this sounds dangerously like advocating for protocol level censorship of accounts. 

protocol level censorship is bad. period. no one should be given those powers. 

remember, @geoffgolberg they used these powers to kick you off of X.

Technowatermelon. Elder Millenial. Building Farcaster. 

nf.td/varun

Decentralized social protocols will not succeed without guardrails.. that is my opinion

You are obviously welcome to have a different opinion

We have traded messages on this in the past, in fact

My position remains the same, i.e. censorship refers to content.. and not behaviorally-based policy violations 

I have long advocated for Farcaster to have formal and thorough policy as it relates to platform manipulation, more broadly (and not limited to spam.. which is a subset of platform manipulation)

It sure would make for spicy (and informative) discussion/debate during FarCon

Unfortunately, I have been gatekept from attending

It sure would make for spicy (and informative) discussion/debate during FarCon

Unfortunately, I have been gatekept from attending https://warpcast.com/v/0x0c272dca https://warpcast.com/geoffgolberg/0xe3048478

I like running, poker and oysters | Founder, Social Forensics (SocialForensics.com) | Berkeley & UPenn | Learning to listen

Debate is always useful, I don't know maybe he misrepresented your opinion, but I do think that banning at the protocol level is a very poor solution.

My preferred solution is open-sourced labeling algorithms. 

But IMO Warpcast already bans people in the form of shadowban, which is the worst form of ban, it's better to ban someone temporarily or permanently at the client level but never do a shadowban, shadowbanning should be illegal, I don't care if it helps fighting the bots or not because is the definition of lack of transparency, and has been weaponized too many times to control distribution in a specific way.

Software developer, open source enthusiast, privacy advocate.

Clear Wallet Open-source privacy focused wallet: https://clear-wallet.flashsoft.eu/


Not on farcaster the protocol.

On Warpcast the client, there are circumstantial poofs:

- the API has manually add/remove from trending
- the boost mechanism have been confirmed by team early on
- labels existed long before they were made public, 
- the team never denied shadowbanning or nerfs ( https://warpcast.com/dwr.eth/0x17f59e0e )
- Annecodaly many users have complained about nerfs.

Without an open-source backend, there's no proof there's no shadowbanning on Warpcast, and I tend to believe it is considering the circumstantial and anecdotal evidence.

But I don't think they will never open source their backend, I mean they begrudgingly just announce open-sourcing the client which is where you can't even hide stuff ( I just made a reconstruction of that).

But the backend? I'll be amazed if I ever see that open sourced in my lifetime while thier still in business.

interspace.fi via sequence. pimlico. poap. polygon. metamask. paxful. flipside crypto. dash. bridgewater. darpa. secdef. navy. dia. linktr.ee/alexanderchopan

has anyone every agreed that there is such a thing as a shadowban in farcaster? i am not saying there is or isn't just asking

There's a lot the Warpcast team can do to improve on this matter.

- A pledge against shadowbanning. 
- A client policy for temporary/permanently banning accounts at the client level by Warpcast.
- A transparent and public process of appealing such decisions
- More transparent algorithms to ensure user content and network are not purposely pushed in predetermined directions 

These are all great suggestions to improve trust, transparency, and fairness, while also potentially limiting damaging accounts. 

To be brutally honest, I don't expect them to ever do this as these will strongly limit their ability to control the network which I think is the main reason why they do this whole project.

I don't agree with censorship, i.e. decisions to ban accounts based on content

That certainly is not what I am advocating.. nor are shadowbans

Platform manipulation – which extends far beyond malicious bots & spam – is quite nuanced.. and not well-suited for effective discourse via this format

Working on Farcaster and Warpcast. Longer thoughts at https://dwr.email

Again, it's just a statement without an open-source backend there is no concrete proof.

You could 100k secret labels, or you could tell the truth, but it is not provable just by a team member saying it.