resistant vs proof, big distinction

many lawsuits over this one

misunderstanding the difference is why it isn't "censorship-proof" and why it is extremely specious to say that shitcoin chains with 100 max nodes are anywhere near as censorship resistant as a protocol that doesn't have a consensus

the consistency and partition resistance of nostr is entirely the product of relays pulling content from other relays or users pulling content from one relay and pushing it to others

for private relays you don't want this, but it certainly could leak, that's an important thing to understand also... but on the other hand, a private relay could identify who had been served an event when and greatly narrow down a broadcasting user 

 Good distinction.  Thanks.  I think when normies see "censorship resistent" they think "censorship proof".  I cant remember who but a prominent bitcoiner was on a podcast and said "damus can ban you".  Ive not seen that tested, but I think if a damus user was banned from the damus relay there could be significant degredation of service, and if the top 3-5 I suspect there would be so many paper cuts that most would stop using the system. 

 yeah, that's the fun part

perhaps it would me more accurate to say that nostr is leaky

doesn't sound as cool but that's the facts... anyone sees an event they can publish it and it's self-authenticating