Congrats you turned Slack into (an even worse version of) Jira.
This got me thinking though. Instead of turning your chat into a ticketing system, has anyone ever turned the ticketing system into a chat?
Like instead of “comments” on a ticket, you get a live chat channel (that can be reviewed later as “comments” for historical data).
Most companies I’ve worked for will setup channels on slack in a similar fashion for projects and initiatives but these are not really ergonomic for someone that prefers to “live” in the ticketing system for work management. And context gets lost the older things get.
You could pair this with a general channel for unfocused chitchat, but all relevant work would be discussed under the work item itself. Perhaps a “slack-like” view where you can see all your watched work items at once in “channels”.
Yes, it’s just an IM client. Like all in history, what matters is whether it can post images and whether other tools are integrated with it. Another generation will invent a new one and suddenly all app will say “Insert your $nextGenChat key here”.
You can rebuild a chat client, but you can’t make up for popularity. Atlassian tried twice: Once with HipChat, once with Stride, and failed at both - like everything Atlassian does, I know, but you have to admit they are popular in corporates.
Also, it’s so vastly better than MS Teams. But Discord is so vastly better that a lot of companies use it, despite it being aimed at communities.
Meanwhile it feels like half my colleagues don't understand the difference between starting a new Teams conversation ("thread" in Slack), or replying to an existing one. And there's no way to move a message that was posted in the wrong conversation. AFAIK it's the same with Slack threads.
Getting people to post in the "correct" channel faces similar challenges.
Imagine the chaos that would result if we ran everything through Teams.
> Each member of the staff has their own channel, in which they give updates on their work status, ask questions of other teammates, notify of their unavailability, share their uncertainties and thoughts on the program.
When a piece of work require input from two persons, should I ask in project channel or channel of person A or channel of person B?
> Each resident has their own channel, in which they talk to their coach, ask questions of the team, request improvements to their room or writing setup or just generally throw anything they want someone to look at.
If I want input from my coach and not discuss in public, why not DM but channel?
This is one of those posts where I cannot work out if this is earnest or satire. I kept waiting for a punchline but I don't know if it ever came. Makes me suspect the whole thing was the punchline.
It seems serious. I can only imagine it’s referring to a pretty small company. I suppose it can be tempting to do everything with one tool.
I’ve seen some slack maximalism before, like using Slack as a primary operations platform - sending alerts and so forth to it, and nowhere else. But then that company hired a real engineering manager.
I’m not just talking about heavy use of slack, I’m talking about maximalism as described in the article. Larger organizations will typically have several different systems to perform many of the functions described in the article, and it generally wouldn’t make sense to replicate that functionality, but worse, in slack. It would quickly become unmanageable, because slack simply isn’t designed for that. Heck, slack is barely designed for its own core functionality - e.g. its thread support is incredibly limited.
It is really too bad that "Slack" (the application) is the antithesis of "Slack" (the SubGenius philosophy):
In the satirical Church of the SubGenius, Slack is the ultimate goal: a state of blissful, lazy freedom from work, responsibility, and societal pressure, achieved by rejecting "Normal" conformity and embracing conspiracy, self-delusion, and "Bulldada" (bullshit) to attain personal liberation, money, and effortless success, with the mustachioed avatar J.R. "Bob" Dobbs as the ultimate guide to this spiritual laziness.
Key Aspects of Slack:
Anti-Work/Anti-Conformity: Slack means escaping the "compulsive urges" of modern life, like working, saving money, and trying to be "normal".
Effortless Achievement: It's the ability to get what you want (wealth, status, love) without effort, often through bizarre, pseudo-occult means or by exploiting the system.
Conspiracy & Weirdness: Slack is tied to uncovering hidden truths (aliens, conspiracies) and embracing abnormality, separating believers from the "Normals".
J.R. "Bob" Dobbs: The iconic, pipe-smoking, suited figure is the living embodiment of Slack, a shortcut to financial heaven and a life of ease.
"Hour of Slack": This is the name of the SubGenius radio show, broadcasting their anti-establishment message and teachings on achieving Slack.
How to Get Slack (According to the Church):
* Join the Church of the SubGenius and pledge allegiance to Bob.
* Use "Bulldada" (bullshit) and "Morealism" (more bullshit) to overcome problems.
* Learn "occult technology" and incantations for financial power.
* Reject mainstream pressures and embrace your inner weirdness.
Essentially, Slack is a satirical take on the American dream, promising ultimate success and happiness through utter laziness and rebellion against the very systems that create the need for such a shortcut.
...and it being "the season" - if you live in any city larger than 30K, look for an announcement of the "drunken Santa pub crawl". That is a global annual event the SubGenius put on every year, where mobs people in Santa outfits swarm bars for a 24 hour period, often over a hundred Santas.
I'm a chat maximalist (we all are going to be as agents improve), but this article makes the idea look bad. Chat should be the interface, not the system of record.
I wish they’d just display chat lines as cards, for queue channels, with a clear status, search JQL, and allow external apps (if they want) to sync those items with Jira.
Slack is an awful ticketing system, there are many better ones, many with slack integrations even, if you're dead set on using one of the worse IMs out there for everything
Slack would be good tool if it would let me just stream and filter straight from the CLI.
Since IRC allows to do this with almost zero setup I'd rather see it used in my fantasies where non-technical people aren't considered for choice of tooling ;)
Unless there is something new Slack doesn't have personal APIs but merely integration APIs and history extraction was a big violation list time I checked. I doubt anything had changed in this scope though.
(Protip for confused skim-readers: This is called context. It helps you understand the rationale for why a group - not a company - might enjoy having 150 Slack channels with such intense micromangement. Ctrl-F for "Inkhaven", then look up Inkhaven, Lightcone Infrastructure, and LessWrong.)
The context should be included in the piece. Also, when I reach a page chock-full of low-quality AI images [1], I assume the contents are also AI slop and stop reading.
Nope to all of this. It’s impossible to get everyone to follow the rules. I also dislike Salesforce and what Slack has become. Less slck if you please.
Yeesh. Slack can be used well and poorly, but this sort of overcategorization is definitely on the poor side of things. Sounds like a hypermicromanager boss. Not a great work optimization for anyone who didn’t invent the entirely arbitrary system of categorization.
> Principles of Slack Maximalism for Autists in Charge
I dislike the OP's post too. But throwing around terms like "autists" as a joke or snark is in very poor taste. Not every socially awkward or unreasonable person is an autist. Not all autists experience the same kind of social awkwardness. There are people and parents who genuinely live stressful lives due to dealing with autism. Let us not use it as a derogatory term.
This got me thinking though. Instead of turning your chat into a ticketing system, has anyone ever turned the ticketing system into a chat?
Like instead of “comments” on a ticket, you get a live chat channel (that can be reviewed later as “comments” for historical data).
Most companies I’ve worked for will setup channels on slack in a similar fashion for projects and initiatives but these are not really ergonomic for someone that prefers to “live” in the ticketing system for work management. And context gets lost the older things get.
You could pair this with a general channel for unfocused chitchat, but all relevant work would be discussed under the work item itself. Perhaps a “slack-like” view where you can see all your watched work items at once in “channels”.
reply