Live data from Hacker News

Why Slack is inappropriate for open source communications

dave.cheney.net

91–100 of 536 posts

Re: Why Slack is inappropriate for open source communications

#91
post #78
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well put. But you may have missed the memo because you're in the wrong time zone, and with Slack, your possibly-relevant input is ignored because you can't participate in real time. This is my beef with chat. As the OP says, it biases all conversation to those in the same time zone. Fine for some things (like baked goods arriving in some far-off kitchen), but not for others (like a design decision that should have in…

If a group has the choice between realtime and asynchronous channels there needs to be a guideline for this. If my org takes pride in consensus for everybody, everybody needs to have the time to submit input. It's not uncommon that some active users in a chat go for an ad-hoc decision just because they are more than one and want to work _now_. In the long term this damages the culture, splits the participants and is…

I completely agree. Unfortunately, what I've seen more than once is that mgmt (or even someone from the rank-and-file) sees / experiences a new tool like Slack (or Campfire, or Hangouts, or...) and says "hey, great new tool we should use!" and that's the 'decision'. No thought given to how async comms biases development when developers are spread world-wide.

I gripe because I am a US left-coaster who works with a team that is increasingly based in Western Europe. By simply deciding to rely on Slack, they have essentially cut me from development conversations other than the weekly live session.

Re: Why Slack is inappropriate for open source communications

#92
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Chatting is having to write the same thing a million times. If you find yourself repeating the same thing a lot in chat, it would be a good idea to document it somewhere and just paste a link. With a link to the relevant documentation, a lot of people will just do the rest of the legwork on their own, and will now be able to quickly reference it going forward, and hopefully bug you less in chat (you can always be e…

The problem is though, that some people like to be the local expert on IRC/Slack with all the answers. They don't want to document it elsewhere.

Fix your group's culture. Document things. If people refuse to document things, then do it for them and shove your docs in their face. Do it until they write the documentation themselves.

Re: Why Slack is inappropriate for open source communications

#93
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Chatting is having to write the same thing a million times. If you find yourself repeating the same thing a lot in chat, it would be a good idea to document it somewhere and just paste a link. With a link to the relevant documentation, a lot of people will just do the rest of the legwork on their own, and will now be able to quickly reference it going forward, and hopefully bug you less in chat (you can always be e…

The problem is though, that some people like to be the local expert on IRC/Slack with all the answers. They don't want to document it elsewhere.

Then that person is doing all the legwork, but someone else can come along and create a KB themselves with those answers.

Re: Why Slack is inappropriate for open source communications

#94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It just has a good interface But this is such a big deal. You make it sound like a good interface is trivial. It isn't, and it makes a huge difference.

irssi is a significantly better interface than any slack application.

The technically illiterate people I know would have a much harder time using irssi than slack

Re: Why Slack is inappropriate for open source communications

#95
I massively disagree with #2. Unless your project has very little activity, synchronous or pseudosynchronous communication is a lot more efficient than async through email/discourse. It's also a lot more friendly to your contributors, it makes things less formal and more human.

Async shines when you have a lot of users, but only if it's very accessible (searchable). Otherwise it's just people repeating themselves constantly.

Also, longer rant on the IRC thing. For the past decade I've been using IRC as my central mode of group communication for all open source work. Last year and as part of my (open source) company, I've completed the switch to Discord.

I'm an open source die-hard and it bugs me that Discord isn't open source yet, but I believe this has a fairly high chance of changing (MUCH higher than Slack has at any rate). I would heartily recommend Discord for open-minded open source communities.

I'm now using Discord for everything. It has given me a unified interface for all my personal and group communications, easily searchable, with voice chat too (and video chat very soon, I cannot wait to never open Hangouts again). Needless to say, I'm a huge, huge fan.

Slack has none of that. The #1 thing that bugs me with Slack is the forced separate accounts for every single Slack instance. And you can't delete any of those accounts, you can only "deactivate" them.

Our open source community uses it. It works really well for us because we're a gamer-oriented open source community, so Discord is already pretty well known in that circle. On an ideological level, its API gives enough control over everything that goes in in it that I'm satisfied I could move to another service, should I need to. If anything, it's harder to move off IRC because there's no public logs, easy point of contact for the regular users, etc.

Also, I'm using Matterbridge to mirror our public channel to IRC: https://github.com/42wim/matterbridge/ (highly recommend everybody here checks it out; it supports a lot of protocols)

IRC has really disappointed me the past few years. I had a lot of hope that irccloud.com would offer a solution to IRC becoming irrelevant in the face of Slack and Discord, but it just hasn't happened. They're understaffed and don't have enough money coming in.

There's also a lot of ideological purity in recommending against SaaS "centralization" for comms but the truth is, it's not better. Last year my HDD crashed and I lost the logs for my organization's original channel going back to its creation... I'm very, very sad about that. Had I been using IRCCloud (or Discord) at the time, I wouldn't have lost all that. Granted, those companies could have, but the chances are lower than me fucking up.

This is the same reasoning why email is usually better off handled by companies whose livelihood depends on offering you the service, than by yourself.

Also like I said elsewhere in this thread, for a project using a Freenode channel and another using a Discord/Slack server, there is no difference between Freenode disappearing and Discord/Slack disappearing. Your host disappears, you have to find a new one, update tons of references and contact lots of users to let them know. On IRC, that's even harder. You can run your own IRC server, but very few do that, and those that do get less mindshare because connecting to yet another server is very annoying on IRC. It also costs you more, both in money and maintenance.

Re: Why Slack is inappropriate for open source communications

#96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if your entire infrastructure is centrally managed and can disappear at a company's whim, you're setting your community up for problems.

This applies to Freenode as much as it applies to Slack. If freenode disappears, people using its channels for foss will have similar issues and inconvenience as if Slack/Discord disappear and in both cases, it's recoverable.

If freenode disappears, it's less than a day to pick a new network and connect.

Nobody changes clients, tooling, etc. That's the difference between a closed walled garden like slack and an open protocol.

Re: Why Slack is inappropriate for open source communications

#97
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely agree with this. I'm part of a group that's trying to help people in the local community learn programming and we're using Slack to chat outside of any scheduled sessions. We're at over 1000 members in Slack now and are seeing messages disappear before the two-week mark. We don't collect any money from our members and Slack's pricing model makes it unfeasible for us. At this point, Slack's search feature…

With respect - Slack is a business that runs on a freemium model. You can't expect them to handle your (large) user base for free just because.

Which sounds like another reason Slack is inappropriate for open source communication. Money is a completely valid reason.

Re: Why Slack is inappropriate for open source communications

#98
post #18
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why people seem to thing that chats will solve all the problems. Chatting is having to write the same thing a million times.

> Chatting is having to write the same thing a million times. If you find yourself repeating the same thing a lot in chat, it would be a good idea to document it somewhere and just paste a link. With a link to the relevant documentation, a lot of people will just do the rest of the legwork on their own, and will now be able to quickly reference it going forward, and hopefully bug you less in chat (you can always be e…

Could clever chatbots help there? Might be hard to avoid being intrusive though.

Re: Why Slack is inappropriate for open source communications

#99

Issue #2, that slack is based on synchronous communication, is something that is always ignored. Sometimes I log in to slack and see a conversation that I want to add something to, but it is 4 hours old with 50+ new messages on varying topics. Even with Slack's new threaded messages it is hard to evolve the conversation after all the synchronous folks have moved on to other topics.

What you're looking for is email. Multi-user chat simulates a real life conversation, and in real conversations it's also awkward to say "hey so going back to what we were talking about 15 minutes ago..." after the conversation has moved on.

Re: Why Slack is inappropriate for open source communications

#100
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely agree with this. I'm part of a group that's trying to help people in the local community learn programming and we're using Slack to chat outside of any scheduled sessions. We're at over 1000 members in Slack now and are seeing messages disappear before the two-week mark. We don't collect any money from our members and Slack's pricing model makes it unfeasible for us. At this point, Slack's search feature…

With respect - Slack is a business that runs on a freemium model. You can't expect them to handle your (large) user base for free just because.

With respect - you are reading something that wasn't necessarily there, the person you were responding to said nothing about expecting Slack to change their business model.
Post reply on HN