Sense

Farcaster

Damn. The average user X with 100k followers earns about $70k a year just from posting. 

At the same time, Twitter is not a cryptocurrency project where the financial part is mandatory to encourage users.

At the same time, Farcaster, which has a fairly good investment round and a solvent audience, cannot give its users with 100k followers even $300 per month.

Perhaps the Farcaster Rewards system and other systems are not quite right? Because they give insanely little and supposedly say, “you're just here to cast,” and then demand quality content for $300 a month (in a good scenario).

Funny how the math works out.
On X, a creator with 100k followers can rake in $70,000 a year—simply by posting. No crypto gimmicks, no Web3 buzzwords. Just reach, engagement, and a platform that values attention.

Meanwhile, over on Farcaster, with its sleek VC backing and a user base full of "solvent minds," that same creator might earn $300 a month—on a good month.

Farcaster isn’t short on innovation. But somewhere between protocol purity and "you're just here to cast," it forgot something crucial: incentive design is everything.

You're asking for premium content… but paying in peanuts.
You're building for creators… but rewarding like it’s a hobby.
You're preaching Web3 empowerment… while re-creating Web2 indifference.

If Farcaster wants to be more than a niche playground for crypto insiders, the rewards system needs a serious upgrade—not just in numbers, but in philosophy.

Because right now, it feels less like create-to-earn, and more like cast-for-clout, beg-for scraps