Farcaster is a single-tribe network, not a social network. Big difference.
A single-tribe network is a better name for what I was calling* a 1-network. It's a social network where there is only one tribe. There isn't yelling or squabbling to the same extent because people have been pre-filtered on values. * See: https://thenetworkstate.com/on-network-states#0-network-1-network-n-networks
I do wonder how quickly networks need to become multi-tribe to stay relevant for the long term
What's more valuable for the users, a single-tribe network or a social network?
do you anticipate Farcaster evolving into a multi-tribe network?
That's very true. However, we can grow and try to keep that in mind, by creating cyber-tribes, or sub-tribes on Farcaster, segregated by their Web3 signature (NFT holding, etc..)
Is that a social network that doesn’t work, or like, our beautiful mad max metaverse future?
prob more accurate to say that the current users of this particular FC client seem to be very like minded or single tribe, but could change as more people join FC also only shows you posts from people you follow, so more tribes could exist that u don’t 👀 FC as a protocol tho has no opinions
Does that mean each single-tribe network I am a part of, could be one of the various “puzzle pieces” that make me me and not someone else, if my digital identity were in fact interoperable across all?
Yes! Zulip has incredibly focused single-tribe networks as well, but their max size is capped at total # of experts. Farcaster tribe succeeds at a more balanced member graph, not just one focused on expertise-gated outer reaches of human experience 📐 https://categorytheory.zulipchat.com
A web of interoperable single-tribe networks is the future. It's really how civil society has evolved, more so than purely unguarded ‘social networks’.
At this moment in time definitely Forever though? 🤷♀️ I no longer even pretend to predict the future with any certainty - I leaned that from someone I admire (🫵 🤣)
I agree but also feel like @v and @dwr are doing this deliberately to learn how to scale quality communities with the end goal of being multi network. Aka this is a strategy not an end goal. Time will tell, and it’s exciting to see it happen in real time
Single vs. multi requirement comes down to the business model in the end. Can you make enough revenues to sustain your social network? This David Foster Wallace point is still valid and Twitter seems to have struggled with it always: https://twitter.com/ntmoney/status/1605279421090484234?s=61&t=u0i5T63zwdCyUC0WsfqW_Q
One of the more intriguing threads I’ve seen here yet. The idea of interoperable single tribe networks is provocative. In some ways, isn’t this what DAOs are attempting?
interesting parallel to clubhouse, it was a single-tribe network / tech-bro enclave until the tech vs music industry war started (proving out the one tribe lack of squabbling)