Varun Srinivasan
@v
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.
370 replies
117 recasts
850 reactions
Varun Srinivasan
@v
Brand identity usually accrues to a single name, and this helps word of mouth growth. Email may be the exception where Gmail, Outlook and others have established brands. Even other decentralized apps are unifying around a single name that they use to refer to their projects in all forms of marketing. No one thinks of ATProto or ActivityPub, they say Bluesky and Mastodon.
9 replies
14 recasts
215 reactions
Varun Srinivasan
@v
The original decision to separate client and protocol names was made to encourage client devs to build on the protocol. We are less convinced that its important today. The main reason client devs cite is lack of users, and the diluted branding seems to be affecting our ability to bring new users into the ecosystem.
4 replies
1 recast
84 reactions
Varun Srinivasan
@v
There are of course downsides to unifying under a single name, and this is not a simple decision. We want to consider the perspective of new users, old timers, frame developers and client devs before taking a decision.
4 replies
1 recast
72 reactions
Alex Mack 🏔️
@alexmack
What would happen to any other client protocols built on farcaster protocol? I guess I’m confused as to how rebranding would merge the client Warpcast with the protocol… and how developers would differentiate between the two? (Sorry a two brain cell non-dev question) From a branding perspective probably simpler for new users but I’m indifferent tbh
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
KMac🍌 ⏩
@kmacb.eth
This is so disappointing.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sticks and Bones BBQ
@sticksandbones
Yes, consolidate to Farcaster. Everything else is downstream of usage/distribution.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
