BlogMinded

@alexsev Thank you for reply, very much appreciated!
Not to argue, whatsoever, but just to comment with my humble opinion on your bullet points:

1. I still strongly feel that what the blog owners really want is for public to share site’s links everywhere possible. To them, where exactly the link is shared, in my opinion, is in fact completely irrelevant (…unless, for example, the entire blog is somehow fully dedicated to a particular social media type). “Relevance” can only come from the public’s perspective, not the blog owner’s. It is public who takes the link to relevant to them places, including, for example, creating just a bookmark in their browser (do you have a dedicated option for that, btw?). It is for this reason, the absolutely most straight forward sharing option, must be primarily “copy link”.

2. “Sharing to many social platforms with a single click” is probably something potentially very interesting for the “premium USM plugin” (unlike the simplest imaginable “copy link” :)) and it shouldn’t be that “technically not possible”.
Here is the “scenario:
“Would you like to share this post to multiple social notworks at once?” – > click “Share Multiple” -> “Check corresponding boxes” -> press “Submit” button -> then corresponding, multiple tabs will open, with corresponding share options shown, per each network’s posting specifications -> All that is left for user to do, is click on “post” button at each of the newly opened tabs.

3. “Copy link” icon, is the absolute centerpiece of “everything share”. Perhaps, add Facebook and Twitter to the free version and put EVERYTHING else into “premium”. …I would actually pay for such a minimalistic and not over-bloated version (well, maybe the “short codes” function would be a plus here).

4. I guess, editing files is potentially an option, but in my case, I believe that I have to edit template files, because I need the share icons to display outside of posts and pages – in users’ “activity feeds” (I am using “BuddyPress” plugin version). My beta site is at https://dinades.com/

I wonder if this is normal? How long have you been using the plugin?

Thank you very much for detailed explanation!
This is what I wanted. Will work on it now :o)

Any recommendations or adding redirects on newly discovered 404s manually is the only option?

A bit confused too, if the plugin is updated with the functionality to update/replace the post or not.
But, just in case a +1 more in support of this feature request.
P.S. it should not be merging though…

I am new to this plugin, but just a thought:

This is from plugin FAQs:

Can I select tags or categories based on the content of the e-mail?
Yes. You can create your own function, and use the postie_post filter. See the filterPostie.php.sample file for examples.

Since you already have that emails master list, perhaps you can simply create specific signatures for each email, which will then become “the content of the e-mail” (if not stripped). Inside signatures, you can then input codes for categories for Postie to “recognize” as “custom function”, filter accordingly and post.

It seems what you are requesting is somewhat redundant of the very main feature of posting via email, which is the use of “secret email address”, where only emails to this address will get posted. I mean if you guard your secret email address good enough, you should not be needing this feature at all.

With that said, I do however envision some scenarios where such function may be needed, for instance if you plan to give your “secret” email address to someone else and/or for better “guarding” of it.

Here is what may help:
I believe you should be able to accomplish what you need simply by setting filters in some of your “other” email box (which you CAN give to others). Such filters may include email forwarding, which is where your secret email comes in. Gmail filters for instance will allow you to do exactly this. Just input the desired string in such filter and then only the desired emails will be delivered to your secret email for publishing.

I guess you can also play even more with double email forwarding if for instance you want to publish on per-different-author-basis…

Actually, while on it, enabling the user side choices for other parameters such as HTML – Full, HTML – Excerpt, Plain Text – Full, Plain Text – Excerpt seems logical as well.
Where there any particular reasons to not have all these choices available to subscribers on the first place?

Same issue now with accessing www.remarpro.com from admin panel of WP installations:
After some “hanging”, there is an error in wp admin panel:
“An Unexpected HTTP Error occurred during the API request.”
Try again”.
This happens when admin is trying to either update plugins, search for new plugins and perhaps doing anything else that requires connection to www.remarpro.com.

However, this does not seem to be a www.remarpro.com issue, but rather that of some networks on the “way” to it. Thus, depending on what particular server is used to trace route, connections are dropped from some servers, but not others. For example as of the time of this post, WHO.IS shows problem:
https://www.who.is/tools/traceroute/www.remarpro.com

traceroute to www.remarpro.com (72.233.56.139), 25 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 174.36.196.241-static.reverse.softlayer.com (174.36.196.241) 0.402 ms 0.451 ms 0.550 ms
2 ae11.dar01.sr01.wdc01.networklayer.com (208.43.118.133) 0.218 ms 0.397 ms 0.496 ms
3 ae8.bbr02.eq01.wdc02.networklayer.com (173.192.18.192) 31.691 ms 0.532 ms 0.676 ms
4 xe-8-2-0.edge1.Washington4.Level3.net (4.53.112.25) 0.838 ms 0.944 ms 1.044 ms
5 vlan80.csw3.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.149.190) 1.045 ms 1.149 ms vlan60.csw1.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.149.62) 1.110 ms
6 ae-61-61.ebr1.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.134.129) 1.231 ms 1.068 ms ae-71-71.ebr1.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.134.133) 1.059 ms
7 ae-2-2.ebr3.Atlanta2.Level3.net (4.69.132.85) 14.498 ms 14.680 ms 14.777 ms
8 ae-7-7.ebr3.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.134.21) 34.351 ms 33.368 ms 34.158 ms
9 ae-63-63.csw1.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.151.133) 33.861 ms 33.542 ms ae-73-73.csw2.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.151.145) 33.438 ms
10 ae-32-80.car2.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.145.132) 33.677 ms ae-42-90.car2.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.145.196) 34.333 ms ae-22-70.car2.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.145.68) 34.555 ms
11 DATABANK-HO.car2.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.71.170.2) 33.812 ms 34.251 ms 34.013 ms
12 * * *
13 * * *
14 * * *
15 * * *
.....

While this one does not:
https://networktools.nl/traceroute/www.remarpro.com

traceroute to www.remarpro.com (72.233.56.138), 25 hops max, 40 byte packets
 1  static-ip-188-138-112-3.inaddr.ip-pool.com (188.138.112.3)  9.066 ms
 2  217.118.16.161 (217.118.16.161)  0.338 ms
 3  217.118.16.25 (217.118.16.25)  3.447 ms
 4  217.118.16.129 (217.118.16.129)  3.653 ms
 5  ve498.bbr1.fra3.inetbone.net (83.220.157.37)  3.903 ms
 6  xe-11-2-0.400.edge5.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (195.16.160.25)  3.938 ms
 7  vlan90.csw4.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.69.154.254)  3.796 ms
 8  ae-91-91.ebr1.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.69.140.13)  3.758 ms
 9  ae-48-48.ebr2.Paris1.Level3.net (4.69.143.146)  12.854 ms
10  ae-43-43.ebr2.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.137.58)  91.855 ms
11  ae-62-62.csw1.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.134.146)  91.860 ms
12  ae-61-61.ebr1.Washington1.Level3.net (4.69.134.129)  92.050 ms
13  ae-2-2.ebr3.Atlanta2.Level3.net (4.69.132.85)  105.343 ms
14  ae-7-7.ebr3.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.134.21)  124.920 ms
15  ae-83-83.csw3.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.151.157)  125.011 ms
16  ae-32-80.car2.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.145.132)  300.480 ms
17  DATABANK-HO.car2.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.71.170.2)  125.447 ms
18  10.0.0.14 (10.0.0.14)  126.539 ms
19  www.remarpro.com (72.233.56.138)  125.112 ms

Of note, Akismet.com connections were also dropped earlier today for some time (comments went to “approval” instead of “spam”), but things got normal on their own now.

Now, as we are hosting not only WP clients, we have other needs to connect to external servers (server side) and we see that at the moment at least some connections, to some services we are using are dropped as well. This again is pointing to the issue being related to specific segments of the network, not blog installations, or www.remarpro.com, or Akismet.com.

We are still trying to ping pong the issue, but it really seems like a “sit and wait” type of solution this far.

P.S. I also read somewhere else a recommendation to increase time out value. I would not do that, unless this is temporary and unless the issue persists and such adjustment helps.