Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Follow up: what would a token-gated experience solve for you on Farcaster *today*?
40 replies
3 recasts
41 reactions
Jonny Mack
@nonlinear.eth
monetization outside the walls of warpcast
2 replies
0 recast
13 reactions
Jonny Mack
@nonlinear.eth
communities are defined by boundaries: who can enter and who can’t channels are currently like hashtags: anyone can enter. gating would make them more like real communities this would give hosts more autonomy, agency, and a feeling of true ownership every host a founder
4 replies
0 recast
17 reactions
ted (not lasso)
@ted
i agree the end state should be this, but the Q i ask myself is why is *now* the right time to launch that? imo, FC has provided value to many sides with its accessibility and its openness. it’s magical. what are the pros/cons of /nouns not being token-gated? if not many cons, is now the time to intro exclusivity?
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
Jonny Mack
@nonlinear.eth
exclusivity is precisely what made farcaster such an amazing place prior to permissionless. why? because of the romerogorithm. in order for fc to scale each channel host needs to become a dan. that won’t happen unless they have authentic ownership and real financial upside
2 replies
1 recast
6 reactions
ted (not lasso)
@ted
i 100% agree with that being the reason why FC scaled so thoughtfully and sustainably. spot on. i would def token-gate ted, but does each channel need to become a dan though? memes? books? eli5? LA? geopolitics? if yes, why? side Q: if i do tokengate + use fabric for subs, i would need to make an allowlist — right?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Jonny Mack
@nonlinear.eth
imo, no not every channel. youtube is a good reference: majority of channels aren’t monetized, those that are drive most of the growth growth began increasing nonlinearly once they figured out favorable creator economics. they used market forces as tailwinds using fabric for subs wouldn’t require an allowlist
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
