It's great that activity from inauthentic accounts is wayyy down.. but said accounts should have been nerfed long ago

They are still here, just not active https://warpcast.com/mvr/0x3552f7d2

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.

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

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)

Guardrails should be client-side, or maybe from nodes/relays when it makes sense, but never in-protocol.

I have not elaborated on what I mean re: guardrails

That would probably be a good place to start :)

But I don't feel like having this discussion here, it's not one that's well-suited for this format

Happy to hop on a call with you next week to discuss