We have subject-specific channels that are hardly used (I would call these "ghost towns"): • #CKC6FM9DF • #CEZ6QTHL1 • #CJT25RWKE • #CL0FBFS8H We also have subject-specific channels that, while not thriving, get at least a few posts a month: • #CLYCGTCPL • #CE1R695T7 There are a bunch of folks (myself included) who have voiced a preference for keeping channels to a minimum. So if we're going to create a new channel, it'd be nice to (A) do our best to make sure it sees regular usage, and (B) have a plan in place for closing it down if it doesn't. So here's what I propose doing: 1. Archive all the ghost-town channels. 2. Create a #functional-programming channel, since that's a popular enough topic that it may see a good amount of usage. #CKC6FM9DF discussions can probably happen here, too. 3. Post in #C5T9GPWFL letting people know about the change. 4. Revisit this in the future, and close #functional-programming if it's also become a ghost town. Let me know what you think.. by replying to this post :)

Granularity is always tricky. When I first took to Lisp, I thought the aversion to name spaces would be more of a problem than it ended up being. Likewise with conversations here. Perhaps the deciding factor could be: would someone want to subscribe to X channel but not Y channel. For my part, I mostly want to subscribe to all the channels, yet I get value out of having them. So that's not it. Here it is: for me different channels have slightly different etiquette. Partly that's captured by a topic, but I think it's more about the kind of conversation that tends to happen there.

i think one thing to keep in mind is how successful (at least to me) #C0120A3L30R has been by enforcing a topic constraint that both keeps things focused but (more importantly IMO) gives people a clear boundary of things that are ok to post even if they’re half-baked: one feeling that i at least have that stops me from posting more is simply a concern that what i’m saying is trivial or incomprehensible, and a really clear context of the type of content expected in a channel might make it easier to participate without feeling like one might be committing a faux pas

@Garth Goldwater I think that's an excellent point, and pairs nicely with @wtaysom's thought about different etiquettes. I think a good idea for a channel would be something like #beginners or #newcomers, where you can post very basic questions/thoughts and there will be very strict guidelines in place about not dunking on people. I think that'd help new people have an inroad to the community, whereas diving straight into #C5T9GPWFL might be too intimidating. The flip side of that is the flame channel, which.. well, my thoughts are here. So yes, in broad terms, I'm fond of channels that define new ways for us to interact, like #C0120A3L30R, #CFQUMT7M3, and #CCL5VVBAN. So I think we should probably have a moratorium on new subject-specific channels, unless and until we find the volume of discussion about a subject becomes overwhelming in #C5T9GPWFL.

Like in personal productivity or note taking, categories based on topics always seems like a clever idea because it comes so naturally to us, but mostly isn’t that useful. It’s better to categorize by context. Maybe that is true for Slack channels also… #C0120A3L30R, #CFQUMT7M3, and #CCL5VVBAN seem to be excellent examples.