Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
sean 🔹
@swabbie.eth
just an observation on $ANON lore — it seems like there was some frustration around its inception (the timing, distribution, etc) but let's be honest — $ANON could *only* ever be created anonymously and fully distributed immediately. for its creation to be planned by a known individual would destroy the narrative. this was the only way. i'm sure @supercast can have its own token for its members at some point, but the true $ANON could only ever exist anonymously.
3 replies
3 recasts
4 reactions
accountless
@accountless.eth
semi anonymous bc it’s not anonymous
2 replies
0 recast
3 reactions
accountless
@accountless.eth
riffing: super anon is pseudo anon and that’s ok. supercast keeps logs and can read logs; they say they won’t unless required; but… supercast team, knows others here on socials, your peers and friends and competitors, etc bc we are all one community. this makes it even less pseudo and raises risk. this isn’t the same trust you would have with let’s say facebook. with Facebook if they saw your data, you wouldn’t be worried that Zuckerberg would tell your ex partner. so there is a sword w many edges here
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
sean 🔹
@swabbie.eth
Let’s hope the logs are deleted as promised. It’s as anonymous as super anon could get. This is what the lore should be - not an organized thing
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
accountless
@accountless.eth
someone could set up anonymous. supercast could also changes practices. i’m not saying they should. it’s a feature in an app doing a service for you. but for folks who use it, the behavior with a totally anonymous posting method would be different and so, it’s not used as an anonymous channel for real i am a happily paying subscriber to supercast since day1 tho. i am. it negging. just being specific.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
sean 🔹
@swabbie.eth
No it has to be created by a super anon post. That’s the lore.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
