7 ms·

I think it's even worse than "supporting" it, it was breaking their UX if certain users didn't have certain features (namely threads). Disclaimer: I hate threa

by rplnt 9y ago

I think it's even worse than "supporting" it, it was breaking their UX if certain users didn't have certain features (namely threads). Disclaimer: I hate threads in slack

merlincorey 9y ago
> Disclaimer: I hate threads in slack When you already have too many channels, and then they give you the ability to have too many threads. I feel like they do a worse job at the supposed value add of being able to archive and later refer to a topic of conversation than channels simply because they are so light weight and proliferate so many of them, potentially. Plus it's really jarring to be pulled into a bunch of threads.
- jochung 9y ago
  I think the too-many-channels problem is a symptom of the excessive walled gardening. Slack segregates by interests and social group, and bundles that with strict gatekeeping. There is no way for people to remix that to suit their own preferences. You can only fragment existing communities more. I would love a slack multiclient where I can put channels I care about side by side, regardless of origin, and keep the rest out of sight. Instead now everyone has their own #random and #offtopic and so on. Cruising between Slacks and Discords is like navigating a hall of mirrors. If there is disagreement, the only solution is complete schism.
  - pavel_lishin 9y ago
    Slack's use as a "community" chatbox is a mangling of its original intent to be used by teams. That's where your pain points are coming from, and some of my own (no /ignore feature, for instance).
    - allwein 9y ago
      I have some of the same issues, but I'm not part of any community slacks. I run my own consulting company, and as such, I've been invited to most of my client's slacks. So I've currently got 37 Slack workspaces going. But most of the time, I'm only concerned with the specific project channel that I'm working on for a client, and I might only be active in 2-3 projects at a time. So I'd love, like OP, to be able to just have those 3 channels front and center.
      - pavel_lishin 9y ago
        That's definitely a use case I hadn't considered.
jcbrand 9y ago
The point is that with XMPP at least, they could add those features. They presented their case as if it couldn't be done with XMPP, which is not true.
- emodendroket 9y ago
  Probably the subtext here is that they didn't feel it was worth the effort of doing double work for all their new features.
  - gsich 9y ago
    Then they could at least say so. Not making some BS excuses.
    - emodendroket 9y ago
      What difference would it make to anyone if they added "...and yeah, we could fix it, but we don't see it as worthwhile" to the end of the post?
      - gsich 9y ago
        Without the additional text it reads like it's the fault of XMPP/IRC.
bryanlarsen 9y ago
I really recommend checking out Zulip. It's open source, and they do threading so much better than everyone else.
Daycrawler 9y ago
Making your UI so that it doesn't break is the very definition of supporting it.

by rplnt 9y ago

I think it's even worse than "supporting" it, it was breaking their UX if certain users didn't have certain features (namely threads). Disclaimer: I hate threads in slack

merlincorey 9y ago

> Disclaimer: I hate threads in slack When you already have too many channels, and then they give you the ability to have too many threads. I feel like they do a worse job at the supposed value add of being able to archive and later refer to a topic of conversation than channels simply because they are so light weight and proliferate so many of them, potentially. Plus it's really jarring to be pulled into a bunch of threads.

jochung 9y ago
I think the too-many-channels problem is a symptom of the excessive walled gardening. Slack segregates by interests and social group, and bundles that with strict gatekeeping. There is no way for people to remix that to suit their own preferences. You can only fragment existing communities more. I would love a slack multiclient where I can put channels I care about side by side, regardless of origin, and keep the rest out of sight. Instead now everyone has their own #random and #offtopic and so on. Cruising between Slacks and Discords is like navigating a hall of mirrors. If there is disagreement, the only solution is complete schism.
- pavel_lishin 9y ago
  Slack's use as a "community" chatbox is a mangling of its original intent to be used by teams. That's where your pain points are coming from, and some of my own (no /ignore feature, for instance).
  - allwein 9y ago
    I have some of the same issues, but I'm not part of any community slacks. I run my own consulting company, and as such, I've been invited to most of my client's slacks. So I've currently got 37 Slack workspaces going. But most of the time, I'm only concerned with the specific project channel that I'm working on for a client, and I might only be active in 2-3 projects at a time. So I'd love, like OP, to be able to just have those 3 channels front and center.
    - pavel_lishin 9y ago
      That's definitely a use case I hadn't considered.

jcbrand 9y ago

The point is that with XMPP at least, they could add those features. They presented their case as if it couldn't be done with XMPP, which is not true.

emodendroket 9y ago
Probably the subtext here is that they didn't feel it was worth the effort of doing double work for all their new features.
- gsich 9y ago
  Then they could at least say so. Not making some BS excuses.
  - emodendroket 9y ago
    What difference would it make to anyone if they added "...and yeah, we could fix it, but we don't see it as worthwhile" to the end of the post?
    - gsich 9y ago
      Without the additional text it reads like it's the fault of XMPP/IRC.

bryanlarsen 9y ago

I really recommend checking out Zulip. It's open source, and they do threading so much better than everyone else.

Daycrawler 9y ago

Making your UI so that it doesn't break is the very definition of supporting it.