Add option to have non-threaded channels
I'd like the capability when I add a new channel to make it non-threaded. Threaded conversations are great for some channel topics, but other more casual channels get too cluttered with multiple threads. I'd prefer to have the flexibility to decide which format I want when I create the channel.
This request is still being considered by the feature team but a final decision has not yet been made. I’m still awaiting more details.
Threaded messages are difficult to follow when multiple threaded messages move at the same time. A toggle to enable threaded messages per channel would be helpful, especially as named chats have a user limit.
Chris Collins commented
Who ever heard of a chat application that moves things out of chronological order? The threading is so disruptive to our team, we lose things because it's hidden in a reply that auto collapses. Please allow us the option to turn threading off, and get rid of that silly Reply button on every comment that takes up valuable screen real estate.
yes please. we cannot replace any of our persistent chat tools with Teams until they add this feature. it's just too hard to keep up with conversations that have constant chatter without removing the threads.
Matthew Vaughn commented
Threads, and the way threads with recent replies are always brought to the bottom of the buffer so that chronological order is not preserved, is an annoyance to literally everyone on my team. Even if we all agreed not to use threads, someone from another part of our larger organization (our very, very large software company is forcing us all to use Teams) could come in, reply in a thread, and wreck the channel buffer.
It's profoundly irritating that no one at Microsoft has bothered to contemplate that people might prefer to communicate in some way other than how Microsoft has prescribed.
Allow users to have a non-threaded view. Take it to e-mail if you want threads. UI devs need to eat the dog food in real companies, it seems.
Ash A commented
Please make this option available. Our organization has a lot of confusion between group chats and channels, and as MS Teams users are going to of course to go to "Teams" first, the threading confuses people--not to mention how it jumps from comment to comment. It's a massive pain point for UX with this software, and the threading functionality does not work for us.
Amy Dee commented
You can kind of accomplish this with Named Group Chats.
I would like to see this too. I can't find messages when they're threaded in each other.
Michael Saulters commented
I think a flat non-threaded view option should be available as a user in ALL channels. Threaded view works for some people. For me, it makes things VERY difficult. It also would eliminate the need for that 'reply' link under every single message.
The issue for me is not thread vs no threads, but how notifications (mentions) are handled. On desktop it's perfect: When I get a mentioned somewhere, it navigates me to that mention and allows me to view previous (possibly thread unrelated) messages. The mobile apps don't do that. This is a huge issue if a channel isn't maintained strictly thread based. Any plans to align the desktop app experience with the mobile one? Why are these even different?
Chris Webb commented
Johan, Slack isn't the best method. I prefer Teams method better as it encourages threads, vs. lazy chatting. They just need to remove the text box that starts a conversation vs. how it is now. A button to start one would fix the issue and make people more apt. to typing replies.
However Honestly, I think just having a choice would be win win. Let us choose to Thread or not to Thread, make both Team Thread and Team chat happy lol.
Please look at Slack. The've already figured this mess out with threads.
Doug Lee commented
I wonder if it's better to make admins choose channel format or let users decide for themselves. For that, see the "Keep the messages in channels in chronological order" idea, where I posted a design concept.
DonJuan DeMarco commented
please add this
If you want a different conversation- open a different channel- but don't go over the channel limit.
Personally I do not see the point of having threads in a collaboration tool as we already have an effective solution for that - it is called email. Having used several different collaboration tools it is ones that do not provide threads that seem to improve collaboration by changing the way teams work.
The current solution it just another way of doing the same thing - our company wants to adopt a more collaborative approach so I am actively lobbying HR etc. to block the rollout of teams and replace it with a different tool - and the only reason for this: Teams forces the company to think "threads" which is a hindrance to change.
Alex Smith commented
Cannot MS use some of their super-dooper AI to determine who is replying to whom? Rather than fill the UI with "<-Reply" text boxes which serve to bamboozle us users. Agree it is an education thing, but I don't want to learn a special way of doing this to use an app I just want to use it. Thanks!