Thanks for bringing those up and be the bridge. I am going to address the issues per item.
was there a specific reason for not to? telegram is used frequently by other community members and by not having them there it just isolates one part of the community to the other
this is a feeling and not a reason. I understand uncertainty on something new but again there is a reason and that is better communication
can we be more specific on security issues? On spamming it’s the same case with IRC. At least on telegram is easier to ban spammers from a group
unreliable in what way exactly? again we are not forcing people to join the telegram channel, we are just briding the two channels to give visibility on conversations
if we are referring to the terrorist groups accusations (only assuming here) I would suggest it’s not the technology’s fault but the people using it
and that is for privacy reasons, the users can actually select to show if they want to appear online or not
I am not sure what that means to be honest
Again thanks @hostmaster for bringing this forward. From the comments here I see more concerns on the tool (this case telegram) that a portion of community chose to use rather on the fact we are connecting the community to each other. And that’s why the suggestion is to bridge the tools and enable everyone to participate and ask each other rather than be fragmented.
I will leave this open until the end of the week and unless there are concerns against the bridging as not being a good way to connect the community I will move forward.