Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
18 recasts
21 reactions

Luka ā†’{protocell:labs}ā† šŸŽ© pfp
Luka ā†’{protocell:labs}ā† šŸŽ©
@luka
X vs Farcaster I created identical threads on two platforms to compare engagement on them. The results blew my mind šŸ¤Æ To learn how I *earned $873 in crypto tips, read on and make your own judgement (šŸ›‘ NOT financial advice!) šŸ‘‡
14 replies
4 recasts
13 reactions

Luka ā†’{protocell:labs}ā† šŸŽ© pfp
Luka ā†’{protocell:labs}ā† šŸŽ©
@luka
The thread I created is a HOW-TO for "Second Law", a short movie I made using a hybrid AI workflow. The goal was to make it appealing to contemporary creators with useful learning content, not just engagement farming. X on the left, Farcaster on the right
3 replies
0 recast
2 reactions

Luka ā†’{protocell:labs}ā† šŸŽ© pfp
Luka ā†’{protocell:labs}ā† šŸŽ©
@luka
Some stats for the threads: X followers: 3567 FC followers: 965 X likes: 20 FC likes: 38 X reposts: 10 FC reposts: 9 X views: 2250 FC views: 400+ X comments: 2 FC comments: 25 With 3.5x less followers on Farcaster, the thread there got similar engagement in terms of likes and reposts.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Luka ā†’{protocell:labs}ā† šŸŽ© pfp
Luka ā†’{protocell:labs}ā† šŸŽ©
@luka
Obviously, it was viewed many more times on X (>5x more), but also garnered 10x less (!) comments than on Farcaster (to be fair, most were tipping comments) Why is engagement on Farcaster so high in comparison to my followers? My guess is the use of channels, which help focus attention to the target audience.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction

Luka ā†’{protocell:labs}ā† šŸŽ© pfp
Luka ā†’{protocell:labs}ā† šŸŽ©
@luka
On X, discoverability is facilitated almost exclusively by the algo (do hashtags even work?) There are NO hashtags on Farcaster, so maybe they are not needed šŸ¤·ā€ā™‚ļø The issue with using the algorithm to find the target audience for the post is that it comes with huge trade-offs.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction