I understand this is coming with good intentions and any dev can do this but seems like the perfect tool for harassment since it massively lowers the entry barrier to a single click. 

 Yes this seems concerning to me too. Curious your thoughts @Vitor Pamplona 

 There is no way to avoid this. The receiving user's will have to offer protections, like only seeing replies from follows or some Web Of Trust check in the key itself.  

 I guess this triggers an evolutionary arms race. If this becomes a source of harassment clients can filter out keys that have no track record. Of course, that has certain downsides too. 

 Great idea 

 Is it possible to get a nip 05 in amethyst in the future? Is there anyone that accepts amber as a signer? 

 Oh. That's a neat idea. Maybe hold down on the Post button the prompt the option to reply anonymously, but people won't know that it's there unless you surface that with some notification at first. 

 I love this idea 

 Anonymous reply...
What could go wrong? 

 Everything. That's why is cool :) 

 But you would be Snowden's pride 

 Is it really as useful as you think? What if the response is unexpectedly sensible and another reply is needed?
I'd rather have a button to quickly create a second account with no further data attached that can be dropped whenever I click the button.
Just my 2 cents. 

 Anonymous replies are bad. If someone wants to say something to me. They should say it to my face so I can see if they are a real person or not.
Transparency is the key. 

 Yes and no. Yes, from the perspective of standard unrecorded face to face communication (and not even in every case), no in any other case. Anonymity is a basic Nostr feature, and as such it should be available to all the users, not just to developers, hackers and dedicated fans.  

 what i think would be neat, if possible, would be to preserve some sort of WOT while remaining anon. to give the post some weight if it came from within your graph 

 We have PoW for this.  

 along the lines of what we've been thinking with @nielliesmons @elsat @pippellia  

 Does any method exist for me to sign a message that proves that the message came from one npub on a list of npubs without specifying which npub? So for example, you see a message and you know it’s from someone you follow but you don’t know who exactly. Maybe something using ZKPs? Seems like it should be possible, although I’ve never heard of anyone actually doing it. 

 If the npubs collaborate, it should be possible, see this for reference.

note1c785z9qs2u093jh3th0jurvchhq7h2n0a7enslp8kp4ysyzpwfuqst2uxg 

 I’d love to see an implementation where the npubs don’t have to collaborate.

Imagine a source like Deep Throat, but where we don’t have to trust Bob Woodward that the source comes from someone on list X. Instead, we have list X, we have a signature, and that’s all we need. 

 Would probably require some sort of zero-knowledge WOT as you need to prove the WOT is transitive without revealing who you are. 

 Sound interesting 🤔😁 

 trolls are gonna love this 

 Good! that's what zapthreads been doing all along 

 I agree with Derek. Long press or double tap makes sense for that. 

While you're thinking along those lines, would you consider adding an indicator receiver-side that a private zap was sent as private?   

 I want the anon reply button 

 Fascinating 

 infinite spam function, no please 

 That is the hard part, even if we can manage to make a free speech platform (I hear the text here is harder to censor), what’s to keep offensive spam attacks to disrupt the platform. 

 What about incentives? Let's say 1sat/kB to all who show up in my feed? Or only if i'm actually open the post with replies? Or if streaming something...