News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Startup Zeitgeist by ritchiea on Wednesday May 04, 2016 @11:47PM (#11633903)
The NYC Ruby users group just replaced their email list with Slack, it's great, it's cut down participation by about 80%, messages that are not seen immediately go forever unread, and what was once a valuable community for me to reach out to as a freelancer is now worthless. But at least we're on the coolest new billion dollar valuation closed source tech. And we have some great new channels like #general that no one ever posts to. I can't imagine anything better.
Re:The Startup Zeitgeist by nihonde on Thursday May 05, 2016 @01:20AM (#11634156)
This made me laugh because it's also exactly my experience with free community Slack. I suppose there is an argument for a more transient means of communication, and Slack's interface is certainly an improvement over IRC or awful, awful Google Groups, but...

Of course, if you want a better Slack experience, you can shell out an unknown multiplier of thousands of dollars per month for a paid version (which is never going to happen). The pricing gap for free/paid community Slack is just nuts.

Re:The Startup Zeitgeist by stephengillie on Thursday May 05, 2016 @01:59AM (#11634261)
Slack amplifies "fishbowl" workplace environments. Imagine if you're only allowed to discuss certain topics in certain channels, but what you can say in each channel changes often. And your boss can't cut you any...slack...about these changes, because his boss is watching all of these channels too, telling him who should say what where.

We've been coping by hanging out in private channels. And so the tribal knowledge remains hidden among a small cabal because management doesn't want it discussed. They prefer the illusion that we are...all-knowing or psychic or something.

Re:The Startup Zeitgeist by fsloth on Thursday May 05, 2016 @04:54AM (#11634721)
What? Managament controlling information dispersal within a company?! How can any place work that way? NDA and GAAP rules limiting discussions to third parties but within companies...?! (shudders). Either the process would need to be trivially linear or the management need to be psychics to know what information is actually needed where.
Re:The Startup Zeitgeist by annnnd on Thursday May 05, 2016 @05:13AM (#11634763)
Happens more than you would think... Key phrase is usually "on a need-to-know basis". It is difficult to argue with such phrase as it seems completely reasonable on the surface, but what happens is that someone has to decide which information someone needs to know. Such decisions are not without mistakes, and to top it off, there is even incentive to keep people out of the loop because information gives the holder some power. So it often happens that people do not get the whole picture and operate on limited knowledge, leading to bad decisions.
Re:The Startup Zeitgeist by fsloth on Thursday May 05, 2016 @06:16AM (#11634938)
Crazy. I've worked in companies ranging from 10 to thousands of employees and never heard before of such a self immolating idea gaining wide acceptance. I must be lucky.
Re:The Startup Zeitgeist by noobiemcfoob on Thursday May 05, 2016 @10:42AM (#11636488)
With my group, we started to use slack for email, but the transient nature of the chat did exactly what you describe.

We ended up finding Discourse, a forum system, and have been using that. Now, slack is more about simulating in person discussion (i.e. we rarely use it), and Discourse is more like emails pre-sorted by category. I have to say, it's working pretty well.

Re:The Startup Zeitgeist by tedmiston on Friday May 06, 2016 @12:00AM (#11641604)
I think there's a chance of Slack winning this use case when they add one feature: threaded conversations / topics.

Zulip (https://zulip.org), Dropbox's Slack clone, supports threaded convos out of the box quite nicely.