Dan Romero pfp
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Second channels question Again, looking for input. No imminent change. Assume a “yes” to the below makes it more likely that we unlock channel innovation in other apps and they are fully decentralized and that happens *a lot* sooner than alternatives. Here’s the hypothetical: 1. We remove all the existing channel functionality from Farcaster app. 2. All old and future channel casts still appear in the app (ie FIP-2 casts today but we make them a bit nicer than they are now). 3. In order to cast in a channel you use a mini app or another client like Cura or Zapper. Yes or No?
46 replies
17 recasts
82 reactions

shazow pfp
shazow
@shazow.eth
If the only option is this or nothing changes, then maybe yes? Channels as they are rn are a dead end. But, as others put it, this would almost definitely kill channels. Maybe there could be another MM app dedicated just for channels? Could be a valuable forcing function for fleshing out the protocol, but I understand the hesitation of bifurcating focus. (I'd prefer the main client was channel focused but I assume that's not what's working for onboarding rn.) I think that sovereign channels is the one credible path of keeping high quality signal if Farcaster succeeds at x100 growth (rather than degrading into a cesspool like every other scaled social network). Does that mean it's a good problem to have later? I dunno. I'd rather it was part of the growth strategy from the start.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Dan Romero pfp
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
We don’t have bandwidth for a second app unfortunately.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction