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

The Problem with Slack at Scale

liorn.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 107 posts

Re: The Problem with Slack at Scale

#51

Post by rtpg »

karmakaze wrote: post #14

> Slack Alternatives > 2. Slack clone but with Feature X. Feature X is usually something like task management, project management, notes etc. Examples of these apps are Chanty, Rock.so, Flock, Ryver, Twist (there are many more). > The problem with the apps in the second category is that they end up competing with two existing tools. I use 4 written communication tools: 1. Slack for (a) async & sync team chat (b) asyn…

Slack _is_ missing some basic functionality for keeping yourself organized when receiving a bunch of info, it's not just about the people. Especially when it's the replacement for corporate e-mail.

Dumb example: you are in N threads. You want to remove yourself from those threads. You can turn off being notified from them one-by-one (refreshing the page to actually have them disappear). Compare with e-mail, where you can quickly select a bunch of threads and just hit "archive".

Re: The Problem with Slack at Scale

#52

Post by kibwen »

epivosism wrote: post #36
molsongolden wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I switched companies which meant moving from Zulip to Slack. I don’t understand why people like Slack or what they like about the UI. Threading is terrible, async catchup is difficult, gif links don’t convert cleanly, group DMs are limited to 8 users then Slack suggests creating a new channel…?!

I've never used Zulip, and prefer slack threads to discord's attempt. Could you explain how they work in Zulip?

Zulip requires all conversations to happen inside of topics; think of it like an extremely lightweight and synchronous email, where the topic is the subject line. You can view a channel to see all its messages chronologically, and in the sidebar you can narrow to a single topic.

Zulip is great, I highly recommend it. On projects where I have to use Slack or Slack clones, I end up closing them when it's time to get work done because they're terrible at being productive and hopeless at preserving information for more than a few seconds. With Zulip I have successfully searched for information sent months ago/thousands of messages ago and still found it, thanks to the powerful search and mandatory topics.

Re: The Problem with Slack at Scale

#54

Post by gorgoiler »

onion2k wrote: post #33
FullyFunctional wrote: post #20

We adopted Slack and I hate it but use daily. What I find so frustrating with Slack is that it's 1. Super terrible at threading. Threads are clearly discouraged and don't nest. This appears to be by design, but even Usenet handled threading better. 2. Slack is an information wastebasket - at least in my experience it's really hard to find information once there's a significant traffic in a deployment. 3. Too Much Not…

Slack is a tool, and like all tools it can be used badly. You work at a company that uses it badly. - No one should be using Slack for deep, branching conversations that require nested threads. Those would be lost and hard to refer back to in any system. Learn to separate and focus on things better. - Slack is not a documentation system or a knowledge base, and shouldn't be treated like one. Pull salient points out o…

Slack-the-company’s mission was for Slack to be a searchable knowledge base.

Re: The Problem with Slack at Scale

#55

Post by Manheim »

I have used Slack, Teams and Discord. If I should choose one I would go for Discord. Discord is much better in the collaboration department for distributed teams, and I love their open audio channels. It just works. Teams is good when it comes to integration with office and onedrive (of course). Slack is, in my opinion, just another chat service. A hugely successful one with a big user base and a strong brand, but not superior when it comes to collaboration.

Re: The Problem with Slack at Scale

#56

Post by FateOfNations »

cyberpunk wrote: post #2

I mean, good luck… Getting into enterprise IM in 2022 is complete idiocy, but… Good luck. We already have the solution, it’s zulip, yet no one uses it or cares. > Slack is based on IRC Not true any more, maybe in ancient history. > It was built for synchronous communication. Also wrong.

>> Slack is based on IRC

> Not true any more, maybe in ancient history.

I see that comparison more in the conceptual sense, rather than using the actual IRC protocol.

Re: The Problem with Slack at Scale

#57

Post by onion2k »

gorgoiler wrote: post #54
onion2k wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slack is a tool, and like all tools it can be used badly. You work at a company that uses it badly. - No one should be using Slack for deep, branching conversations that require nested threads. Those would be lost and hard to refer back to in any system. Learn to separate and focus on things better. - Slack is not a documentation system or a knowledge base, and shouldn't be treated like one. Pull salient points out o…

Slack-the-company’s mission was for Slack to be a searchable knowledge base.

Company mission statements are marketing, not actual missions. If you want to see the mission of the company look at what it actually does rather than what it says it aims to do.

Re: The Problem with Slack at Scale

#58

Post by Karrot_Kream »

slg wrote: post #17
1123581321 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminders are the 2.5 option. Scan and postpone until a better time to read.

How do you identify if a message is of the 2.5 variety without first reading it to confirm it is not a 2? You still need to be interrupted to read the message. In my experience reminders have always been a way to manage work and not a way to manage notifications.

By default I turn all of my channels to Mention only. Other than that I have a few channels with low posting frequency which require urgent attention that I always have on notify. This gives me all 3 message types. I use the same pattern on Matrix and IRC as well.

Re: The Problem with Slack at Scale

#59

Post by fnord123 »

vemv wrote: post #40

I've long held the opinion the best chat app is no chat app, i.e. delegate everything to your favorite issue tracker and other forms of knowledge keeping (e.g. Git commits, design documents). Let everything be either fully 'literate' (for lack of a better term: abundant context, complete paragraphs and argumentation, hyperlinking), or fully sync and human (meetings), with no in between other than email, used thinly.…

> It's a model that has worked well for OSS - many projects do just fine with Github alone, sustainably, for years.

What's the biggest OSS project you know of with no IRC, Discord, Slack or other chat presence?

Re: The Problem with Slack at Scale

#60

Post by LilBytes »

pjmlp wrote: post #28
FullyFunctional wrote: post #20

We adopted Slack and I hate it but use daily. What I find so frustrating with Slack is that it's 1. Super terrible at threading. Threads are clearly discouraged and don't nest. This appears to be by design, but even Usenet handled threading better. 2. Slack is an information wastebasket - at least in my experience it's really hard to find information once there's a significant traffic in a deployment. 3. Too Much Not…

I used to hate Slack, then I got involved with some projects that require Teams,....

I'm fairly certain this feeling is ubiquitous across anyone and everyone who's had to transition from Slack to Teams.
Post reply on HN