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

Why public chats are better than direct messages

teamplify.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 139 posts

Re: Why public chats are better than direct messages

#61

Post by doctor_eval »

zibby8 wrote: post #32
jrootabega wrote: post #4

This is why, when a colleague has a question about a pull request, or my feedback on THEIR pull request, I push us to have the discussion in the PR comments, instead of the pernicious "I just have a few questions, it will only take a few minutes" that always adds up to more time and attention than people claim. There ARE often situations where opening a synchronous communication channel is necessary, but even then, y…

Honestly, that does sound difficult. I get what you're trying to achieve, but if I'm trying to land a change, having a synchronous conversation (ideally in person) will resolve any misunderstandings between us on the order of minutes. Having an asynchronous back-and-forth takes on the order of hours or even days. And what do you get for your time? A nice record you can look back on? What are you going to use that for…

I agree. The only thing that matters is the change that ultimately gets committed. It’s rare enough to need to go through the commit logs, but optimising for this instead of optimising for getting the job done quickly and well, makes no sense to me. And anything contentious or tricky should be commented in the code itself.

There is a place for everything - PR comments, public slack channels, private DMs, in-person meetings, video calls, 1:1s - even phone calls! - but what’s critical is to use the tool that best gets the job done. And most of the time the job is not “teach everyone all the time”.

Re: Why public chats are better than direct messages

#62

Post by vasco »

doctor_eval wrote: post #57
vasco wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're stressed by typing in your team chat you don't trust your team and therefore there's a deeper issue already. I strongly believe you are wrong because all the examples you mention signal different team disfunctions. You need to understand everyone is different, yes, but your team should use public channels to communicate.

You strongly believe that I am wrong that there is no one single way? So, you are saying that yours is the only way? And that being flexible and working out what’s right for your team… is wrong?

Yes, if you have a team, the team should discuss work progress, discoveries and problems in a shared space that is accessible by other team members. If conversations about the work itself happen in silos because someone is not comfortable, you're doing it wrong because you're fixing the symptom instead of the cause.

Re: Why public chats are better than direct messages

#65

Post by talideon »

I'm not a fan of DMs. While they have their place, they have some massive problems: they create silos and oracles, and reduce visibility. I know this because I'm an unwilling oracle on my team. Part of this can be solved with documentation, but then you have the problem of people who won't look at the docs sending people DMs that could've been solved by searching the docs for a keyword.

Re: Why public chats are better than direct messages

#66

Post by talideon »

jrootabega wrote: post #4

This is why, when a colleague has a question about a pull request, or my feedback on THEIR pull request, I push us to have the discussion in the PR comments, instead of the pernicious "I just have a few questions, it will only take a few minutes" that always adds up to more time and attention than people claim. There ARE often situations where opening a synchronous communication channel is necessary, but even then, y…

Not just that, but the version control system is an actual system of record, while your chat system isn't.

But people get lazy because Slack is there and it's "easier" (really, more immediate) than looking at the PR.

Re: Why public chats are better than direct messages

#67

Post by black_13 »

jrootabega wrote: post #20
ungamedplayer wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have learned that its good to praise in public, criticise in private. It is possible to have criticism in PR's private inside a company which reduces its "publicness" but some people are still sensitive even with the reduced exposure.

Some people are insecure and terrified to ever have a record of them being wrong or ignorant. That's understandable, especially in cultures that hire a lot of relatively unskilled people and h highlight that they're competing. I think it's essential that those who are considered senior or expert demonstrate their own vulnerability by asking questions that show they don't understand or know about something, and being…

No post body was provided.

Re: Why public chats are better than direct messages

#68

Post by bombcar »

doctor_eval wrote: post #60
doctor_eval wrote: post #21

As I read this, I got the sinking feeling that I'd read it all before. But then I realised, it's just another case of someone thinking that their specific solution is best, solely on the basis that it worked for them, in their specific circumstances. But here's the thing: every group is different, has different needs, and will respond differently to different styles of communication. Some people (especially people no…

I’m just going to add that it looks like this is some kind of Slack hasslebot dystopia. They want all conversations in public so they can data mine them? From the home page, > Teamplify | Hey @anna.austin, we haven't seen updates for PROJ-716 since Thursday, July 19. Could you please add a comment there summarizing your progress as of today.

Chat clients as TPS devices. Wonderful.

Re: Why public chats are better than direct messages

#69

Post by efojs »

jrootabega wrote: post #4

This is why, when a colleague has a question about a pull request, or my feedback on THEIR pull request, I push us to have the discussion in the PR comments, instead of the pernicious "I just have a few questions, it will only take a few minutes" that always adds up to more time and attention than people claim. There ARE often situations where opening a synchronous communication channel is necessary, but even then, y…

Would be cool if comments to PR in Slack were transmitted to Github.

Opened a feature request: https://github.com/integrations/slack/issues/1433

Re: Why public chats are better than direct messages

#70

Post by doctor_eval »

vasco wrote: post #62
doctor_eval wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You strongly believe that I am wrong that there is no one single way? So, you are saying that yours is the only way? And that being flexible and working out what’s right for your team… is wrong?

Yes, if you have a team, the team should discuss work progress, discoveries and problems in a shared space that is accessible by other team members. If conversations about the work itself happen in silos because someone is not comfortable, you're doing it wrong because you're fixing the symptom instead of the cause.

So how do you propose you “fix” the cause, which is some human being’s discomfort at working in a particular way?

Do you force them? Sack them? Threaten them?

Or just send them for reprogramming?

Honestly, this is just cargo cult stuff.

Post reply on HN