5 ms·

Hmm. It seems that these chat applications are more and more becoming like a polished webmail system. Now they've introduced threads, it's searchable forever, y

Hmm. It seems that these chat applications are more and more becoming like a polished webmail system. Now they've introduced threads, it's searchable forever, you can mail erm. I mean send messages to individuals or even groups. This new technology is amazing. Seriously there is nothing wrong with using e-mail (apart from the dated protocol) and for knowledge sharing your team is better of with some kind of wiki with organized information.

amix 9y ago
Why not just use email? This was asked by a ton of people and we have addressed it here: https://help.twistapp.com/hc/articles/115003654589 https://help.twistapp.com/hc/articles/115003654589 Email is great and we are fans of it, but not for internal team communication.
- mdekkers 9y ago
  allright, let´s play this game, from your help page: > An email inbox is unorganized Mine isn´t. Between folders and labels, my inbox is clean and organised. > Email chains easily become long and difficult to read, and can splinter off into multiple chains The multiple threads/chains is a feature. I want to be able to splinter off a discussion. Also, if you frequently have massive email chains, you might want to just call a webex. > when someone goes on vacation or leaves your team, progress grinds to a halt That is an organisational problem, not a communications-tool problem. > your email inbox is just one of many places where your team communicates. And twist is going to be yet another place to look. [rehash of email is bad] > On top of that, Twist gives your team the space to get deep work done by allowing you to snooze all notifications. So, like slack, snoozed, but looks like email? When I need to put my head down to get stuff done I switch stuff off, which appears to be the easier option.
  - dkersten 9y ago
    I'll add to your last point with: Email never interrupts me. I have all audible and popup notifications turned off and generally check if I have new email only when it suits me. I make this super fast and simple by checking if my email icon on my phone has a little red number. Takes two seconds. If I have email, I can read them, if I don't, great. Like you, I use filters and labels to keep my inbox clean. Automated emails and mailing lists get filtered away right away (and I check them manually when I feel like it). My inbox itself then takes a few seconds to clean leaving only stuff I have to act on. I use the Spark mail client which is very similar to google inbox in that I can quickly deal wia h messages or "snooze" those I can't deal with right now. This way, I have zero unread messages in my inbox most of the time. (And I get OCD when I see other peopl ea phones or screenshots with 30k unread messages... wtf is wrong with people!)
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- MarceColl 9y ago
  I don't see anything there that cannot be solved by a client. I only see a proprietary email service here, one that cannot be used with other existing solutions. Why not build this on top of the current email protocols and offer a good client for reading it and an easy way to setup a mailing list (with an easy way to browse the archives)? That way this could be used with other clients and existing mail bots. No need for another integration API or to install another bloated client. If the user experience is really what sets this apart from mailing lists then you shouldn't have problems monetizing it. Also the point about > An email inbox is essentially just another list to manage. Twist is the same, but everyone already has an email account, why should I add yet another one?
- lillesvin 9y ago
  The question that immediately came to my mind was, "why not NNTP?"
  - Jaruzel 9y ago
    I see what you mean with this. I think NNTP is still a great protocol for discussions, it's just that over the years it got a bad rap for being a warez/porn haven. The server/client mechanism is robust and scalable. With a good client UI, it could be turned into quite a smart social/work platform. I've been toying with attempting such a NNTP client, but it's way down on my list of projects.
jensenbox 9y ago
I hate to say it but I concur... mostly. The idea that is different here is that it is an invite only system - meaning no spam. The first question that came up for me was 'who do I invite' - I had to think who in the team is an early adopter and would be receptive to trying something new. Then my next thought was to Hangouts them and tell them what I was doing so they did not see an invite for something unknown... then I thought... Why don't I just email them... and lastly... Why am I doing this again? I have already everything I need to talk to them... What is the advantage of this service? As it stands, I get very little spam. So what is the value prop?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- jensenbox 9y ago
  So I had a few minutes to think about my response and am going to respond to my own question... With a potential solution. Much of what I am reading is that it has better thread handling - I will assume that it does. I have also read the part where it is better for new team members - I get that, a new member can pop in and see the trail (how often that would actually happen? - unknown). I also read the sync vs async argument - sure, I like async but at times I need sync, like hard sync with red lights and bells (sms and whatsapp + phone calls and knocking on doors at night). I think at the core there is a kernel of greatness that can be built upon: Everything is a 'topic' and has potential triggers to external systems. I think this could be a system that has everything in it eventually. If a topic is a lazy topic then it could be tagged as such, for example a message about next weeks dev lunch, but if the site is down then tag it with a critical tag and the alarms could go off. I see the real power here is that it can be connected to external things much better than email can without significant rfc822 parsing. There is opportunity here to supplant your current email stream. The other coolness I can see is the potential for archiving everything - I think in certain circumstances Hangouts is too ephemeral. Daily standups should be recorded for remote teams or brainstorming sessions for SR&ED (Canadian tax thing). Even whiteboards and phone calls should be archived against a topic. Connect the system to a SIP service and all calls about a topic could be logged. Perhaps WebRTC would be the cool kids way of doing things. I would use a service that recorded everything (that I wanted to be recorded) and had ways of moving from async to hard sync fluidly.
mgkimsal 9y ago
"raw" email doesn't help much when someone new comes in to the project, and has no access to the previous emails. systems like these keep most of the ceremony of emails, but provide historical access. Of course, you can set up email group systems with archiving and search in those, but... that's more work, now you may have multiple systems for people to have access to, etc. systems like this are logical extensions of the ceremony of email with some added benefits.
mseebach 9y ago
It's email that gets to reinvent ~30 years of formal and informal specs and interoperability hacks because it controls all clients, and all servers in between. And yes, there's a lot wrong with email, it's just that it's familiar and we've figured out how to work around/live with a lot of the badness.
evilsnoopi3 9y ago
The org I work for has used [Flowdock](flowdock.com) for several years now and I have to say that threaded semi-real time communication is a huge boon. So, on the face of it I'm not against Twist but, as a user of a similar application, I have several questions: 1. Must all messages be thread topics or thread replies? 2. Are messages presented in the order they were sent/recieved or in some grouping based on thread? 3. Can messages be "re-threaded" so that replies i. become their own thread topic? ii. become a reply to a different thread? From my own research, it seems the answers are: 1. yes, all messages are either thread topics or replies; 2. messages are only grouped by thread and can't be seen as a stream where real-time communication across threads can happen; 3. and, no, messages cannot be re-threaded. Which, if true, I think makes it decidedly worse than Flowdock. Its true that Flowdock also does not support re-threading and for that I will eternally hate Rally/CA for never adding but in all other aspects where Flowdock attempts to be something fundamentally different than email, Twist attempts to be, like Slack before it, an email killer. For Flowdock default communication in a channel is just a message and only reifies into a thread topic when it recieves a reply. Also, the default presentation of messages is "real-time" group chat with color coding to identify threads and a dedicated thread viewer to "focus" on a single discussion if needed. Essentially Flowdock is standard group chat with an admittedly useful organizational concept of threads. Twist seems to strip out the "group chat" part, leaving only threads and at that point I kind of agree that its just sexier email. I'd argue the whole reason Flowdock (or similiar) is necessary in addition to email is it reduces the barrier of what is "message worthy". If I want to send a message about my dog as an email, that feels weird. If I want to send the same message to a channel in Flowdock it doesn't; it may even become a thread but it doesn't disrupt useful work going on in other threads. Twist seems like it falls decidedly in the first camp and _that_ is why I won't switch to it from Flowdock. I simply can't use it for water-cooler style communication (group chat - Slack, Flowdock, even AIM win here) or productive real-time focused discussion _across problems_ (multi-threaded group chat so that one thread can dovetail/inform another in the public discussion - this is a Flowdock only thing AFAIK). The only problem it seems to solve is productive focused discussion on a single topic and honestly email already does that very well. I will say searching is nice; of course, Flowdock has that too (as does Slack and many internet-based email solutions).
ChuckMcM 9y ago
There is a simple reason that email is not a good team communication mechanism, and that is onboarding new members and capturing collective memory. A threaded store and forward system works better for that as it allows new participants (members of the team) to read back in the historical documents about what happened before and what outcomes were created. The three pillars of communication appear to me to be: Time sensitive; communication of the specific moment (calendars are included here) Evolved knowledge; communications of the group which represent the evolution of the group understanding of processes, challenges, and solutions. Directive/Command; communications which direct individual or group action and recover group status. The typical solutions fall into 'chat/calendar', 'news/bulleitin board', and 'email'
- alfra 9y ago
  An archive isn't a good tool to onboard people. The knowledge you get at school or college is a kind "onboarding" new members. But it doesn't make you read every single piece that was ever written. You get a summary of both events and outcome, and most importantly the current state. That's also how Wikipedia works: Articles don't get longer and longer, you can also summarize and put stuff into perspective. That's why there is a way to delete stuff (with version control, of course). Moreover, onboarding new people (or maintaining the collective memory) isn't the only form of communication that happens in a team. Maybe it's not even the most important. What about coordination? On the smaller stuff, on the daily stuff, but also on the bigger picture?
  - ChuckMcM 9y ago
    I don't disagree with your assessment but note that in 'school' the subject is taught from a text book which is a distilled version of the knowledge. Those text books get periodically rewritten. In an engineering organization it would be difficult to justify the expense (although it might be worth it!) to hire a writer to distill all of the learning that happened and the history of that learning into a text that could be handed to new members to bring them up to speed. As a result it is simpler and more cost effective to have a mailing list archive that can be reviewed. Now it you want to create a product/company out of that practice, then you would build a system that would let people reviewing messages be able to 'vote them up' based on their importance to the over all work product. That sort of 'auto curation' would then let you scan just the list with a 'curation threshold' and just read the important bits rather than everything in the list. That might be a good compromise between a dedicated historian/textbook writer and a list which had all the data but it was inter spersed with the occasional "lets gets the group together for a movie / which movie" discussion.
Alex3917 9y ago
> Seriously there is nothing wrong with using e-mail (apart from the dated protocol) and for knowledge sharing your team is better of with some kind of wiki with organized information. I'm the co-founder of https://www.fwdeveryone.com https://www.fwdeveryone.com, which implements the same sort of functionality on top of email. This way you can capture both the knowledge created within your organization, and also conversations between your coworkers and people outside your business. There is no new client to adopt, and your data already comes pre-exported into your gmail or google apps account. And if you have a conversation you'd like to share publicly then we provide tools, like requesting permission and redacting sensitive info, to make this easy also, e.g.: https://www.reddit.com/r/Connecticut/comments/65kbok/good_hikes_for_southern_ct/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Connecticut/comments/65kbok/good_hi... Wikis are great, but maintaining them is basically a full time job, which is why they tend to be terrible and out of date. And even in cases where you have a PM maintaining your wiki full time, the majority of organizational knowledge is still locked up in email. Given that the amount of personal non-spam email sent every day is something like 100x the total size of Wikipedia, it seems unlikely that chat programs, email replacement solutions, or wikis can ever really be a complete solution. Also, everyone already knows how to write or respond to an email, but many people within organizations don't know how to do simple things like making an account on a website. It sounds like a trivial problem, but we've found that having a system where everyone can contribute without having to learn anything new is actually a big win.
- edoceo 9y ago
  > Wikis are great, but maintaining them is basically a full time job, which is why they tend to be terrible and out of date Good documentation is a full time job, via Wiki or whatever. It's not the Wiki's fault it's out of date.
- e12e 9y ago
  Looks interesting. But from a qursory glance it appears to work with Gmail, and not with email?
  - Alex3917 9y ago
    Right now the person uploading the thread needs to be using gmail or a Google Apps account. We started there because there are 1.1 billion daily active users, but in the future it will work with other email service providers. Being able to use DKIM and SPF to authenticate threads is part of our value proposition, and a key part of the value proposition of email in general. (For example, being able to prove that you agreed on X project requirements with a certain person on a certain date.) Doing this type of authentication requires every message in a thread, not just the last one, so the most pragmatic way to meet this requirement is to work with email service providers with available APIs. The alternative is storing the entire contents of your inbox, but this doesn't make sense until we're ready to roll out our enterprise offering.

amix 9y ago

Why not just use email? This was asked by a ton of people and we have addressed it here: https://help.twistapp.com/hc/articles/115003654589 https://help.twistapp.com/hc/articles/115003654589 Email is great and we are fans of it, but not for internal team communication.

mdekkers 9y ago
allright, let´s play this game, from your help page: > An email inbox is unorganized Mine isn´t. Between folders and labels, my inbox is clean and organised. > Email chains easily become long and difficult to read, and can splinter off into multiple chains The multiple threads/chains is a feature. I want to be able to splinter off a discussion. Also, if you frequently have massive email chains, you might want to just call a webex. > when someone goes on vacation or leaves your team, progress grinds to a halt That is an organisational problem, not a communications-tool problem. > your email inbox is just one of many places where your team communicates. And twist is going to be yet another place to look. [rehash of email is bad] > On top of that, Twist gives your team the space to get deep work done by allowing you to snooze all notifications. So, like slack, snoozed, but looks like email? When I need to put my head down to get stuff done I switch stuff off, which appears to be the easier option.
- dkersten 9y ago
  I'll add to your last point with: Email never interrupts me. I have all audible and popup notifications turned off and generally check if I have new email only when it suits me. I make this super fast and simple by checking if my email icon on my phone has a little red number. Takes two seconds. If I have email, I can read them, if I don't, great. Like you, I use filters and labels to keep my inbox clean. Automated emails and mailing lists get filtered away right away (and I check them manually when I feel like it). My inbox itself then takes a few seconds to clean leaving only stuff I have to act on. I use the Spark mail client which is very similar to google inbox in that I can quickly deal wia h messages or "snooze" those I can't deal with right now. This way, I have zero unread messages in my inbox most of the time. (And I get OCD when I see other peopl ea phones or screenshots with 30k unread messages... wtf is wrong with people!)
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
MarceColl 9y ago
I don't see anything there that cannot be solved by a client. I only see a proprietary email service here, one that cannot be used with other existing solutions. Why not build this on top of the current email protocols and offer a good client for reading it and an easy way to setup a mailing list (with an easy way to browse the archives)? That way this could be used with other clients and existing mail bots. No need for another integration API or to install another bloated client. If the user experience is really what sets this apart from mailing lists then you shouldn't have problems monetizing it. Also the point about > An email inbox is essentially just another list to manage. Twist is the same, but everyone already has an email account, why should I add yet another one?
lillesvin 9y ago
The question that immediately came to my mind was, "why not NNTP?"
- Jaruzel 9y ago
  I see what you mean with this. I think NNTP is still a great protocol for discussions, it's just that over the years it got a bad rap for being a warez/porn haven. The server/client mechanism is robust and scalable. With a good client UI, it could be turned into quite a smart social/work platform. I've been toying with attempting such a NNTP client, but it's way down on my list of projects.

jensenbox 9y ago

I hate to say it but I concur... mostly. The idea that is different here is that it is an invite only system - meaning no spam. The first question that came up for me was 'who do I invite' - I had to think who in the team is an early adopter and would be receptive to trying something new. Then my next thought was to Hangouts them and tell them what I was doing so they did not see an invite for something unknown... then I thought... Why don't I just email them... and lastly... Why am I doing this again? I have already everything I need to talk to them... What is the advantage of this service? As it stands, I get very little spam. So what is the value prop?

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
jensenbox 9y ago
So I had a few minutes to think about my response and am going to respond to my own question... With a potential solution. Much of what I am reading is that it has better thread handling - I will assume that it does. I have also read the part where it is better for new team members - I get that, a new member can pop in and see the trail (how often that would actually happen? - unknown). I also read the sync vs async argument - sure, I like async but at times I need sync, like hard sync with red lights and bells (sms and whatsapp + phone calls and knocking on doors at night). I think at the core there is a kernel of greatness that can be built upon: Everything is a 'topic' and has potential triggers to external systems. I think this could be a system that has everything in it eventually. If a topic is a lazy topic then it could be tagged as such, for example a message about next weeks dev lunch, but if the site is down then tag it with a critical tag and the alarms could go off. I see the real power here is that it can be connected to external things much better than email can without significant rfc822 parsing. There is opportunity here to supplant your current email stream. The other coolness I can see is the potential for archiving everything - I think in certain circumstances Hangouts is too ephemeral. Daily standups should be recorded for remote teams or brainstorming sessions for SR&ED (Canadian tax thing). Even whiteboards and phone calls should be archived against a topic. Connect the system to a SIP service and all calls about a topic could be logged. Perhaps WebRTC would be the cool kids way of doing things. I would use a service that recorded everything (that I wanted to be recorded) and had ways of moving from async to hard sync fluidly.

mgkimsal 9y ago

"raw" email doesn't help much when someone new comes in to the project, and has no access to the previous emails. systems like these keep most of the ceremony of emails, but provide historical access. Of course, you can set up email group systems with archiving and search in those, but... that's more work, now you may have multiple systems for people to have access to, etc. systems like this are logical extensions of the ceremony of email with some added benefits.

mseebach 9y ago

It's email that gets to reinvent ~30 years of formal and informal specs and interoperability hacks because it controls all clients, and all servers in between. And yes, there's a lot wrong with email, it's just that it's familiar and we've figured out how to work around/live with a lot of the badness.

evilsnoopi3 9y ago

The org I work for has used [Flowdock](flowdock.com) for several years now and I have to say that threaded semi-real time communication is a huge boon. So, on the face of it I'm not against Twist but, as a user of a similar application, I have several questions: 1. Must all messages be thread topics or thread replies? 2. Are messages presented in the order they were sent/recieved or in some grouping based on thread? 3. Can messages be "re-threaded" so that replies i. become their own thread topic? ii. become a reply to a different thread? From my own research, it seems the answers are: 1. yes, all messages are either thread topics or replies; 2. messages are only grouped by thread and can't be seen as a stream where real-time communication across threads can happen; 3. and, no, messages cannot be re-threaded. Which, if true, I think makes it decidedly worse than Flowdock. Its true that Flowdock also does not support re-threading and for that I will eternally hate Rally/CA for never adding but in all other aspects where Flowdock attempts to be something fundamentally different than email, Twist attempts to be, like Slack before it, an email killer. For Flowdock default communication in a channel is just a message and only reifies into a thread topic when it recieves a reply. Also, the default presentation of messages is "real-time" group chat with color coding to identify threads and a dedicated thread viewer to "focus" on a single discussion if needed. Essentially Flowdock is standard group chat with an admittedly useful organizational concept of threads. Twist seems to strip out the "group chat" part, leaving only threads and at that point I kind of agree that its just sexier email. I'd argue the whole reason Flowdock (or similiar) is necessary in addition to email is it reduces the barrier of what is "message worthy". If I want to send a message about my dog as an email, that feels weird. If I want to send the same message to a channel in Flowdock it doesn't; it may even become a thread but it doesn't disrupt useful work going on in other threads. Twist seems like it falls decidedly in the first camp and _that_ is why I won't switch to it from Flowdock. I simply can't use it for water-cooler style communication (group chat - Slack, Flowdock, even AIM win here) or productive real-time focused discussion _across problems_ (multi-threaded group chat so that one thread can dovetail/inform another in the public discussion - this is a Flowdock only thing AFAIK). The only problem it seems to solve is productive focused discussion on a single topic and honestly email already does that very well. I will say searching is nice; of course, Flowdock has that too (as does Slack and many internet-based email solutions).

ChuckMcM 9y ago

There is a simple reason that email is not a good team communication mechanism, and that is onboarding new members and capturing collective memory. A threaded store and forward system works better for that as it allows new participants (members of the team) to read back in the historical documents about what happened before and what outcomes were created. The three pillars of communication appear to me to be: Time sensitive; communication of the specific moment (calendars are included here) Evolved knowledge; communications of the group which represent the evolution of the group understanding of processes, challenges, and solutions. Directive/Command; communications which direct individual or group action and recover group status. The typical solutions fall into 'chat/calendar', 'news/bulleitin board', and 'email'

alfra 9y ago
An archive isn't a good tool to onboard people. The knowledge you get at school or college is a kind "onboarding" new members. But it doesn't make you read every single piece that was ever written. You get a summary of both events and outcome, and most importantly the current state. That's also how Wikipedia works: Articles don't get longer and longer, you can also summarize and put stuff into perspective. That's why there is a way to delete stuff (with version control, of course). Moreover, onboarding new people (or maintaining the collective memory) isn't the only form of communication that happens in a team. Maybe it's not even the most important. What about coordination? On the smaller stuff, on the daily stuff, but also on the bigger picture?
- ChuckMcM 9y ago
  I don't disagree with your assessment but note that in 'school' the subject is taught from a text book which is a distilled version of the knowledge. Those text books get periodically rewritten. In an engineering organization it would be difficult to justify the expense (although it might be worth it!) to hire a writer to distill all of the learning that happened and the history of that learning into a text that could be handed to new members to bring them up to speed. As a result it is simpler and more cost effective to have a mailing list archive that can be reviewed. Now it you want to create a product/company out of that practice, then you would build a system that would let people reviewing messages be able to 'vote them up' based on their importance to the over all work product. That sort of 'auto curation' would then let you scan just the list with a 'curation threshold' and just read the important bits rather than everything in the list. That might be a good compromise between a dedicated historian/textbook writer and a list which had all the data but it was inter spersed with the occasional "lets gets the group together for a movie / which movie" discussion.

Alex3917 9y ago

> Seriously there is nothing wrong with using e-mail (apart from the dated protocol) and for knowledge sharing your team is better of with some kind of wiki with organized information. I'm the co-founder of https://www.fwdeveryone.com https://www.fwdeveryone.com, which implements the same sort of functionality on top of email. This way you can capture both the knowledge created within your organization, and also conversations between your coworkers and people outside your business. There is no new client to adopt, and your data already comes pre-exported into your gmail or google apps account. And if you have a conversation you'd like to share publicly then we provide tools, like requesting permission and redacting sensitive info, to make this easy also, e.g.: https://www.reddit.com/r/Connecticut/comments/65kbok/good_hikes_for_southern_ct/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Connecticut/comments/65kbok/good_hi... Wikis are great, but maintaining them is basically a full time job, which is why they tend to be terrible and out of date. And even in cases where you have a PM maintaining your wiki full time, the majority of organizational knowledge is still locked up in email. Given that the amount of personal non-spam email sent every day is something like 100x the total size of Wikipedia, it seems unlikely that chat programs, email replacement solutions, or wikis can ever really be a complete solution. Also, everyone already knows how to write or respond to an email, but many people within organizations don't know how to do simple things like making an account on a website. It sounds like a trivial problem, but we've found that having a system where everyone can contribute without having to learn anything new is actually a big win.

edoceo 9y ago
> Wikis are great, but maintaining them is basically a full time job, which is why they tend to be terrible and out of date Good documentation is a full time job, via Wiki or whatever. It's not the Wiki's fault it's out of date.
e12e 9y ago
Looks interesting. But from a qursory glance it appears to work with Gmail, and not with email?
- Alex3917 9y ago
  Right now the person uploading the thread needs to be using gmail or a Google Apps account. We started there because there are 1.1 billion daily active users, but in the future it will work with other email service providers. Being able to use DKIM and SPF to authenticate threads is part of our value proposition, and a key part of the value proposition of email in general. (For example, being able to prove that you agreed on X project requirements with a certain person on a certain date.) Doing this type of authentication requires every message in a thread, not just the last one, so the most pragmatic way to meet this requirement is to work with email service providers with available APIs. The alternative is storing the entire contents of your inbox, but this doesn't make sense until we're ready to roll out our enterprise offering.