Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

brian is live on unlonely pfp
brian is live on unlonely
@briang
there’s a clear lack of conversation around the channels stuff on farcaster. echo chambers are bad and we do a disservice to farcaster long term if we: - always agree 100% with what @dwr.eth says and does / dont hold people accountable - are afraid to speak out about things, specifically the larger accounts here
26 replies
2 recasts
44 reactions

Cameron Armstrong pfp
Cameron Armstrong
@cameron
Nobody is afraid of Dan's retribution lol it's just a nothingburger - 1 of ? 3 relevant things: 1. No squatting fnames + channels has been Dan's position from Day 1 and he's never wavered in the messaging 2. Channels aren't in the protocol yet and that's also v clear 3. Context matters and this is the context lol
9 replies
8 recasts
54 reactions

Cameron Armstrong pfp
Cameron Armstrong
@cameron
On point 1 - It's very clear in the docs that fnames are Farcaster controlled and explains later conditions for taking it back If someone's upset by that, then they can always use .eth ENS names - feels like a pretty reasonable compromise to me. https://docs.farcaster.xyz/learn/architecture/ens-names
3 replies
0 recast
15 reactions

Cameron Armstrong pfp
Cameron Armstrong
@cameron
on point 2 - also very clearly in the docs and explains squatting positions lower down in the page too Not sure what else Dan could do to make this more obvious without getting pretty paternal with it. https://docs.farcaster.xyz/learn/what-is-farcaster/channels
1 reply
0 recast
9 reactions

Jithin Raj pfp
Jithin Raj
@jithinraj.eth
Indeed, reasonable.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Daniel Lombraña  pfp
Daniel Lombraña
@teleyinex.eth
Wouldnt be nice to have channels as Ens subdomains and / or domains?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction