Warpcast

fc-updates

Update on channels

1. It's not a top priority right now

2. Channels are not expiring; if we end up moving forward with an expiration, we will give advanced notice; consider it an indefinite grace period

3. When it becomes a priority, we will resolve abandoned and squatted channels as part of the expiration; we will likely decentralize channel creation at that point — however, only when a top priority

4. What's higher priority than channels?

a. Continue to improve frames UX, especially with regard to onchain interactions

b. Improve discovery across Farcaster for anyone building / creating something onchain

c. Snapchain — need to scale the underlying protocol

d. Cheaper sign ups — top request from several existing apps with large user bases considering integrating with Farcaster

e. Migrating Sign in with Farcaster to Farcaster Connect (see FIP) to allow other clients to provide auth for apps / frames

f. Rewards and onboarding improvements around invites

Remember when channel registry was supposed to move onchain? Pepperidge farm remembers

gm. Fulltime degen, building fun stuff onchain. 
Master of Disaster Frogworks, /ottodao bullfrog, ex @astaria

Feel good work. If the feature is not growing, then doing the work to decentralize it doesn't solve the fundamental problem.

Dogmatic adherence to decentralizing things that aren't working is a death knell for a pre-product market fit protoocl.

Working on Farcaster and Warpcast. Longer thoughts at https://dwr.email

Appreciate the pragmatic approach but imho channels as a primitive (without the moderation changes we’ve seen over the months) have been validated enough now to be prioritized and moved to protocol level. 

Would enable more interoperability without the centralized aspect that is Warpcast. See supercast and other clients, most of them implement channels as a core feature

> have been validated enough now to be prioritized and moved to protocol level

Define validated enough? If they aren't growing, that means they aren't working in the current form.

Other than channel creation, everything else is available via API.

Don’t have the same insights as you, but as a user I see a good amount of the casts in my timeline posted in channels. This fact, the additional moderation possibilities and community aspect around channels make them a valuable feature of farcaster and they would be a great addition to the protocol imho. I feel like many would agree.

Maybe they’re not ready to be protocolized in their current form, but something more in the direction of topics or tags could be interesting. Much like bluesky’s facets

Don’t have the same insights as you, but as a user I see a good amount of the casts in my timeline posted in channels. This fact, the additional moderation possibilities and community aspect around channels make them a valuable feature of farcaster and they would be a great addition to the protocol imho. I feel like many would agree.

Maybe they’re not ready to be protocolized in their current form, but something more in the direction of topics or tags could be interesting. Much like bluesky’s facets https://docs.bsky.app/docs/advanced-guides/post-richtext