37signals: Live design review, recorded.

[@mooktakim]

Maybe I'm just getting old, but why is all the design so subtle now. It's hard to see the borders of things. Can't see where the textbook begins or ends. Are we only designing for Macbook Retina screens??

[@notnotjake]

4:59 isnstead of X to remove, what if they were all checked to begin with and then you can uncheck them if you don’t want them. More familiar because it’s how you multi select and then when it’s unchecked it could be greyed out, but you could add it back in if you change your mind.

[@atelesh]

It was fun to see how you are quickly making decisions or even delegating them to the actual person implementing this to decide. I can easily see how an enterprise company would run a 3-week long pit-testing of every option discussed here 😂

Many thanks for the sneak peak into your reviewing process. Really inspiring. At the same time, I'm really excited to get this new "Reply to Everyone with the same thing" function. It could be really useful in our workflow.

[@37signals]

You're welcome. And me too! Can't wait to use this. Big level up. -JF

[@pging8328]

Thanks for posting. I would say this: Let the guy explain his concept! sounds like he's spent a lot of time thinking about it, and boss spent like zero time and starts pontificating, poor employee has to pussy foot around this.................

[@openpilgrim]

One idea for "not this one" is that after clicking the "X" to deselect a message, you could cross it out without removing it from the list? The user could then re-select it if they change their mind and it would no longer be crossed out.

[@smorez]

On the threads discussion, around time 3:50. I'd be hesitant to click it (the X), my first thought is: but what if I need to get it back? Where will I find it? Better safe than sorry, I'll leave it.

[@37signals]

Yes, I had a similar thought. We'll see what we can do to potentially add some friction here without making it onerous. -JF

[@subminorthreat]

@@37signals I don't use Hey, so I don't know if you've changed the behavior yet. So, regarding only this video: why not use checkboxes to select receivers? They are definitely more mistake-proof in this case.

[@Moderntractiondotcom]

I agree you could hit X and go oops! I like the idea of greying it out. What about a toggle button: include/exclude.

[@Karabo_Ngoatle]

I am honestly inspired by this review session, love how you have simplified the process and how you are sharing what is possible and what is not worth taking into account… as a consultant working across various clients I hardly get a chance to do this with my team, we mostly review Figma prototypes instead of working software, what you are doing is on a different level altogether

[@37signals]

Thanks - glad you enjoyed it. -JF

[@Benforeva]

I share JF’s suspicions about the large surface area this feature inherits in the workflow scenario. How I thought it would be handled better is to make those workflow decisions after the reply screens. Like a hook into workflow management that keeps both features cleanly separated but integrated. You might need to just give persons a hint that they can do more on the next screen but still to me feels cleaner.

[@Juiceboxfromspace]

This is great - thank you for sharing. Hope to see more of this! Also mandatory designer moment: For the “not this one” idea, you could use the check mark, similar to how its used to select emails in the inbox. So all of the ones in the list would be checked and the user can uncheck/check again. Its familiar and allows for discovery without negative repercussions/added steps.

[@BrucevanZyl]

Thanks for sharing! I’ve always been curious how these meetings go at Basecamp. Very inspiring !

[@37signals]

Thanks Bruce. I wouldn't call this a meeting. It's just two people looking at some work together on an ad hoc basis. Wasn't scheduled, didn't involve anyone else. Just a curiosity session with a few suggestions.

[@DevonMeadows]

3:17 keep the x.

[@dominuskelvin]

Love it.

[@thefinancefemme]

I love your emails and LOVED watching this review session. Thanks so much for sharing... your "content" is truly helpful & inspiring.

[@dougjones-q6c]

How do you handle not having an answer to a design/product question every time? I can't always find solutions in the moment and feel like I'm not "doing my job" when that happens

[@jtmusson]

Really interesting to hear the discussion about the case for including the feature within Workflows. A great example of working through the balance between competing goals - scope vs feature

[@thienlh]

At 5:12, how about no X, you click the thread to peak at them (inline), then there's a button saying "Remove this one" with no confirm?

[@TakiMoore]

Super fun seeing you work this through

[@jonbloor8661]

I was hoping for snippets in F&R, but this makes more sense

[@zviavraham]

Currious, if this working software UI/UX Design Review a part of the Shape Up method, or at least a next iteration of it as practiced at Basecamp?

[@37signals]

It's just two people looking at some work together. It's not part of any specific way to work, but it fits in nicely with Shape Up, of course, because we know the constraints we're under. How much time we have left, discussing tradeoffs we may have to make, etc.

[@ginger-viking]

Really great style of communicating feedback

[@gleicon]

Totally drop the feature from workflow, not all companies have 2k applicants per position. On hey tho I’d go for the “not this one” button. Thanks, next

[@37signals]

2k is of course just one unlikely scenario, but there are plenty where even 12 responses would make this useful. Either way, definitely up for consideration. Thanks for your thoughts. -JF

[@annafilou]

I disagree! This feature seems super useful, even at my company where it would probably be around 5-10 emails that would need to be moved.

[@gleicon]

@@annafilou np I was playing the bad cop reviewer in my head that ends up agreeing with the boss. I'd probably have got back to it after you slacked me this.

[@noebilibioaragones6902]

Love Hey! ❤