schnaq

schnaq in Fintec for Data and Software teams

Pros:

Great visualization, easy to use, gives a good structure to questions and answers, interactive search works really well.

Cons:

Some of the developers I talked to would be happy about a dark mode

Schnaq is making communication with the audience a lot easier.

Pros:

I really like the easy set-up and integration. With just a few clicks you can set up a structured exchange with your audience. Also the exchange itself on common questions is a lot easier with schnaq than how I solved this before. Lastly the team behind schnaq is really responsive and open for suggestions on possible improvements.

Cons:

Joining a schnaq as a participant was a bit cumbersome in the past, but that is improved by now through the simple access codes / QR code.

Easy to use cooperative mind maps

Comments: I think the direction schnaq is going in - more Q&A, response system - is also interesting, but not the feature I used schnaq for when I started. At the moment, I almost feel like those two features clash a bit, e.g. why would I switch a Q&A section display to a mind map display? But I'm still excited to see, where schnaq is going as a project.

Pros:

I used schnaq to make mindmaps with my study group, which worked great. One of us shared their screen and I liked most to see new ides 'plop' up in the mind map display.

Cons:

I would have like to add images to the mind maps - to give examples or reference. I think this could have been easily implemented at this point.

A great take on persistent, asynchronous team communication

Comments: The software is very helpful in asynchronous collaboration and has helped us to collect and discuss many opinions and proposals on a problem in a short time. It really gave us a head start in brainstorming a new project together.

Pros:

I think the software is a good mix of the informality of chats and the persistent and structural format of a wiki or similar software. It's simple enough to get started right away, and at the same time engaging enough to interact on a deep level with other collaborators.

Cons:

There are some rough edges that the developers can still work on to make the interaction as fluid as it is with established solutions. Most of the time, however, these rough edges in the system are just unfinished polish or the first steps towards new features with a lot of potential. As a researcher in the field, I can't blame the developers too much here, as they are sometimes on highly innovative terrain and have been quite good at balancing reliability and progression.

Best of several worlds

Pros:

The interface is self-explanatory and resembles a mixture of idea boards and pro and con lists with the functionality of modern social networks like Twitter. The main feature that makes schnaq immensely different from social networks like Twitter and Facebook, which is extremely helpful, is the indication of pro/against/neutral, which finally makes the relationships between content and statements transparent.

Cons:

Due to the presentation, clarity may suffer, but the summary tool is only available in the Pro version. I think it would be better to offer general summaries directly in the free version and to pack more specific functions like better embeddings and models for summaries, which are possibly customizable, into the Pro version. I think it would be a unique selling point compared to other platforms like Kialo, Twitter, etc. if you could get summaries directly, even if they are basic. Therefore, a general summary for the free version and specific summaries which can be induvidualized for the Pro version.