Hot take: Have been trying to introduce both Bluesky and Farcaster to people in tech but not crypto. The wallet login and web3 connotation have became a big obstacle to onboard more people. It will be even so when move to mainnet and pay gas to register. But CT need attention, they aren’t moving to FC neither.

The social internet is made of cats | Director @ Internet Society Hong Kong | Ex-Apple Sr. Engineer | 🇭🇰🇹🇼 | kcchu_.twitter

This might sound counter intuitive, but creating a barrier to entry isn't a bad thing. It helps keep the signal to noise ratio of FC higher than other platforms. 
If people really want to be here, there's nothing stopping them from figuring it out. If they don't have the motivation, what value would they bring?

off & onchain operations
<--->
Sharing ideas over at /workflow <--->
Problem solving is my jam😎
🎩

I agree that the exclusivity help keep the quality of the community. But the problem is that Farcaster can’t be kept at few thousands users scale forever. This scale can’t sustain a protocol, especially not with 30M investment from a16z. This size isn’t attractive to app developers too.

That paragraphs sounds very much a wishful thinking.

Some perspective is needed here. Couldn't fit it into a single message, but I've condensed it in the image below https://i.imgur.com/mcbOTV6.png

My definition involves having enough people, including paid and volunteers, to keep using and updating the protocol. A test is that, if the team who created the protocol disappear, will people still use the protocol? Having enough users is a necessary condition.

Can you say more what are the qualifiers for sustainability? We‘re talking about making an ROI, right? How does Bluesky male a ROI vs FC?