I'll repeat more broadly: decentralized social networks (whether crypto or non-crypto architectures) are limited by supply of interesting and entertaining content.

If you increase the supply, audience will follow.

Everything else is downstream of that.

The "interesting" qualifier is key: 1m carefully curated and thoroughly thought casts by me, are less interesting than a single "hello farcaster" cast from a sports, music or politics celebrity -or even their teenage kid. 

This has been the inflection point for every social network.

Dad, geek, conversation liquidity provider. vrypan.net (home), @l--o--l (fun). devcoin:$lemon3

This is when Twitter started to register for celebrities.

https://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/04/17/ashton.cnn.twitter.battle/

Lady Gaga is considered to be the first celebrity of this caliber to join Twitter in March 2008.

This was the state of Twitter at the time (not sure if before or after LG joined) according to TechCrunch. https://techcrunch.com/2008/04/29/end-of-speculation-the-real-twitter-usage-numbers/

March 2008
Total Users: 1+ million
Total Active Users: 200,000 per week
Total Twitter Messages: 3 million/day

I'm sure you've studied these numbers more than me :-), just sharing for reference.

Sequencing matters. Get interesting / entertaining density with nerds first, then expand from there. Celebrities always come after scale.

Fun havoooooooor | Co-creator of the universe | FuckANiche.com | prev @forefront

Interesting. Reddit is probably the only social network I have not followed closely over the years. What were the pivotal moments related to its growth?

This is not necessarily true. See reddit.

weird internet kid. word rotator. yapping on /okbanger. playing with @wannanaplabs. curating in /cameron | dev + vet + HBS. 
seemore.tv/cameron 🫡

and none of those have anything to do with the quality or type of content, right?

for instance, i know one content creator on insta who creates content for her super niche services business, and the reality is there just aren't enough people on farcaster for there to be enough clients for that niche service

so perhaps now we can just call farcaster a good (maybe the best?) marketing channel for onchain enthusiasts, new tech crowd, maybe a few more categories? 

?8^)

My guess:
1. Someone onboards one of them, and they do it as a personal favor, or because it sounds cool
2. They are deplatformed and looking for a platform where the risk of happening again is lower. (I can think of a politician who would have considered this path 3 years ago...)
3. They just want to be cool and in touch with the next thing, and they are sold Farcaster may be it.

i think this is right

there is definitely a viable decentralized social thesis that there are communities that want a more direct channel with content creators, but how does farcaster enable that rn better than instagram, youtube, tiktok, etc? what's the secret sauce that'll get content creators to immigrate to farcaster? 

h/t some thoughts @cameron has shared recently

Our sardines can't compete with the Chad's toes.