Sam Hall

My feedback

  1. 10,373 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1196 comments  ·  Public » Files  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Sam Hall supported this idea  · 
  2. 21,014 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1810 comments  ·  Public » UX/Design  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Sam Hall supported this idea  · 
  3. 3,455 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    483 comments  ·  Public » UX/Design  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Sam Hall commented  · 

    As a team leader, this is a terrible idea (I'd have thought that the reasons are obvious, I mean the clue is in the name of the product). A successful team collaboration tool should offer private IM features as an exception to the normal channels of communication. Blurring the distinction between the two features is not conducive to open and collaborative discourse. I would have to abandon using Teams as a team collaboration tool if this were implemented and I'd suggest you rename it to something less misleading if you did implement this.

  4. 64 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    4 comments  ·  Public » Wiki  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Sam Hall commented  · 

    Microsoft shouldn't try to shoehorn a **** Wiki feature into Teams. Just provide the integration hooks for decent wiki platforms and be done with it. How much time and effort will the Microsoft Teams dev team have to waste on this feature which is fundamentally flawed? At least change the name to avoid confusion. It's more like a place where people post content that other platforms would consider "Sticky Posts" or at best it's a "Channel Notes" feature. A Wiki it is not.

  5. 92 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    31 comments  ·  Public » Wiki  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Sam Hall commented  · 

    I agree, this "Wiki" feature is useless bloat. I found the feature amusing at best, especially the way you can actually have multiple Wiki's in a single channel (just to confuse it's purpose even further). Fragmented knowledge, hidden and scattered across channels really flies in the face of what a "Wiki" is about.

    When I look around our Teams channels, the wiki feature's usage is limited to what I'd call sticky posts on other platforms.

    Sam Hall supported this idea  · 
  6. 20,545 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2079 comments  ·  Public » Messaging  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Sam Hall supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base