Dan Finlay 🦊
@danfinlay
Last night I created an experiment on Farcaster that went farther than intended. What started as platform research revealed deeper truths about incentives, boundaries, consent, and human impact in web3. Some important lessons and thoughts on building better systems: https://blog.danfinlay.com/meme-tokens-and-consent/
13 replies
12 recasts
99 reactions
niftytime
@niftytime.eth
Definitely a good read One point I’m still thinking through is when you mentioned not knowing who was buying your tokens as a distinct negative An emergent identity proof I’ve been using when it comes to wallet analysis of a group of wallets is roughly noting the % of wallets linked to FC profiles that I recognize / respect @interface has made this much easier than before but there are probably much better ways to surface this / leverage those public associations It’s better signal if nothing else But have a feeling better FC identity surfacing combined with tools that privilege specific token communities (eg whose membership may be more well know and/or considered [insert beneficial adjective]) during launches would do a lot to mitigate the above issue you flagged Fwiw the FC association of $anon token holders with distinct FC linked address is what imo makes @anoncast interesting since the anonset is comprised of many notable FC accounts that hold the qualifying number of tokens to post
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
