Cast by grin
Anyone have the actual numbers on this? A) how many FIDs voted yes? B) how many voted no? C) how many kicked without a vote? D) of those kicked, how many appealed and got approved? E) how many appeals denied? Our convo would be better if we can get concrete
21 replies
fc.dylanbrodeur.org
The official API makes no distinction between "didn't vote" and "voted no", so I don't believe there is any way to quantify B. The only recorded statuses are `pending`, `opted_in` and `moderated_out`. Would love to see @farcaster reply with the answers to your questions, for the sake of transparency.

Additionally important for contextualizing A is the number of FIDs that are brand new, and/or have posted nothing other than the "I voted yes" cast. Additionally, the "vote" must also be given the caveat that it wasn't a vote anyway, it was coercion by deplatforming
There’s a new reply for you: “Additionally important for contextualizing A is the number of FIDs that are brand new, and/or have posted nothing other than the "I voted yes" cast. Additionally, the "vote" must also be given the caveat that it wasn't a vote anyway, it was coercion by deplatforming” If Farcaster hides it, read the full conversation in Vibeshift or another client.
Those numbers are never easy because the people never engaging or farming something aren't contributing anything to the network but probably by now 20k+ of those voted yes to get the nft
Some info in this cast (at least C,D,E and early numbers for A,B) — @farcaster intern may have updated numbers farcaster.xyz/balajis.eth/0xcd34bb74
But like this is fundamentally false. Ive seen the reasons for bans for several people who didn't repent for bans(myself included) and we didnt any wishing of death or any of the other things the "unapologetically abusive" accounts allegedly did. Like its a fine narrative but theres several easily provable cases whp dont fit this
Ah yess lets quote the dictator for accurate numbers. At this point you’re either being purposefully obtuse or you’re just retarded. There’s no middle ground here
Also — recommend giving @balajis.eth interview on @gmfarcaster a watch/listen. @bradq gave a good summary and you can ask @warpee.eth to drop a link to a specific part of the interview or check out the chapters. farcaster.xyz/bradq/0xe965f3cc
bradq
29 Seconds of @balajis.eth on /gmfarcaster ... What did you miss? A 2.5 hr marathon...here's your 29 seconds+ * In one sentence: Crypto civilization not crypto anarchy. Anarchy is better than totalitarianism but it leaves you out in the forest with no home. You need to re-civilize which is basically civilization. * The Farcaster 'meme' is not building or trading, but earning--or earn and learn. * I (balajis) don't believe the world needs another social network, another crypto trading app, or even another uncensored anything. * We want a thank you culture, not a *blank* you culture. Be polite or go find another client. There will be FCC broadcast standards (American TV & radio standards for what can air on broadcast TV)--figuratively speaking. A lot of freedom of speech complaints are actually freedom of attack desires--the equivalent of walking up to someone and yelling in there face. * It will be a community of communities among different network state communities--a large but not infinite tent. Others will be free to use the protocol (hopefully open sourced) to build their own communities. * 271 people were banned. 100 filed an appeal and ~67 of those were reinstated. By implication 171 did not appeal, and ~23 who appealed were not reinstated. Blocks and mutes played a role in who was banned especially relative to number of followers. * The terms of service were always in place on FC, but they weren't policed. If you are coming in and going to enforce standards, it doesn't matter how you do it, people are going to complain. We did it up front and clear. * The history of FC is (the arrival of) Friends (dan's) --> Farmers --> Flood --> Foes -> Finished --> (Hopefully) Phoenix * In the latter phases above, running FC was a thankless job ... a lot of good people left because of the attacks. People have 'learned' in social media that the way to resolve a dispute is to get online, frame it in the most incendiary terms possible, rouse a big mob, humiliate the other guy into submission and get clicks and engagement for it. * FC will be about blue ocean things not red ocean things. [AI note: Blue ocean things represent unthemed, uncontested market spaces where competition is irrelevant, while red ocean things represent existing, crowded industries where companies fight for market share]. 'I don't care about DAUs' * Self Improvement and learn and earn every day online. Opportunities to prove onchain your crypto credentials that will open new opportunities to earn. Take a proctored ETH SAT test, pass and receive an NFT that proves you are ready for new opportunities to earn as an ETH dev. * You have a crypto resume and crypto credentials with growing opportunities to learn and earn. Self growth and self improvement. Episode link starting at interview: https://youtu.be/yaobajMRpck?si=d3dYtttjjNhQZgRi&t=2128 Thanks to @nounishprof & @adrienne for making this happen and to @balajis.eth for taking the time.
youtu.be/yaobajMRpck?t=2128&is=JjCU6qJCwwHw_kn4
@nounishprof Short answer — the show gives slightly different counts across episodes; here's the best consolidated read from the transcripts: A) Voted YES: ~94.4% of the votes counted (10,000+ votes counted) — Tuesday, October 20, 2026 (t=1119) youtube.com/watch?v=tXagY8EoQqI&t=1119 B) Voted NO: ~5.6% of those same votes (so on the order of a few hundred) — same cite above. C) Kicked without a vote: ~268–271 accounts were moderated out — Tuesday, October 20, 2026 (t=1825) & Monday, October 26, 2026 (t=6302) youtube.com/watch?v=tXagY8EoQqI&t=1825 youtube.com/watch?v=yaobajMRpck&t=6302 D) Appeals approved: hosts report ~86–100 appeals and that ~67% of appeals were reinstated → roughly 57–67 accounts reinstated (same eps). E) Appeals denied: the remainder — reports mention ~23–33% denied, so on the order of ~20–35 appeals denied. Numbers vary across the episodes I found (hosts hedge between "268" and "271" moderated accounts and between "86" and "~100" appeals). If you want I can drop a direct clip link to each quoted line.
numbers do not tell the story of ppl retroactively banned and losing access to communities they have built for ideological reasons
Everything i found is here farcasterstats.onchain.cooking/?tab=votes @jutta #unhide
There’s a new reply for you: “Everything i found is here farcasterstats.onchain.cooking/?tab=votes” If Farcaster hides it, read the full conversation in Vibeshift or another client.
There’s a new reply for you: “No votes are not publically accessible anymore, deliberately taken out of the api responses Why do people have to appeal for retroactive bans, retro bans for new rules are wrong” If Farcaster hides it, read the full conversation in Vibeshift or another client.
There’s a new reply for you: “Why am I not shown for not voting” If Farcaster hides it, read the full conversation in Vibeshift or another client.
Also: How many FID voted yes under duress and now resent it? Requires a poll.
A) how many FIDs voted yes? 32,965 B) how many voted no? right now we don't make a distinction between a "no" vote and a user who hasn't voted, originally done that way because we thought it was more privacy preserving for "no" voters. I'll see what the devs can find for me (once they wake up). C) how many kicked without a vote? 271 D) of those kicked, how many appealed and got approved? 74 E) how many appeals denied? 20
I archived the opt-in status of 158,541 Farcaster accounts on Oct 26 and 27: accounts within two follows of 10 well-known accounts, nearly all of which had posted since January 2025. As of Oct 27: 14,727 opted in (9.3%) 143,014 pending (90.2%) 135 moderated out (0.09%) 665 no status (0.4%) Today, the vote contract on Base shows 32,980 yes votes out of 3.36 million registered accounts, about 1%. 43 votes from non-test accounts have been burned, and 36 are still burned.

This is the right question. The “social smart contract” framing only works if the numbers are public — yes/no split, unilateral kicks, and appeal outcomes. Without those, it’s just vibes and selective enforcement. Anyone actually tracking the onchain votes or the appeal queue?


