jalil
@jalil.eth
i stopped using farcaster for a while because i didn't agree with some of the protocol design decisions and how quickly warpcast was iterating on it. but @yougogirl.eth rightfully pointed out to me that having A protocol infinitely better than having NO protocol. to that i had no rebuttal 😂. gm...
6 replies
3 recasts
61 reactions
woj
@woj.eth
well said — what are the changes that you disagree with?
2 replies
1 recast
11 reactions
jalil
@jalil.eth
the new/future channel design vs sticking to the previous metadata or DNS records for example felt more like a business decision than a protocol decision
2 replies
0 recast
4 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Just for context: It was a channels aren't really working decision. If they are working, we're committed to enshrining on the protocol. We've since added a bunch more APIs for the metadata as a placeholder. cc @sahil who is probably the biggest developer on channels right now
2 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
sahil
@sahil
@jalil.eth +1 on making channels permissionless legos (enshrined on the protocol) but we're still a few iterations away in finding PMF for channels. we've been working with 300+ channel mods to help them manage and grow their channels with tools like @curabot. Merkle's been adding whatever functionality/API we've requested for channels so far. my guess is once we find PMF, we should have a good idea of what/how to enshrine on protocol. my north star for channels as a primitive - enable permissionless communities on the internet with a sovereign tech+treasury stack (namespace, data, algos, wallet, incentives).
1 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
jalil
@jalil.eth
interesting, excited to learn more. my initial suggestions (a year ago & i haven't caught up since) came from how channels were basically parentURIs but got special treatment in warpcast (i tried creating "channels" by creating custom casts with visualizevalue related parentURIs).
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
