Co-founder @bountycaster (bountycaster.xyz). Co-producer @ethereumfilm. Previously co-founder of Scalar Capital and product at Coinbase

The determining factor for socialFI for me is that you can do transactions right in warpcast.

SocialFI seems to get a negative connotation right now due to friendtech and very speculative use cases but there‘s nothing inherently wrong with being a social fintech app - it doesn’t mean you need to be hyperspeculative, you can provide great social and financial value

Socialfi is not a social app with finance / transacting signing in it.

Socialfi is the financialization of a following - buying and selling of accounts. So Friendtech, Scoop, Drakula, BitClout, etc.

Not Farcaster or Lens, which are open social graphs that you could build socialfi products on top of (like Scoop).

summoning /daylight | kylemccollom.com | we are hiring: careers.daylight.xyz

If this were the case, then TikTok, Instagram, etc would all be socialfi.

They are not.

Do you consider any social app that has transaction signing a socialfi app?

Or is socialfi specifically buying/selling of social accounts (like Scoop and Friendtech)?

Skeptical of socialfi term, but generally think most of the examples are apps, not protocols.

Protocols can be an emergent feature of socialfi apps because of the nature of blockchains, but identifying as a protocol usually indicates a more serious effort from the core team to court other developers (and having to convince them that the system has strong enough guarantees either today or in the future for credible neutrality, permissionlessness and decentralization). 

There will be exceptions, of course.

Socialfi blends social media with financial elements, allowing users to buy and sell accounts. It differs from platforms like Farcaster and Lens, which focus on building social graphs for other uses