Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
20 recasts
20 reactions

ST pfp
ST
@vercelabloh
For anyone that’s investigated this, what’s the technical difficulty with a channel-focused client? Serious question.
5 replies
0 recast
16 reactions

horsefacts pfp
horsefacts
@horsefacts.eth
IMO very few. You can still only create channels in Warpcast but that shouldn’t stop anyone. Republished from a GC: if you asked me to build this "channel-focused client" I would: 1) Approach it more like an "app" than a "client." Cut out most of the stuff a generic "client" has to do (signups, follows, feeds, search, notifications, chat). If you want to do that, use Warpcast or any of the 10 other clients. 2) Focus narrowly on a really good channel viewing and management experience. Try to do better at surfacing and curating interesting content. Add an integrated curation/moderation tool. (There is a huge underexplored programmability surface here with automated moderation). Add stuff like downvoting, threading, etc. Build on what already exists. 3) Expand to some unique channel focused features: a gated chat, private content, more UI customization, pinned posts, integrations with spaces/blogs/newsletters/subscriptions/events. 4) Monetize by subscriptions, focus on getting 100 power users to start.
7 replies
5 recasts
43 reactions

Rodrigo Bardin pfp
Rodrigo Bardin
@rodrigobardin
but from a technical pov, what’s the limitation with channels not being on the protocol? creating and managing only via Warpcast? if warpcast decides to discontinue it for whatever reason, bye bye client/app/whatever? not a dev here but interested to know more
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction