Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
The primary reason most people use social products (and stick around) is their friends are using it. This is why invites and contact upload are core UX to any successful social network. The secondary reason is there is entertaining or interesting content. This is why algorithmic feeds have won. Nothing else matters.
24 replies
16 recasts
170 reactions
niftytime
@niftytime.eth
> This is why invites and contact upload are core UX to any successful social network yes but you also don't need to exclusively optimize push the old "connect your phonebook" approach; you'll get more folks doing that when folks joining with *existing* onchain networks feel connected together on FC
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
We inititally tried this. Turns out most people don't have meaningful onchain connections. And in many cases, people with similar NFTs don't end up wanting to follow each other (despite popular belief).
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
niftytime
@niftytime.eth
Curious when this was first attempted. FC didn't grow meaningfully large until a few months back (and this sort of support is def one that works better at larger scale) when most of the popular artists and collectors (i.e. folks who have material and meaningful onchain connections)
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
We will likely revisit at some point. What onchain connections are meaningful to you?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
niftytime
@niftytime.eth
Outside of the obvious creator-collector connections (1st degree), the most interesting part of the social graph thats emerged over the last 5 years has been latent 2nd & 3rd degree connections (e.g. creators that a creator in my collection has collected; collectors who collected the same creators I've collected)
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
