3 ms·

Notify on start of new thread or @mention is the sweet spot. But there are always people who insist on having their entire conversation at the top level of the

Notify on start of new thread or @mention is the sweet spot. But there are always people who insist on having their entire conversation at the top level of the channel rather than in a thread, so everybody gets notified for every message (unless they mute the whole channel). /me shakes fist at cloud that looks like the face of a past team lead

chatmasta 1y ago
That doesn’t generate notifications by default. It does bold the channel though.
notatoad 1y ago
this is the sort of thing i want AI to be solving for me. i don't need it generating hyper-realistic videos, but when those two people in my office who never thread their messages start having a conversation in #general, i want slack to automatically thread it.
- catlifeonmars 1y ago
  Now I am wondering how difficult this would be to implement. You could extend the idea to connect multiple threads (intentional or virtual) across channels. E.g: <see all 25 other discussions on this topic>.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
NooneAtAll3 1y ago
what's the point of it being a channel if everything should be in a thread? just make every thread a channel, and "channel" should be a folder
- lbotos 1y ago
  #customer-incident-channel Lbotos: okay @jane you are leading expert on problem y. Use this thread for your debugging until next sync Lbotos: @phil your up for rebooting all the hosts. Ack this message and thread your work here. Please get started ASAP. Lbotos: others, is there anything else that we need to get unblocked? —- By having one channel you can leave that open and can be up to speed on the overarching state easily. Otherwise, if I'm making subchannels I gotta make sure to invite everyone to the sub channel or switch to the “meta coordination channel” to get unplanned collaboration. Threads have value.
  - catlifeonmars 1y ago
    It occurs to me that channels are just topics and it’s somewhat limiting to have a thread only belong to a single channel.
- rectang 1y ago
  On the surface that sounds reasonable, but when you consider that subscribers and settings (notifications, security, privacy, search, archival…) have to be managed per channel rather than per “folder”, it quickly becomes unmanageable. And if it’s as it sounds and you are one of the people who always has full conversations in the root of a channel where other people use threads, please reconsider.
- jve 1y ago
  Threads are short lived with 2-100 messages. Like a topic or an email conversation. In email analogy - you want dedicated mailbox for every conversation? Nonsense.
  - NooneAtAll3 1y ago
    in forum analogy - I want you to make a subforum (category) instead of complaining "why people talk in topic that in no way indicates it's for creating topics"
stevenicr 1y ago
for me the sweet spot would be toggle on / off / delay X #of minutes for mentions, replies, all the things (each thing individually).. this way some channels I would set to notify of all the things once every 2 hours, unless @mentioned Some channels would be once every 4 hours.
catlifeonmars 1y ago
Had one person who would send multiple messages in the top level Per. Sentence

chatmasta 1y ago

That doesn’t generate notifications by default. It does bold the channel though.

notatoad 1y ago

this is the sort of thing i want AI to be solving for me. i don't need it generating hyper-realistic videos, but when those two people in my office who never thread their messages start having a conversation in #general, i want slack to automatically thread it.

catlifeonmars 1y ago
Now I am wondering how difficult this would be to implement. You could extend the idea to connect multiple threads (intentional or virtual) across channels. E.g: <see all 25 other discussions on this topic>.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]

NooneAtAll3 1y ago

what's the point of it being a channel if everything should be in a thread? just make every thread a channel, and "channel" should be a folder

lbotos 1y ago
#customer-incident-channel Lbotos: okay @jane you are leading expert on problem y. Use this thread for your debugging until next sync Lbotos: @phil your up for rebooting all the hosts. Ack this message and thread your work here. Please get started ASAP. Lbotos: others, is there anything else that we need to get unblocked? —- By having one channel you can leave that open and can be up to speed on the overarching state easily. Otherwise, if I'm making subchannels I gotta make sure to invite everyone to the sub channel or switch to the “meta coordination channel” to get unplanned collaboration. Threads have value.
- catlifeonmars 1y ago
  It occurs to me that channels are just topics and it’s somewhat limiting to have a thread only belong to a single channel.
rectang 1y ago
On the surface that sounds reasonable, but when you consider that subscribers and settings (notifications, security, privacy, search, archival…) have to be managed per channel rather than per “folder”, it quickly becomes unmanageable. And if it’s as it sounds and you are one of the people who always has full conversations in the root of a channel where other people use threads, please reconsider.
jve 1y ago
Threads are short lived with 2-100 messages. Like a topic or an email conversation. In email analogy - you want dedicated mailbox for every conversation? Nonsense.
- NooneAtAll3 1y ago
  in forum analogy - I want you to make a subforum (category) instead of complaining "why people talk in topic that in no way indicates it's for creating topics"

stevenicr 1y ago

for me the sweet spot would be toggle on / off / delay X #of minutes for mentions, replies, all the things (each thing individually).. this way some channels I would set to notify of all the things once every 2 hours, unless @mentioned Some channels would be once every 4 hours.

catlifeonmars 1y ago

Had one person who would send multiple messages in the top level Per. Sentence