you gotta be harsh with these slimebags, you know... make the game hard for them to win, then you get them out of your neighbourhood 

 i think you could probably easily get relay operators to feed their deleted events into your midden if you just asked... it's a matter of just adding a tiny feature "when delete, send to dumbass who wants deleted events"

in fact, i am just about to build out a two level caching algorithm that lets me maintain some reasonable limits on the cache inbuilt database and maintain searchability (via simple filter searches) but push the event itself to a secondary store

that's practically half of what you are looking for

but i think you are barking up the wrong tree looking for preemptive methods of blocking spam

web of trust will do most of that for you, spammers can't win long term confidence in people and they have to constantly make new identities, which excludes them from getting deep into the web 

 Multilevel caching sounds like a great idea.

I am a big believer in WoT, but I also believe preemptive filtering is a "must have" for many, many users. Not me and not you, but many.

Spammers are already using LLM generated content. They can fail as many times as they like, and one human user only has to fail once for a spammer to get into the WoT for a while. 

 the thing is that fakes can't get deep into the social graph without being like the people in it

ultimately if you are a fake you gonna get tricked

there's many helpful things we can build into the systems to add friction for malicious actors but ultimately social manipulation in general is something that requires *requires* personal responsibility, skepticism, alertness, and emotional maturity to defeat 

 100%, but partial successes still annoy nostriches and waste their time.

We need to do all the above. 

 Winners study the British SDS undercover training manuals.

Losers study "ChatGPT For Dummies". 

 i'm making a mental note about this, that 1984'd events will not be served to the reporter

this will ultimately lead to a concept of "web of distrust" which could be a marketable data set too 

 Except, its the reporter that most needs that event for training their own filter. Hmmmm... 

 @Bob_stores_nostr's idea of an "archive relay" solves my data problem. If he doesn't build it I may have to... 

 Happy to collab or learn about your use case. What subset of Nostr notes specifically would be enabling for your filter training? 

 Thank you, Bob!

Anything that:
- is a Kind-1984, or
- is the note reported in a Kind-1984

The idea being that client apps can train their own filter models, or at least a marketplace of data vending machines can build them on demand.

Two-tiered access to your archive could work, free access to last month's data, maybe, and paid access to everything... 

 It would be great if an archive could generate revenue, but honestly, my focus is on building relationships and trust with relay operators to get the data without disrupting their primary function. Once the data is coming in, then it will be down to working with people like yourself to figure out how to serve the data subset you need in the time frame you need it with the resources I have available. And if the resources are lacking, how to get them.