nah. Many clients to choose from. Choose a different one 

 Yep. And if you really like the client that’s doing something you don’t agree with, fork it. 

 🤝 

 Aren’t you censoring them? 

 Who? How? 

 If someone wants to put a 💩 next to #Monero. It is up to them, who are you to say that is not allowed? 

 Yes, it’s up to them. I don’t have any authority over their client code. I can only express my opinion as a user of the client and open pull requests to the code base. I value user choice above all else. It’s the client developer’s right to write whatever software they want, but it’s the user’s right to express their opinions about what they want to see or not see. The question is if the client developer values their users’ choices. If not, the user has the choice of using a different client. 

 This. 

 If they can choose a different client, is it really censorship or could it be curation? Can you say for certain that it would 100% be censorship? Is curation censorship? Should client made for kids allow porn or would curation be the key there? Would that be censorship?

Tough questions. I don't think it is good practice for the client creator to add a shit emoji (funny but not good practice); but I have a hard time seeing that as actual censorship when you can switch clients or even create your own. 

 Yeah, but it isn't. Censorship prohibits free speech. Adding information is manipulative, persuasive, maybe even intimidating. But it's not censorship. Be careful not to become the child crying wolf. 

 We have different definitions and are debating the semantics. We’ll just agree to disagree. 

 Yes, but definitions matter. Bcashers had a different definition of "cash". 

Either way, you're right to point it out. It's not censorship, though. At least not in my book. 

I think it is important to be precise and less dramatic about things. 

 Fair enough. 🤙🏼 

 Personally, I would classify the misrepresentation of signed content as forgery... so, worse than censorship. 

 Fair enough. One could very well see it this way. 

 Preventing certain communications from taking place is censorship. Adding information to discourage certain communications is just an intimidation / persuasive tactic. 

 You're grasping, for some reason.

Adding the shit emoji to whatever word is not "adding" information but completely changing the meaning of the sentence. That's censorship, full stop. 

 I get you’re very emotional about this but it doesn’t change the facts. An emoji added is information added. It’s not suppression of free speech. 

I’m sorry you don’t like the emoji, but please try to use words adequately. It’s not helpful to declare everything censorship. 

When everyone is Hitler and everywhere is Nazi germany we loose sense of reality in discussions. It’s not helpful. 

 Being purposely daft about obvious concepts *isn't helpful*.

I guess you wouldn't feel censored if the client you use did the following every time you use the word "speech":

"IMMVSO
I get you're very emotional about this but it doesn't change the facts. An emoji added is information added. It's not suppression of free speech. But I am a fucking moron, who am I kidding?"





 

 We have different opinions about this. Everyone argues about it. So I would go out on a limb here and say that it is not an "obvious concept". 😂

By the way, you can always just use another client. You're not being censored, you're just whining. 

 It's good to know that you agree that someone adding the sentence "I'm a daft cunt, don't take me seriously" every time you use a period is obviously not censorship and totally fine with you. You seem very smart. 

 You’re grasping, for some reason lol 

 I like steel men so here's mine: both arguments have merit since censor is ambiguous with at least two meanings:
1 - to remove/edit access to information
2 - to suppress intended information propagation which could come in the form pejorative framing without removal

However, when information is like water and someone wants filtered water because there are certain things they wish to prevent, it seems more like an expression of personal curation than censorious.

If one thinks curation is censorship, then Nostr will not be very fun as it scales. By that metric, not using all information would effectively be censorship and that's not reasonable. 

 I share your view on this. Just one additional thought: If you think that framing is censorship, that would mean that in order to prevent censorship, you have to change everything that in any way frames the original information. This leads to exponential censorship. We should be vigilant against real attacks, and therefore a little more relaxed if it's not a real attack, imo. 

 That would be crazy - I'm working on a plugin and realized I don't want to include an npub's followers and just include npubs that the profile follows when traversing profiles. The can of worms that would open should that be called censorship.

Moreover, I imagine that would cripple nostr's scalability. 

 I do not fully understand what that plugin is all about and how it is supposed to function but in general I think it’s hard to predict such second order effects. 

The crazy thing is that we need filters to perceive reality but every filter is a kind of censorship. So it can’t be about the information flow per se but should focus more on intention and influence. 

That’s the underlying philosophical conundrum for me: freedom only works long term if it’s total but total freedom basically leads to entropy. Freedom is destructive but vital at the same time. 

 I'll hopefully have a video of it out soon showing some of my work but the idea I got from https://nosta.me/ which after using for quick profile references to check against my plugin.

Definitely agree on freedom and filtering being a requirement to perceive reality. 

 Looking forward to see it 

 What are you going on about? This is not a case of a user curating his own feed.

What we're talking about here is a dev who wrote a client that manipulates the notes of users, without their permission, to make them say something they are not saying, and most like exactly the opposite of what they're saying.

This is clear cut censorship. 

 I didn't mention users, stop assuming clients must cater to users - it's a dev curating the experience. You don't like it - leave, that's not censorship. The information is accessible elsewhere in the pure form you seek and is directly accessible should you care to run your own relay. That client has a red flag for you but that doesn't give you a bit of authority to dictate to devs how they MUST present information they receive from the network.

You don't like that the library may have added checkout slots to the books because it alters the effective published artifact. Go to a different library if it bothers you so much. 

 Don't get emotional, I was simply adding some information to your note. 

 LOL dude, don't get triggered. I was just pointing out that we disagree on the definition of censorship. This is silly. 

 It’s a rendering thing though, not an actual addition to the note. Right? 

 Yeah it just displays the poop emoji 😂 

 I find it really funny 🤣🤣 

 Cause it is 😂 

 How did you come to this conclusion? Did I call for legal consequences? State violence? Banning the app from the appstore? Obviously the dev is free to do whatever he wants and I would even protect this. I just used my freedom of expression and said what I thought would be the best for nostr clients, and in my opinion the software should be neutral and unbiased. No bitcoiner will prefer using Nostur because there's a silly poop emoji after the #monero hashtag but possible future nostr users will stay away from using this client and won't use their freedom of expression in the first place. Luckily there are a ton of other nostr clients which don't engage in such childlike behavior.  

 I took your phrasing 1 step further. I admit jumping to conclusion