No. Client != protocol Protocol is censorship resistant. Just like the web. I said each client is free to implement their own acceptable use policies. But the underlying content is still available at the protocol. try @jam or @discove if you want a different POV
This is the right path to a decentralized social network. Separating posts from UI. UI content filters (preferably the user can choose those, but I guess choosing clients works too)
I understand your point, but what sets Farcaster apart from protocols like http or smtp? Is it primarily the inclusion of an on-chain ledger, or does it offer something more distinctive?
Moving on to the topic of censorship, I agree that the problem lies not in the protocol itself, but rather at the level of individual clients. In this context, how can we leverage on-chain elements to foster a less centralized system?
Also, @dwr don’t get me wrong. I am a big fan of what you guys are building! Might be a bit too French in my comments… just trying to understand/contribute