<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Slack on The Dangling Pointer</title><link>https://aaron.blog/tags/slack/</link><description>Recent content in Slack on The Dangling Pointer</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2016 02:28:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://aaron.blog/tags/slack/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>The Slack Channel Effect</title><link>https://aaron.blog/the-slack-channel-effect/</link><pubDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2016 02:28:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://aaron.blog/the-slack-channel-effect/</guid><description>&lt;figure&gt;&lt;img src="2016-12-07_20-17-57.png" class="kg-image" alt="2016-12-07_20-17-57.png" loading="lazy" width="664" height="199"&gt;&lt;/figure&gt;&lt;p&gt;Instead of talking in a big group we split off into separate channels which is somewhat anti-collaboration.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I realized the other day that channels in Slack (or any other group messaging platform) are both good and bad. When there are a small number of rooms it's easier to find a conversation or to be involved in the majority of discussions. As the number of people in the rooms grows, chats become more noisy. The solution is to create another channel - ideally something subject-specific to filter out the noise. There's a counter-effect which is somewhat unexpected - it can reduce interaction between members.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>