Threads are on the verge of greatness. Instead, they are hellish and clunky. There are simple fixes, let's discuss them

Commenti

7 commenti

  • Asher_Y

    "would be to make both Moderators and Bots join all threads by default"

    imo there should be a channel permission "Join all threads in this channel by default", rather than incorporating it into a server-wide permission such as Manage Server.

    5
  • tpir04

    100% this, you read my mind. Mods and bots not being able to see by default is the #1 problem for the reasons you mentioned, and during testing the rampant problems mentioned were too unsettling for my liking.

    The feature itself is good, yes, but changes need to be made, as currently there are so many ways it can turn sour it does more harm than good.

    (P.S. Hi Asher lol)

    4
  • SpacePinata

    Absolutely agree on your points, and I'd like to add - can we turn off archiving? and/or add a setting where instead of archiving, the thread ungroups? (unravels?) dump all the thread messages into the channel, based on timestamp, maybe with a thread tag or something like we get on reply messages. 

    Threads can help me overcome the hurdle of "oh my god, so many conversations at once", but my friend discords aren't going to use them if we lose (instant access to) all the messages eventually. 

    1
  • ekisacik

    Yes, this targets my number one problem with threads currently: They totally break the previous moderation flow of the read/unread system for channels. There is no instant visual indicator for a new, newly unarchived or otherwise unjoined thread you haven't read yet. Archived threads could be unarchived, there could be any amount of archived threads, etc. This results in a potentially *massive* amount of time just searching or sifting through threads on a server where users can freely create them for conversation.

    In other words, Threads currently take the issue of "too many conversations" and turn it into "too many threads".

    Also, the UI for this is just rigid and uncomfortable. You have to hover on a channel to see the thread menu as opposed to clicking a button beside the create invite button. Sure, it's nice that the button at the top of the screen automatically moves back to the top of the "active threads" tab every time you open it, but it's not so nice if it closes every time to try to open or archive or do anything to a thread, even if you hold shift. It might be nice to users that thread lists don't appear unless you subscribe to them, but it's detrimental when you want to do things like cross-referencing (you should be able to see where a thread originated from considering how the thread id is the "parent" message id) and you're forced to join a thread to keep it open, as opposed to, say, having a view that shows a subset of threads you're not subscribed to.

    Finally, the wording on the "use threads" permission is a headache. I had to read the Discord help article to understand how its interaction with the "send messages" permission worked.

    2
  • chemicalivory

    Auto-join is actually a neat solution to a couple of problems with threads. I'm not sure about how to implement it well (server permissions? notification setting? some kind of user setting? are all of the options not-good in some way?), but I hope the team at least talks about it.

    1
  • Akira Tanikel

    I think Asher_Y is right with making auto joining threads a permission instead of a default. 

    As for threads, there's another problem not mentioned:
    You can never truly leave threads, and notifications settings on them being changed, even on the main channel, doesn't stop people from being able to ping you in them, giving you a notification and forcing you back into the thread.
    Meaning users could abuse this and troll other members or moderators, by continuously pinging them pulling them back into threads they're trying to leave. 

    Furthermore, threads have a time you set for them to expire;
    However, the catch is, this time extends proportional to the most recent message. If you send a message at 12:00PM, and the thread is for 1 hour, it will archive at 1:PM, but if you send another message at 12:07PM, the timer will extend to 1:07PM. That being said threads could be never ending if people continue to interact in them, which is a problem and can make moderation difficult unless mods actively manually archive threads after a time to stop users from hiding out in past threads and breaking rules. There needs to be a hard set time limit that doesn't keep extending.

    Finally, members have the ability to unarchive threads, and as others have mentioned this can be a disaster, even if mods are diligent in archiving manually, users can just reopen any and all threads. Mods need a permission to manually shut down threads without members able to just reopen them afterwards. 

    1
  • BlazingRaven495

    - Search feature doesn't include threads you aren't participating in, limiting results accuracy

    now they do the opposite and its hellish. thank you community.

    why do we even need threads?

    0

Accedi per aggiungere un commento.