Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
The challenge with channels is there’s no consensus on what they should be. 1. Distribution vs. niche interest 2. Open but tons of mod work vs. Closed but frustrating for new users A lot of this is a result of our iteration on the feature and not having anything work. A simpler version not dependent on the Farcaster app—but not emphasized by it, would most likely mean other app developers could solve for the various cases. And now with mini apps, you could imagine channel-specific clients as mini apps. https://farcaster.xyz/dwr.eth/0x19ce197c https://farcaster.xyz/dwr.eth/0xd7e9b71b
23 replies
17 recasts
81 reactions
JR ↑
@juli
This Tech Simplification seems Like an added user / interest group barrier with worse ux. 1️⃣ having a similar access ux would already be much better > Click to follow + fulfill x requirements to post 2️⃣ with 3-4 heavily modded top channels, we’d have a townsquare aside the niche interest groups, and main feed. I expect plenty of Volunteers for Content and modding & a place for newcomers to follow along crypto news, token trading (trenches), DeFi, crypto x ai .. 3️⃣ The big advantage I see for channels/chats on Farcaster (vs discord, twitter) for crypto projects or interest groups is that they are close to all the other crypto/farcaster users and can better share internal content with the rest or external content with their Community. >> Distribution only in Channel is fine. People can reshare to main feed (or user miniapps to grow their sub-community/economy) 4️⃣ it‘s on Communities to manage Channels (Tools). Filters would be cool for Manager (Content Type) and User (words)
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction