“Farcaster must remove all the bots” 

This is a worrying line of thinking I’m seeing more often.

The argument goes that it’s not enough to hide uninteresting content. It *must* be removed from the protocol. 

That is, someone must judge the worthiness of accounts and delete them from the protocol.

Technowatermelon. Elder Millenial. Building Farcaster. 

nf.td/varun

Ethereum does not judge the worthiness of your transaction. If you pay the fee, you can make it happen. 

Even email doesn’t ban accounts. It only filters spam into a separate inbox. 

It is very important for credible neutrality that no one has the power to delete accounts that they do not like.

The right solution is quality filters - build tools that  filter out content that is not interesting to you.

Priority mode is our first step in this direction. It’s not perfect but it’s MUCH better than what came before and we will keep improving it.

What we will NOT do is start removing accounts from the protocol. 

This is dangerous and threatens there credible neutrality of farcaster. 

Be very wary of anyone who advocates for this.

No one likes spammy FC accounts. 

No one wants XEN to take up all the block space on Ethereum. 

No one wants spam in their inbox. 

But the solution is not to have some arbiter who bans things at the protocol level that they do not like.

Artist, Designer & Technologist → epr.net

FC is a protocol. 

You can create an account, post a message and read messages even if our company disappears tomorrow.

i understand what you're saying here and maybe 3P devs can build a bot filter product for it. but you're also comparing FC to a protocols when it operates more like an open social media platform built on top of a protocol layer. plus, it's run by a single company which makes it unlike any protocol layer i'm aware of.