Varun Srinivasan
@v
Should we rebrand Warpcast to Farcaster? We separated Warpcast (the app) from Farcaster (the protocol) a few years ago. We've heard from many new users that this is very, very confusing. People hear about Farcaster, search in the app store, can't find anything called Farcaster and then churn.
376 replies
117 recasts
852 reactions
Varun Srinivasan
@v
Brand identity usually accrues to a single name, and this helps word of mouth growth. Email may be the exception where Gmail, Outlook and others have established brands. Even other decentralized apps are unifying around a single name that they use to refer to their projects in all forms of marketing. No one thinks of ATProto or ActivityPub, they say Bluesky and Mastodon.
9 replies
14 recasts
215 reactions
Varun Srinivasan
@v
The original decision to separate client and protocol names was made to encourage client devs to build on the protocol. We are less convinced that its important today. The main reason client devs cite is lack of users, and the diluted branding seems to be affecting our ability to bring new users into the ecosystem.
4 replies
1 recast
84 reactions
Varun Srinivasan
@v
There are of course downsides to unifying under a single name, and this is not a simple decision. We want to consider the perspective of new users, old timers, frame developers and client devs before taking a decision.
4 replies
1 recast
72 reactions
Paul Cowgill
@paulcowgill
my vote is the app gets renamed as farcaster, and the protocol gets renamed as something else
3 replies
0 recast
24 reactions
KMac🍌 ⏩
@kmacb.eth
This is the best of many bad ideas.
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
