Content
@
https://warpcast.com/~/channel/hottakes
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Steve
@sdv.eth
I've thought a lot about channels since they opened up to the public in late 2023. After various iterations, I now strongly believe channels should be entirely permissionless, as in: - no owner - no moderators - no fees Gatekeeping topics adds friction to the entire network. See /ai vs /aichannel vs /theai. Everyone wants to talk about AI but no one wants to curate or moderate these channels. Why would they? The rate of noise will only ever increase as automation improves, and Farcaster clients should be doing a lot of the noise filtering anyway. Curation happens with likes, recasts, and replies. The best posts already get picked by the algorithm feeds. With this framing channels become singular hashtags. No one likes hashtags because without limits they become #SEO #maxing #word #slop. A single label strongly signals the in the intent of the message. It also allows for easy mixing by quotecasting, e.g. /dont-do-this, /someone-build, etc. Channels as a label wouldn't work. So I propose: Contexts
11 replies
8 recasts
52 reactions
Ghostlinkz
@ghostlinkz.eth
I think the "gatekeeping topics" framing is misleading. No one can stop you from casting about AI in the main feed or in another related channel that you are a member of. You can also start your own channel about any topic > The rate of noise will only ever increase as automation improve This makes human curation and moderation even more important > Farcaster clients should be doing a lot of the noise filtering anyway Have you ever tried building a Farcaster client? It's really hard to get a feed that is free of slop/spam. Even WC labeling system isn't the best. The only thing that works is creating user lists, which is what @recaster-fc offers > Curation happens with likes, recasts, and replies. The best posts already get picked by the algorithm feeds This doesn't work if most of the reactions are made by spam accounts. Without channels, you also end up missing hq content from newer/smaller accounts that the algos are not good at picking up
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Steve
@sdv.eth
Of course no channel is an option, but channels, subreddits, and hashtags by design are intended to broaden reach, especially to interested people. Who am I to say what does and doesn't belong in /adhd? I made the channel at someone's request. I tried to be on top of the channel but stopped entirely once announcements were introduced and notifications got moved around. As for starting new channels, that definitely makes sense without the $25 price tag. I understand it was used to discourage squatting and slowdown spam but one could argue big channels that become abandoned are becoming squatted. Sure they can be transferred to new stewards but then the burden falls on MM. Solving for slop filtering shouldn't fall on clients or other developers, that's a systemic and infrastructure problem. Having that burden greatly reduces velocity for new developments.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Ghostlinkz
@ghostlinkz.eth
> channel by design are intended to broaden reach Channels were meant to help you find your tribe, but MM neglected them. Discovering and navigating channels is frustrating, and casting in them doesn’t improve reach in any meaningful way > Who am I to say what does and doesn't belong in /adhd? There's a setting that allows the channel owner to let anyone cast and reply without requiring a membership > big channels that become abandoned are becoming squatted Valid concern, but the protocol is meant to be permissionless. Also, channel ownership doesn’t officially exist at the protocol level, so it’s not too late for MM to step in and prevent big channels from being abandoned. Channels are still experimental, so the burden should be on MM > Solving for slop filtering shouldn't fall on clients or other developers, that's a systemic and infrastructure problem. I agree, but up top you said FC clients should be doing a lot of the noise filtering. I assumed noise = slop/spam?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Steve
@sdv.eth
/adhd was a poor example because I have that exact setting enabled. I guess my point was if someone else had made it first, it's uncertain if they'd had the same openness I allow. Which is to say, what should the criteria be for anyone to talk about ADHD in a moderated channel? And that's my bad, I misspoke in the reply regarding clients and filtering. imo it should look like this Snapchain: all casts ↓↓↓↓ Warpcast/Neynar: opinionated infra (on labeling bots vs spam vs low quality) ↓↓↓ Clients: fined tuned usage (channel specific, recent casts only, etc) ↓↓ User settings: muting, toggles like Priority Mode, etc ↓ User Ideally we have more infrastructure options down the road to make downstream developments easier. And maybe there'll be some clients that intentionally tap into all casts! But I think letting users label their casts and trusting the infra to surface it to the right people is the way to go.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
