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

Guide to Slack import and export tools

get.slack.help

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 529 posts

Re: Guide to Slack import and export tools

#251

Post by prewett »

peterkelly wrote: post #194
tvanantwerp wrote: post #13

As head of IT for a company using Slack: FINALLY. Don't get me wrong--it's not like I want to read your messages and very likely won't. But there are times when I have no choice. A few years back, a group of interns started privately harassing other interns via Slack. Only way to see it was to boot an offending intern from his work station and go into his Slack to see what was happening. We had to make all intern acc…

If two people want to have a private conversation, they'll just find another means by which to do it. In the long run, abusing your privileged access to conversations intended to be private (however justified you may consider it to be) will just breed mistrust among employees. I would quit a job that treated me as a child which must be supervised in such a manner.

So what would your solution to the OP's problem be? If harassment is happening, I expect the company has some legal requirement to act. I also expect that you support the company making a safe workplace. How does the company do that if it cannot verify that something is actually going on? Just blindly believe the accuser without confirming if it's true? Just disbelieve the accuser? Tell them to work it out themselves?

Re: Guide to Slack import and export tools

#252

Post by ravitation »

dsacco wrote: post #242
ravitation wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> socio-political paradigm Sigh. And workplaces are socio-political contexts... I didn't find it very difficult to get past his hyperbole, and I frankly find it hard to believe that you did. It isn't hard to argue that monitoring channels that even just imply privacy, regardless of whether they take place in the workplace (or in academia, or at home) is a violation of personal rights - regardless of the fact that you…

> And workplaces are socio-political contexts They're not governments, they're companies. > monitoring channels that even just imply privacy, regardless of whether they take place in the workplace (or in academia, or at home) is a violation of personal rights It isn't, unless your definition of "personal rights" includes "things I personally want which are neither codified in, nor protected by, laws."

In what way are companies not trivially compared to states (governments) in this context (surveillance)? You're being intellectually disingenuous.

I mean, you completely (amusingly) misquoted that sentence. I said "it isn't hard to argue that [...]". I did not make an absolute statement that it is (a violation)... Come on now.

Re: Guide to Slack import and export tools

#254

Post by humanrebar »

tedivm wrote: post #224
peterkelly wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If two people want to have a private conversation, they'll just find another means by which to do it. In the long run, abusing your privileged access to conversations intended to be private (however justified you may consider it to be) will just breed mistrust among employees. I would quit a job that treated me as a child which must be supervised in such a manner.

I hate to tell you this but if you would quit a job for this reason you probably can't work in the US. The US has laws about corporate compliance, and it has requirements for things like dealing with sexual harassment. There is no such thing as a "private conversation" that takes place over a corporate network. For example, in the US sexual harassment is taken seriously. If a company gets a complaint of sexual harass…

> There is no such thing as a "private conversation" that takes place over a corporate network.

It's a tech issue, cultural issue, and a legal issue, but it's harmful that we seem to be forgetting the wisdom of discretion as life become more digitized. If the law or culture says "no expectation of discretion", they're just wrong and likely hypocritical.

It's healthy, normal, and appropriate to tell specific things to specific people. If we're worried about abuse, there are other solutions to those problems, like letting the harassed share the conversation later, which they can already do, with screenshots if nothing else.

Re: Guide to Slack import and export tools

#255

Post by freyir »

ramblerman wrote: post #68
tvanantwerp wrote: post #13

As head of IT for a company using Slack: FINALLY. Don't get me wrong--it's not like I want to read your messages and very likely won't. But there are times when I have no choice. A few years back, a group of interns started privately harassing other interns via Slack. Only way to see it was to boot an offending intern from his work station and go into his Slack to see what was happening. We had to make all intern acc…

> Only way to see it was to boot an offending intern from his work station and go into his Slack to see what was happening. Why couldn't you just ask the recipient to look on his station? > We had to make all intern accounts into multi-channel guests after that Are 2 interns ever allowed to be alone together? I mean it's essentially the same, you are saying they can't be trusted so either you always need them in grou…

>> Only way to see it was to boot an offending intern from his work station and go into his Slack to see what was happening.

> Why couldn't you just ask the recipient to look on his station?

This is probably exactly what happened? I'm guessing they didn't physically pry the unwilling intern from his seat like he was passenger on United.

Re: Guide to Slack import and export tools

#256

Post by chimeracoder »

thomasz wrote: post #179
imglorp wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, Europe might be different. In the US, if your employer owns the platform, they have the right to all the messages for compliance. We view this as "if you have something private, don't do it on corp channels." This is usually fine unless you're harassing someone or engaging in something against corp ethics. https://www.privacyrights.org/consumer-guides/workplace-priv...

It really depends on national legislation, as well as individual contracts with unions or work councils. At least here, as a rule of thumb, as long as private internet use is permitted, the employer can't legally monitor traffic outside of very specific circumstances. AFAIK you can't get around that by prohibiting personal internet usage without generally enforcing that prohibition.

> At least here, as a rule of thumb, as long as private internet use is permitted, the employer can't legally monitor traffic outside of very specific circumstances. AFAIK you can't get around that by prohibiting personal internet usage without generally enforcing that prohibition.

This isn't relevant here. ECHR has ruled that employers do have the right to read emails, as long as employees are notified in advance (which can include blanket notification as part of their employment agreement). ECHR has jurisdiction over all ECHR countries, which is a superset of EU countries and includes several non-EU countries, like Norway. Other European countries, like Germany, Switzerland, and the UK have also affirmed this right.

Email being roughly analogous to Slack, in the eyes of the law, there's little room for doubt that employers in Europe have the right to read Slack messages on the company's Slack account.

Re: Guide to Slack import and export tools

#257

Post by Vektorweg »

protomyth wrote: post #209
peterkelly wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If two people want to have a private conversation, they'll just find another means by which to do it. In the long run, abusing your privileged access to conversations intended to be private (however justified you may consider it to be) will just breed mistrust among employees. I would quit a job that treated me as a child which must be supervised in such a manner.

> abusing your privileged access to conversations intended to be private (however justified you may consider it to be) will just breed mistrust among employees Abusing your privileged access?!? You do realize some of us are required to access those communications for a variety of reasons especially because a threat is happening? Also, I don't get a choice when the lawyer shows up and says we need to look at X's accou…

threats are hardly a good reason for mass surveillance.

Re: Guide to Slack import and export tools

#258

Post by adfm »

tedivm wrote: post #224
peterkelly wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If two people want to have a private conversation, they'll just find another means by which to do it. In the long run, abusing your privileged access to conversations intended to be private (however justified you may consider it to be) will just breed mistrust among employees. I would quit a job that treated me as a child which must be supervised in such a manner.

I hate to tell you this but if you would quit a job for this reason you probably can't work in the US. The US has laws about corporate compliance, and it has requirements for things like dealing with sexual harassment. There is no such thing as a "private conversation" that takes place over a corporate network. For example, in the US sexual harassment is taken seriously. If a company gets a complaint of sexual harass…

We may have already hit peak Slack, but for folks that don't already know, most folks use something like Signal for anything you want to keep private.

Re: Guide to Slack import and export tools

#259

Post by marvin »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #141
s3nnyy wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Compare that to our email, where I can go into anyone's messages immediately if need-be. This is all very standard corporate IT stuff that you need for HR and legal reasons." Wow, THAT is highly illegal in Europe.

I was under the impression it WAS legal in Europe as well after being litigated to the Court of Human Rights[1]. The requirement is simply that they inform you ahead of time that they can (and will) monitor your email. In the US there is usually a form you sign at your hiring that says you understand the company may monitor your email. It is couched in terms like "to ensure compliance with laws and company policy" bu…

Certainly illegal in Norway. Hell, I've heard stories of corporate networks up here that MITM all their computers for security monitoring, and where the admins routinely see evidence of searches for sketchy pornography, but can't legally do anything because this kind of surveillance of your employees is illegal.

Re: Guide to Slack import and export tools

#260

Post by [deleted] »

dsacco wrote: post #242
ravitation wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> socio-political paradigm Sigh. And workplaces are socio-political contexts... I didn't find it very difficult to get past his hyperbole, and I frankly find it hard to believe that you did. It isn't hard to argue that monitoring channels that even just imply privacy, regardless of whether they take place in the workplace (or in academia, or at home) is a violation of personal rights - regardless of the fact that you…

> And workplaces are socio-political contexts They're not governments, they're companies. > monitoring channels that even just imply privacy, regardless of whether they take place in the workplace (or in academia, or at home) is a violation of personal rights It isn't, unless your definition of "personal rights" includes "things I personally want which are neither codified in, nor protected by, laws."

[deleted]
Post reply on HN