Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
jordanᵀᴺ
@jordanisgreen.eth
If "top priority is grow users on the protocol" and the original naming strategy is "extremely confusing for new users", it feels like a swing and a miss to view developer feedback as more important than the advice you could get from people who regularly work on challenges such as: adoption, onboarding, retention, etc. Creating a name that can scale, and a brand that is magnetic isn't some fluffy soft skill. It's work that deserve's to be taken seriously, and skipping that step causes ALL kinds of problems in the future (the problems that the developers are being asked to weigh in on, actually).
1 reply
2 recasts
14 reactions
jordanᵀᴺ
@jordanisgreen.eth
I, for one, have heard from a lot of the people I talk to or interview that web3 feels "really abstract". "Farcast" may have a lot of brand equity from the existing users, but does it mean anything to someone brand new? And how much does that matter? What exactly is it about "Farcast" that people love? Could this be an opportunity to consider what a more open source brand looks like, starting with the name? WDYT Design Cabal?
2 replies
0 recast
8 reactions
jordanᵀᴺ
@jordanisgreen.eth
@esdotge @clfx.eth @victoctero @chic @nicolaus @fffflood @anacarolina.eth @erica @lambchop @antimofm.eth @web3designer @chsh.eth
5 replies
0 recast
4 reactions
Victor 🎩🚴↑
@victoctero
The name issue goes back a long way, and part of my thinking coincides with @antimofm.eth, (maybe not purely 100% but almost 😅) of how much names matter sometimes... because from the moment Farcaster was launched, both the protocol and the application shared the same name. As the protocol gained traction with the public and the existing community, the decision was made to change the name to differentiate it internally and reflect the direction they wanted to emphasize: to attract users to rely on the protocol to build new customers and thus begin the kind of growth that seemed appropriate in the strategy at the time. Now, that time has passed. Builders who find something worth building here already know what tools to use, and more often than not, they pay more attention to those tools and names they use on a day-to-day basis than they do to the Farcaster or Warpcast names. This creates two situations that, in my opinion, are opportunities for designers and brand builders: 👇👇
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Victor 🎩🚴↑
@victoctero
1.- Learn from developer advocates who are able to focus and launch projects and products without having an audience or community sometimes. Imagine launching brands built without selling anything but emotional impact from aesthetic arguments 😅 2.- The platform's brand has been strategically left aside; however, thanks to the human quality of many people in this community, emotional connections are beginning to emerge, to be maintained and to take priority. But the truth is that tomorrow the brand could be called something else, and as long as we continue to interact with the same people, we wouldn't care. Of course, new users wouldn't notice it right away, no matter how good it is to have a wallet or how much the UX is improving. So the focus goes back to the basics of identity until, somehow, the emotional connection is built. Hopefully refocusing on the Farcaster name is an appropriate step to start really branding and not expecting people to connect because of the meaning of the word just like that.
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
