Yeah, I’m not talking about the code. I’m talking about the ethos. You want to libel people with a list, no one can stop you. But that should be instant reputational suicide. 

And this should be well known and part of the ethos (the code, In a different sense of that word.) 

I wouldn’t need to spam the protocol with those bots because in trying to destroy its free speech ethos (by essentially trying to excommunicate or “deplatform” others for their views) he would excommunicate himself. 

You can build whatever tools you like to help on the spam front (and you should!), but I’m going to advocate for an ethos in the spirit of free speech, which is the free expression of ideas. 

It’s like Karl Popper’s paradox of tolerance: the only thing we can’t tolerate is intolerance because that’s the end to tolerance.  
 

 Why should it be suicide? What is my report list or mute list? Same sort of list.
Anyone can write any list and publish it. I'm probably on lots of lists. 😂 I don't know and don't care.

We have to get over trying to control what other people write. 

 Your mute list is just a collection of npubs you personally don’t want to encounter. Not remotely the same thing as someone building a bot/team to monitor bad/unworthy accounts and to serve on purpose as a signal to others to avoid.

Sure, those lists are a bunch of randos now that don’t affect you, but if you get put on the “bad” list and suddenly you’re reaching 1/10th of your former audience, you might care quite a bit. It’s Linda Yaccarino saying, “Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom of reach to justify Twitter throttling certain accounts.” 

It *should* be reputational suicide IMO to try to turn nostr into that, no matter the ostensible greater good of the purported motivation.