Advanced
Jason Goldberg @betashop
12/10/2022

💟❓❓❓ If you were joining another app on the Farcaster network/protocol, would you expect your followers from this app to automatically be there? Would you prefer: 1. Followers are same across all apps on FC protocol 2. Manually decide when joining new app 3. Different followers on different apps 4. Smth

In reply to @betashop
Homocryptus @homocryptus
12/10/2022

1

In reply to @betashop
buidlpreneur@scottrepreneur
12/10/2022

I like the option in 2. If the content is similar enough then same follows should work. I'm excited for some client(s) to support lists, so maybe there's a standard feed/list that is Farcaster-wide and one that could be curated for that specific client.

In reply to @betashop
kmacb.eth@kmacbeth
12/10/2022

Each app should be able to have its own data namespace. This shouldn’t be a protocol decision. Each user should have control over their data in each space via their keypair. If an app wants to adhere to another app’s data schema đŸ”„đŸš€ Anyone should be able to use the ‘msg sync protocol’. Let freedom reign.

In reply to @betashop
12/10/2022

user choice and flexibility

In reply to @betashop
Daniel Lombraña@teleyinex
12/10/2022

I would go with number 1

In reply to @betashop
Sean Bonner@seanbonner
12/10/2022

Same across is best. So #1

In reply to @betashop
12/10/2022

1 sounds good but 2 sounds better

In reply to @betashop
MC10 | Bankless Consulting 🎯@mc10
12/10/2022

I would like to see my followers come with me across apps, but would my followers like that?

In reply to @betashop
zico@zico
12/10/2022

2 optionality is best

In reply to @betashop
zico@zico
12/10/2022

2

In reply to @betashop
Jason Goldberg @betashop
12/10/2022

Appreciate all the thoughts here!

In reply to @betashop
Akim Gue@akigue
12/10/2022

1 would be cool!

In reply to @betashop
moreReese@morereese
12/10/2022

2 & 3. 2 when I join a new app (based on follower list in #1). then it grows over time and looks more like #3

In reply to @betashop
12/11/2022

4. Same social graph (followers) but ability for them to toggle on/off at client level without un following altogether

In reply to @betashop
Vinay Vasanji@vinayvasanji
12/11/2022

Different contexts = different relationships so #3

In reply to @betashop
Les Greys@les
12/11/2022

Default my pre-existing connections, with the option to boast relative to the use-case of said app. Hence, amps. I think the team is hitting on big-ness there.

In reply to @betashop
Les Greys@les
12/11/2022

I’d add that this is where identity curation and remixing becomes interesting. People will be able to “try-on” different, amps, or whatever relative metric, change their “follow” crowd and experience different things. Instead of static silos, you create dynamic silos, rotation.

In reply to @betashop
Matt Bateman@matt
12/11/2022

1

In reply to @betashop
Connor McCormick@nor
12/11/2022

I think unless you have a reason why you wouldn’t want anyone to see your posts there, you should inherit all your followers.

In reply to @betashop
Avi 💙@savvyavi
12/11/2022

An excellent question. My preference would be for a prompt that asks if l want all followers and if not, offers me a way to easily unselect some (based on the platform.) Perhaps people who follow me on a visual first platform like IG, wouldn’t want me on a platform like Twitter or audio only like Clubhouse.

In reply to @betashop
Tayyab@tayyab
12/11/2022

2

In reply to @betashop
wijuwiju.eth@wijuwiju
12/12/2022

You social graphs are user case specific, apps may only make it easier for you to port ur existing graphs once you onboard. Plus don’t forget that there are few protocols, many apps and verticals that might need to compose experience in crazy number of ways, and it’s not just social graph.. identity, configs, etc

In reply to @betashop
David Tomu@tomu
12/12/2022

2 decide what content is available to whom

In reply to @betashop
12/12/2022

I'd prefer to have same followers everywhere but not the same content on every platform.