Indeed! So good to find someone else who had this experience. We went from Flowdock => Slack on a fully distributed team of ~20 engineers, total staff size of ~

Indeed! So good to find someone else who had this experience. We went from Flowdock => Slack on a fully distributed team of ~20 engineers, total staff size of ~40. Flowdock threading was night-and-day so much better than Slack threading. It was such a stark difference, everyone noticed. What's so maddening about this is that I'll bring it up to anyone who will listen, and they'll think I'm just nostalgic, or a curmudgeon against all new things. But no, Flowdock simply did threads better. And you had to use both, for awhile, on real teams, to "feel" the difference. (Screenshots can't really convey it.) If you were on a scaled team using Flowdock before adopting Slack, it would have been totally obvious to you. Tweeted about this here: https://twitter.com/amontalenti/status/1263317861537402885 https://twitter.com/amontalenti/status/1263317861537402885 Nice to meet a fellow traveller! And yes, to the point of someone else on this HN thread, the closest thing to Flowdock threads on the market today in a semi-popular chat product is Zulip "Topics", as described here: https://zulip.com/help/about-streams-and-topics https://zulip.com/help/about-streams-and-topics -- the difference is that Zulip forces threads to be labeled (similar to an email subject: line) whereas in Flowdock, all threads were anonymous, given a thread-id (permalink) automatically, and also automatically color-coded.