in a case like this would locking cards that you don’t want collaborators to edit work?
You can even quick lock all cards on the board with ctrl/cmd-a -> styles
2 Likes
Yes, it would work in some cases.
2 Likes
Just wanted to jump back in here as someone who’s asked for both locking cards and for comments 
A case where the current features don’t quite cover is: I’ve created a space that I want to share with the world. I want to give folks the ability to comment, but since comments are just cards, I have to rely on convention. The shortcomings of this are:
- I can’t force visitors to create comments.
- Even if I could, comments still distract from the work.
- Locking cards doesn’t prevent #2.
Here’s a recent example of mine: https://kinopio.club/iii-seminar-series-DECfJmIQTgIdAsLl7R4uZ
I used Kinopio for a presentation. I made the space Open to All so that people could comment on it, ask questions. However, the comments get in the way of the actual content. I would like a way to hide comments so visitors can see the original “work” and not be confused by what others have commented.
I feel like this is a pretty common use case. I’d argue that the majority of spaces in Explore would be more fun and have more activity around them if visitors could comment somewhere and have a conversation with the creator. I know I’ve made this argument before, but thought it was worthwhile to rehash it now that we have the ability to lock cards.
That features is great, but doesn’t enable this use case
3 Likes
I now hurried to delete my comment, so I did not interfere with your work. 
2 Likes
If You could use filters to only highlight cards created by you , would that work in this case?
1 Like
No, not all the way I’m looking for a greater semantic difference between the core content and metadata (comments (but not necessarily the current implementation), annotations). It’s not a matter of ownership (cards created by me vs others), but of intent and purpose.
In this use case, I see the Kinopio space as a work. It could be a presentation, a mind map, a visual essay, poetry, a moodboard, etc. This could have been created solo or collaboratively, but regardless, we have this core content.
I’d like to publish/share that work with the world and invite comments, discussion, feedback. It should be unambiguous what the core content is versus what are the metadata. Maybe that means the ability to hide comments. In some cases, I want them completely invisible so it doesn’t distract from the original form (for example, my presentation space. I might want to use that space again to present, but now there are comments on it that I can’t hide, I can only delete them, or make a copy of the space etc).
I hesitate to make analogies with other apps because I’m not saying to solve it that way, but it’s a similar idea as comments on a Google doc. They’re on the side and I can hide them. Also, same with Figma. A designer might create some designs in Figma and invite others to add comments and feedback. But that metadata is clearly not part of the work they have done.
(I realize this topic has diverged from the original, but it is all kinda related)
1 Like
i agree but might be better split into a seperate topic, there may be easier/more-short-term solutions to this
1 Like
Adding more to this list… after sharing a space, I want to lock it so it’s only readonly, but I don’t want to remove my collaborators.
1 Like
I want to lock it so it’s only readonly, but I don’t want to remove my collaborators.
would it work to select all cards and actually ‘lock’ them in this case?
1 Like
Bumping this cuz it got another request via email
2 Likes
Bumping again because this is now under development
1 Like
1 Like
I find the second screenshot (of the settings when the space is private) really hard to parse and understand.
It’s not clear the difference between a “private” URL vs a “read only” URL. The term “private” is a little weird. I know why it’s called that—because the space is private. But I just think of it as the URL. If I share that with someone, they will be able to see the space if I’ve made it public, otherwise, I expect someone to get a 404 or something.
Another thought—it might be clearer if the UI speaks in terms of the what a user can do with the URL. That is, more copy that describes, “with this link, people you share this with can edit your space.” And “with this link, people can view the space but not make changes”.
I know this is tough, just wanted to share this feedback 
1 Like
That makes sense and maybe there’s a better label I’ll take another look at notion and google so ppl can use their knowledge from there
1 Like
here’s another pass on the design which makes you choose whether you want read only links , but i think it’s a lot easier to understand overall. Also ‘private url’ and ‘public url’ are now just ‘url’
1 Like
Quick take: the term collaborator 100% communicates to me someone who can add, remove, modify spaces. It excludes people who are view-only. A term for that might be observer.
The UI is contrary to that.
1 Like
It’s also unclear what Private URL means, why is it a separate thing?
If I share that with someone, I might think they could see the space. Because it’s called Private, so me sharing it could be intentionally sharing this private thing for others to see.
1 Like
Where are you seeing ‘private url’ in the last mock-up? That button now just says ‘copy url’
I’ll try changing ‘invite collaborators’ to ‘invite others’, or maybe just ‘invite’
