Hacker News Reader

People don't seem to like your names, and perhaps the names do need more work, but I wanted to commend you for trying. Whenever I see something named "Group" I cringe a little, because it is so abstract and meaning-free. It is barely better than names like "Thing" and "Entity". So I appreciate your attempt to be more concrete and creative!

View on HN

This is such an important point. I'm living with a generic "group" feature in a SaaS app and it's a nightmare. It's been used by numerous clients for totally different things. These are the weeds that will choke your garden.

...or they will be the very thing that frees up your users to use them in creative ways without feeling hemmed in to a particular mindset.

We have the concept of 'tags' in our app, which are used by our users to delineate anything from company departments, social groups, locations, age bands etc. - basically anything they see fit. It saves us creating a mess of drop downs to try and cater for all edge cases, and they feel the freedom to think of them however they like.

I'm one of the devs on Kobble. There was debate about the names - it's not easy. 'channel' seems good, it's used by Slack also, and one of our channels is similar. 'track' however, is another story. It's really a tree or folder structure.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com