Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
"Warpcast needs to do a better job with threads" What does that concretely mean? How is X / Twitter better? e.g.
38 replies
78 recasts
496 reactions
ted (not lasso)
@ted
i am not a product person but if warpcast is going to be for communities, then the X / Twitter comparison (for broadcast) is perhaps not the most productive nor informative. reddit is good at threads. iMessage has great thread UX with multiple participants, imo. supercast better than warpcast.
2 replies
0 recast
63 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
But what specifically when you say that. Reddit is a forum. iMessage is chat. So not the same product.
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
ted (not lasso)
@ted
1. please don’t autoscroll to the top of a threaded conversation when you click lower level replies 2. reddit has a great indentation system paired with the ability to condense and expand certain offshoots of a post (makes sense for larger forum); iMessage great to click into a message and threaded vs chronological view (makes sense for group chat). both great features to see parallel convos under one post or in one group. WC UX makes it really hard to transition between parallel convos -> allow threaded replies to go deeper than 2 levels 3. i do like discord’s thread feature as a way to distinguish between specific thread vs channel context; great at showing real-time active participants, number of replies, etc… doesn’t make sense for 99% of WC but do appreciate optionally to turn something into a thread (discussion) vs standalone 4. unrelated, but i like slack’s “send to main” feature in a thread that also may be useful for some version of channels (rn we quote tweet + starts new convo)
2 replies
2 recasts
14 reactions
sahil
@sahil
yes, current warpcast threads are not optimal for reddit like threads for deep/long conversations. Warpcast doesnt need to solve for it if the comparison is with twitter.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
