0x32d1a53f…d4f5sent to0xf790a5f5…1365·#19,991,337·view on Etherscan
rounds is the key but only the extent to which it can be made trustless & durable at scale.
didnt have conviction here because feel disappointed there is isn't a clear onchain roadmap or much of an attempt to address the sybil resistance challenges rounds is likely to face as it tries to grow (beyond the brief reference to the farcaster social graph). proof of concept is imo not needed and in any case not esp useful bc the (mostly) offchain model is likely to have little in common with a version that can be protcolized, with high-SNR of voter/contributor participants (ie bot-resistant, etc) while still being low friction/good ux etc. I believe its possible but that it needs to be an explicit priority in order to make meaningful inroads. How is the graph going to be leveraged algorithmically? What supplemental mechanisms (if any) are are being considered to check against bias at the platform level? Is there a research budget? Imo its clear there are big existential problems (not too far) ahead in this area for rounds, as there continue to be for $50b social media companies, & relying on the centralized aspects of Farcaster is prob not a panacea.
Any response to this concern after the fact would be appreciated, to give a better sense of what protocolization roadmap might look like, but still emphasize that its distressing that it has gone from a focus (with prop house protocol) to something marginal when its really *the whole thing*- whether the idea can actually be made to work in an automatic and distributed way without central controls of some kind.
Lot of fun games out there already that work exactly because of moderation. Personally dont think its good enough for rounds to be another one of those. Hoping we can align on putting a big % of the brain/economic power that will go into rounds towards making it credibly neutral and infinite, which likely means not overly dependent on the farcaster team and its investors