Toby Sterrett commented,
@Daniel – thanks for the detail! So it sounds like as part of a macro it would be important to be able to set the recipients of the side conversation as well? Would these folks generally be interna...
Toby Sterrett commented,
@Gal – this is great! Thanks for the info on how you use Slack, it sounds very much in line with how we've been thinking about it. We'll be sure to contact you for further feedback on this type of ...
Toby Sterrett commented,
@Wes – since Side Conversations is a wholly new, standalone feature, legacy Enterprise accounts with grandfathered Light Agents will not be getting Side Conversations without purchasing the new Col...
Toby Sterrett commented,
@Rachel – hmm, that definitely doesn't sound right. If you'd like to provide me with some ticket numbers where this happened we can look into it.
Toby Sterrett commented,
@Gal — awesome, thanks for the detailed example and explaining your overall workflow, that’s really informative. It’s an interesting use case to is it just for internal discussion of a ticket rathe...
Toby Sterrett commented,
@Rachel – yeah, that type of signal (different subject) are things we're hoping to take into account in the decision making process of when a new ticket should be created vs. updating the side conv...
Toby Sterrett commented,
@Niclas – that's correct, we don't support search on side conversations at this time. We've had some discussions with early access users about this, and have some ideas of how this could work in th...
Toby Sterrett commented,
@Sonia – not at this time, but we're investigating the best way to make reporting available on side conversation activity. We definitely know it's important. @Gal – there are a few different approa...
Toby Sterrett commented,
@Rachel – one idea we've had for this situation is to let the incoming email go ahead and create a new ticket if it's in reply to a side conversation that belongs to a closed ticket. The thought be...
Toby Sterrett commented,
@Niclas – this won't work because emails received at the collaboration@ addresses are routed to a different system and not processed in the same way as tickets. What is the outcome you're trying to...