1. Your last cast was 6 months ago until today
2. You were the only member of the channel and it had a single cast

Will refund you the warps some point soon when we clean up.

We've been clear channels are not decentralized, not an asset for you to sell later. Use it in good faith or lose it.

Eventually, they will be decentralized and then we won't be able to change it. 

But that's not the case today.

"Sufficiently decentralized"

Crazy that some founders don't realize that people have jobs and sometimes have to put projects on hold. Tech bro privilege really does warp reality for these dudes.

I think there’s only two options really. 

1. Someone, ideally a FarcasterDAO, votes on whether or not to add or remove mods. Channels would be owned by the DAO but not moderated by it. All decisions would be taken by voting. 

2. Harberger tax

The problem of squatting is a big one. It shouldn’t be Dan who decides whether someone can use a channel for something they aren’t affiliated with (and especially if they don’t use it at all) but it should be someone.

writing stuff about tech + decentralization over on blog.thumbsup.me

Harberger taxes perpetuate dominance of those with more access to wealth over those who cannot afford to value their property as high, which in this case would result in capture of communities..

But otherwise agreed 100%. 🔥

My understanding of harberger taxes (limited as it is) is that it should actually prevent a lot of the wealth accumulation we see in society that comes from the unrealistic valuation of non-money property.

Yes! For non-resources (like art, luxury goods, etc), it's a great idea IMO.

However for resources, housing, medicine, food, clothing, organizations, Warpcast channels, etc., it is not. This would require people to pay rents on everything (even our toothbrushes) in the form of taxes, while also giving the wealthy a legal right to seize our personal property.

I’ve never heard any case for applying these things to personal goods. Just like the argument that communism is when shared toothbrush, I think that’s hyperbole. While I don’t like market-based to housing, medicine, or utilities, as I feel these are public goods, it’s undoubted that in the case of club goods or private (in the capital sense) goods, harberger tax should at least do better than allowing for unquestioned accumulation

Re the infinite mods thing, maybe a quorum would be best, with a challenge period that requires a quorum (excluding the original quorum members) as well.

Also I want to point out that this isn’t my dream solution. Just something I feel could work better than what exists currently for channels.

Another interesting option could be a  sort of “no one owns channels” with majority vote moderation, infinite mods selected by zk-proving that they are a relevant party. 

Or better still, we could just use hashtags and limit the amount that work per post to 1-3.

cryptoleft

Sorry, I think I forgot to mention that I think the harberger tax should be paid by a DAO/group. 

Also I don’t think it would be beneficial for someone to squat it. Maybe to post spoof, bot, misinformation content to make the left look bad but not to just squat. And as Dan pointed out re: channels, the canonical source is not always the one with the most predictable name. We would just create “crypto lefties” or “left crypto” and so on and so forth.

But I take your point that harberger might not be the best approach.

Fair, but what would you say if someone bought /cryptoleft and deleted it just because Ben couldn't afford to pay high taxes and also feed his kids.

That would be bad right?