This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
- # announcements (4)
- # asami (36)
- # babashka (11)
- # beginners (31)
- # calva (71)
- # clojure (51)
- # clojure-boston (2)
- # clojure-europe (3)
- # clojure-nlp (1)
- # clojuredesign-podcast (1)
- # clojurescript (30)
- # community-development (25)
- # css (1)
- # cursive (10)
- # datomic (1)
- # events (1)
- # figwheel-main (1)
- # girouette (5)
- # graalvm (18)
- # graphql (1)
- # honeysql (37)
- # instaparse (3)
- # jobs (1)
- # malli (6)
- # polylith (2)
- # releases (3)
- # remote-jobs (5)
- # rum (1)
- # shadow-cljs (16)
- # sql (1)
- # tools-deps (37)
- # vscode (11)
Why do you want to keep them around a few percent longer than the week or two they stay now?
Accept the fact that they are going away here soon, and use one of the logging sites like the Clojurians log or Zulip chat for long term searchability / archive
I think the effect could be much more than a few percent. My use case is that I often want to check something up that was said in the #calva channel some days ago and I get very happy when it’s still there as well as a bit disappointed when it isn’t. If I really need to find it I check Zulip, but it is not close enough so often I won’t bother and the quality of my answer suffers...
@U0ETXRFEW As far as I can tell, threading makes no difference to the “10K” search history. If you want #calva discussions to be retained for the historical/searchable record you either need: 1) your own commercial Slack for it (expensive) 2) move the primary Calva community discussions to Zulip (it’s on an “open source” plan so it has unlimited history) or 3) just live with the fact that this Slack is somewhat arbitrarily ephemeral and you have to go elsewhere for searching (ClojureVerse log site or Zulip).
You could poll your 713 #calva members and see if they’d be willing to start using Zulip en masse…
(in addition to Slack, I guess, since there’s still so much good chatter here across the board)
Good to know about the threading visavi post count. I’m not particularly keen on moving to Zulip myself. I only have so much bandwidth. Yesterday I found a month old Calva question on Discord because I happened to check another thing there. Also Clojurians Zulip was a bit too managed to my taste. I much more enjoy the anarchy we have here on Slack. 😃
@U0ETXRFEW As a Zulip-admin I’m curious what you mean with ‘too managed’ - mind to elaborate?
To me it was a contrast with how this Slack works. People just do whatever they like and only when someone gets annoyed there might be some small policy created to deal with it (most often not). The structure and how people use this community tool emerges and evolves from all the thousands of interactions, in a spontaneous way. The Zulip felt more “designed”. I created some channels/streams that were removed because they didn’t fit the design. In contrast, on this Slack channels that doesn’t fit just remain unused and might wake up only now and then, taking the mind share they “deserve”. This is just a personal preference of mine, and not a complaint of any kind.
I think what you refer to was during the bootstrap phase, end of 2018. These days it’s not much different from Slack I guess with quite some projects and communities managing themselves (either in public of private streams). Anyway, thanks for the clarification!
Yes, it was early, just when things started. And not the reason I stopped using it. That was rather that I found that I was stretching myself thin trying to build a Calva community in two places.
I think that the only way we could hope for Slack to be less used in favour of Zulip would be to deprecate Slack. Like state that in X months this Slack will be closed and that people should move their communications to Zulip. Of course, that would be inconvenient , at least during the transition, but that 10K cliff is also inconvenient. 😃
a start might be to, if someone wants to move ‘their’ channel to Zulip, publish a “this community has moved” message periodically (and/or via DM). This could easily be added to the zulip-archive-bot.
It’s a bit like what I tried to do back then. But maybe it is time to try something like that again. I might conduct that poll that @U04V70XH6 suggested. The drawback doing it that way is this spreading thin thing. Most people are interested in more Clojure things than Calva, so they would have to use both Slack and Zulip to engage for quite a while.
Yeah, Slack is indeed already ‘near’ for a lot of us. Maybe it’s time for us to develop a ‘move-to-Zulip starters-pack’ 😉 - food for thought!
@U0ETXRFEW There's a bit of odd behaviour with threads and the history. If a post can access the thread, I believe it can still be accessed? So using the 'also send' functionality can extend the lifetime of some threads... This could of course change based on slack modifying this behaviour...
I ask because I personally and generally prefer flat communication, but if we can keep more conversations longer by threading, then that is a reason to really encourage that style.
On all but the smallest channels (small relative to the size of clojurians), I think threaded conversations are a must. It would be very difficult to follow discussions otherwise Edit: now that I think about it more, it would also depends on the nature of the channel. For a technical channel, where people ask questions or discuss technical issues, thread are important. For a social channel, like #clojure-europe, flat conversations allow for all users to participate
Kinda off topic, but one thing that really, really annoys me, is when I’m having a “flat” (non-threaded) discussion (on my work slack, so only a few people per channel) and all of the sudden… they start a thread on a old comment, instead of quoting it or something
And then on another, and then on another, and I find myself in the unthinkable situation of having to follow and monitor multiple threads, for a conversation with only one other person