can use Stationery and HTML should be able to prevent the links from being put on most of their posts for some reason.
At least that is what I’ve discovered for the past two days of watching which posts carried the links and which didn’t. People using Stationery or HTML are are not getting the links – those using plain text or regular e-mail that is plain and blasville so to speak are getting them.
We may have to explain to our people how to use the HTML feature or how to use Stationery, but hey Try it – it may work – I won’t say it’s 100% but it seems to be at least 95% maybe more.
Also I wish we had a way to make a copy of something on Yahoo and transfer it like we used too be able to do. If I could have just done a copy and paste this wouldn’t have taken me half an hour to write. It would also help on my site since I can no longer copy a name and E-Mail address when I need to change the person’s name that submitted the item through me instead of directly to the post board and give credit where credit is due – how about you give that little ability back to us. It would also help when you have to edit something out of a post as well, LIKE LINKS which I do not allow, now I have to use the backspace or hold down the delete button to do it – crazy and time consuming.
Sorry for any errors in typing, it’s late, my cats need to be fed as do I and I’m still furious about this link thing. Yahoo please take your links and put them somewhere else, front page of the website with ability to turn off, let us put them on our links area and advise our members, anywhere but where you currently have them, I have another suggestion as to where you can deposit those links, but I best not say it here.
Marie
Gil. said,
March 20, 2008 @ 7:09 pm
Marie,
Even if switching to html works to stop most of the Related Groups recommendations from showing up, my groups won’t change from plain text. Plain text has stopped dead the possibility of viruses being transmitted to our lists through html emails from people who don’t really know much about protecting their computers and haven’t a clue about the necessity of having anti-virus programs or keeping them updated. Switching just isn’t worth it.
Tony said,
March 20, 2008 @ 7:57 pm
Leonard, thank you for taking the time to write, it is nice to know that the comments really are being looked at. However, I must take the opportunity to say once again that I believe this is the worst idea Yahoo has ever thought about implementing, at least from the standpoint of the group moderators. And without us, there wouldn’t be any groups whatsoever.
Yes, with this feature, more people will join more groups. Like I stated in my other post, that is great for owners who are in it as a popularity contest, and for Yahoo, who gets paid for volume.
However, for those of us who run legitimate, good groups, it is our worst nightmare. Especially those of us who run medical related groups, where other groups are supplying incorrect information to people (whether by accident, or more likely to sell their snake oil).
We don’t want our group to promote other groups like that. If we, as a group, want to promote another, we will let the moderators discuss it, then approve it as necessary. While I don’t have a problem with our members being a member of some bikini-babe group (I might join one myself one day), I do have a problem with my family oriented, medical related group promoting such just because a few of our members might be in the other. If someone wants bikini-babes, let them go search for themselves, or head to their local beach.
Most people have come to realize the internet is not free. If this is so important to Yahoo to inflate its numbers, then do as was discussed a few years ago and make moderators pay to run a group, then give them the option of charging members or asking for donations, or making their group free. Anyone who won’t slap down $1 a month isn’t very serious about their groups in the first place. Not to mention, it might cut down on some of the spam.
I don’t know how long you have been with Yahoo groups, but I was here when it was Yahoo clubs, and even egroups. And again I will say, from the moderator perspective, this is the worst idea that has ever come along. It is sad, considering the strides that have been made in the groups recently. If moderators want a popularity contest, link them to myspace and let them knock themselves out.
Sue said,
March 20, 2008 @ 9:03 pm
There’s not much I can add that would be new, considering the hundreds of negative comments already made, and with which I agree.
The only new point I’d like to make is this: the timing of this “recommended groups” issue seems very short sighted for Yahoo. Perhaps you are seeing more group members join new groups initially, but it’s like dangling cheese fries in front of users who will ultimately be disgusted and overwhelmed. Let motivated people choose to seek groups when they feel a need, don’t create a false appetite through temptation. Once they get all the new group mail plus their old, nothing will drive them faster to delete messages from their inboxes and not read, or send them to Grouply to manage all that mail. There goes not only your customer satisfaction, but your ad revenues.
At least in theory, I have already blocked Grouply access to my group, but you are pushing users toward the day when they will dispose of YahooGroups that don’t coordinate with it. And the answer is not to create a YahooGroups version of Grouply with massive digests that encourage people to become passive readers, or who find the sheer volume of a digest to be too mind-numbing to read through. Allow proactive people to join groups at their own speed. The key is to keep people reading and participating too, so they actually see your advertising and send their own messages generating more ad views.
The other day, an ad for my group showed up in the messages of another forum. The owner of that forum is a former friend of mine who chose to start a group like my own. Putting the personal issues aside, I do not refer people to that group for a number of reasons not much relevant here including commercial recommendations she makes, poor customer service in handling requests for a volunteer enterprise she runs, using fake email addresses and other problems. So am I laughing up my sleeve that without my doing a thing, my group was advertised on hers? No, because the day will probably come when my list will see ads for hers.
If the point of a test is to see what happens, hopefully you have seen the overwhelming discontent of group owners and will bring it to a rapid close. I fear that if this test moves to permanency, YG will see an exodus of groups. Frankly, I feel badly about this whole thing, and wish YahooGroups would drop this short-sighted cannibalization of its own audience, and focus on drawing new users into the YahooGroups fold.
Brenda Nolen said,
March 20, 2008 @ 10:30 pm
This test, while you initially stated was desired by many members of Yahoogroups, would be best on the main Yahoogroups page, instead of clogging up emails.
Andy Swarbrick said,
March 20, 2008 @ 10:39 pm
Leonard
There is an almost unanimous outcry against this idea. The way it has been implemented has created a total backlash. Your post has done nothing to assuage the strength of feeling against the recommendation feature. There are some very well thought out posts on this and the original thread. Posts by people who “know” Yahoo Groups.
If you continue down this road the backlash will not stop. This is not some concerted effort, just spontaneous and total agreement on this not helping groups, members or owners.
I would ask what problem were you trying to solve? My guess is that this is revenue led. Is someone putting pressure on you to generate more revenue, probably from advertising.
If this is the case then I have a great suggestion for you. Ask for advice from the people on this blog. Ask for help on the main moderator forums. Form a special focus group. And then don’t ignore the results, they will be absolute gems that could double your revenue.
Work with us, not against us.
Shalf said,
March 21, 2008 @ 12:41 am
I don’t get the bit about hate, but your message full of suggestions was nicely said, and some good ideas too.
http://www.ygroupsblog.com/blog/2008/03/19/update-related-groups-feature-test/#comment-2273
F said,
March 21, 2008 @ 3:44 am
I’m with Andy. If you ‘d just tell us what you really need and explain your goals, we’ll help you come up with ideas that won’t drive us to move our groups to Google.
I wonder if you and the rest at Yahoo understand about those who use groups. For most of us, out time is finite and what will happen is exactly as Sue at 9:03 explained. Group owners want members who participate in groups. Groups die without that. And when members join too many groups they haven’t the time to read nor participate in them. That causes the opposite of what you want, I think, because then the groups die. And when groups die, you’ve got no income.
RS said,
March 21, 2008 @ 8:27 am
Shalf: It was just a reference to a Star Wars quote. =) Still following the whole Evil Leonard theme. I’m a goofy goober like that.
Steve Hill said,
March 21, 2008 @ 8:58 am
Shal said “I would suggest something simple like “Yahoo also recommends …” “; RS suggested a box ““I would like Yahoo to recommend groups to me that are similar to this one”. ”
In my book, ‘recommend’ means “I’ve been, seen, done and liked this – and you might like it, too”. There is nothing in the selection by a Yahoo robot of groups that have members in common that is anything to do with recommending.
By definition, the related group feature has no idea whatsoever what the ‘related’ group is like; whether it’s even ‘live’.
I agree mostly with the opt-in crowd, but we’ve got to find a better – if less punchy – title for the feature. “Some members of this group are also members of the following groups: you may care to check them out” suggests itself, not least because it’s honest and true.
RS said,
March 21, 2008 @ 10:10 am
And now I’ve had more ideas. Finally got to posting them on the net. I’d very curious to hear what fellow YG mods think of these ideas. They were based on what I’d like to see as an ideal version of YG. There’s more to come, but it is all related to this feature because of the idea of search being improved and spontaneous content surfacing, which people seem to favor over getting the doo-doo in our e-mails with every post. I started a blog to post my ideas in, hopefully it makes sense. It’s kind of long, but it starts here:
http://cybervirulent.blogspot.com/2008/03/yg-conceptmain-page.html
I welcome your feedback too. If I’m off in wonderland, I should know that sooner rather than later. This just sounded good to me. The search and rating system is a bit complex, I hope I explained it well enough. Enjoy.
Jan said,
March 21, 2008 @ 12:23 pm
RS – Your suggestions read well to me – the only thing I think would not suit yahoo’s (possible) purpose is that many members of groups treat them as email lists instead and rarely if ever sign into yahoo – especially if they receive their group messages at a non yahoo address. I do sign in and read most of my groups at each website so it would work very well for me.
RS said,
March 21, 2008 @ 2:05 pm
Jan-
Thanks! Good point too! Part of my thinking is also that the Yahoo Groups Beta had the option of adding content to the group’s home page, such as embedding video, etc. User feedback told the YG B team that we liked this, and it seemed to be a direction they were going long term. On an active group with a mod who frequently makes use of this and modifies the page, it creates a dynamic (as opposed to static) page for users to interact with and creates good reasons to go see new things, and thus use the online interface. The RSS Feed module is a particularly good reason to visit often. More time on the dynamic YG site means ideas stimulated, and more possible impulses to search for more groups. In theory anyway.
Right now, you’re 100% right (and its true for me that I generally use my groups via e-mail only). The issue for me is that the home page content is generally static, so there’s no motivation to go see what’s new. So, YG is about e-mail distribution primarily. That may change slightly with the new modules, who knows. I know I’ll be sourcing content for my groups like mad. All the more reason to make the searching that does get done more effective. “A competing service” offers automatic notifications to members as an option when you make a change on one of the pages. This would potentially add more mail, but the users could quickly and easily get alerted to the increased, non-email content by this means, encouraging the use of the Yahoo ID/YG portals (and corresponding increase in ad serves).
Karen said,
March 21, 2008 @ 2:35 pm
Your interesting take on this that “I would think it is precisely the members of ownerless or otherwise poorly run groups that most need to see the recommendations” is a bit hard to swallow. Some of these groups have owners that have been gone a long time and can’t even let a new member in. And those virtually dead groups I’ve seen advertised by Yahoo really are not going to suddenly become alive with new members, from what I’ve seen. And “Yahoo also recommends” does suggest that Yahoo knows something about the group. Call it what it is and only what it is–that members of that particular group also belong to another particular group. But “related” or even worse “recommends” is wrong. Yahoo can’t attest to either.
Kh said,
March 21, 2008 @ 2:43 pm
Well said Karen. I totally agree with you. Opting in instead of out will keep the dead groups dead. Not artificially inflate their numbers because someone tries to join them from the so called related groups links. Some of them might not have moderated entry to join or moderated first posts. If you have opt in instead those that truly want this new “feature” can have at it.
Billie said,
March 21, 2008 @ 3:43 pm
This is my 2nd time writing to you.
I wish you would stop this feature, as I have had several
“New Applicants” ….these applicants had no clue what my group was about, or that they need IM to join, of course they did not have the program, they
just could not follow any of the rules to join my group.
Horrible.
Please, let us opt out…PLEASE!!!!
Thanks
Billie
Tracy said,
March 21, 2008 @ 8:00 pm
This related groups feature is absolutely horrible. I’ve got my biggest competitor’s link smack in the middle of my group. I refused to advertise for that group to my members. I’ve stopped allowing posts through to my group, and have all of the active members on an “email list” I created. We’re posting that way until Yahoo comes up with an opt out button. It’s not enough to take your group out of the directory…I read somewhere that taking your group out of the directory stops your groups links from being put in other groups posts, but still doesn’t stop the “related groups” links in your group.
Yahoo, when will the “opt out button” be available? Soon I hope, because I am not putting posts back through my group until it is. The Email List is actually working pretty well…you’d better hurry with that opt out option, cuz my members won’t want to go back to the posts through the group at all.
I am truly shocked that Yahoo would put a feature like this in without an opt out button available. Your team obviously has no clue what so ever how competitive these groups can be.
Hurry up with that opt out option.
Thanks,
Tracy
Shalf said,
March 22, 2008 @ 12:08 am
Good point about “recommends”, Steve & Karen.
http://www.ygroupsblog.com/blog/2008/03/19/update-related-groups-feature-test/#comment-2326
http://www.ygroupsblog.com/blog/2008/03/19/update-related-groups-feature-test/#comment-2340
How about an Amazon-like “Members Who Joined This Group Also Joined”
Karen, I think you got my point about ownerless groups backwards. I don’t want to see them recommended, and for that reason I like RS’ Opt-in to have your group promoted in other groups. But I do think members of ownerless groups would particularly benefit from seeing links to other groups, hence I oppose giving moderators a true Opt-in for recommendations placed on their group’s messages.
Hassan Ali said,
March 22, 2008 @ 12:37 am
Dear Moderators and Yahoo India Team,
Here are my suggestions for New feature recommendation introduce recently
I am Hassan Ali You all are well aware of me we were at Moderators Union at Taj Residencey Bangalore, I am Owner and Moderator of Two Group Hum-Our-Tum and Shayariworld
This new feature is really not good and moderators can misuse this feature to a great extend by spamming the other small groups and add links to the mails of small moderated groups which is giving excellent service to members and which give 100% Guarantee against spam and safe guard the interest of members. Example we are against pornography,Virus mails, Spamming mails and groups to great extend.
They simply edit the mails as there is no copy right guarantee as many people copy and paste mails from other groups they received and they try to misused this feature to promote their groups.
The following suggestions i can give you
1) We are against spam mails and links of advertising which will encourage if this feature come in use and it is against group rules of my group and most of the groups who accept rules as deadline for functioning of their group
2. the links added by this new recommendation feature will enable some group to post Pornography and Nude photos in these links which really hurt the interest of members members join our group as we guarantee 100% safety from pornography and Adult photos which is not allowed and not at all suitable and yahoo team is also against such thing some owners of Big group list in entertainment and they just want to attract members by such thing this is really against the self respect of woman. and children who get attracted by such photos is really unmoral and this bring bad thoughts in their minds against women such thing will make them thing women in wrong way.
4. this new recommendation feature will only advertise the biggest groups
who advertise in small groups to promote their groups by images in small groups and Small groups need promotion yahoo is promoting bigger groups who are misusing the feature and spammed other small groups with pornography material, Virus hidden in photos and links and is a threat to great extend to interest of members I advice Yahoo should promote good small groups which is giving excellent service and safeguard interest of members
5. the links added as recommandation in my and all other group will spammed my group and other small groups they should not advertise in small groups and spammed with those links
6) What i suggest and feel that you should give possibility of each owner to turn off this feature for the interest of members of the group when member dont like advertising in the mails with those links.
7) Yahoo should have better search group by activity or interest this can be introduce to make it better search for group for which people serch to join the community
I thanks All the moderators to share their views and suggestions like Nubia did.
Thanks & Regards
Hassan Ali
Groups Owner and Moderator
Shayariworld and Hum-Our-Tum Group
Hyderabad India
Mobile 9885290563.
Rebecca said,
March 22, 2008 @ 9:14 am
I am a moderator and owner for a number of Yahoo Groups.
First, I want to thank Yahoo for providing the Yahoo Groups. It’s a great service and has meant alot to our members. The opportunity for people to be connected through the Yahoo Groups is very worthwhile. Thank you very much for providing them for us and for being transparent about your changes and communicating your plans.
We’d prefer to either opt out of the “related groups” feature test or to be allowed to opt out of this via a moderator control, should Yahoo decide to keep this feature. Some of the related sites that are recommended are really unrelated to our group and some are offensive. This isn’t Yahoo’s fault I know, it’s just how the beta test is going and how the software is working.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback on your new feature,
Rebecca
Shyanne said,
March 23, 2008 @ 7:15 am
I run a support group and was shocked last night when one of our members and his wife informed me of this. They were utterly astounded at some of the groups that were suggested in their daily digest! I have ran a very clean group for 8 years now, I do not allow links in posts, I do not allow links to ‘adult XX groups’ on profiles and I do not allow links to XX groups to be posted in our links section. With one fell swoop you have managed to undo what it has taken me 8 years of hard work to accomplish!
The 1800 members of my group are diverse and free to join any groups they wish, but Yahoo’s way of pushing these groups on other unsuspecting members is unacceptable. We have over 60,000 clean, supportive, informative and SPAM free posts in our group. What took my member mentioned above 3 years to accomplish in helping his wife come to grips with his situation, Yahoo undid in a flash by having these links shown to her.
Now it is clear to me why I have had a flood of ‘mr winky’ shots on profiles of others that are trying to join my group! Thanks for the extra work, as if I don’t have enough to do checking out the legitimate members that want to join, now I have to sift through the trash to get to them!
Marty said,
March 23, 2008 @ 4:13 pm
From recent comments, it appears that Adult groups are being recommended where they aren’t welcome.
ADULT GROUPS SHOULD NOT BE PART OF ANY IMPLEMENTATION!! Even groups flagged as “Adult” may not want any part of anything related to porn. The only way to avoid it is to omit Adult groups from recommendations. I don’t think they are included in search results and they shouldn’t be included in Related Groups either.
In any case: ADULT GROUPS MUST NOT BE RECOMMENDED TO NON-ADULT GROUPS! EVER!
Marty said,
March 23, 2008 @ 4:33 pm
One way to make it somewhat an “Opt-In” capability, at least at the member level, would be to make the Related Groups just a link. At least that way there isn’t an unwanted list staring at every reader. Only those looking for similar groups would use it.
It still isn’t the perfect solution without controls since it still would list competitors.
Marty said,
March 23, 2008 @ 4:35 pm
You really should hire a visionary such as RS.
Look at his blog for a series of design concepts that would carry Yahoo! Groups capabilities and ease of use light years ahead of this Related Groups feature you are shoving down our throats:
http://cybervirulent.blogspot.com/2008/03/yg-conceptmain-page.html
Beth said,
March 23, 2008 @ 7:41 pm
I absolutely hate this related group feature! Please take it off or do like google groups does and make it an option if the owner wants it on or not!
Carl said,
March 23, 2008 @ 8:36 pm
If you are listening to our feedback, then please fix the ongoing problem with group emails going in our bulk/spam folders.
K said,
March 24, 2008 @ 3:21 am
Marty, are you saying why not just have a link to all those groups in the directory that are listed in a similar way? That way you’re not suggesting any particular group, which is fair. In a situation like that the competition is just one of a hundred or more groups and nobody is suggesting one group over another. It gives new and smaller groups an equal chance with the larger ones.
Bruce Wilson said,
March 24, 2008 @ 12:52 pm
When is someone at yahoops going to tell us what they are going to do? It should be obvious to anyone that the so-called test has been given a resounding thumbs down.
Marty said,
March 25, 2008 @ 4:08 am
K,
There are a lot of ways to make it available to those who want to see it without it appearing to be an advertisement and without it appearing to be endorsed by the group whose email you are reading.
Making just the link available in the email would serve the stated purpose (although it would still be unwelcome by many group owners) without actually displaying competing groups in each email.
Making the link available in the search results would also serve the stated purpose.
Still, I think the stated purpose is just cover for Yahoo! to force something upon us which no one really wants or needs.
Dewitt Gimblet said,
March 25, 2008 @ 7:10 am
Leonard,
How are you? It’s been so long since we’ve heard from you that I’m concerned you may have come down with the flu or something. Perhaps one of your minions could let us know where to send Get Well cards. And, if it’s not too much trouble, perhaps someone at Yahoo! Groups could respond to the concerns that have been voiced regarding this new “feature.” “Let’s keep talking” requires communication from both sides.
deg
Tracy said,
March 25, 2008 @ 7:35 am
This is the second time I am writing, with no response from Yahoo as to when the “opt out feature” will be available. I have completely redirected all group emails (and there are still hundreds) to an email list I created from Active Group Members. It’ll be one week tomorrow since I allowed any posts, which thanks to Yahoo, have my biggest competitor’s link smack in the middle of every post, to go out to my group. The Email List is actually working pretty well, Yahoo, and that is 261 members that haven’t seen the Yahoo homepage in almost a week. Get the picture? I’ve haven’t gotten one complaint, and in fact many group members have said they like it better.
What is lacking, with what I hope is a temporary fix until Yahoo’s opt out button is available, is the fact that all of the posts look like they are coming from me. I’ve solved that to a degree by putting the name of the sender in the subject line. It’s not perfect, but it’s keeping the group active while we all hold our breath waiting for Yahoo to release their promised “opt out” feature.
This entire “related groups fiasco” is even more outrageous when you think about the fact that on every homepage there is a “directory” link, which, when people click on takes them to the “related” directory which lists every group there is. So Yahoo’s comments about “helping people find related groups” is just ridiculous.
RS said,
March 25, 2008 @ 8:55 am
I work my own job, yet I find the time daily to catch up on what is happening on the comment boards and can even make the time for a short message. You folks work at the place itself, and while I know you are reading, and not much can be said too frequently, a weekly update or regularly scheduled communication would be a good thing. One thing I have learned is that in absence of information, people tend to assume the worst. I’ve also learned any sort of change can be difficult for people to adjust to. Here’s a situation where you made a change, without much communication. So, surprise, double whammy on us–change (negative as far as I can tell for the mods), and minimal communication. Not much of a wonder that we might might feel a little like mushrooms at this point.
So (poke poke):
Hows that data tracking going? How many people who applied to join groups were rejected by the mods? How many were kicked back out with in the week? How many blindly joined a group cluttered with spam e-mails or that has had no activity in years? What is the minimum number of members in common it takes to have your group become listed? What’s the ETA on that Opt out control? How soon will this testing be stopped in favor of a better method?
These questions and more we would like to get answered please. Thanks in advance.
Nubia said,
March 25, 2008 @ 12:05 pm
it will be nice to have updates about these tests
we all wonder what you will decide
Nubia
George said,
March 25, 2008 @ 12:50 pm
I can see how a list of related groups can be helpful for folks searching for more/other groups specific to their interests. However, I’m irked that my group is being invaded with these lists. We have had certain groups listed that are contradictory to what my group is all about. A list showing up as ‘recommended’ on the pages of my group has certain implications that it is condoned by the group asdministrators. Ludicrious!
Perhaps it would be better to present this information on the individuals’ My Groups page. This way the service is rendered, but the security of individual groups is preserved.
There’s just got to be a vbetter way.
George
Karen said,
March 25, 2008 @ 3:17 pm
RS makes a sound point. I’ve taken polls of members in my groups and over 95% are against this. It’s not just mods against it. So let’s see some statistics.
It takes me very little time to communicate to you. Why do we wait so long for any communication back? The level of anger and frustration merely grows without communication. The world doesn’t go away, and one doesn’t become invisible, when one puts one’s head in the sand.
Sue said,
March 25, 2008 @ 3:33 pm
I absolutely hate this feature. I opted out of being listed in the directory
so I would not have to be bothered with this. You are forcing it on my anyway.
I can’t say I am too happy with Yahoo right now. Hopefully you will listed
and know I am not the only one. It seems everytime you “improve” you service
it causes more problems than before. Why can’t you just leave it alone.
You know, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
Jan B said,
March 25, 2008 @ 7:32 pm
There is an update from Jami – please read and comment at:
http://www.ygroupsblog.com/blog/2008/03/25/related-groups-feature-test-results/#comment-2517
Ellen R said,
March 26, 2008 @ 7:11 pm
Can’t help wondering if Yahoo’s latest test has anything to do with the following news release.
Also, can’t help wondering if Yahoo and Google are joining forces to combat this Grouply thing, or if Grouply is the way for handling the combining of the two?
Time will tell.
http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_Yahoo_Fi...
Yahoo! Finally Says Yes To Google’s OpenSocial Platform
“Yahoo agreed to join rival Google’s OpenSocial platform, which aims at building an infrastructure for the social web, as Google described it. Through the OpenSocial, platform, developers will be able to create applications for social-networking sites. The platform was launched last November, and MySpace is already a member.”
saka84 said,
May 26, 2008 @ 11:53 pm
haa