Of course in many cases there can't globally be truth but you may care/weight some groups as having better signal with respect to what you care about. Wide open is a great first step but i know the optimal is to have more community and themed relays where individuls are more likely to enjoy interacting with each other.   if i want to learn about the technical side of nostr development  i want credible sources from developers who know what they are talking about with some technical proficiency, WOT doesn't solve less credible or external to the domain even if their trust is high.

Humans typically are not great with a fully connected friend/association network (everyone sharing the same relays could be viewed as a fully connected community even if they aren't followers of each other, but because they fish in the same pond. I'd expect that most of the time humans had most heterogeneneity was during and immediately after war. There were individuals at the edge who crossed boundaries (merchants, performers, etc)

there is an ongoing "problem" of big relays centralizing nostr. What is going on however is that those on nostr are quite likely to aligned on some principles. We get some others that expect different and leave because they don't want to deal with the extremes.

believe it or not, those on nostr are not a shrunken proportional representation of humanity. We are actually a single community with a smaller portion at the edge because they are in the wrong community. They have no other community because there is no framework which aligns for them yet.

more segregation is benificial because that is how niches grow. The fundamental architecture however allows individuals to connect to different communities that they align in a whole spectrum of possibilities. This is a  magnificent but underdeveloped aspect of nostr - relays with various levels of openness and themed community values.

It is a well known phenomena that natural networks generally are not fully connected because there are physical constraints that exist (neurons - metabolic and spatial density, circulatory system, tree networks) where paths have fractal throughput - they are scale free and are small worlds (groups of nodes with many connections, sparse connections across groups, efficient navigation). The internet generally doesn't have that constraint (beyond POW as an acknowledgment) and think that we should have the all to all connections. 

we need a framework to tweak the knobs of exclusivity on relays. You shouldnt be obligated to continually mute what you dont want to see. This falls straight into the harassment problem which ill save for another note. Regardless, this framework will: 
1) help the network and individuals will have a higher probability of connecting with individuals they value
2) traversal between groups (proportion out your posts to different relays/communities)
3) you'll have a lot less to worry about in terms of fitting a too general WOT curve, or mass reporting/muting individuals you want out of your feed.

I love wikifreedia, but we need micro wikifreedias where there is strong social concensus about the ideas within a homogeneous groups and a framework for discovery and traversal (apply, show credentials, pay fee, pledge qualitybcontent). We shouldn't want a nostr (& wikifreedia) where all ideas are shown evenly. Both classes of users - highly specialized, highly diverse and hetergeneous should be able to flourish.




 

 The wot is a great feature, probably would cover the top 20%ile of individuals who are within 4 follow distances. Though, that bottom 20th percentile of individuals who are within that distance you really don't want to see.

The Wikipeedia approximation and enhancement from nostr and WOT could work with a default score set high, but having even more specialization and mixing would be enhanced through the tools that allow you to configure how open your community is, and governed by a subset of stakeholders for the relay being operated. 

Finally, the users will settle into some Pareto Optimality of engagement in any such community: some may be appointed moderators in a community, or an individual just interested. The Reddit community model is great for this type of interaction, just that its centrality can remove individuals from that entire network of which nostr removes by design. 

 Love this! More fine tuning levers for the feed. Next, more tuning levers for relay operators. To wrap it all up with a bkw would be tools that leverage both top level moderation and bottom up feed control. 

Many natural phenomena exist at the edge of chaos and order. It is necessicary that the push and pull exist and that neither overtake the other. Nostr is an ecosystem and things actually need balance.

The main purpose for nostr is censorship resistance. If all else, that is a truth about it given its underlying assumptions. What this means, is that we don't need to fight censorship resistance.

But the capacty to decorate your home with anything doesn't mean that every type of decoration works or would be wanted. Sure you can say whatever you want and many here will continually fight and build for your right to do so, but tha doesn't mean what you say is welcomed.

The worst case, you're a bad actor. You have no social ties to the group you interact with. If it is the group's space, they should be free to eject you, but you are free to shout whatever the hell you want  elsewhere. -> Relay operator immediate ban. Nothing wrong with that.

Best case: you're ingroup. You and the rest of the community is building your echo chamber. Again perfectly fine.

Now what about the in between? Relay operator cant see everyone in big communties. Our free-for-all relays accomplish the task of censorship resistance, but this stance is also too far in one direction because now everyone's feed is filled with toxicity, spam or bots.


The WOT helps thaf space where you're not sure who is enought to interact with. Your users are also high signal for curating against malicious behavior. 

The more fine grained control we have over our /communities/ the more likely nostr will flourish. Control over our interactions that bridges the top down and bottom up, the push and pull will allow for interesting effects.

nostr:nevent1qqsr8w954se2j598vujfhcs5fpnwew276yjpglxz235vvjslt7t00nqpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzvupzphzv6zrv6l89kxpj4h60m5fpz2ycsrfv0c54hjcwdpxqrt8wwlqxqvzqqqqqqymqkqn7 

 @Laeserin 

 Feel weird attaching these notes as a comment, but trying to keep a hold over a specific group of notes. Feels a little intrusive, but its a way to keep the idea and its linked notes together. Doing so gets cumbersome with lots of notes though.

- (solution) modular articles: think full wiki's, but the atomic unit are (sub) sections of them. Written about them here:
https://wikifreedia.xyz/nkbip-01/dc4cd086cd7ce5b183

- what i actually wanted to comment, but its all related anyway. Communities, KB's, curation mechanisms etc.

nostr:nevent1qqsdej8tz55tya5jt9kmd77k4nzuvpn227ya2h3sm0nc34va3dhakwspr3mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmqzyrwye5yxe47wtvvr9t05lhgjzy5f3qxjcl3ft09su6zvqxkwua7qvqcyqqqqqqgjc79hf