jordanᵀᴺ on Farcaster

Content pfp

0 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

jordanᵀᴺ pfp

@jordanisgreen.eth

If "top priority is grow users on the protocol" and the original naming strategy is "extremely confusing for new users", it feels like a swing and a miss to view developer feedback as more important than the advice you could get from people who regularly work on challenges such as: adoption, onboarding, retention, etc. Creating a name that can scale, and a brand that is magnetic isn't some fluffy soft skill. It's work that deserve's to be taken seriously, and skipping that step causes ALL kinds of problems in the future (the problems that the developers are being asked to weigh in on, actually).

1 reply

2 recasts

9 reactions

jordanᵀᴺ pfp

@jordanisgreen.eth

I, for one, have heard from a lot of the people I talk to or interview that web3 feels "really abstract". "Farcast" may have a lot of brand equity from the existing users, but does it mean anything to someone brand new? And how much does that matter? What exactly is it about "Farcast" that people love? Could this be an opportunity to consider what a more open source brand looks like, starting with the name? WDYT Design Cabal?

2 replies

0 recast

6 reactions

jordanᵀᴺ pfp

@jordanisgreen.eth

@esdotge @colfacts.eth @victoctero @chicbangs.eth @nicolaus @fffflood @anacarolina.eth @erica @lambchop @antimofm.eth @web3designer @chsh.eth

5 replies

0 recast

2 reactions

jordanᵀᴺ pfp

@jordanisgreen.eth

@borrowlucid.eth @slowcrypto @chsh.eth

0 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

antimo pfp

Maybe contrarian take but I've always been a firm believer that naming doesn't matter. If there are PMF and growth, any name is fine Some names seem to mean something, like idk Red Bull, but it's all rationalised entirely retrospectively. Also important to remember that for the majority of people in the world who don't speak English as a first language, word association isn't as immediate, it's just random sounds Maybe they know, consciously, that Facebook means "face" and "book" but I'm willing to bet their mental image does not include a college facebook nor do they know what it is In this context, a unique name like Farcaster is a plus as it's easy to remember; if you want to go deeper, farcaster portals in the Hyperion novels are as good a metaphor as I've ever seen one (although I didn't love the books lolol) Having said all that, two names are too much, warpcast always felt like a stopgap to me Long live farcaster

1 reply

0 recast

9 reactions

Chic Bangs pfp

Doing away with Warpcast is the move imo. Definitely need strong branding to attract new users and working with /design cabal is a no-brainer

0 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

Victor 🎩🚴↑ pfp

Victor 🎩🚴↑

The name issue goes back a long way, and part of my thinking coincides with @antimofm.eth, (maybe not purely 100% but almost 😅) of how much names matter sometimes... because from the moment Farcaster was launched, both the protocol and the application shared the same name. As the protocol gained traction with the public and the existing community, the decision was made to change the name to differentiate it internally and reflect the direction they wanted to emphasize: to attract users to rely on the protocol to build new customers and thus begin the kind of growth that seemed appropriate in the strategy at the time. Now, that time has passed. Builders who find something worth building here already know what tools to use, and more often than not, they pay more attention to those tools and names they use on a day-to-day basis than they do to the Farcaster or Warpcast names. This creates two situations that, in my opinion, are opportunities for designers and brand builders: 👇👇

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

_slow_crypto 🌅⏳🪁 pfp

_slow_crypto 🌅⏳🪁

I’m with @antimofm.eth in part, product function beats naming and I’m generally pleased the team focuses on experiential iterations. That said, everything is design and why have any name when you can have a good one? As plenty have said before me Farcaster/Warpcast, while a valiant attempt to differentiate protocol from client (not instantly understood, esp early on), really was an unnecessary split and a lot of long term users stuck with saying Farcaster (I have, it’s never felt natural to switch). I sense that’s among the main reasons for confusion and why we even question the naming so much. I wouldn’t be averse to a full rebrand, but purple has to stay, ofc.

0 reply

0 recast

2 reactions