Bugs and Suggestions

That is not so. Voice chats work in basic groups too. There was a bug during beta stage that flipped them, but it was fixed before the public release.

•● 🅨🅘🅢🅗🅐🅘 ●•™ Æ 𓂆 😇

What would be the point of a basic group if any small change it switches to a super one?

The point is that basic groups have a significantly lower overhead.

I did say that it “would have been nice” to have just one type – but it would also have been nice if jets could fly without burning fuel.

... Dec 30, 2020

Admin Dog

Ok thank you 👍

•● 🅨🅘🅢🅗🅐🅘 ●•™ Æ 𓂆 😇 Dec 30, 2020

I understand, but then why any small change upgrades it? If it's really a different type then it should stay like that, unless the user wants to upgrade it manually with a 'upgrade' button...

Because the things that change it are either not possible in the underlying architecture of the basic group, or are significantly more difficult to implement, or are unlikely to be useful for anyone in a small group.

The current system works pretty well in the vast majority of cases. There are some inconveniences when it doesn’t, but these cases are not significant enough to warrant an overhaul of the scale that would be necessary to change it.

One of the reasons Telegram pushes 10-12 major updates a year while others manage one of they’re lucky is that Telegram doesn’t move mountains to improve the view in just two windows of a high-rise building.

Ok and why won't we go back where there was a button for upgrading?

Deleted Account Dec 31, 2020

There is no need for a button to upgrade the group. Once you reach a considerable amount of users in your group OR make a change that isn't possible in the architecture of basic groups, it will be migrated to a supergroup.

•● 🅨🅘🅢🅗🅐🅘 ●•™ Æ 𓂆 😇 Dec 31, 2020

Deleted Account

Ok got it 👍

riccardo Jan 1, 2021

What is the use case for this proposed change? Do you have examples of any particular situations where it would improve the experience? (Naturally, it would have been nice to only have one type, but you may have guessed that there are technical reasons why things are different now – and for the existing limits.)

There is no "use case" in particular, but there are a couple of differences and not-so-small annoyances that comes with this double chat type system (will list them later) that, if removed, would improve the experience in some (probably rare, one would argue) scenarios.

The following list of UX differences between basic and super groups is probably not exhaustive, but I've tried to list every possible annoyance that this system leads to (I will try to list them ordered by a) how easy it is to run into them and b) number of times I've been asked about them by my private circles):
1. supergroups only allow their members to delete their own messages for everyone, while in basic groups members are allowed to delete other people's messages (and of course their own messages) just for their self
2. when members are removed from basic groups, they'll still see the messages history up to when they were removed, while when they are removed from supergroups, they can't access the chat history anymore
3. members can't answer to messages sent before the conversion (if they do, as far as I remember, the replied-to message is forwarded in the chat again)
4. members can't pin messages sent before the conversion
5. messages links in normal groups are not available (this is really an edge annoyance, but, exactly yesterday, I've been asked by a friend (being the Telegram nerd among my friends) why in some groups they couldn't copy messages links)

(1/2)

riccardo

(2/2)

Point 1 & 2 are definitely the most annoying ones, and
also the ones that generate the most confusion among users, in my
experience. As weird and unusual as it might sound, I've had to clarify
them to some of my contacts more times than one would expect.
3, 4
& 5 are smaller issues that arise only during the period right after
the conversion to supergroup, but definitely make a poor user
experience and are just confusing to the user - the app behaves in a way
they are not used to.
Also one of the most frustrating things about
this inconsistencies (especially for point 1 and to some extent 2) is
that normal users have no idea why these differences are a thing, and
have no way to figure out why eg. they can delete messages for theirself
just in *some* groups. There is literally no explanation they can come
up with, without someone who knows the underlying system explaining them
why it works like that.
To normal people used to simpler apps such
as whatsapp, Telegram groups might already feel a bit overwhelming -
these mysterious inconsistencies don't help Telegram's cause for sure.

I perfectly agree that "moving mountains" might not be the best decision
for Telegram, but users furstration is just one of the things I'm
struggling the most with, when trying to make my circles accustomed to
new things (such as Telegram in a context where messaging defaults to
WhatsApp). Having a consistent experience and avoiding to make users
clueless-ly wonder "why some groups yes and some no?" is hopefully worth
some effort in trying to overcome the current limitations that force the
system to work like it does right now.

Show next 3 comments

39796 Cards

Log In