C O M P Ξ Z on Warpcast

C O M P Ξ Z pfp

Let's be the voice of the community they have tried to build! Filtering is undoubtedly a necessary tool for any project to grow and improve its objectives. However, when specific rules have already been communicated to users, they should be reviewed based on community feedback and surveys. Implementing sudden rule changes without considering prior commitments can harm both the project and its users. cc @jacek

16 replies

22 recasts

68 reactions

C O M P Ξ Z pfp

We've seen this happen with projects like Rare, and even in Farther, where unilateral decisions by administrators—without considering user expectations—led to significant negative impacts for both sides.

1 reply

2 recasts

30 reactions

C O M P Ξ Z pfp

1) User Categorization & Algorithm Transparency One critical aspect that should not be overlooked is how users are categorized. Based on recent data, fewer than 10% of users are considered "non-spam." However, many among them are artists, developers, and valuable contributors who have suffered under these policies. Yesterday, I witnessed the ban of numerous engaged users, including myself, despite months of active participation. These individuals, whether smaller accounts or highly-ranked users, are vital to this ecosystem. Instead of blanket enforcement, a transparent categorization system must be implemented to ensure fairness. Are all banned users really "farmers"? What criteria does the algorithm use? Sudden decisions at the end of a season only foster distrust and uncertainty within the community.

1 reply

1 recast

33 reactions

C O M P Ξ Z pfp

2) Inconsistent Rules & Unfair Implementation Some rules appear illogical, especially for genuine, long-term contributors. For example: T4T rule! The policy states that users can tip each other up to 15 times. However, we've seen users banned for tipping even within this limit, with their last 24 hours of tips erased. If a rule has been set, why change it at the end of the season? Consistency is the foundation of trust. Introducing new rules that penalize loyal users is a critical mistake.

1 reply

1 recast

17 reactions

C O M P Ξ Z pfp

3) New Rules & Financial Impact Implementing new policies without considering user investments is unfair. Users have locked their assets for months, unable to withdraw. I, for instance, have over 1 million DEGEN locked to support the project and help artistic communities I’ve known for years. As a supporter of both the arts and the ecosystem, I cannot accept a system where we suffer financial losses while being subjected to unpredictable daily rule changes. If we invest our time and capital into a project, we deserve a voice in its governance. Unilateral decisions harm both the community and the project’s credibility—and without loyal users, no project can survive.

1 reply

1 recast

10 reactions

C O M P Ξ Z pfp

4) Ignoring Community Feedback Leads to Failure DEGEN is one of the most significant projects in Farcaster’s history. Many projects have come and gone, failing simply because they ignored community expectations. I have repeatedly emphasized in my posts that community feedback drives growth. Unfortunately, this feedback appears to be largely disregarded. The expectation is that we collaborate to strengthen the community, not divide it.

1 reply

1 recast

9 reactions