Organize Your Slack Channels by "how Often", Not "what"
Posted3 months agoActive3 months ago
aggressivelyparaphrasing.meTechstoryHigh profile
calmmixed
Debate
60/100
SlackProductivityCommunicationOrganization
Key topics
Slack
Productivity
Communication
Organization
The article suggests organizing Slack channels by frequency of checking rather than topic, sparking a discussion on effective Slack management and notification strategies.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
33m
Peak period
45
0-12h
Avg / period
11.4
Comment distribution57 data points
Loading chart...
Based on 57 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Sep 30, 2025 at 4:04 PM EDT
3 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Sep 30, 2025 at 4:37 PM EDT
33m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
45 comments in 0-12h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Oct 4, 2025 at 10:17 PM EDT
3 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45430542Type: storyLast synced: 11/20/2025, 2:46:44 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
I rarely have >3 unscheduled conversations in a day that couldn't wait until tomorrow morning. They just never come from the same place.
It's a yappers paradise. They wouldn't include me on an email where they deliberately have to pick participants, but think the serendipity will occur down the road justifies forcefeeding me whatever bullshit they're working on just in case.
It's not designed for having single-concern conversation or managing priority or intent. It's there for call-reply.
We switched to cushion.so which is async. We use posts, pretty much like a post here, for most conversations. It uses a message board-like approach where it makes sense. You don't need to be pinged constantly for everything. Especially when theres 10 people all discussing the same thing that might not be a priority for you right now.
Then you can just use chat for direct high shit-is-on-fire messaging.
Problem is Slack is designed to get to you to constantly chat, chat, chat. So that's what you end up doing.
Made our lives 10x easier.
I’d love to have original the origins design back.
And of course, if someone needs you specifically, they'll @mention or PM you
Not sure why you would need a four-tiered scheme of frequencies for this
Most channels should not be public but when people have fear, it is private by default, and when they have safety it is public by default.
But then again that’s solving a problem that shouldn’t exist if there is no performance penalty from joining many channels. It doesn’t seem like there is, either. I haven’t had an issue just hiding everything under the “Stale” category.
But there are always people who insist on having their entire conversation at the top level of the channel rather than in a thread, so everybody gets notified for every message (unless they mute the whole channel).
/me shakes fist at cloud that looks like the face of a past team lead
just make every thread a channel, and "channel" should be a folder
Lbotos: okay @jane you are leading expert on problem y. Use this thread for your debugging until next sync
Lbotos: @phil your up for rebooting all the hosts. Ack this message and thread your work here. Please get started ASAP.
Lbotos: others, is there anything else that we need to get unblocked?
—-
By having one channel you can leave that open and can be up to speed on the overarching state easily. Otherwise, if I'm making subchannels I gotta make sure to invite everyone to the sub channel or switch to the “meta coordination channel” to get unplanned collaboration.
Threads have value.
In email analogy - you want dedicated mailbox for every conversation? Nonsense.
And if it’s as it sounds and you are one of the people who always has full conversations in the root of a channel where other people use threads, please reconsider.
this way some channels I would set to notify of all the things once every 2 hours, unless @mentioned
Some channels would be once every 4 hours.
Per.
Sentence
I don't need (nor want) to react instantaneously to anything and everything that occurs in a channel, thread, or direct-message chat... and especially not for that one senior co-worker who submits each discrete sentence in their indefinitely long stream of consciousness.
"Mute" is not an answer, because I do need to be notified of activity... But I'd rather get a single minute-delayed "boop" about multiple events than a stream of instant and sporadic mad chittering.
I have channels that I ignore and read ~once a day but there's often still not a great signal to noise ratio. Something more detailed than "x new messages" would be helpful.
I find that if you don't respond in real time people around you adapt to that. If you always respond instantly, it lowers the barrier for them to bother you more. So, you'll be dealing with them constantly. If you simply delay your response, they'll adapt and be less likely to interrupt you.
Of course, prominent Subgenius adherents may not tend to acknowledge their "faith" outside of pseudonym-based posting on Usenet or other media, but the intersection of irreligious techies working on a project/company named for their central tenet seems too much coincidence to be an accident.
If Slack's chat service sort of destroys productivity and ruins workplace hierarchies and relationships by design, it seems that it is achieving the goals of the formerly "parody religion" and introducing more "Slack" to the world in the process. Mission accomplished, Bob?
This makes Inbox Zero in Slack easy and I don't understand why it's so difficult for other people to do it.
(currently working in a Fortune 500 with membership in probably thousands of channels, only maybe 20-30 of which are actually relevant to my daily work).
Disable multi-DMs
If you need to message multiple people, it goes in a public/private channel (existing or new)
goes unread for 2 hours
- Channels I care about: ones where real work gets done every day, eg my team channels, other people I interact with frequently and directly.
- Temporarily important: short lived channels, or project channels that aren't as frequently actionable as the first category. Eg, I am struggling with some build issue so I join the public channel for the team that owns that process until I resolve my issue.
- Channels I need to follow: I don't really care too much about this, but partners or stakeholders are in them and sometimes say things I should know about or ping me or will add me if I leave, so I need to somewhat monitor it.
- Channels not really about me: Broad-based channels about company strategy, etc. In theory I guess they impact me since its about what the org, or my part of it, is up to, but tbh it doesn't actually impact me materially.
- Channels I may leave soon. Basically recycle bin, before I leave channel entirely.
Every morning I go in, get half a dozen inquiries left from people who are in earlier time zones, and have to like write "..." in a reply, because then you can at least find them in "drafts" instead of having them disappear.
I'll often also pin a specific search term of interest for a topic I'm following for the moment, but don't plan on subscribing to.
Most of the time my streams are then the A & B lists plus a topic of interest. Very rarely more than that. If anything vital turns up I'll generally see it one way or another. Every so often (a few times a week/month/year) I'll glance at the lower-priority lists.
I've also made a point of putting highly-voluble sources in their own channel, and then ... ignoring that. This keeps them from dominating other streams, their good stuff (usually infrequent) tends to show up elsewhere through re-shares, and my own QoL is generally improved.
Whenever the experience starts to get too annoying, I start pruning from my high-priority lists. Less is more. No news is good news.
Definitely agree with others that Slack needs a richer selection of notification mechanisms, both for new content in channels and for mentions. For mentions, there's no level between "I demand immediate attention from this person" and "the characters that make up this person's name happen to be in the text of my message."
My workplace switched to Teams about 5 years ago. The app is of course janky and slow, but it had the side effect of pushing all the important conversations to emails and scheduled meetings.
Teams integrates with Outlook well enough that I never have to second guess my schedule and all the chatter is now just DMs, informal group chats that I would actually care about, and a bunch of broader group channels that nobody is expected to look at very often (not even every day).
I rarely feel distracted by chat anymore unless it makes sense because something is actually on fire.
1 more comments available on Hacker News