I have similar thoughts but I ultimately think it’s a bad idea; one of the powers of nostr is the portability of the social graph and starting from scratch on each use case breaks a lot of what’s cool about it.

That said, being able to fork your follow list, or have some slight modification to your kind:3 could be very cool and depends a lot on the use case.

FWIW, I don’t think it’s a per-kind follow list, but more a per-use case list, like I might be interested in someone’s thinking and want to follow them and also follow their highlights, long forms and podcasts but their music taste sucks and I want to not have them in my music follow list.

Agreed on paragraph #2. I changed my opinion recently about this and I think it solves some problems. 

 I don't think separate follow lists are optional. I don't want to see any music recommendations or my only fans feed from you people :)

A way to solve it is to create separate keys for each major kind and that breaks the graph too.  

 I think it depends a lot, some follow lists will have huge overlaps with your kind:3, some will have no overlap.

It would suck for me to have to re-follow all the people I’m interested in reading long-forms because that’s pretty much exactly my kind:3.

To be clear; it’s a different event, what I’m talking about is the tooling to make this empowering instead of detrimental to people using this. 

 Sure. I think we made a mistake when we change the kind3 list from contact list to follow list. We could keep all contacts there and then have different follows per kind as 30000 lists. 

 Deriving Keys like you derive BTC addresses from an xpub would be nice