this sounds dangerously like advocating for protocol level censorship of accounts. 

protocol level censorship is bad. period. no one should be given those powers. 

remember, @geoffgolberg they used these powers to kick you off of X.

Technowatermelon. Elder Millenial. Building Farcaster. 

nf.td/varun

Decentralized social protocols will not succeed without guardrails.. that is my opinion

You are obviously welcome to have a different opinion

We have traded messages on this in the past, in fact

My position remains the same, i.e. censorship refers to content.. and not behaviorally-based policy violations 

I have long advocated for Farcaster to have formal and thorough policy as it relates to platform manipulation, more broadly (and not limited to spam.. which is a subset of platform manipulation)

It sure would make for spicy (and informative) discussion/debate during FarCon

Unfortunately, I have been gatekept from attending

It sure would make for spicy (and informative) discussion/debate during FarCon

Unfortunately, I have been gatekept from attending https://warpcast.com/v/0x0c272dca https://warpcast.com/geoffgolberg/0xe3048478

I like running, poker and oysters | Founder, Social Forensics (SocialForensics.com) | Berkeley & UPenn | Learning to listen

i'm not sure where i stand on this debate, i see both sides, but "its bad. period." does not sound like a good debate partner tbqh