Oddbean

I see nip29 and if that's what it takes - i'm for it. however, looking at the levels of complexity (read heterogeneity in users/relays) i see a very simple solution requiring ittle modification because its already baked in: nostr:nevent1qqszggrwxt62rtc2xd5lywhlcvj0fah7mune9l6um62jjzds77y989qpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgsdcnxssmxheed3sv4d7n7azggj3xyq6tr799dukrngfsq6emnhcpsrqsqqqqqpce02ea and nostr:nevent1qqstq5j2qhem2hjfmjgdfjlcr3rsjeu8ruuhd253th80h7npznlqlpgpr3mhxue69uhhg6r9vd5hgctyv4kzumn0wd68yvfwvdhk6tczyrwye5yxe47wtvvr9t05lhgjzy5f3qxjcl3ft09su6zvqxkwua7qvqcyqqqqqqgpud8qd

Look up small-world networks and what "Rich clubs" are. tell me that nostr doesn't have this property on relays. It already exists. I'm advocating we exploit this feature for more segregated communities. NOT EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE SUPER CONNECTED because IT ALREADY IS LIKE THAT. One of the most natural network structures that come up. Small hubs with small connections, rich clubs with massive connections. It comes up because due to natural constraints on resources. On nostr, our attention is a limited resource and exploiting this structure helps us move toward the signal activity that means most to us. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich-club_coefficient https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small-world_network nostr:nevent1qqs0dnc3z0a69gmeg3r58ktna0ys78jpyxan7p2hrjkzgmwec8ylk9cpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtczyrwye5yxe47wtvvr9t05lhgjzy5f3qxjcl3ft09su6zvqxkwua7qvqcyqqqqqqgpetnwe

My gripe is that devs are trying to work with the most complex situation for groups, both public and private - which is known to be a mess. I'm arguing that we get more or less the same functionality with a simpler implementation because it is already baked into the functionality of nostr itself. The problem I'm seeing is that the UX is not there, but the most basic functionality is how Amethyst has different feeds for hashtags and lists. A 'community' can be one relay or multiple, but the only criteria is that they have similar values, either in topic or in moderation. "Scale of complexity" just means how mixed everything is. For example your global is the highest complexity. Your follower count is just a smaller global because your feed is just who you follow, but anyone can comment. The same property applies if you are just one user posting to 5 relays about beekeeping because thats the community you want to cultivate. The 50 relay global can't cultivate a beekeeping community because anyone can jump in the conversation. Right @7fqx? (please add a name or 7fqx, I want to tag you 🥹) nostr:nevent1qqszggrwxt62rtc2xd5lywhlcvj0fah7mune9l6um62jjzds77y989qpr9mhxue69uhkymm4de3k2u3wdehhxarjv4jjumt99uq3vamnwvaz7tm9v3jkutnwdaehgu3wd3skuep0qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9ungxxum

so like Git Citadel goes into nip29 and a thematic community doesn't need it, it uses group/communities/list/tags/subject and chooses 2 or three relays to write to. The problem with the lists is that you read everything about those profiles, in the chat there is moderation but they can come from anywhere, then the chat is not available in many apps

Relay feeds you say? Like this that I'm trying to advocate for? Apologies for the wall of text - been strongly advocating for it the past few days. nostr:nevent1qqs0dnc3z0a69gmeg3r58ktna0ys78jpyxan7p2hrjkzgmwec8ylk9cpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgsdcnxssmxheed3sv4d7n7azggj3xyq6tr799dukrngfsq6emnhcpsrqsqqqqqpyhwwp8

I don't know if I get what you're saying because it's too many words, but essentially I agree. NIP-29 is different, it's for more closed groups, they deserve a separate client even, very different from the "public square" microblogging use case of Nostr. Relay feeds and dedicated or niche relays, on the other hand, would fit well in the normal microblogging use case.

The use case i imagine, open to watch but permissioned to write communities. Facilitated by relay feeds. group A, group B, write to their own set of white listed relays independent of each other. Conversational and communtity "security". Group C pulls in events from both group A and B, comments on their content and extends the work done, but only on their relays while A and B can do whatever they want without being intruded on or having their signal muddied by thousands of forks, edits and comments they don't care about.