Varun Srinivasan
@v
“Farcaster must remove all the bots” This is a worrying line of thinking I’m seeing more often. The argument goes that it’s not enough to hide uninteresting content. It *must* be removed from the protocol. That is, someone must judge the worthiness of accounts and delete them from the protocol.
58 replies
63 recasts
438 reactions
@king
The targeted attacks at you and dan seems peculiar. As if insinuating the bot surge is somehow orchestrated but you both. It's hilarious.
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Brad Barrish
@bradbarrish
What I have seen is people pushing back on including the garbage in DAU. The criticism goes that because they are VC-funded, the assumption is DAU is the north star growth metric (probably is), so it incentivizes counting everything. But if the quality takes a dive, humans will leave, even if the garbage stays.
2 replies
1 recast
1 reaction
Ghostlinkz
@ghostlinkz.eth
You are correct. I have been here supporting the protocol since Oct 2022. It’s pathetic to think that users like me are targeting anyone. We all want the same thing at the end of the day. https://x.com/peter_szilagyi/status/1788187688782217515?s=46&t=-ryjZLjDEOK3S34rbvKqgQ
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Brad Barrish
@bradbarrish
I take issue with some of the tactics being employed to draw attention to this issue. VCs typically look for hockey stick growth. I think the team is being thoughtful overall. It’s early. Let’s be solution-focused. Being anti-VC feels like a cop out and avoids a nuanced discussion.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ghostlinkz
@ghostlinkz.eth
I’m not anti VC. I’m simply pointing out that WC team allowed the spam problem to run wild. Users like me were ignored. I shared data to make my point and still no one cared. The answer is “Twitter is worse” and “if you don’t like it build your own client”
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
