Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Curing Our Slack Addiction

blog.agilebits.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 187 posts

Re: Curing Our Slack Addiction

#161

Post by eeeeeeeeeeeee »

sickbeard wrote: post #158

Email communication, slow, initiator feels ignored. Slack/chat communication, instant, receiver feels overwhelmed. The problem is not email or slack, it's the method in which we communicate. We need to make sure we use the right tools, as the author mentioned, knowledge bases, email, chat etc at the appropriate times. The problem is not Slack per say, it's using Slack for all communications.

Yep, a lot of these issues the OP reports can be resolved by, as a team, discussing how you communicate and what is a priority. That team seems to be lacking clear expectations. Oddly enough, that is a failure to communicate.

If someone does an @here or @channel or even an @person notify for a simple question that is not urgent, that is rude. Non-urgent issues should go in the channels and the person can respond when they get time, or e-mail it to indicate it's not a priority.

I really like Slack, but I do agree that it's easy to get carried away with notifications and integrations and it becomes a lot of noise. But most of these issues can be resolved by talking as a team about how the tools should be used.

Re: Curing Our Slack Addiction

#163

Post by [deleted] »

Touche wrote: post #141
moron4hire wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, email is an open standard, with plenty of choices in both client and server software. Slack is a proprietary system. Why are we actively axing solid, widely distributed, open ecosystems for proprietary ones? It'd be like if everyone woke up one day and decide "eh, Linux is just not animated-giphy enough, let's all switch to this startup OS with a crippled free version."

Because Slack doesn't have to write up an RFC and wait months/years for feedback before getting features implemented. People care about features, not interoperability (until they want out, at which point they feel the lock-in burn).

[deleted]

Re: Curing Our Slack Addiction

#165

Post by jolux »

Why can't you just search your Slack for answers to old questions? Isn't that supposed to be part of the point? I've heard that's one of the main selling points.

Re: Curing Our Slack Addiction

#167

Post by mikestew »

a-saleh wrote: post #140
stephengillie wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2. Don't expect people to be online. It's the same as irc. If people are there, they are expecting to be interrupted / they are feeling helpful at that moment. One of the reasons I don't like Slack is that people contact me when I'm off shift. I support APAC and so work different hours from most of my company. If I have a problem, I have to either email someone, or DM someone who isn't online. Either way, my voice…

This really seems to be a culture problem. We have long time established custom, that if you want to communicate with somebody via chat, you send him a 'ping' first, and wait if he responds.

We have long time established custom, that if you want to communicate with somebody via chat, you send him a 'ping' first, and wait if he responds.

On my list of pet peeves, this one is near the top. Nothing annoys me more than getting a chat message as follows: "Hey..." Because it's apparently not enough to bother me with a DM, one must first make sure that the "ping" is a complete waste of electrons, apparently. Once my train of thought is completely broken, then and only then are conditions right so as to allow the individual to fully absorb the weight of what you are about to type.

Here's an idea: how about typing WTF it is that you want, and if I respond you'll know I'm online. Typing "got a minute?" w/o any context is a sure-fired way to get me to ignore you.

With that screed out of the way, I am open to arguments on the value of sending a "ping" first. Better make it convincing. :-)

Re: Curing Our Slack Addiction

#168

Post by j_s »

phillc73 wrote: post #135
katheriin wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact, Slack users have reported an average of 50% reduction of internal email (source: https://slack.com/results ). But you're right, Slack is a closed system, and thus it cannot really replace email when used for external communications. This is where Fleep comes in - a messenger that works with email, too. You can include anyone in a conversation with their email address, and if they're not a Fleep user yet, the…

Hadn't heard of Fleep before, but thought immediately that it might solve one use case for me. After checking the pricing (good), if there was a self-hosted version (no, but maybe not a deal breaker) I looked for the Android app installer. Only available from Google Play Store. Unfortunately, that kills Fleep for me. Please consider making your app directly downloadable and not reliant on Google Play Services.

As I'm sure you know, .apk files can be downloaded using a computer without Google Play Services being on the phone.

https://www.androidpit.com/how-to-download-apk-file-from-goo...

Re: Curing Our Slack Addiction

#169

Post by julie78787 »

aaron695 wrote: post #155
randomsearch wrote: post #97

Recently I've seen a lot of anti-Slack articles. Not once have I heard a colleague criticising Slack. Every startup I know is using it and praising it. When I work with some people who still use email to coordinate in situations where I usually use Slack, I find it to be maddeningly time-wasting. Email is terrible for group conversation. It strikes me that there must be some more general for the Slack criticism. Perh…

I think you don't get the article at all. Slack is heroin (is the point), it is great to start, and seems great for a while, but for many people it gets worse and worse as time goes by. You have not answered the point at all. Obviously many people spend their lives enjoying heroin (with no bad affects) But for many it's toxic, why are you not just an addict selling something you yet don't understand?

[Disclaimer: I work for AgileBits. I also started the #slack-murderer hashtag inside :slack: before we switched over. My opinions are my own. Just ask anyone at AG!]

"Slack is heroin" is pretty accurate. Instant communication (and video games, and Facebook, and Y-Combinator ...) feeds the gratification / pleasure parts of the brain. That's great if one is working on their own time and can enjoy the inevitable crash when everyone else has finally gone to sleep, but when you've got a company full of people flitting around like crazy, because their neurochemistry says they have to "keep up", because "keeping up" is what keeps the brain in a happy mood -- that's a bad thing.

Changing collaboration software won't do a damned thing until teams have a chance to attend Narcotics Anonymous meetings.

Re: Curing Our Slack Addiction

#170

Post by tootie »

dingo_bat wrote: post #53
tootie wrote: post #12

I love electronic communication and Slack in particular. For a distributed team, it's an absolute must that every important chat happen on Slack. Stuff spoken in person is imprecise, secretive and easily forgotten. Slack is clear, persistent, and public. Everyone is on the same page. I too feel the need to read every conversation, but compare that to having those conversations just happening without my knowledge. The…

>Stuff spoken in person is imprecise, secretive and easily forgotten. Slack is clear, persistent, and public. I don't get how verbal stuff is imprecise but slack is clear. I find it to be the opposite. It's much better to have a face-to-face chat or a voice chat than converse in writing. It's more clear and you can get more feedback from the other person. Also, if you need to be more precise, you can just write stuff…

I mean literally more clear as in not mumbling. Also, your focus can wax and wane in a meeting while text is like having built-in rewind and playback.
Post reply on HN