• Ulrich@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Having a public chat group inevitably devolves into an endless waterfall of messages. I dunno how you do it. I can barely stand being a group with 5 people.

      • Ulrich@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s very different. Discord has “channels” and “categories” to organize discussions.

        • Eyedust@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          I agree here. As much as I hate Discord, it would be much better geared for this. Have you considered Revolt? I haven’t tried it myself, but it is the most prominent open source solution to Discord.

          • Ulrich@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            I was by no means suggesting using Discord instead. Just from a purely practical perspective, it is very different.

    • bad_news@lemmy.billiam.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’m also pretty sure Signal has a low cap on users per group – to do real encryption you’re inherently blasting all X users’ public key to all X users, AFAIK, nobody is really doing real encrypted group chats for mass audiences, although we do live in infinite compute world, so maybe I’m not up to date.

      • elements@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        the cap is 1000 per group but this group will not ever get to that size. also your latter statement is misinformed. all messages are still e2ee regardless of how many connections you make