Oddbean

Some of that is true I believe, but I think that's often how we grow and build new things even if we don't agree on everything. Trust me there is plenty I don't agree about, but I'm still here and still building. I think it's a bit of a misnomer that we all have to get along for success to occur. Bitcoin protocol is still highly successful despite it being mostly anarchistic, and we have a much larger scope. >in the worst of cases, completely closed off to user feedback. That is a universal software development problem unfortunately, very often (outside of nostr) these people can even be heavily funded or even building highly successful tools we use today. If you look at my notes, I regularly harp on inability to accept user feedback and criticism. To be fair some of the largest development firms (Apple, Microsoft etc) they aren't really open to feedback. Some individual products have corralled feedback mechanisms but it's highly confined to their vision. Point is, it's often too difficult to send feedback so most users don't. Not saying it's morally right or wrong, but this issue is prolific and generally accepted, only in open source are developers highly exposed to their customers directly. Most developers (including product staff, making design decisions), are paid ones, working in corporate settings shielded completely from their users, on purpose. It's just a different world and we have to learn how to work in it.

I wasn't suggesting that we all need to get along to progress but more cooperation among devs and users, regardless of differences of opinion, would be nice. You don't have to like someone to realize that a particular piece of feedback or recommendation they gave you holds potential value if implemented. Also, many devs don't seem to possess your approach to inclusion. That's disappointing to hear. Though, I'm not all too surprised to hear that. As for funding, I think nostr might have taken the wrong approach to that matter. I'll elaborate on that another time, perhaps. We'll see what happens. I just hope we see better cooperation fairly soon.

Wrote a long reply, nostrudel reloaded :( > I just hope we see better cooperation fairly soon. I was just going to say, in my opinion we're getting along very well over all. We have our disagreements but the better ideas will win eventually. Speaking as a member of one of the few (if not only) nostr development companies, who believe in this cooperation. But we also aggressively fork and do whatever TF we want to when necessary. @Silberengel suggested we move our bickering out of public relays if we can help it. Keep it away from the users. Im of the opinion any highly skilled & motivated individual become difficult to manage, in a corporate setting this is just hidden from the users, but forums and twitter are alive with software devs bickering. If you are unfamiliar, just look up about any highy ranked post on hacker news (https://news.ycombinator.com/) you'll notice most developers don't cooperate well XD Depends on your definition of cooperate I suppose. I'd like to hear your ideas on funding, my ears are always up when money is involved :) That said I have never received a dime for MY software yet. Our team has been pretty big critics of the current funding systems as well.

It's normal for devs to bicker in dev forums, and that should be visible. But if we want to attract a more diverse clientel, that probably shouldn't be what they're all staring at, when they show up. 😂 At least, give them a means to turn it off.

I'm glad to hear about most of the devs getting along very well for the most part. That could be a good idea, especially if developers who are more open to user feedback are frequently present in the group. I will definitely look that up. Thanks. As I understand it, the more major clients are funded by people like Jack and such, right? I've just been wondering how nostrs retention rate would've performed if it was solely crowdfunded. Like the launching of a bunch of different clients at once, observing which ones are used the most for maybe the first month or so, then have a crowdfunding round for those clients and other future projects that get a significant amount attention through feeds. Maybe some form of advertisement on clients that aren't strictly social media-based.

Yeah, that would be users choosing which clients they prefer, but they went a different route. Various nonprofit and investment funds picking particular clients they like, basically, with no effective feedback-loop from users. I wrote about it, once, under my other (much bigger) nym. https://habla.news/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzphtxf40yq9jr82xdd8cqtts5szqyx5tcndvaukhsvfmduetr85ceqq49w6re94mk2ttgv9mx2ttwda6z6ctswpkxjety94nx7u3dvykkwunpde6z6mpev9mxcms7c8sha

Well, having nonprofits and investment funds funding the project will always lead to dev teams basing their work strictly on investor incentives. That's also just a rehashing of a typical corporate business model. You know... the kind of business that so many nostr users seen to want to escape from. Point is, that's probably not the best way to fund a freedom of everything protocol. Btw, I'll promise I'll donate to GitCitadel once I have a better grasp of it. I'll read that later😁.