Group picture changes

I made the following changes:

1. Group images are now in the "new image system," so they get their own pages, copyrights, etc.
2. Groups can have multiple images.
3. Group creators or admins (see http://www.librarything.com/topic/104110) can decide whether everyone gets to add images or just some people.

Notice on a group page:


Group option:


As you can see, I have defaulted all existing groups to "not set," which is equivalent to "admins." I am going to send out messages to all current admins that they need to decide, or it will become "members."

Nice! Thanks for adding the option, Tim.

> 1


I have defaulted all existing groups to "not set," which is equivalent to "admins." I am going to send out messages to all current admins that they need to decide, or it will become "members."

I noticed that in the groups I've created, the group page says "This group allows all members to add pictures", despite the fact that "not set" is checked on the edit page. (See, for instance: http://www.librarything.com/groups/bookarts)

I was going to change these to "members", but I'll leave it for now so that you can see whether this is a bug or not.

I do note that I don't see this on groups which I did not create.

Sweet!

Oh, man, I should have suggested "curator" instead of "custodian." It actually has a cool library-ish feel. But I know it's pointless - any suggestion now will probably just push you even more firmly towards your pre-existing preference. :D

Curator would be so cool. C'mon Tim, you don't want make this site like every other site on the web.

I don't know. LibraryThing always chooses the weird route. We don't follow, we interesting. Etc. Admins just seems so easy. Everyone instantly knows what it is without knowing specifically what it is. It's open-ended. "Curator" sounds weird--it makes you stop and think--and it seems to imply something more tangible and specific.

any suggestion now will probably just push you even more firmly towards your pre-existing preference

I refer you to my infamous two-word reply.

However...

7> I refer you to my infamous two-word reply.

"Sure thing"?

;)

(And yes, I actually do think I know to which one you reply.)

9,10> Ah, nice. Are those checksum votes, so you can just claim "people are just randomly clicking on buttons!" if the vote isn't in your favor? :D

9>

Me. ;-)

I'm not fond of admin but it is at least clear to the newbies. Curator isn't quite right to me but is somewhat more interesting.

What about doyen (or doyenne), bureaucrat, marshal, panjandrum, keeper, concierge, super, or warden?

15> I forsee someone seeing that UserX is an admin (of a group) and thinking they are the admin of the SITE.

>14 lorax:

Snort. No, I anticipated it. LibraryThing and I are like an old married couple. I know what's coming.

That's waiting for another employee (Dan) to complete a Google graph connector. But, yeah, I've now changed my mind on that--we need a "Map this" field.

I forsee someone seeing that UserX is an admin (of a group) and thinking they are the admin of the SITE

If that happens, I propose we go along with it.

18> Well, it will certainly motivate me to ask various groups for admin privs. Think of all the fun that could be had with the newbs...

We could have a special "King of the World" icon that such people get. Only they would see it.

I didn't vote on the basic curator vs. admin poll, because I'm still hoping you won't become too fixed on the idea.

I did vote yes in #9, not because it's a yes-or-no question but because it raises a valid issue, and one that I think reflects the main problem with the whole idea. Currently, all members police each other equally, and it works pretty well. I think the addition of an upper echelon of members with extra powers would go against the community spirit of LT and would add all sorts of extra conflicts for little gain.

People couldn't even tolerate the idea of member-awarded Barnstars, because it might turn things into a popularity contest, etc. etc. And those wouldn't even do anything; they would just be nice forms of recognition. I don't know how you can even consider giving some members real additional powers over others.

As cool as curator sounds, I think admin is clearer to newbies. Oh, but I love the idea of curators. I may have to go change my vote to undecided.

I really like Curator although in some of my groups Keeper might be more accurate. ;-)

Unfortunately, there was only a vote to say if you thought curator is BETTER than admin. This doesn't really ask the converse: is admin BETTER than curator. It's an unfortunate limit of only having Yes/No/Undecided options in a poll. You can read the current results as "6 people think it's better and 15 people think it's worse" or "6 people think it's better and 15 people think it'd be no better or worse", depending on your bent.

I would post the other poll now, but I don't think it'd be valid, coming so much later than the other one.

23> How about Hall Monitor? ;)

Babysitter.

I'm thinking "Pope." That would go well with the new sedevacantist poster.

#25 & 26

Both are good suggestions and I am old enough I would not mind having a babysitter.

Chief potentate.

Lord High Everything Else?

Grand Pooh-Bah?

27> I'm wondering on which wall you've hung that poster *؟*

>28 TLCrawford:
But those two suggestions might offend those 12-year-olds who "aren't" here. <ducks><covers>

Pictures in some groups disappeared. And the 'Add a group picture' option too, even for the admin.

http://www.librarything.com/groups/discusslibrarything1
http://www.librarything.com/groups/clubdelecturaencatal

perhaps this one?
http://www.librarything.com/groups/welcometolibrarythin

Yeah, I'm not seeing how to add a group picture, even when the creator has enabled it.

> 20

Empress of the World, in my case, please.

Has anyone actually managed to upload a picture to a group that they didn't create?

Not me. The creator of Bookshelf of the Damned explicitly invited the members to do so, but I couldn't find any mechanism.

So what ever happened to this feature?

I belong to a few groups that have no group picture and would like to submit one...

>38 jseger9000: Something has happened. I have found one group with the permissive message but most of my favourites have nothing noted. Was anything reset on the Dec.13th deadline? Certainly some of my groups have lost the picture they once had.

See also here: http://www.librarything.com/topic/105451

In my experience, only group 'creators' are allowed to insert images on groups. Being admin of two groups created by other people, these groups have lost their images and I'm not able to reinsert them.

#40 - In my experience, only group 'creators' are allowed to insert images on groups.

Right, but one of the details of this new feature was that (unless the creator/admin specified otherwise) any group member would be able to add group images.

Per message #1: As you can see, I have defaulted all existing groups to "not set," which is equivalent to "admins." I am going to send out messages to all current admins that they need to decide, or it will become "members."

And even on groups where the creator posted that they allowed all members (Bookshelf of the Damned for instance).

I'm wondering if the feature was never implemented?

There's a bug thread about this that Tim has recently responded to.

Here it is: http://www.librarything.com/topic/105451.

Thanks. On my list for today (again).

I was happy to see message #44. But that was yesterday. As of today I still can not change group photos for any groups, even dormant ones or groups where the owner said the enabled for all users.