chat, do we really believe that the space doesn't need more virality?

Having rarely seen the word “viral” used in this app for the past year and a half, it’s been jarring seeing it everywhere the last 36 hours

I personally don’t care for it. Of course I want distribution, but “viral” carries connotations of low quality attention sniping

Maybe a marketing optics thing

Yes. Co-sign @flynn.eth on this one

The word is also bad. “Virality” feels boomer / cringe and almost like an anachronism from an age where the attention economy hadn’t formed yet

Folks want distribution and ownership, not a million shallow impressions

ceo boost studios, core contributor of /boost

Yes. Co-sign @flynn.eth on this one

The word is also bad. “Virality” feels boomer / cringe and almost like an anachronism from an age where the attention economy hadn’t formed yet

Folks want distribution and ownership, not a million shallow impressions 

https://warpcast.com/androidsixteen.eth/0x47f1353c

You think so? “Distribution and ownership” are dry, but feel like creators / developers are professionals who wouldn’t mind the straight talk

But agree with you on the meaning — “attention compounding + building influence” is a great way of putting it. Feels closer to the money

i understand where you’re coming from but actually think “distribution and ownership” is (sadly!) more boomer than virality

i think we should probably dial the language in more. “viral” is imperfect t shorthand for attention compounding + building influence

Onchain startups. /rebase, /basedjobs and more

We need fungal tokens. Too many non-fungal tokens out there.