This conversation reminds me of Karl Popper’s paradox of intolerance, wherein the only thing a tolerant person should not tolerate is intolerance because it leads to the end of tolerance. 

I think (maybe I’m wrong) what nostr:npub1fd6xvlufxkxdtq4ds2ck5tfy6kluhzdvfvf50m5qu4n55ya60zeq43tddp is arguing is that this kind of bot is not simply another instance of free speech or a project on the protocol, but is antithetical to the ethos of the protocol itself. 

That not anything can be tolerated on this open protocol, and this is pushing it. Because no one can stop you, the alternative is to point out how antithetical this truly is and make it reputational suicide to push it, ironically reporting *you* at the meta level for creating a reporting bot. 

Once people see this kind of intolerance will not be tolerated, they will cease trying to report people, for the “greater good”, for “public safety” “for the women” “to save the children” for “national security” or whatever other noble reason one can conjure. 

That doesn’t mean women being harassed on nostr isn’t a real issue to solve, only that it has to be done in a way that’s in keeping with the ethos of the protocol. 

But it’s possible I’m misunderstanding.