Should we rebrand Warpcast to Farcaster?

We separated Warpcast (the app) from Farcaster (the protocol) a few years ago. 

We've heard from many new users that this is very, very confusing. People hear about Farcaster, search in the app store, can't find anything called Farcaster and then churn.

Working on Farcaster and Warpcast. Longer thoughts at https://dwr.email

Assuming there's a desire to maintain a standalone protocol, is there an opportunity to rebrand that to some other third thing?

Warpcast -> Farcaster
Farcaster -> The Cast Protocol

Tbh I’m not attached to farcaster as the name for the protocol, I just think it is actually important for the client to have a different name from the protocol

I like the idea @runninyeti.eth suggested here. If the client becomes Farcaster maybe there’s an opportunity to rename the protocol for the sake of preserving this distinction

Technowatermelon. Elder Millenial. Building Farcaster. 

nf.td/varun

Tbh I’m not attached to farcaster as the name for the protocol, I just think it is actually important for the client to have a different name from the protocol

I like the idea @runninyeti.eth suggested here. If the client becomes Farcaster maybe there’s an opportunity to rename the protocol for the sake of preserving this distinction

https://warpcast.com/runninyeti.eth/0x2f31eb1d

Imo warpcast should abstract away farcaster and remove it from its messaging to prevent confusing users before renaming itself to farcaster

Bluesky doesn’t mention atproto anywhere in its messaging for example

Either way, the protocol needs to be abstracted from consumers. They don’t care about the protocol, they care about the value offered by the app

Either way, the protocol needs to be abstracted from consumers. They don’t care about the protocol, they care about the value offered by the app

https://warpcast.com/stephancill/0x0c3ba404

Farcaster and Farcaster Protocol is maybe fine but I would give bonus points for a name that preserves credible neutrality

Yes! There's a short term win for user growth by cannibalizing the "Farcaster" brand

But there are many long term wins for keeping the protocol separate (and branding matters way less there; for now)

BDLR CREATR COLLECTR  Creator of Thingies 🖼️
🏗️ Metaverse Bldr  
📸 Photog #Brookpix 👀 
@theWIPmeetup🔺@CultCryptoArt https://brookhawk.artstation.com/

i think the most important think is to promote the protocol to developers and promote the product to everyone else. this lack of distinction in the marketing is most likely the source of confusion and avoidable without a rebrand

This.  If we call the protocol & the client the same thing, how is that less confusing.  So supercast will run on Farcaster protocol & Farcaster client will also run on Farcaster protocol..  I do want more clients, that is the value of the Open Source protocol right? So rebrand, but also rename and promote the protocol 🦅

The challenge is Farcaster has 10-100x the brand recognition.

Bluesky is actually a vote for -- the consumers gravitate toward the app brand. 

The argument is the Farcaster app brand (the original strategy) was the correct one. And we're still early enough to correct that.

i agree but
1. i think the problem varun is describing is something that is completely avoidable i.e. warpcast is confusing their users in their messaging
2. from what i can tell they view farcaster as the stronger brand and therefore want it to be the name of the product to help short term conversion rates (?) https://warpcast.com/dwr.eth/0x4eb30810

imo the name is unimportant and a rebrand will be even more confusing at the cost of neutrality

summoning /daylight | kylemccollom.com | we are hiring: careers.daylight.xyz

This doesn’t solve the problem Varun just described.

first time i'm reading this and i like it

It would even work with
Farcaster
Farcast Protocol