Virtually all of the people on Farcaster with large audiences:

1. Don't have large audiences elsewhere (Farcaster is their first time with a large audience)

2. Didn't know me or Varun and didn't know each other. The "Farcaster OG scene" is net new creation of Farcaster.

3. Were early and stuck around when everyone made fun of Farcaster (and people still do)

4. Continued to cast interesting stuff, casted in channels when we suggested people cast in channels

5. Warpcast onboarding asks all users for their interests

6. Based on the interests, we pair the account with an initial set of follows

7. There are 200+ accounts on the list, weighted toward accounts that get the most engagement / drive retention, but a large group of people benefit

8. On our list to improve, but the reality is outside of "I should be on the list!" haven't seen any concrete proposals to improve

I quit a large audience on Twitter and joined Farcaster a year ago as a direct replacement. I didn't know Varun or Dan, and indeed, anyone else active on Farcaster at the time. While "the list" made sense early on, it should be opt-in recommendations now - the engagement inequality is very real. 

This is made worse by the hyperfinancialization, where a handful of those people are incentivized to be very active, while a vast majority of the rest are bots. (IMO, as a casual observer nowadays) Farcaster right now should be aggressively focused on social values over financial values (and yes, this is a very direct contradiction and trade-off) - in design, engineering, and most importantly marketing. Unless the terminal addressable market target is degens, which is fair enough.

It's fascinating how platforms evolve. Your experience highlights crucial gaps. Balancing engagement and values is key. Farcaster can thrive by nurturing genuine interactions and reducing financial biases. The direction they choose will indeed shape its community and future.