It seems that anybody could go to the opt-out page and sit there all day punching in the group names for lots of groups to get Grouply to send them the OAC. Probably not a good thing for Grouply, and a good way to annoy moderators, especially those who already opted-out.
Could the opt-out page restrict the same IP address from using it more than once per day? Maybe twice in case the owner didn’t get the email the first time for some reason beyond Grouply’s control.
A better solution would be for Grouply to block access to any group where the owner had not first opted-IN to grant access to their members. In my groups, nothing would win over the hearts and minds of members for using a new service better than their own fearless leader promoting it, because I have a long-term trusting relationship with them that Grouply does not have (and probably never will have now). Of course, first I’d have to be convinced that Grouply was a good idea. That’s hard to do when Grouply uses spam as a promotional activity.
If Grouply wanted a short-cut to attract members of Y! Groups, they would provide special features and benefits to owners and moderators, to encourage their use of the product, instead of annoying them with spam and unrequested OAC emails and security holes like overrides on archive access restrictions and personal information sharing defaulted to on instead of off, and defaulting to on advertising in member profiles links to groups that are unlisted in the YG directory.
I have found nothing in Grouply that improves my ability to manage my groups, or anything to make it more convenient for me to do so, no tools that make my life any better as a moderator. On the contrary, I have found that Grouply has caused me more work.
Because of Grouply and the potential for similar services putting me through still more hoop-jumping to avoid their intrusion, I’m considering moving my groups’ communication venue to another service instead of YG, even if it means having to pay for a secure one. Is that what Grouply wants? Is that what Yahoo wants? Is that “improving the experience of Yahoo Groups?”
Since group owners have the power to abolish Grouply access, and began doing it (as I did) even without the opt-out procedure Grouply now provides, aren’t group owners and moderators people whom Grouply needs to attract rather than annoy with illegal spam via their “Invite Groups” postings to groups, something universally objectionable to conscientious moderators of good groups?
Spam once a month or even only once per group lifetime is still spam and illegal under U.S. federal law when it is unsolicited commercial email (the definition used by the Federal Trade Commission), as Grouply’s “Invite Groups” thing certainly is, because it is sent BY THE COMMERCIAL ENTITY. I checked the headers on their spam; the originating IP is registered to grouply.com, not the Grouply subscriber pulling the trigger on Grouply’s spam gun. So when I send it to the FTC, I will be careful to point out that it originated from the web site of a commercial entity, not just some Joe Citizen sharing an idea he likes with fellow group members. The subscriber may be something like an agent for Grouply’s spamming operation, but the message IS SENT BY GROUPLY.COM. How does Grouply expect to win hearts and minds among owner-moderators when they break the law to advertise their service to their members in spam postings?
Everyone who agrees should send the spam, with full headers displayed, and with a note emphasizing that the originating IP is registered to grouply.com, a commercial entity, to the FTC’s spam reporting center at:
FTC probably won’t act on one complaint, but they might if lots of citizens file it. It would be so much better if Grouply acted on it themselves.
Turn off the spam gun. That would be a very good Grouply Improvement.
Since moderators of YGOG and EL-M seem to like Grouply, and put considerable effort into defending Grouply against criticisms, they could welcome Grouply posting promotional messages about their service in those big groups, which are actively promoted by Yahoo itself via links to them on Yahoo official web pages, and being groups that cater to moderators, people Grouply would seem to have a vested interest in winning over.
Or, instead of allowing access for any group by default on request of any one member of the group (which can be just a Grouply employee who joined the group to get a head start on scraping their archive, which takes time), Grouply could promote their product via the advertising banner in YG to attract moderators to sign up for it, and to attract members to lobby their moderators to sign up.
Yahoo uses YG banner ads to promote their Y! Hotjobs, Y! Personals, Y! Small Business web hosting, Y! Autos, and other services. T-Mobile uses it to look for customers who want to “Get rockin’ now” with the “Samsung Beat,” and T-Mobile’s $10/month unlimited email. Disney Cruise Line uses YG banner ads. Macy’s, University of Phoenix, too. Right now I’m looking at a banner ad in YG for Waste Management, Inc. They seem to have the notion that it’s a good idea to advertise to YG users.
I’m no business tycoon, but it seems that Yahoo would have an interest in telling Grouply, “If you want a piece of the Yahoo Groups action, you can use our advertising banner service to target your ads at our YG users,” and come in through the front door instead of the back. Yep, I suppose it might be expensive. Cost of doing business with the big boys.