Geoff Golberg
@geoffgolberg
👀👀 $degen – not frames – has been driving Farcaster's growth 📈📈 (data from The Indexing Company; h/t to @aperture)
8 replies
2 recasts
13 reactions
Ghostlinkz
@ghostlinkz.eth
What changes would you make? Would you simply disallow devs from adding tipping through replies, or is there another solution you have in mind?
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
KMac🍌 ⏩
@kmacb.eth
Tips could be protocol level reactions (extend with two fields ticker & amount) or a new message type or outsourced to frame servers & processed onchain. There’s no way to stop in cast tipping. Would be super curious to hear how much activity is now in dc & group chats vs onHub
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ghostlinkz
@ghostlinkz.eth
You could filter out reply tipping at the client level. What’s the reason for not having reaction tips at the protocol level? I assumed it’s because Apple doesn’t like it, but clients don’t need to add it if they don’t want to? I also want to see some data about dc/group chat.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
KMac🍌 ⏩
@kmacb.eth
Filtering at client is fine when the context is isolated. eg this is a cast. This is a tip. Mix the two & 🤦. That’s why new reaction or msg type suggestion. Why not do that? Good q. Same q for why not have frame interactions (ie messages) onHub? 🤷🏻♂️ Guessing: speed of iteration 😒
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Samuel ツ
@samuellhuber.eth
I would prefer cast actions for tipping with frames to show allowances and received tips vs protocol Keep protocol as lean as possible. No need to have tips there
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
KMac🍌 ⏩
@kmacb.eth
Agreed on not increasing what the protocol does (verify, store & sync). I wonder in your suggestion, how the recipient of the an offchain, frame base tip would hear about the tip? A cast? Seems heavy if not a new message type. How are you envisioning that?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
