Skip to main content
Sticky

Improved conversation list filters

  • November 12, 2025
  • 7 replies
  • 87 views

conniechen
Forum|alt.badge.img+4

The next improvement we’re making simplifies the process of applying or removing filters on your conversation list by utilizing hover interactions and pills. We’re also adding in conversation type filters, so you’re still able to split out tasks and discussions as needed. 

Take a look at the experience below.

 

➡ Here’s a prototype for you to try out ⬅ 

 

Note that this prototype is not exhaustive; you’ll only be able to apply filters for Discussions and Ben Jones. You can always press ‘r’ on your keyboard to restart the prototype.

 

Some questions as you explore the new filtering experience:

  • How often are you using conversation list filters?
  • When you are filtering, what are you typically looking for? What’s your typical workflow?

Let me know your thoughts and feedback below!

 

7 replies

grit_evy
Forum|alt.badge.img+3
  • Conversationalist
  • 6 replies
  • November 13, 2025

How often are you using conversation list filters?
We use filters constantly. They’re an essential part of our daily workflow. Since our customer service team has access to all 50+ shared inboxes across workspaces, filters help us quickly zero in on the conversations that actually need our attention - which are the @ mentions.

When you are filtering, what are you typically looking for?
We primarily filter to see @mentions. Because all other incoming messages are managed directly within the shared workspace inboxes (where our rules for tagging, archiving, and routing trigger correctly), the only conversations we need to track in the Subscribed section are the ones where a team member was specifically @mentioned.

What’s your typical workflow?We created a tag for each user and set up a rule so that when someone is @mentioned, the rule automatically applies their tag to the conversation. Team members then filter the Open section by their specific tag to view only the messages that require their attention. This process worked well for quite some time, but within the last couple of weeks it’s started to fail, unrelated conversations are now appearing even when the tag filter is applied to the Open or Subscribed section, making it harder to track true @mentions.


brandon_lockhart
Forum|alt.badge.img+4
  • Conversationalist
  • 6 replies
  • November 13, 2025

Conversation filters are typically only used by management looking for something specific or by teams testing new workflow ideas, however, even though we don’t use them frequently, it is important to have them. This new flow looks great. 


Carrie
  • Conversationalist
  • 2 replies
  • November 13, 2025

Similar to Brandon, we are very light filter users.


conniechen
Forum|alt.badge.img+4
  • Author
  • Fronteer
  • 9 replies
  • November 13, 2025

Thanks for the feedback!

@grit_evy Thanks for the insights into your team’s workflow. Have you contacted support about the issue you’re running into? That does seem like a bug!


anthonyv
Forum|alt.badge.img
  • Conversationalist
  • 9 replies
  • November 13, 2025

We regularly use filters, predominantly to filter with tags.
This allows us to handle all enquirer types that relate to the same tag in bulk/sequence - which creates efficiency for our workflows as different types of tasks require using different systems and tools.

I think adding the pills makes a lot of sense so it is easy to see what tags are applied and clear them as needed. Good improvement


rmace
Forum|alt.badge.img+3
  • Conversationalist
  • 8 replies
  • November 14, 2025

Love this! Our use case is primarily management users. We receive direct messages, get tagged and have emails assigned. It's sometimes difficult to find things like discussions vs emails. 


grit_evy
Forum|alt.badge.img+3
  • Conversationalist
  • 6 replies
  • November 14, 2025

Hello ​@conniechen 

Response from the Front support team "The workflow you’ve built (using global shared tags to try and track @mentions) isn’t something the system was originally designed to support. Because of that, some latency or temporary mismatches in counters are expected. In most cases, and based on your reports, things do eventually reconcile, but the process is not perfectly reliable."