Péter Szilágyi
@karalabe.eth
This is called conflict of interest. When every bot is paying you $5 a year, you are definitely not going to get rid of them. Don't blame the "consumer". Filtering out every single new user by default is just dumb. It makes it almost impossible for new users without a social circle already on FC to start out.
3 replies
10 recasts
95 reactions
Varun Srinivasan
@v
Genuine question - what do you think we should be doing instead?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Péter Szilágyi
@karalabe.eth
Be honest about how many real users you have. You are currently selling the bots are users. Sure, technically bots are also users... just not really what people come here for, so whilst technically correct, it's disingenuous. https://warpcast.com/dwr.eth/0xf073853b
3 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
> how many real users you have What methodology would you use to do this? What other social networks do this well?
3 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Ghostlinkz
@ghostlinkz.eth
Here is one of your team members trying to engage in an honest conversation about finding a solution. https://warpcast.com/deodad/0x6eab7d74
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Tony D’Addeo
@deodad
my point was there is one objective metric for the protocol and countless possible subjective metrics that may be useful to 1 person or 1 situation but not others talking about protocol users is valid & the idea of Some Perfectly Delineated True Set of Users metric is naive https://warpcast.com/adrienne/0x8614f6f5
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ghostlinkz
@ghostlinkz.eth
No one asked for perfect. But if 80% of your protocol is spam/bots, don’t get mad when those of us who actually analyze the protocol start to call it out. We all want the same thing, but looks like we disagree on how to get there.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
