1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Implemented Mass Messaging Members - Email Notifications

Discussion in 'Closed Suggestions' started by The Sandman, Jan 7, 2016.

  1. The Sandman

    The Sandman Well-Known Member

    When sending out a mass messaging campaign there is no option to respect a member's preference for receiving site (i.e. admin) mailings - only their preference for email notification of PC's is respected. This creates a bit of an issue since mass messages generated by an admin via the AdminCP are both site messages and PC's.

    Put more simply, I sent out a mass message and some members who had elected not to receive site mailings were unhappy when they did receive what they considered to be a site email (regardless of their preference to receive email notification of PC's).

    I'd like to see more granularity in the options for sending mass messages to allow us to determine who should get email notification of these PC's - in other words we need to tell the system to respect the site mailing preference, the email notification of PC's preference, both (only those with both options enabled would get the email), or neither (everyone gets the email regardless of any preferences set).
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2016
    Lisa, Mouth, RDR and 2 others like this.
  2. Mert

    Mert Well-Known Member

    Great suggestion , i can totally understand as our users are also pretty sensitive in their preference regarding site e-mails.

    Basically after reading this thread i can't use this function until this improvement request is implemented.
  3. Martok

    Martok Well-Known Member

    Rather than respect members' site mailing preferences (which result in an email), maybe there should be a separate site messages option? Some users might be happy to receive a mass message (especially if they have conversation email notifications switched off) whilst they prefer no site mailings.
  4. The Sandman

    The Sandman Well-Known Member

    That could work as long as the members understand what it is they're signing up for or declining. The issue (as I see it) is that the user message is a PC and follows PC rules *but* still generates an email that looks like a "site email" and doesn't follow site email rules. Depending on the nature of the message (i.e. content) and the number of members it's going out to it might be better for the admin to decide on the email rules pertaining to the blast rather than on a user option that many members won't fully understand. Besides, with email blasts, admins have the option of respecting the user preference or not. Why give up that granularity?
  5. Amaury

    Amaury Well-Known Member

    I always thought site mailings were messages sent from the ACP.
  6. The Sandman

    The Sandman Well-Known Member

    "Site emails" are emails sent out by the site admins via the AdminCP. So what do you call an email sent by an admin generated mass messaging PC? More importantly, what do your members who've opted not to receive site emails call them?
  7. Martok

    Martok Well-Known Member

    It only generates an email if a member has email notifications of PCs enabled.

    Anyway I'm not disagreeing with your suggestion, I'm suggesting an enhancement which gives more granularity. :)
    SneakyDave likes this.
  8. The Sandman

    The Sandman Well-Known Member

    Right - the issue being it's not a normal PC so it's not perceived as a normal PC notification email.
    I know, and I don't necessarily disagree with your idea of the user option specifically for admin generated PC emails although I don't think most members would understand it.

    I do think the admin sending the mass messages should have full control of who gets the email as I mentioned above though - sometimes you might want to respect their site email preference (if you're sending out something fluffly like "Thanks for helping us hit 1 million posts", or an ad campaign for example. But if it's important site business, you might want to bypass their preference and send the email notification anyway. That's how I'd use the option for mass emails, and I think it should be available for mass messaging emails as well (though it's a bit more complicated).

    Keep in mind that email notification of PCs is quite important if you want to convey a message in a timely fashion. PC's without email notification might not be seen for days, weeks, months, or even years by someone who isn't a regular visitor to the forum for whatever reason.
  9. Tracy Perry

    Tracy Perry Well-Known Member

    Again, as Martok said, not disagreeing - but it IS a PC, whether it's a normal one or a mass-blast one or whatever the Admin meant for it to be.
    For mass-blasts, I'd assume that would be what the ACP one would be used for... and if I'm not mistaken, it does honor the settings.

    A conversation? ;)

    A mis-use of conversations? :ROFLMAO:

    I see where you are coming from.. what I would like to see is a separate type of "convo" that can ONLY be generated by an Admin (via priv's) and respects the email notification settings - and it be able to be done from the front end... but honestly, I think the original philosophy was to do that type of stuff from the back end and not utilize the conversation system for a site-wide conversation generation.
  10. The Sandman

    The Sandman Well-Known Member

    The mass message *is* a PC - no question about it. But it also sends out an email from an admin (the definition of a site mailing in the Contact Preferences). Some members who've elected not to receive "site mailings" will complain about this. There should be as much granularity, and probably more, in the AdminCP mass messaging options as in the user options:

  11. Lisa

    Lisa Well-Known Member

    But what it sends out is notification of a PC, not a Site Email - which, if they have that set to accept in their user options, is the standard action and somthing they'll receive if anyone sends them a PC. And I know you'll argue that these particular members don't understand the difference :D I'm just pointing out that it is the working as it should right now.

    With that said, maybe adding an additional option in the Message Users ACP page to only send to those people who have checked "Receive Site Mailings" would be viable?
  12. Martok

    Martok Well-Known Member

    I think that's what @The Sandman is suggesting.

    But what about members who don't want to receive site emails but would be happy to receive a 'site PC', particularly those who have switched off "receive email when a new conversation message" is received? Whilst some may be complaining about receiving site PCs as they don't respect their site mailings preferences, I can also see some not being happy if they missed out on site PCs. Hence my suggestion to give an extra option in the user messaging preferences for them to tick or not. If it's clearly labelled, I don't see it being a problem.
    Lisa likes this.
  13. Lisa

    Lisa Well-Known Member

    In his typical convoluted way, most likely ;) I just wanted to mention the specific option as it states it in the user profile options for further clarity.

    Further thought - it could even come down to the wording of "Receive Site Mailings" being the issue. It could be argued that some people would read that as anything emailed from the site - be it a mass email, PC notification or thread notification and not understanding that the further options for not receiving notifications of PCs or replies to threads is a separate thing.

    And, just in case I'm not being too clear, I'm actually agreeing that there is a need there :D
  14. The Sandman

    The Sandman Well-Known Member

    It's not a misunderstanding by the members, it's an oversight in the code. Look at the Contact Option for Site Mailings:
    A mass messaging blasts creates site mailings for those who've chosen to receive email notifications of PC's, which is a separate option:
    I sent out a mass mailing and so far have received 2 to 3 dozen complaints from members who've chosen not to receive site mailings even though they've also chosen to receive email notification of PC's. Res Ipsa Loquitur.
  15. Lisa

    Lisa Well-Known Member

    See, I'd argue that it is a misunderstanding from the members. Technically, you didn't send out a mass mail, you sent out a mass PC.
    Tracy Perry likes this.
  16. Mike

    Mike XenForo Developer Staff Member

    I've added this, mostly because it's literally just a tiny template change. The mass messaging system wasn't really designed around sending a newsletter type thing, though I can see people wanting it for that.

    The difference here is that by default, we won't limit to that option when doing mass messaging; you'll need to enable it. (This differs from emails.)
  17. Martok

    Martok Well-Known Member

    So in your change, does that mean that if I don't want to receive site emails, I won't receive site messages either if the admin unchecks the 'Only send to users opting to receive emails from the admin' option? Because I'd be happy to receive a mass PC (as let's say I have switched off email notifications for PCs). If so, then I'm forced to accept site emails if I want site PCs.
  18. The Sandman

    The Sandman Well-Known Member

    They're TAZ members - forum owners and admins. If they misunderstand it than surely members of other forums will as well.

    And of course I sent out a mass message, not a mass email. But my mass message caused a mass site mailing as a result. ;) It's not the semantics that matters, it's the net effect.
    ozzy47 likes this.
  19. Lisa

    Lisa Well-Known Member

    I'm going to take my argument with you on this to Skype... it might last a while hahaha

    Either way - for here, let's go with good call by Mike :D
  20. Chris D

    Chris D XenForo Developer Staff Member

    It's just a compromise, the criteria is there for admins if they want to restrict mass conversation messages to only those who have opted to receive site mailings. It's just another criteria, just as restricting to members of a certain group or when they were last active, etc.

    It's off by default so I wouldn't necessarily expect it to start being used by admins unless they have a specific reason to.
    Martok likes this.

Share This Page