Feedback by UserVoice

SjoerdV

My feedback

  1. 42 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    SjoerdV supported this idea  · 
  2. 0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Microsoft 365 Groups  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    SjoerdV shared this idea  · 
  3. 3 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    2 comments  ·  Microsoft 365 Groups  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    SjoerdV commented  · 

    I like this idea! There is obviously a gap between Public and Private Teams. I would like to see some kind of policy setting just like the ‘Prevent O365 Group Creation’ method that would prevent a certain group of internal users to be able join any team without approval and that any O365 Group mailbox (particularly Public O365 Group mailboxes!) is not accessible at all until approval to join has been given. All Teams Workloads should of course respect that policy. This all would be required to accommodate temporary personnel without comprehensive nda’s

  4. 184 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    SjoerdV commented  · 

    Got this back from MS Support on the subject on 10 Feb 2020:
    "Further to my previous message there are unfortunately no plans to increase the inclusion/exclusion limit for retention policies."

    SjoerdV supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    SjoerdV commented  · 

    Indeed we need these limits raised please. Today everything is a Group or a Site Collection of its own. Nested sites are not recommended as well, so please make these limits more practical.

    On a side note, I am quickly running out of votes here as Microsoft insists on adding stuff nobody asked for but fails to fix stuff that is desperately needed. Please listen to your communicty or disband the site altogether.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    SjoerdV commented  · 

    This is very much needed, I have many customers with over 1000 projects and each should be assigned (or excluded) to a different retention policy scheme. This limit needs to be increased asap, as the current limit is simply not realistic. Also the Site Collection entity is the new standard for years now (de-emphasizing enormous sub site structures in one SC), so limits on these entities should be increased as well.

  5. 64 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    4 comments  ·  Microsoft 365 Groups  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    SjoerdV supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    SjoerdV commented  · 

    It should be at least configurable to disallow member email deletion

  6. 437 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    13 comments  ·  General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    SjoerdV supported this idea  · 
  7. 105 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    SjoerdV supported this idea  · 
  8. 262 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    SjoerdV commented  · 

    You can actually achieve this already with Azure AD Conditional Access App Control (Block Downloads setting) which will make use of Cloud App Security.

    https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/active-directory/conditional-access/controls#session-controls
    https://docs.microsoft.com/en-gb/cloud-app-security/proxy-intro-aad#supported-apps-and-clients

  9. 36 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    7 comments  ·  General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    SjoerdV commented  · 

    With us the OneDrive thing worked, but some Groups gave this error (but not all groups, btw)

  10. 496 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    13 comments  ·  General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    SjoerdV supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    SjoerdV commented  · 

    'By Design'... indeed. Please change this to the intuitive and logical way of interpreting this column.

  11. 84 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    4 comments  ·  Office 365 Admin » SharePoint Admin  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    SjoerdV supported this idea  · 
  12. 1,258 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    73 comments  ·  Delve  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    SjoerdV supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    SjoerdV commented  · 

    This is really getting rediculous, 2.5 years and no action on this... Foreign Principles, Cloud Meeting Rooms, all kinds of 'users', which are no users at all. It kind of bugs me that a corporate directory has 'by default' so much waste.

  13. 287 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    36 comments  ·  General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    SjoerdV supported this idea  · 
  14. 752 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    18 comments  ·  Office 365 Admin » SharePoint Admin  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    SjoerdV supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    SjoerdV commented  · 

    There is a difference between disabling and hiding the buttons. I have configurered a couple of flows on a list that are being triggered by buttons through 'column formatting', they should keep working of course so disabling flow alltogether on the site is not an option, but I would like the abilitiy to start these flows from the command bar to be removed for obvious reasons.

  15. 695 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    SjoerdV commented  · 

    Why must user experiece always be impacted when enabling a seemingly background process like a retention policy... please fix asap

    SjoerdV supported this idea  · 
  16. 37 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    SjoerdV commented  · 

    We have a lot of false positives on the default postmaster address as a sender, which does not have mailbox. mails containing Undeliverable and X-Microsoft-Antispam-Untrusted are being seen as a DLP policy hit on the default GDPR rules ... there are really far to much false positives and no tools to filter those out. Kind of a sucky experience.

    In general I find the 'wizard system' to be poorly designed, they require far to much clicking and waiting. Overall I am not fond of Security and Compliance Centers, where is the responsiveness, where is the speed??? It's like going back 10 year

    SjoerdV supported this idea  · 
  17. 99 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    7 comments  ·  Microsoft 365 Groups  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  18. 605 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    20 comments  ·  General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    SjoerdV supported this idea  · 
  19. 222 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    16 comments  ·  Microsoft 365 Groups  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  20. 23 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    4 comments  ·  Microsoft 365 Groups  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    SjoerdV supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    SjoerdV commented  · 

    Please fix this to a realistic limit

← Previous 1

Feedback and Knowledge Base