Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
20 recasts
20 reactions

Dan Romero pfp
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Why don't you clean up "the bots"? Useful to be precise here: "bots" is a catch all term that people use to describe low effort, uninteresting or otherwise off-topic content. However, a "bot" is traditionally thought of as a programmatic account, i.e. controlled by a script or software. e.g. bot net When people on Farcaster refer to "bots" they are more often referring to actual people using a mobile device (with the aid of translation tools and ChatGPT) who post uninteresting content (from their pov). They are casting and replying in hopes of appearing to be a "real account" because they have learned that turns into a future economic reward in crypto. Recent tipping meta has increased the expected value of these accounts. It's possible to algorithmically label these accounts, but then you create a "shadowban" meta. So you massively increase the number of support messages and complaints. This was the state of the world before priority mode.
79 replies
79 recasts
406 reactions

studio whimsi pfp
studio whimsi
@whimsi.eth
wondering if you had any thoughts on using some kind of criteria that makes a user eligible to opt in as a ‘community moderator’ maybe acc age, open rank, powerbadge weeks held etc can either see the system working 1 of 2 ways 1) a community mod flags a post and it gets highlighted for review for other mods to accept/decline (multiple declines ‘shadowbans’ that user i see this needing some kind of separate admin panel though 2) community mods essentially get the ability to highlight and based on community size, will have a criteria of X highlights required in order for the message to be hidden (essentially like downvoting) i see this more being in cast (like at the bottom of a bot cast, it’d say something like ‘cast highlighted for review: 2/X’ and it would be ‘highlighted’ with the equivalent of a cast action)
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction