4 ms·
Yeah, I honestly enjoy the loosely linear way that Discord's chat works for informal conversation. You just.... chat, unless you're replying to something a bit
by jackson1442 6y ago
Yeah, I honestly enjoy the loosely linear way that Discord's chat works for informal conversation. You just.... chat, unless you're replying to something a bit further up, then you mark it as a reply. It feels completely informal without the rigidity you get from Teams/Google Chat/Slack's independent versions of threads.
I feel like something like this makes sense in theory, but when you apply it to a group you'll have people either exclusively use the content feature or exclusively use the messaging feature. People don't want to need to think to chat, they just want to talk like they normally would.
- kevincox 6y agoI think this is the best solution for moderately sized and mostly-responsive groups, especially when the conversations aren't really important. This is common with groups of friends. However for larger groups and cases where you get more async communication I find it falls apart. In this case I like Zulip's approach of forcing every conversation to be a thread more. But honestly my favourite is still email's tree of comments (or Reddit sorted oldest-to-newest). It makes it easy to follow a threads and mute threads or subthreads. Few other systems deal so gracefully with tangential conversations which I find to be very common. Of course email has it's flaws, but for async discussion between a large number of people I find the ability to see the reply-tree to be the most effective.